11 replies to this topic

[kconradi]

Hello,

 

I'm new at a chocolate manufacturing plant. I'm trying to re-number their program system. We're SQF certified but I also notice a certification for FSSC 22000. Can someone explain the difference between these two? Also, I'm seeing a lot of documents labeled/numbered with FSMS (Food Safety & Quality Management System), and I'm unsure if this is something they used on their own for numbering or if it's referencing a specific scope or code from somewhere else. 

 

Thanks!

[nwilson]

Have you asked around your plant if there is/was an FSSC 22K implementation?  I would be digging for a current certificate somewhere to confirm as well.  Assuming however that the SQF Cert would be the applicable certification currently and that FSSC 22K was either prior or just partially implemented.  

 

They are both GFSI Certifications so there really wouldn't be a need for both, just one.  Seems like the document format is inhouse created.  Is there are reference document for Document Control and Creation that could steer you i the right direction?  

 

I'm in chocolate too, all the best.  

[jfrey123]

FSMS/FSQMS is common nomenclature for your own book of SOPs/programs, a Food Safety Management System is a fancy way to refer to your own manual.

 

FSSC 22000 and SQF are both GFSI approved schemes for food safety compliance, with 22000 focusing almost solely on safety where SQF can get into more nuance with overall quality.  Kind of silly to have both, but I could see a case where a customer prefers one over the other and your predecessor felt having two was somehow relevant.  I'd find out what your customers prefer and stick to the one in most demand.

[kconradi]

Have you asked around your plant if there is/was an FSSC 22K implementation?  I would be digging for a current certificate somewhere to confirm as well.  Assuming however that the SQF Cert would be the applicable certification currently and that FSSC 22K was either prior or just partially implemented.  

 

They are both GFSI Certifications so there really wouldn't be a need for both, just one.  Seems like the document format is inhouse created.  Is there are reference document for Document Control and Creation that could steer you i the right direction?  

 

I'm in chocolate too, all the best.  

 

Hi! Thank you for your response. The unfortunate issue I'm having is that the former QA department is gone and I'm here to pick the pieces up without any correspondence for clarification from them. Are you referring to something like a master control document list? If so, there is not unfortunately.

 

Are you? That's great. You would be a great resource for me, as this sector of manufacturing is entirely new to me.

[GMO]

Are you supplying any retailers with their brand or are you own branded?  Do you supply business to business?  That's where I'd look first as to whether there is a specific customer desire for SQF or FSSC.  But I agree with previous posters, you don't normally need both.

 

From experience (brief) with both SQF and FSSC is I prefer SQF or BRCGS as GFSI standards particularly in sites where there isn't all that much experience.  FSSC from my limited experience allows a lot more leeway on interpretation.  My thoughts are that something like SQF might give you a bit more structure to what is required especially while you build experience, so if I had the choice, I'd go for that.

 

Renumbering is (excuse my language) a ball ache.  To start with I'd identify the documents you have and pull together a live document list if you don't have one.  Number, what it is and what version number.  If you don't know why that version was created (unless it was v1 so "new document") then you'll have to leave it blank or put something in about having inherited the system.

 

Then rather than renumbering, I'd probably combine gap analysis and audit into one in readiness for whatever GFSI you go for.  So work your way through with your team and other auditors.  Take the section of GFSI standard, take your procedures, see how compliant they are then go out and see if the reality matches both your procedure and the standard.  If the FSQMS has been a bit neglected, you will probably find that most of those document need major or minor adjustments.  If you like as you go you could create a new numbering system but the numbering is secondary to the content in my mind.

 

I would suggest though that you start with HACCP before all of the above.  You sound like you've had a very major change in people so that should prompt a review anyway.  At least once you've done that you can rest a little easier before getting all your FSQMS ducks in a row.

[kconradi]

Are you supplying any retailers with their brand or are you own branded?  Do you supply business to business?  That's where I'd look first as to whether there is a specific customer desire for SQF or FSSC.  But I agree with previous posters, you don't normally need both.

 

From experience (brief) with both SQF and FSSC is I prefer SQF or BRCGS as GFSI standards particularly in sites where there isn't all that much experience.  FSSC from my limited experience allows a lot more leeway on interpretation.  My thoughts are that something like SQF might give you a bit more structure to what is required especially while you build experience, so if I had the choice, I'd go for that.

 

Renumbering is (excuse my language) a ball ache.  To start with I'd identify the documents you have and pull together a live document list if you don't have one.  Number, what it is and what version number.  If you don't know why that version was created (unless it was v1 so "new document") then you'll have to leave it blank or put something in about having inherited the system.

 

Then rather than renumbering, I'd probably combine gap analysis and audit into one in readiness for whatever GFSI you go for.  So work your way through with your team and other auditors.  Take the section of GFSI standard, take your procedures, see how compliant they are then go out and see if the reality matches both your procedure and the standard.  If the FSQMS has been a bit neglected, you will probably find that most of those document need major or minor adjustments.  If you like as you go you could create a new numbering system but the numbering is secondary to the content in my mind.

 

I would suggest though that you start with HACCP before all of the above.  You sound like you've had a very major change in people so that should prompt a review anyway.  At least once you've done that you can rest a little easier before getting all your FSQMS ducks in a row.

 

Thank you for your detailed response! It's so appreciated. We do supply to retailers with their brand, as well as business to business.

 

Can you please elaborate on " I'd probably combine gap analysis and audit into one in readiness for whatever GFSI you go for". I'm a little confused by what you mean here.

 

Thank you!

[MDaleDDF]

we're fssc, and it entails quality as well.   I often wish we were anything else, if that helps....lol.

[GMO]

Thank you for your detailed response! It's so appreciated. We do supply to retailers with their brand, as well as business to business.

 

Can you please elaborate on " I'd probably combine gap analysis and audit into one in readiness for whatever GFSI you go for". I'm a little confused by what you mean here.

 

Thank you!

 

Sorry, what I mean by gap analysis is reading through the standard or standard(s) and seeing if there are any significant gaps in the design of your food safety and quality management system which you then close.  Personally unless the gaps are huge, I never bother or rather I only do with new standards where a significantly new requirement has come in but that's normally on change documents.  For existing food safety and quality management systems, I check the gaps to the standard as part of auditing anyway so as long as I can get through the workload, I miss the gap analysis bit.  I have to do the audits anyway for compliance.

 

Does that make sense?

[GMO]

we're fssc, and it entails quality as well.   I often wish we were anything else, if that helps....lol.

 

Don't all GFSI standards also cover quality?

[kconradi]

we're fssc, and it entails quality as well.   I often wish we were anything else, if that helps....lol.

 

Haha, can I ask why?

[kconradi]

Sorry, what I mean by gap analysis is reading through the standard or standard(s) and seeing if there are any significant gaps in the design of your food safety and quality management system which you then close.  Personally unless the gaps are huge, I never bother or rather I only do with new standards where a significantly new requirement has come in but that's normally on change documents.  For existing food safety and quality management systems, I check the gaps to the standard as part of auditing anyway so as long as I can get through the workload, I miss the gap analysis bit.  I have to do the audits anyway for compliance.

 

Does that make sense?

 

Yes, that makes sense. Thank you. I'm currently in the process of finding these gaps by comparing the FSSC 22000 scheme to the program that's currently in place. I have to do this internal audit of the program before I can make any significant changes. It's such a pain inheriting a program like this with its own numbering system and nobody to explain why they did it the way they did and where everything is. 

[Tony-C]

FSMS/FSQMS is common nomenclature for your own book of SOPs/programs, a Food Safety Management System is a fancy way to refer to your own manual.

 

FSSC 22000 and SQF are both GFSI approved schemes for food safety compliance, with 22000 focusing almost solely on safety where SQF can get into more nuance with overall quality.  Kind of silly to have both, but I could see a case where a customer prefers one over the other and your predecessor felt having two was somehow relevant.  I'd find out what your customers prefer and stick to the one in most demand.

 

The FSSC 22000 Certification Scheme includes quality in additional requirements:

2.5.8 Food Safety & Quality Culture

2.5.9 Quality Control - Includes requirement for Quality Policy and Objectives

 

Don't all GFSI standards also cover quality?

 

Not really, the GFSI Benchmark doesn't cover quality other than for GMP monitoring quality of Utilities so for example: The Food Safety Code: Quality, Edition 9 is not benchmarked by GFSI

 

Certification Programme Owners are currently recognised against Version 2020 of the GFSI Benchmarking Requirements.

Standard: SQF Food Safety Codes Edition 9 (level 2)

Scopes:

AI – Farming of Animals for Meat/ Milk / Eggs / Honey

BI – Farming of Plants (Other Than Grains and Pulses)

BIII – Pre-process Handling of Plant Products

CO – Animal Primary Conversion

CI – Processing of Perishable Animal Products

CII – Processing of perishable plant products

CIII – Processing of Perishable Animal and Plant Products (Mixed Products)

CIV – Processing of Ambient Stable Animal and Plant Products (Mixed Products)

D – Production of Feed

G – Provision of Storage and Distribution Services

I Production of Food Packaging

K – Production of (Bio) Chemicals and Bio-Cultures Used as Food Ingredients or Processing Aids in Food Production

 

Kind regards,

 

Tony