Not a SQF user but I did a (SQF) search for “qualified” after penning the above post.
It seems that “qualified” to SQF is a bit like “Risk Assessment” to BRC. The term is amazingly popular although, as far as I could see, (almost) never quantified. Occasionally one also meets “suitably qualified”.
Accordingly, I suggest an ISO-type answer –
Qualified - possessing proper or necessary skills, knowledge, credentials, etc. for fulfilling a given purpose.
The potential scope of above is clearly substantial.
In the current context, I suggest that the above possibilities will require some kind of documented evidence, eg via training, examination or career history.
From previous threads here, it is evident that SQF employs various of the options above depending on the specific application, eg
Auditor: "Did you have proof of food defense training?"
Auditor: "Did you go to the FDA website and click through the pages and print it out and sign it and put it in a binder and everything?"
Me: "Yes" <pulls out binder, flips to FDA print-a-cert>
Auditor:"Good, I see you are qualified to train people to react to an emergency situation. Let's move on."
Hey folks, I need some help here. I have read the code over 20 times and am having trouble understanding whether or not "suitably qualified" means that as long as you are HACCP trained and certified, per section 126.96.36.199 (iii), you are qualified to implement and oversee an SQF Level 2 program
Verification is simply a visual review by qualified personnel (i.e. certified, experienced, or intimate knowledge of process) of relevant documents. "Normally" it's a management position, and under SQF this all trails back to the practitioner.
Basically, only those in the know, ie SQF users, will (probably) know.
Here’s hoping somebody knows in this case.