Thank you. Good idea. I am wondering something now as I am doing the assessement. I am SQF certified here at our facility. So for SQF it says to conduct a food fraud vulnerability assessment as it pertains to safety. Sooooo, say that I have a plant based ingredient, such as witch hazel, and it is known to be subject to substitution and dilution but it wouldn't necessarily be a safety issue. Rather a quality issue. How should I figure this in?
One answer is in the attachment of Post 18. Have another look.
A possible Procedure is, i think, briefly given (as a response to a similar question) in the 3rd link within my Post 17 in yr parallel thread -
A third approach (presumably much faster) would be to access a database which categorises vulnerabilities in the appropriate SQF 5-item format specifically with respect to Safety. Afaik, no such free database exists. A limited approximation is, perhaps (untested by me), constructable via 2nd link of Post 7.
Basically, it seems to be unavoidable in SQF8 Manufacturing Code/Food Fraud that it is obligatory to complete the Food Fraud, Quality-based VA Requirement prior to "doing" the Safety-based VA.
It is obviously far simpler to hypothesise (as seemingly accepted in GFSI) that all Quality-based VA responses are potentially Safety also. So VA(Quality)(by definition) =(equivalent) VA(Safety). This is (implicitly) done in BRC.
There are clearly major statistical objections (Validation?) to above hypothesis but GFSI's decision is presumably the authoritative version.
It might be argued that, for Food Fraud, SQF8 Manufacturing is no longer in compliance with GFSI ? And FSSC22000 ? And IFS ?