Jump to content

  • Quick Navigation
Photo

GMP Site Inspections - Compare Rating or Scoring Systems


  • You cannot start a new topic
  • Please log in to reply
6 replies to this topic

#1 rellie

rellie

    Grade - Active

  • IFSQN Associate
  • 24 posts
  • 2 thanks
0
Neutral

  • Australia
    Australia

Posted 13 May 2011 - 12:22 AM

Hi.

The food manufacturing site I work for undertakes monthly GMP site inspections of each area i.e Warehouise, Processing.
These audits include such things as general housekeeping & GMP. In regrads to scoring these we rate them as High (-5), Medium (1) and Low (2) for conformance.

We are currently reviewing this rating system. Can anyone provide information on how they score these inspections?



#2 AS NUR

AS NUR

    Grade - PIFSQN

  • IFSQN Principal
  • 581 posts
  • 55 thanks
9
Neutral

  • Indonesia
    Indonesia
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:east java, indonesia

Posted 13 May 2011 - 12:58 AM

Hi Rellie

In my experience to applicate Monthly GMP audit, we define many parameters for one area (safety, cleanliness, tidyness etc) and use rating 1 and 0 ( conformance or not to standard) for each parameter. And GMP score we use perceantage of conformity, GMP is good if conformity 90 % or up, 80 - 89 % is fair and below 80% is bad.

thats my opinion hope can help you :thumbup:


rgds

AS Nur



#3 Dr Ajay Shah

Dr Ajay Shah

    Grade - SIFSQN

  • IFSQN Senior
  • 318 posts
  • 105 thanks
5
Neutral

  • Australia
    Australia
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Melbourne

Posted 13 May 2011 - 02:53 AM

Hi Relli

You can continue with the same format that you are currently using but give the following scores or you can design something similar to what AS NUR has mentioned. It is all up to you as long as it works for you.

High : 8-10
Medium : 6-8
Low: 4-6
Unsatisfactory: below 4

Cheers and good luck mate

Ajay


Edited by Dr Ajay Shah, 13 May 2011 - 02:57 AM.

Dr Ajay Shah.,
BSc (Hons), MSc, PhD, PGCE(FE)
Managing Director & Principal Consultant
AAS Food Technology Pty Ltd
www.aasfood.com


#4 rellie

rellie

    Grade - Active

  • IFSQN Associate
  • 24 posts
  • 2 thanks
0
Neutral

  • Australia
    Australia

Posted 15 May 2011 - 10:50 AM

The probelm I have is that I need to demonstrate to those new people conducting the GMP site inspections how we come to the ranking. I think that having a score of 1-10 leaves it more open for interpretation whereas as a matrix format might be better.



#5 Dr Ajay Shah

Dr Ajay Shah

    Grade - SIFSQN

  • IFSQN Senior
  • 318 posts
  • 105 thanks
5
Neutral

  • Australia
    Australia
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Melbourne

Posted 15 May 2011 - 12:45 PM

Hi Rellie,

It is all about training the staff by showing them examples and then asking them to rate it as a group so that all can learn at the same time and that way you have the same standard across the board.


Cheers

Ajay Shah


Dr Ajay Shah.,
BSc (Hons), MSc, PhD, PGCE(FE)
Managing Director & Principal Consultant
AAS Food Technology Pty Ltd
www.aasfood.com


#6 tsmith7858

tsmith7858

    Grade - SIFSQN

  • IFSQN Senior
  • 262 posts
  • 51 thanks
10
Good

  • United States
    United States

Posted 31 May 2011 - 05:34 PM

Hi.

The food manufacturing site I work for undertakes monthly GMP site inspections of each area i.e Warehouise, Processing.
These audits include such things as general housekeeping & GMP. In regrads to scoring these we rate them as High (-5), Medium (1) and Low (2) for conformance.

We are currently reviewing this rating system. Can anyone provide information on how they score these inspections?



Use what works for you but make sure each rating is defined. We use the AIB rating system since we get audited by AIB.

Minor Issue - No potential for contamination
Improvement needed - A potential hazard, partial Program omission or food safety finding that is inconsistent witht eh standards. If not corrected, it could lead to a failure.
Serious - A significant food safety risk or risk of program failure.
Unsatisfactory - An imminent food safety hazaard, program failure or departure from GMPs.

What does High, Medium and Low mean in your system?

#7 Simon

Simon

    IFSQN...it's My Life

  • IFSQN Admin
  • 12,286 posts
  • 1293 thanks
589
Excellent

  • United Kingdom
    United Kingdom
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Manchester
  • Interests:Married to Michelle, Father of three boys (Oliver, Jacob and Louis). I enjoy cycling, walking and travelling, watching sport, especially football and Manchester United. Oh and I love food and beer and wine.

Posted 31 May 2011 - 07:53 PM

Using a numerical scale is good as it provides a benchamrk and allows you to set targets and track performance. The difficulty is consistent of scoring. Training is a first step, but then I am a firm beliver in mirror audits...meaning department heads conduct their own audits weekly and quality conuct the same audit monthly. Scores can be compared and gaps in perception closed. Eventually deparment heads see product safety and quality with the same eyes as the quality manager.


hand-pointing-down.gif
 
Get FREE bitesize education with IFSQN webinar recordings.
 
Download this handy excel for desktop access to over 140 Food Safety Friday's webinar recordings.
https://www.ifsqn.com/fsf/Free%20Food%20Safety%20Videos.xlsx

 
Check out IFSQN’s extensive library of FREE food safety videos
https://www.ifsqn.com/food_safety_videos.html

 

recommend-us-on-facebook.png


Thanked by 1 Member:



0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users

EV SSL Certificate