Dear mrsflamer,
Yr nom-de-plume is slightly anxiety-making and i am not myself a user of SQF, but hopefully this contribution will not be too catalytic.
Actually you might have been more successful by searching for "risk assessment". This is probably one of the most popular topics on this forum.
You don’t mention what/how you are processing which could be relevant.
The primary components of the program you mention will be cleaning procedure / frequency of application. The choice for each will be logically based on safety risk from things like what you are processing, how, where, by whom (??), etc. This is risk assessment. The (preliminary) evidence / support for the choices made typically constitutes validation. The confirmation from subsequent routine process measurements that yr choice was correct will be verification. (Unfortunately previous posts here have demonstrated that SQF [at least the 2000 version anyway] had some weird aspects within its interpretation of Va/Ve which deviated somewhat from the, IMEX, more common views. A slight caveat emptor).
IMEX, preliminary (data-based) validations are not so common. If yet required, would be necessary to carry out a preliminary, small-scale, pseudo “verification” of the overall situation based on qualitative prediction (intuition?) combined with some data. This is then subsequently honed further based on routine microbiological measurements for classic verification.
Some, IMO, useful links to discussions of RA with various examples (but not specifically tied to SQF) are –
http://www.ifsqn.com...dpost__p__24125
http://www.ifsqn.com...dpost__p__32862
http://www.ifsqn.com...dpost__p__47657
There are probably some specifically for SQF also (somewhere).
As a supplement to previous nice post and for your specific query, I just now put together this ultra-basic, short excel example to illustrate a possible introductory RA approach. The conceptual basis will no doubt be self-evident (I can probably find a link to the simple
haccp matrix which I hv slightly borrowed if you are further interested). You will see my use of “slash” and “dash” is not quite internally consistent but I think the idea is clear enough. I predict that SQF are not expecting anything more subtle than this for your central concept, probably a lot less (disagreements welcome

). You can compare the layout to the various examples in preceding links. Any implementation IMO will typically offer a personal (subjective) choice of going for maximum resulting simplicity (eg convenience) or trying to be “intricate”, I suggest the former is preferable for initial purposes. (But it may depend on yr process / regulatory issues).
The verification will then typically follow routine introduction of the program (unless SQF are still being tricky somehow).
simple example2 of RA for a cleaning program.xls 15KB
711 downloads
Rgds / Charles.C