15 replies to this topic

[kswmreyes]

Are there auditing firms out there that do not fall under GFSI umbrella?  We used GMA-SAFE about 5 years ago and was wondering if they were still around or if there were other food safety certifiers similar to GMA-SAFE.  
 

[TimG]

Sure, there are plenty of auditing schemes and certification bodies that don't fall under GFSI. AIB and !YUM being the biggest ones I can think of, offhand. GFSI schemes seem to still be the FOTM though, even though they never quite delivered on all that was promised.

[kswmreyes]

Thank you! I will look into these other options! 

[GMO]

I came here to suggest AIB too. I know they've faced some bad press over the years but I rate them both for their own standard but also when you get them in as a CB for GFSI standards. Mostly because they focus a lot on what is actually going on in the factory rather than what the paperwork says. I've had some AIB audits where we spent days on our hands and knees with torches and half a day on paperwork. I really rate that prioritisation.

[Scampi]

make sure your customers are good with that before you sign up..............lots demand GFSI or nothing

[GMO]

make sure your customers are good with that before you sign up..............lots demand GFSI or nothing

 

Yep I was going to suggest the same.

 

It's an interesting one what behaviours that then promotes. If you need "x audit" to supply, the problem is the drive is to pass "x audit" but passing the audit and making safe food are not necessarily the same thing.

 

Then I don't think I've ever had a job where "getting x audit score" wasn't in my objectives (and not always in the objectives of the operations team annoyingly). So there is always the temptation to do what you shouldn't. I.e. if you see something but the auditor doesn't...

 

[Scampi]

 

 

It's an interesting one what behaviours that then promotes. If you need "x audit" to supply, the problem is the drive is to pass "x audit" but passing the audit and making safe food are not necessarily the same thing.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Preaching to the choir on that one.............GFSI will NEVER achieve what they think they will.  The current system is inherently flawed

[MDaleDDF]

It's funny everyone wants GFSI certs, because if I'm being honest, AIB did a better inspection of things that actually matter when it comes to food safety when we used to use them.    GFSI does a hell of a job making sure my paperwork is right though!   Lol.

[GMO]

It's funny everyone wants GFSI certs, because if I'm being honest, AIB did a better inspection of things that actually matter when it comes to food safety when we used to use them.    GFSI does a hell of a job making sure my paperwork is right though!   Lol.

 

Exactly. I rate AIB. There are still business out there though that use the results unhelpfully but that tends to be internal. AIB feels like you've had a thorough going over with a camera up your jacksie kind of overview. Not just a "oh I see your engineer turned up to the HACCP meeting" (tick!)

[Lynx42]

It's funny everyone wants GFSI certs, because if I'm being honest, AIB did a better inspection of things that actually matter when it comes to food safety when we used to use them.    GFSI does a hell of a job making sure my paperwork is right though!   Lol.

 

Our AIB audits are harsh because EVERYTHING is a finding, and usually a double whammy, one for what happened (spiderweb on a pallet that came in the day before but she only saw it because it was stacked and eye level to her) and two for not following our program (cleaning).  We had 13 findings on our last AIB. One spiderweb is an AIB finding, but SQF barely looks at the walls or our lifts, which AIB is all over with a flashlight.  

Might be that our AIB auditor lives about 45 minutes away, but the SQF auditors have all lived across the country and want to get through it as quickly as possible so they can catch an earlier flight.   

[GMO]

Our AIB audits are harsh because EVERYTHING is a finding, and usually a double whammy, one for what happened (spiderweb on a pallet that came in the day before but she only saw it because it was stacked and eye level to her) and two for not following our program (cleaning).  We had 13 findings on our last AIB. One spiderweb is an AIB finding, but SQF barely looks at the walls or our lifts, which AIB is all over with a flashlight.  

Might be that our AIB auditor lives about 45 minutes away, but the SQF auditors have all lived across the country and want to get through it as quickly as possible so they can catch an earlier flight.   

 

Yeah I'm not always down with how they score. I think they're sometimes really lenient. Like you can get a tonne of findings in one category and it doesn't affect the score then they double up with adequacy of programs or whatever they call it and training etc. I'd rather the scoring were simpler. That said, I normally agree with the number, not just how they got there.

[beautiophile]

It's funny everyone wants GFSI certs, because if I'm being honest, AIB did a better inspection of things that actually matter when it comes to food safety when we used to use them.    GFSI does a hell of a job making sure my paperwork is right though!   Lol.

I have filled tons of customers' questionnaires. Many ask if we hold a GFSI cert, but none among those give an opened option, like stating: "GFSI-standard certification or equivalent?" 

[GMO]

I have filled tons of customers' questionnaires. Many ask if we hold a GFSI cert, but none among those give an opened option, like stating: "GFSI-standard certification or equivalent?" 

 

I suspect because then they'd have to do the work to establish equivalence or that it covers the parts of the audit required if you were going to do a supplier audit. Also if it's a scheme they're not familiar with, they may feel uncomfortable. For example, while the AIB standard covers trace, from memory I've had loads of auditors just ask to see a recent trace rather than set one themselves or even miss it entirely. I said I rate AIB and still do but having recently been into a non GFSI site, I wouldn't take it as read that some of those basic system elements are there. Much as I kind of hate what GFSI has become.

 

Back about 15-20 years ago, some of these sites didn't have robust systems and GFSI have brought them up to a baseline. I just see it as a systems audit now though and people have got really good at passing system audits even if their systems don't match reality. It's really bad at assessing behaviours are compliant. AIB is better (not perfect but better).

[MlissaB]

Our AIB audits are harsh because EVERYTHING is a finding, and usually a double whammy, one for what happened (spiderweb on a pallet that came in the day before but she only saw it because it was stacked and eye level to her) and two for not following our program (cleaning).  We had 13 findings on our last AIB. One spiderweb is an AIB finding, but SQF barely looks at the walls or our lifts, which AIB is all over with a flashlight.  

Might be that our AIB auditor lives about 45 minutes away, but the SQF auditors have all lived across the country and want to get through it as quickly as possible so they can catch an earlier flight.   

 

This was always my complaint. I understand if they find multiple spider webs that it may be a systemic issue, but frequently one oops is NOT a systemic issue. Or one employee forgot to take off a chain and rectifies it as soon as they are reminded vs. you see jewelry throughout the facility. They changed how they scored which was always hard to understand and then double hit you on a lot of items. I always preferred their audit technique but not their scoring. 

[jfrey123]

I'm with everyone who has problems with the GFSI auditing system, yet at the same time I'm currently in the middle of trying to approve a supplier who doesn't have a GFSI "or equivalent" third party audit.  Our supplier questionnaires are annoyingly extensive (I inherited them when I transitioned into this role), and for people who are GFSI it's really annoying for them to confirm they have the 10+ programs we ask about along with providing copies of about 5 of them for us to review.  The whole idea is supposed to be that a qualified auditor has spent days in this facility, scrutinized them harshly, and certified they are not a risk to my business.

 

But this supplier not only lacks a GFSI cert, but they openly answered they lack the programs we requested copies of.  Straight up no EMP, no Supplier Approval of their own, No Internal Audit program, no Calibration for Equipment, No Food Fraud program.  We're now in a back and forth where they gave us copies of "documents" (not controlled, look like they're written by ChatGPT) where as of 3/24/2026 they have these programs now, and they're the weakest single page program outlines I've ever seen.  So while we all know GFSI has holes and gaps, sticking to requiring those certs has helped me avoid having ever been put in this position and it's not fun, let me tell ya!

 

The tricky rub is that they're already in store with a retail partner who asked us to use their products in a tray we produce.  Pushback from our sales and product development team revolves around "Well, if the retailer uses them already, why can't we?"  Oy vey, I'm working on a PowerPoint that teaches why retail isn't held to the same standard under FSMA or even SQF as we are being a manufacturer...

[GMO]

The tricky rub is that they're already in store with a retail partner who asked us to use their products in a tray we produce.  Pushback from our sales and product development team revolves around "Well, if the retailer uses them already, why can't we?"  

 

100%

 

Not sure if it's a branded item or if it's a retailer brand (i.e. own brand) but if it's the latter, stupid retailer as it's their name who will be dragged through the mud. If it's the former then from experience, no technical person will get involved in the listing of that product. It doesn't matter a jot if their selling it or not because no retailer can get into the weeds of every branded product they sell. They rely somewhat on the brand owner being responsible and having their neck on the block if it all goes wrong.

 

As soon as it's in your pack, either your brand or the brand of the retailer, then it's very very different.

 

On them I'd bite the bullet and visit.