14 replies to this topic

[isoman8]

Hello every one that is first time to me to talk in the forum , I establish food safety system based on yum requirement , i have completed all clauses except approval supplier clause , I do not understand  will i to approve my current supplier again based on HACCP , food fraud , food defense , effective traceability ,...etc or i will assess them on the same points to categorize low risk supplier or high risk supplier   

[SQFconsultant]

isoman8, welcome!

[isoman8]

welcome  too sir

[Charles.C]

Hello every one that is first time to me to talk in the forum , I establish food safety system based on yum requirement , i have completed all clauses except approval supplier clause , I do not understand  will i to approve my current supplier again based on HACCP , food fraud , food defense , effective traceability ,...etc or i will assess them on the same points to categorize low risk supplier or high risk supplier   

Which Product / Standard /Clause ?

[isoman8]

 wheat Tortilla bread , yum requirement ,clause 10

Edited by isoman8, 23 June 2020 - 08:58 PM.

[Charles.C]

 wheat Tortilla bread , yum requirement ,clause 10

Thanks, Unfortunately Yum not discussed here very often.

 

I had a quick look at Clause 10 (version 2018).

 

Looks like you need to define the Supplier as L/H Risk based on the results of the various sub clauses.

 

Attached is an example of an analogous situation  but  I have no idea if suitable for Yum. May be overkill.

 

 SUPPLIER APPROVAL RATING.pdf   286.99KB   874 downloads

 

Maybe any Yum users here know more. Comments welcome.

[isoman8]

thank you very much

[Charles.C]

Welcome.

[Shere- Dean]

Hi,

 

Good morning. What I did at my facilty was create an excel sheet with all the categories ( e.g. HACCP, Allergen, food fraud etc,) and based on the Supplier 3rd party audit reports I indicated whether or not the Supplier has these in place based on the issues/ non-conformances identified in their 3rd party audit reports,  so Supplier Audit Report is very useful in this case. Based on the overall findings I rate Supplier. I also include a general comment, for example, comments for my Supplier (low risk) is Supplier has a robust FSMS based on audit report provided,

 

For Visibility of Supplier routes I requested documentation from the Supplier or use information provided on the bill of lading (BOL) or other documents provided with shipment. 

 

This was accepted by the auditor. 

[isoman8]

Hi,

 

Good morning. What I did at my facilty was create an excel sheet with all the categories ( e.g. HACCP, Allergen, food fraud etc,) and based on the Supplier 3rd party audit reports I indicated whether or not the Supplier has these in place based on the issues/ non-conformances identified in their 3rd party audit reports,  so Supplier Audit Report is very useful in this case. Based on the overall findings I rate Supplier. I also include a general comment, for example, comments for my Supplier (low risk) is Supplier has a robust FSMS based on audit report provided,

 

For Visibility of Supplier routes I requested documentation from the Supplier or use information provided on the bill of lading (BOL) or other documents provided with shipment. 

 

This was accepted by the auditor. 

did you mean ,( you use certification body report on suppliers  as ( ISO-22000 audit , BRC audit , IFS audit ,..etc ) to assess them into high risk supplier or low risk supplier as if xyz supplier  has implemented Haccp , fraud program , tractability ,then xyz supplier will be low risk supplier and all that based on certification body report audit , did you mean this ?

[Charles.C]

Hi,

 

Good morning. What I did at my facilty was create an excel sheet with all the categories ( e.g. HACCP, Allergen, food fraud etc,) and based on the Supplier 3rd party audit reports I indicated whether or not the Supplier has these in place based on the issues/ non-conformances identified in their 3rd party audit reports,  so Supplier Audit Report is very useful in this case. Based on the overall findings I rate Supplier. I also include a general comment, for example, comments for my Supplier (low risk) is Supplier has a robust FSMS based on audit report provided,

 

For Visibility of Supplier routes I requested documentation from the Supplier or use information provided on the bill of lading (BOL) or other documents provided with shipment. 

 

This was accepted by the auditor. 

 

Thanks comments. IMO it also relates to Product/Process Risk.

 

Some criteria (modified from BRC's Philosophy) which I have used-

 

In the case of a product/process categorised as high risk, the supplier is classified likewise unless unsatisfactorily monitored/audited in which case the supplier is classified as either extremely high risk or unacceptable.

 

In the case of a product/process categorised as low risk, the supplier is classified likewise unless unsatisfactorily monitored/audited in which case the supplier is classified as either high risk or unacceptable.

 

Monitoring/Auditing Frequencies are then implemented accordingly.

 

The above begs the question as to basis of (a) product/process risk categorisation (eg HACCP, RTE,etc) and (b) "unsatisfactorily audited" which are determined separately. 

[Shere- Dean]

did you mean ,( you use certification body report on suppliers  as ( ISO-22000 audit , BRC audit , IFS audit ,..etc ) to assess them into high risk supplier or low risk supplier as if xyz supplier  has implemented Haccp , fraud program , tractability ,then xyz supplier will be low risk supplier and all that based on certification body report audit , did you mean this ?

 

Good morning,

 

Implementation is not enough. Are the systems working as they should? Check to see if they were any non-conformances in the Supplier's report in regards to the programs you mentioned above. 

 

Our risk rating is also based on how confident we are in our Supplier (this takes into consideration the number of years we have used them and whether or not we have experience any food safety related issues) and where in the process the ingredients/materials are added. Each Company's process is unique so you may not be able to classify all your Suppliers as low risk (based on were you add them in your process and the food safety risk associated with them etc.) Remember the standard stated that risk assessment is not only limited to sub-clause 10.2.1 - 10.2.8. The reports are very useful but remember you have to be able to sufficiently justify why you selected the risk rating. 

 

NB* Supporting documentation from Suppliers can also be helpful (e.g. Food Fraud/Food Defense/ HACCP Compliance letters etc.) 

 

I hope this helps.

Edited by Shere- Dean, 25 June 2020 - 01:38 PM.

[Charles.C]

Hi isoman,

 

As an initial portion of  Post 11 also see -

 

https://www.ifsqn.co...al/#entry100194

 

(Actually a substantial part of the content of this element of Yum's Standard looks quite similar to BRC)

[isoman8]

Shere- Dean , Charles.C   thank you ,I appreciate your efforts to guide me

[Faizan]

Hi,

 

Good morning. What I did at my facilty was create an excel sheet with all the categories ( e.g. HACCP, Allergen, food fraud etc,) and based on the Supplier 3rd party audit reports I indicated whether or not the Supplier has these in place based on the issues/ non-conformances identified in their 3rd party audit reports,  so Supplier Audit Report is very useful in this case. Based on the overall findings I rate Supplier. I also include a general comment, for example, comments for my Supplier (low risk) is Supplier has a robust FSMS based on audit report provided,

 

For Visibility of Supplier routes I requested documentation from the Supplier or use information provided on the bill of lading (BOL) or other documents provided with shipment. 

 

This was accepted by the auditor. 

Hi, thank you for this helpful information, Can i have a template of what you have said just to make an idea about the document?