Who is responsible for approving the procedures in SQF?
JcChaser
JcChaser,
SQF does not specify precisely who in your organization is responsible for approving SOP's mostly because that will vary greatly from one business to another. SQF provides guidance on the duties and qualifications of the SQF Practitioner:
2.1.2.4 The senior management shall designate an SQF practitioner for each site with responsibility and authority to:
i. Oversee the development, implementation, review and maintenance of the SQF System, including food safety fundamentals outlined in 2.4.2, the food safety plan outlined in 2.4.3 and the food quality plan outlined in 2.4.4;
SQF does talk about the role senior management plays in its system. See this excerpt form the code:
2.1.4.1 The senior management shall be responsible for reviewing the SQF System and documenting the review procedure. Reviews shall include:
i. The policy manual;
ii. Internal and external audit findings;
iii. Corrective actions and their investigations and resolution; and
iv. Customer complaints and their resolution and investigation.
2.1.4.2 The SQF System in its entirety shall be reviewed at least annually.
2.1.4.3 Food safety fundamentals, food safety plans and food quality plans shall be reviewed when any changes implemented have an impact on the supplier’s ability to deliver safe, quality food.
2.1.4.4 Changes to food safety fundamentals, food safety plans and food quality plans that have an impact on the supplier’s ability to deliver safe, quality food are to be validated.
2.1.4.5 Records of all reviews and reasons for amending documents, validations and changes to the SQF System shall be maintained.
The SQF Practitioner designs and implements the procedures. Senior management is required to review your entire quality management system to provide a reassessment evaluation. That is the minimum required though you may elect to require others to sign-off on new or revised SOP's as they come up. It is up to you to develop any additional approval process that ensures the appropriate stakeholders and decision-makers are involved.
Hi Watanka,
Thks for the input.
I deduce it all means that, at the Practitioner's own discretion, the answer to the OP can be "NO" ?
I would always consider who is ultimately responsible for the implementation and execution of the procedure (responsible for that functional area).
Where the 'Recall Plan' could be approved by the SQF Practitioner...the 'Recall Procedure' would be owned by the materials group...if they are ultimately responsible for carrying out the exercise...in this example.
I would always consider who is ultimately responsible for the implementation and execution of the procedure (responsible for that functional area).
Where the 'Recall Plan' could be approved by the SQF Practitioner...the 'Recall Procedure' would be owned by the materials group...if they are ultimately responsible for carrying out the exercise...in this example.
Hi mzenas,
I think that was also a NO to the question in the OP ?
Hi mzenas,
I think that was also a NO to the question in the OP ?
I am suggesting YES, there should be another signature...especially by the owner of the process/procedure.
I would say that the Practitioner has the final approval for the procedure, but I would never write one without the input of whoever will be using/following the procedure. You should work together to make sure that it meets the code and that it works for your operation and is actually what is being done in the operation.