Jump to content

  • Quick Navigation
Photo
- - - - -

Multi-site SQF Practitioner requirements


  • You cannot start a new topic
  • Please log in to reply
3 replies to this topic

#1 RDM_Rep

RDM_Rep

    Grade - AIFSQN

  • IFSQN Associate
  • 37 posts
  • 0 thanks
0
Neutral

  • United States
    United States

Posted 19 March 2021 - 07:00 PM

Hello, looking for some clarification as to multi-site practitioner requirements as my boss and I have different interpretations. We have an SQF audit coming up in July. I am the deputy practitioner, and my CEO is the quality manager, or primary practitioner. Firstly, there should be no problem with the CEO being the QM, correct? Secondly, we are based in Los Angeles but have another plant in Mexico. It's my understanding that the QM can be the QM for both locations and that both sites need a practitioner. Would a full time deputy at the Mexico plant be sufficient for an audit? My boss is under the impression that I can be the deputy for both, but I don't believe this would meet the requirement as I am in Los Angeles full time. I'm happy to assist the Mexico plant in their preparation, but it's my understanding that someone there needs to be designated in practitioner and also meet all the practitioner requirements. 



#2 SQFconsultant

SQFconsultant

    SQFconsultant

  • IFSQN Fellow
  • 3,658 posts
  • 928 thanks
804
Excellent

  • United States
    United States
  • Gender:Male
  • Interests:American Patriot
    WWG1WGA
    Never give up, never give in - allways win!
    Melbourne, Florida USA

Posted 19 March 2021 - 07:55 PM

we have several clients that use the services of a key SQF Practitioner being based at the main facility that also covers three other local - within 100 miles - locations.
 
Each site must still have a staff member that acts as the backup with the same qualifications - haccp training, full time and our course understanding of the SQF program.
 
It is a wonder for the ceo to be the QA, but I've seen some interesting situations in my time and thus yes it is ok.
 
I am not certain if a QM can cover both a location in the states as well as MEXICO, it seems to be a bit of a conflict - travel, etc.
 
And, in a multi-site situation we are talking close by, not distant for an SQF Practitioner, this is not something I would suggest to a client and I have done so a couple of times in our business.
 
The term deputy applies to BRC, not SQF, just to keep things less confusing here this is for SQF.
 
So, yes you are correct someone in Mexico needs to be a practitioner for that location and you'll need a backup as well. 

Kind regards,
Glenn Oster
 
GOC BUSINESS GROUP | SQF System Development, Implementation & Certification Consultants
 

 

Serving the New Republic of the United States of America, Costa Rica, Panama & Caribbean Islands

 

 


#3 Charles.C

Charles.C

    Grade - FIFSQN

  • IFSQN Moderator
  • 18,483 posts
  • 5170 thanks
1,161
Excellent

  • Earth
    Earth
  • Gender:Male
  • Interests:SF
    TV
    Movies

Posted 20 March 2021 - 02:23 PM

Hello, looking for some clarification as to multi-site practitioner requirements as my boss and I have different interpretations. We have an SQF audit coming up in July. I am the deputy practitioner, and my CEO is the quality manager, or primary practitioner. Firstly, there should be no problem with the CEO being the QM, correct? Secondly, we are based in Los Angeles but have another plant in Mexico. It's my understanding that the QM can be the QM for both locations and that both sites need a practitioner. Would a full time deputy at the Mexico plant be sufficient for an audit? My boss is under the impression that I can be the deputy for both, but I don't believe this would meet the requirement as I am in Los Angeles full time. I'm happy to assist the Mexico plant in their preparation, but it's my understanding that someone there needs to be designated in practitioner and also meet all the practitioner requirements. 

 

Hi RDM,

 

JFI, for certainty, these are excellent questions to ask yr CB/prospective auditor. Usually for free.


Kind Regards,

 

Charles.C


#4 RDM_Rep

RDM_Rep

    Grade - AIFSQN

  • IFSQN Associate
  • 37 posts
  • 0 thanks
0
Neutral

  • United States
    United States

Posted 22 March 2021 - 03:27 PM

 

we have several clients that use the services of a key SQF Practitioner being based at the main facility that also covers three other local - within 100 miles - locations.
 
Each site must still have a staff member that acts as the backup with the same qualifications - haccp training, full time and our course understanding of the SQF program.
 
It is a wonder for the ceo to be the QA, but I've seen some interesting situations in my time and thus yes it is ok.
 
I am not certain if a QM can cover both a location in the states as well as MEXICO, it seems to be a bit of a conflict - travel, etc.
 
And, in a multi-site situation we are talking close by, not distant for an SQF Practitioner, this is not something I would suggest to a client and I have done so a couple of times in our business.
 
The term deputy applies to BRC, not SQF, just to keep things less confusing here this is for SQF.
 
So, yes you are correct someone in Mexico needs to be a practitioner for that location and you'll need a backup as well. 

 

 

Thank you so much for the information. To clarify, the Mexico plant is roughly 150 miles away, about 2.5-3 hours travel time. Additionally, when you say "you'll need a back up as well," are you referring to the Mexico plant needing two practitioners also, or that I myself would need a back up for the Los Angeles plant? Our intent was for the CEO/QM to be the primary practitioner and myself the substitute, do you advise against this? 

 

Hi RDM,

 

JFI, for certainty, these are excellent questions to ask yr CB/prospective auditor. Usually for free.

 

Thank you for that Charles, we are currently in the process of obtaining one but I will definitely keep this in mind once everything is in order! I'm assuming answers can vary from CB to CB so probably best to clarify with the one we end up working with what exactly they would prefer to see? 






0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users