Jump to content

  • Quick Navigation
Photo
- - - - -

BRC Audit approach


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

craiglbc

    Grade - Active

  • IFSQN Associate
  • 20 posts
  • 0 thanks
1
Neutral

  • Earth
    Earth

Posted 25 September 2014 - 03:43 PM

Hello again!

 

I've been preparing for our first BRC audit Packaging Standard Issue#4 for sometime now and decided to use this approach.  We have programs and documentation systems in place that should be sufficient for this audit although nothing has ever been done to 'tie' it together as one system.

So I've chosen to write a full Food Packaging Safety and Quality Manual based on the BRC standards/Self assessment.  I've taken the self assessment and gone through each and every section, could some of you with experience let me know if this sounds like an efficient approach.  Below is an example of one section:

 

1.3-Organizational structure, responsibilities and management authority

 

 

Statement of Intent: The company shall have a clear organizational structure and define the responsibilities, reporting relationships and job functions of those personnel whose activities affect product safety, legality, regulatory compliance and quality.

 

1.3.1-     Organizational Structure

                Organizational Chart which defines all management’s responsibilities (attached)

                Document: Org Chart

                Location: HACCP Manual, ******* FS drive            

                Review Frequency: Annual- reviewed during HACCP review- Scheduled through MicroMain CMMS Software

                Reviewed by: Programs Specialist

                Record Retained: HACCP Manual in PS office

 

 

This is the format I have used throughout the entire manual, I have attached examples in the appendix for each section, with further documentation available for review of constistacy etc.

 



RG3

    Grade - PIFSQN

  • IFSQN Principal
  • 501 posts
  • 165 thanks
75
Excellent

  • United States
    United States
  • Gender:Male
  • Interests:"We cannot solve our problems with the same thinking we used when we created them" Albert Einstein

Posted 25 September 2014 - 11:14 PM

3.2.1 The only thing I see missing are dates and who approved the document.

 

The date it was issued.

The date it was reviewed.

Approved by ______

maybe a version# would be convenient for you to keep track if everything is up to date to pair it along with your Master Records

 

I also have a location for the reason the document was updated.

 

 

I use to work at a company that had their own Quality Manual and just made their number of the manual reference the BRC code on the front Table of contents.



craiglbc

    Grade - Active

  • IFSQN Associate
  • 20 posts
  • 0 thanks
1
Neutral

  • Earth
    Earth

Posted 26 September 2014 - 01:18 PM

Thanks for the input, I actually am just using the manual as a reference point, all dates (reviewed, approved etc) are on the actual documents that the manual refers too.  All procedures have document numbers with signatures etc.  I am more or less putting together the manual to help the flow of the audit, with supporting documentation on hand for everything.  



Charles.C

    Grade - FIFSQN

  • IFSQN Moderator
  • 18,884 posts
  • 5259 thanks
1,233
Excellent

  • Earth
    Earth
  • Gender:Male
  • Interests:SF
    TV
    Movies

Posted 26 September 2014 - 03:01 PM

Dear craiglbc,

 

Packaging not my area but i assume the basic auditorial evaluation procedure is analogous to BRC Food.

 

I guess a typical, IMEX, audit is composed into 3 “stages” – (1)  checking the degree of  theoretical compliance of FS system design  to the standard via a desktop audit, (2) Checking the operational degree of compliance to the standard via (i) the data accumulated/followed up from records of items such as Internal Audits, Corrective Actions plus (ii) the “auditorial  walkthrough" to compare actual operations with the manual descriptions.

 

IMEX auditors are somewhat blase over formatting details as long as the specified elements / review frequency statements, etc exist and top documents like Procedures have some kind of recognized structural layout/cross-references. But i may be biased since yr approach  sounds far superior to my lash-up. :smile:  I basically  outputted new documents as i required them for the standard and stuck lengthy running numbers on them. Then applied a similar routine to all the pre-existing forms / QA documents.

 

My own No.1 recommendation would be to make sure you do  a “preliminary” audit. I found it simply invaluable.

 

Rgds / Charles.C

 

PS - i deduced this is to be a first audit ?


Kind Regards,

 

Charles.C


craiglbc

    Grade - Active

  • IFSQN Associate
  • 20 posts
  • 0 thanks
1
Neutral

  • Earth
    Earth

Posted 26 September 2014 - 03:08 PM

Perfect thanks for the input all, its appreciated, yes this is my first BRC audit.....I am really hoping all goes well and would prefer to be over prepared then scrambling the day of :)



fgjuadi

    Grade - PIFSQN

  • Banned
  • 898 posts
  • 201 thanks
26
Excellent

  • United States
    United States
  • Gender:Male

Posted 30 September 2014 - 07:27 PM

Good luck - let us know how it goes


.--. .- -. - ... / --- .--. - .. --- -. .- .-..




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users