Audit Report Findings

Can anyone please advise which among the audit standards (using checklist) requires full description of either conformity/nonconformity? I work with BRC standards, and they are required to be descriptive, both non conformity and conformity, how about? 

• GMP
• HACCP
• SQF
• ISO 22000
• ISO 22000 - Quality
• FSCC v5
• IFS
• Others

Thank you so much!

Can anyone please advise which among the audit standards (using checklist) requires full description of either conformity/nonconformity? I work with BRC standards, and they are required to be descriptive, both non conformity and conformity, how about? 

 

• GMP
• HACCP
• SQF
• ISO 22000
• ISO 22000 - Quality
• FSCC v5
• IFS
• Others

Thank you so much!

This is an ambiguous (and long) request, eg Conformity to ?

What do you mean by "full description" ?

sorry, not so 

This is an ambiguous (and long) request, eg Conformity to ?

 

What do you mean by "full description" ?

Sorry Charles, not so clear, my bad. 

I mean how are findings going to be written in the checklist? a full description of conformity? or just a Yes or No. Or all audit checklist required to be filled out (under comments) by the auditor as evidence of their conformity. (Ex: internal auditor) 

There would be no reason for an internal nor external auditor to write out a conformity,(if it conforms why write anything - would seem to be such a waste of time) only a non-conformity and providing as much information as is deemed needed for the reviewer to open up the corrective action flow/process.

I used to (when I was an SQF Auditor and also prior to that a hotel inspector) write narratives on the gigs, but no reason to do so with what is right - only with what is wrong.

I did have a food plant owner once demand (yes, it was an interesting exchange) that I write something nice and long as to what a great airlock system he installed, but the fact is that while it was nice, it did not need an explanation written becuase it met the requirement.

A standard lists requirements.  An audit check to see if you are meeting the requirements.

If you are meeting the requirements, then you are in conformance with the standard.  If you are not meeting the requirements, then you have a non-conformance.

It doesn't matter if you do an internal audit, have a 3rd party auditor, or a customer auditing your facility.

Unfortunately, some standards may not have black & white detailed descriptions of all situations that would be considered to be nonconformances.  You also can have auditors who interpret the standard differently.

I think the best way to determine conformance/nonconformance is to understand the purpose of the requirement.  Does your program address the intent of the requirement?  Does the outcome of your program show that you are acceptably meeting the requirement?

A plant that is producing table salt may not need the same allergen controls that a bakery may need.  A standard is not going to address in detail every possible scenario.  Thus no black & white exhaustive list in a standard of what is required in a salt plant compared to a bakery.

There would be no reason for an internal nor external auditor to write out a conformity,(if it conforms why write anything - would seem to be such a waste of time) only a non-conformity and providing as much information as is deemed needed for the reviewer to open up the corrective action flow/process.

 

I used to (when I was an SQF Auditor and also prior to that a hotel inspector) write narratives on the gigs, but no reason to do so with what is right - only with what is wrong.

 

I did have a food plant owner once demand (yes, it was an interesting exchange) that I write something nice and long as to what a great airlock system he installed, but the fact is that while it was nice, it did not need an explanation written becuase it met the requirement.

Glenn,

BRC requires that an internal audit specifies conformance. They do not say "what" that needs to be however. Our BRC auditors tend to be long winded in their conformance documentation.
When doing internal audits, I usually simply say (if there is compliance), "Observed documentation complies with the intent of the clause".

Marshall