BRC7-3.5 Procedures-Raw Material Risk Assessment/Supplier Approval

Hi All,

In view of the frequent queries regarding BRC7’s Sections (3.5.1.1, 3.5.1.2) on  Raw Material Risk assessment / Supplier Approval I have assembled the attached example to try and illustrate a possible workflow via combining 2 previous posts and adding/generating some numbers.

Further details and the original sourced posts are included - linked within the following  Excel file(see Sheets 0,1,2 etc) -

 BRC7-3.5-Raw Material Risk Assessment 3.0a.xls   45.5KB   5154 downloads

(above is current version of file as of 14/05/2016)

Comments welcome as usual, especially if Excel errors spotted.

PS - in respect to permutations available relating to the mechanics of supplier audit/certification, these 2 fairly recent threads contain some quite useful comments IMO -

http://www.ifsqn.com...plier-approval/

http://www.ifsqn.com...questionnaires/

PPS - some additional comments/info -

(1) The procedure illustrated in attached Excel uses a combination of  raw material risk factors related to (a) the process HACCP Plan, (b) the VA of the Raw Material, (c) the Quality/Legality of the finished product.

(2) The risk values in (a) are assumed to be interpreted via a decision tree such as shown in this link –

http://www.ifsqn.com...nts/#entry38494

(3) The overall raw material risk status (RMR) as given by Sheet 1 of  Excel  may determine the audit frequency for  maintenance of  Approved Supplier Status. Some BRC6 examples from a Procedure by Tony are given here  –

http://www.ifsqn.com...ent/#entry79193

(4) Similarly the RMR may also influence the monitoring frequency for acceptance control at raw material reception. The cumulative results of the latter can subsequently provide feedback for item (3).

Examples of an ultra-basic Sampling Procedure and a BRC Guideline document follow -

 Incoming Raw Material Sampling Program.png   393.72KB   210 downloads

 BRC6 - Introduction to Acceptance Procedure Raw materials.pdf   3.52MB   2873 downloads

P3S - I should add although it's probably obvious that the Risk score values used in the various Excel columns refer to those specific  "hazards"  found  to generate the highest risk values for the particular raw material other than that derived from the  Vulnerability Assessment which is effectively an averaged datum.

P4S (260816) - Word document below contains some additional Forum links/threads on RA/VA which I found useful.

 Additional useful RA-VA forum threads RV.1.doc   24.5KB   1696 downloads

Charles,

Well done.

Marshall

Hi All,

I have updated the Excel in Post 1 after doing some tweaks on the Procedure so as to hopefully refine the use and display information.

The changes are detailed/discussed on sheet 1 of the Excel together with a few examples of the modifications.

PS - I subsequently realized that some people might like to play with the original version which is relatively Vanilla so, just in case, -

(file deleted since getting a bit aged / Ch.C/14-05-2016) (Current version maintained in Post 1)

(the basic RA calculations are identical to later version)

Hi Charles,

I'm in the processing of updating my ingredient risk assessment and I like your layout. However, I don't understand the letters associated with the "Overall Ingredient Risk". For instance, if I have 12 or higher in column H (Allergen) it will generate a "High-A" in column O "Overall Ingredient Risk". If the 12 or higher is in the next column (column I) then in column O it generates a "High-F", unless the previous column is a 12 or higher. Each previous column seems to supersede the following column (i.e. if column H is a 12 and column I is a 12, Column O will still show "High-A" rather than "High-F")

I've been reading through the excel spreadsheet and the links associated to this thread, but have not been able to understand what the different letters following "High" are referring to. Can you help me in this respect?

Thank you.

Hi Charles,

 

I'm in the processing of updating my ingredient risk assessment and I like your layout. However, I don't understand the letters associated with the "Overall Ingredient Risk". For instance, if I have 12 or higher in column H (Allergen) it will generate a "High-A" in column O "Overall Ingredient Risk". If the 12 or higher is in the next column (column I) then in column O it generates a "High-F", unless the previous column is a 12 or higher. Each previous column seems to supersede the following column (i.e. if column H is a 12 and column I is a 12, Column O will still show "High-A" rather than "High-F")

 

I've been reading through the excel spreadsheet and the links associated to this thread, but have not been able to understand what the different letters following "High" are referring to. Can you help me in this respect?

 

Thank you.

Hi PSC,

Thks yr comments. Nice to have feedback. Yr observations are accurate.

The excel sheet, and particularly Column O, is restricted partially by my PC only having ver. 2003 but mainly by my regretfully limited experience with Excel. The objective in Column O is easy in a full computer program but I don't know VBA for Excel/macros.

I have slightly modified the format/text in some cells of Sheet 1 and expanded the explanation below display to hopefully answer yr queries (See Note 2a). The result is attached below.

Please revert if anything unclear or something(Excel-wise) looks not working correctly.

(File deleted,Ch.C / 14-05-2016, please see latest version in Post 1)

PS - Note that other risk matrices are usable by changing the value of "12" (see Notes 1a,b,c) and  the values in cells P(2-4)

Hi All,

Have been using Excel a bit more lately so was able to (hopefully) improve/streamline the layout of previous version a bit. Text has been adjusted accordingly.

(File deleted and transferred to Post 1, Ch.C/14-05-2016)(Current version is maintained in Post 1)

Maybe FDA will come out with an even simpler Procedure for their anticipated list of High Risk Foods.

Hi

I thought you assessed each raw material in the state it comes into the factory not in relation to what processing your factory will be doing to that raw material. (in the attached excel you say with respect to the process including baking)

e.g If you were risk assessing flour...would you look at the flour suppliers HACCP and from that determine what the micro/allergen/chem risk could be?

Do you need three risk assessments

1. Group your raw materials into similar groups..then risk assess these groups for inherent qualities to give an overall score (inherent qualities being allergen/chem/micro for the type of material).
How detailed do the groups need to be...e.g. Ambient stable could cover canned products or jams etc
This will give you a RMR  that will determine your raw material acceptance and testing procedure (e.g. visual inspection or coa etc)

2. Risk asses your supplier based on service level history, complaints, country of origin, any form of certification..this gives you how you should monitor the supplier either.

3. Do a vulnerability assessment on the raw material groups with economic factors etc to give you your testing procedure 

how do they link?

Super confused!

R

Apologies- that was a bit garbled. but the main point being HOW do you assess a raw material for chem contamination - looking at YOUR process or your SUPPLIERS process? and making a judgement call?

Hi

 

I thought you assessed each raw material in the state it comes into the factory not in relation to what processing your factory will be doing to that raw material. (in the attached excel you say with respect to the process including baking)

e.g If you were risk assessing flour...would you look at the flour suppliers HACCP and from that determine what the micro/allergen/chem risk could be?

 

Do you need three risk assessments

 

1. Group your raw materials into similar groups..then risk assess these groups for inherent qualities to give an overall score (inherent qualities being allergen/chem/micro for the type of material).
How detailed do the groups need to be...e.g. Ambient stable could cover canned products or jams etc
This will give you a RMR  that will determine your raw material acceptance and testing procedure (e.g. visual inspection or coa etc)

 

2. Risk asses your supplier based on service level history, complaints, country of origin, any form of certification..this gives you how you should monitor the supplier either.

3. Do a vulnerability assessment on the raw material groups with economic factors etc to give you your testing procedure 

 

how do they link?

 

Super confused!

 

R

Apologies- that was a bit garbled. but the main point being HOW do you assess a raw material for chem contamination - looking at YOUR process or your SUPPLIERS process? and making a judgement call?

Hi rh,

I am assuming the context of yr query is HACCP rather than HARPC.

Yr initial queries are fundamental to implementing a hazard analysis in a HACCP plan.

Did you see the decision trees I referenced in Post 1 ?. These afaik answer yr query as to the reference point for a typical risk assessment procedure of the raw material. The 2^nd  example is based on  Mortimore’s recent text on HACCP (2013).

(1) I would assume you can group different materials together if you can validate that they possess the same hazard characteristics. The latter would presumably depend on the materials/history involved.

(2) The basic (BRC) Supplier requirement is for Supplier Approval (SA). The requirements for SA are  spelled out in the last paragraph of clause 3.5.1.1 and the entire clause 3.5.1.2. The items you mention would likely be involved, yes. Also refer to Post 1, (3).

(3) Some basic VA requirements are spelled out in clause 5.4.2. An interpretation of BRC’s requirements is in the VA Procedure in the excel file attached to Post 1. Other threads here have alternative procedures.

I agree that the BRC Standard’s requirements in this case are convoluted and not smoothly linked together. This is BRC’s style. You might consider purchasing their Interpretation Guidelines if  you wish to know their “exact” thinking.

(Post 8) A short answer is via  (a) Using an Approved Supplier, (b) having an agreed Raw Material  Specification, (c) a COA, (d) Verification testing, (e) establishing/maintaining GMPs within the factory ( refer the Decision Tree I mentioned above).

Hope that helps to answer yr queries.

PS - It is maybe worth noting that –

(a) the BRC7 Standard contains no mention or definition of high/medium/low risk raw materials.

(b) the Standard (clause 3.5.1.2) does contain a mention of low risk Supplier but without defining the  meaning of such terminologies as applied to a Supplier. (In theory a Supplier of “high risk” raw materials might themselves be rated as either “high risk” or “low risk” from an Audit/Performance POV).

(c) the BRC6 document attached in Post 1 mentions high risk ingredient, but again provides no relevant definitions.

I have chosen to assume that a "high risk"  raw material is interpreted as given in the excel file, sheet 1. This is an expansion of the safety-related interpretation used  in the 2^nd haccp Decision Tree of Post 1. Other interpretations are possible and probably exist. BRC may have deliberately avoided being too specific.

I also assume that a supplier of "high risk raw materials" is designated as a "high risk Supplier". This is again subjective but implies (to me) that the low risk Supplier mentioned in clause 3.5.1.2  is providing  Low Risk Raw materials.

In reality there are a substantial variety of definitions of "High Risk materials" currently being used  in the Literature.  Just as an example you could compare the criteria being suggested  by FDA in their Draft Procedure for determining High Risk Foods. This document has a rather different viewpoint of High Risk.

The “processing” related comment in the 2^nd decision tree has practical relevance IMEX, even where the raw material is theoretically classified as Low Risk.

Greetings, I like parts of the sample given and will incorporate some it to improve what we came up with which is still in the evolution process. Wish we had it when preparing for BRC . We are a very small company with 4 employees so have  merged many functions into this form. We Googled every ingredient and supplier for fraud and abuse, recalls, physical, biological, and chemical hazards. It was laborious to do but is now easy to maintain and make changes to. It passed our audit.

Greetings, I like parts of the sample given and will incorporate some it to improve what we came up with which is still in the evolution process. Wish we had it when preparing for BRC . We are a very small company with 4 employees so have  merged many functions into this form. We Googled every ingredient and supplier for fraud and abuse, recalls, physical, biological, and chemical hazards. It was laborious to do but is now easy to maintain and make changes to. It passed our audit.

Both of these are a much cleaner format that what we are currently using for Risk assessments and vulnerability assessments with my company. (Sometimes, I feel like we're perpetually in the late '90's with our formatting. And with using AS400 systems.) Unfortunately, the template we are using is corporate mandated and I cannot change any of the format, which gets frustrating when some questions are worded/some values given with produce or liquid products in mind, and I'm the only meat plant in the company. 

Regardless, well done, Charles C and Harminnie! I'm going to save these and request with puppy dog eyes that I be allowed to tweak the format.

Greetings, I like parts of the sample given and will incorporate some it to improve what we came up with which is still in the evolution process. Wish we had it when preparing for BRC . We are a very small company with 4 employees so have  merged many functions into this form. We Googled every ingredient and supplier for fraud and abuse, recalls, physical, biological, and chemical hazards. It was laborious to do but is now easy to maintain and make changes to. It passed our audit.

Hi Harminnie,

Many thanks for the feedback and Congratulations on getting it through.

It’s a heck of a lot of work to demonstrate that all your ingredients have low Vulnerability and zero high risk.

I have a couple of queries –

(1)  How did you progress from the data in columns L> R to get the conclusions in Column S ? Visual Inspection (not unreasonable IMO since “one’s" everywhere) ?

(2) Did the auditor have any interest in how you actually determined all the “one’s” ?

I have got the impression from threads here that BRC are (this year) basically expecting to see that people are, at least,  “making an effort” (in current case a massive effort) as far as VA is concerned. Was that the "feeling" in yr  audit ?

Do you have an example for something geared toward SQF?

Hi All,

 

In view of the frequent queries regarding BRC7’s Sections (3.5.1.1, 3.5.1.2) on  Raw Material Risk assessment / Supplier Approval I have assembled the attached example to try and illustrate a possible workflow via combining 2 previous posts and adding/generating some numbers.

 

Further details and the original sourced posts are included - linked within the following  Excel file(see Sheets 0,1,2 etc) -

 

BRC7-3.5-Raw Material Risk Assessment 3.0a.xls

(above is current version of file as of 14/05/2016)

 

Comments welcome as usual, especially if Excel errors spotted.

 

PS - in respect to permutations available relating to the mechanics of supplier audit/certification, these 2 fairly recent threads contain some quite useful comments IMO -

 

http://www.ifsqn.com...plier-approval/

 

http://www.ifsqn.com...questionnaires/

 

PPS - some additional comments/info -

 

(1) The procedure illustrated in attached Excel uses a combination of  raw material risk factors related to (a) the process HACCP Plan, (b) the VA of the Raw Material, (c) the Quality/Legality of the finished product.

 

(2) The risk values in (a) are assumed to be interpreted via a decision tree such as shown in this link –

http://www.ifsqn.com...nts/#entry38494

 

(3) The overall raw material risk status (RMR) as given by Sheet 1 of  Excel  may determine the audit frequency for  maintenance of  Approved Supplier Status. Some BRC6 examples from a Procedure by Tony are given here  –

http://www.ifsqn.com...ent/#entry79193

 

(4) Similarly the RMR may also influence the monitoring frequency for acceptance control at raw material reception. The cumulative results of the latter can subsequently provide feedback for item (3).

Examples of an ultra-basic Sampling Procedure and a BRC Guideline document follow -

 

Incoming Raw Material Sampling Program.png

 

BRC6 - Introduction to Acceptance Procedure Raw materials.pdf

 

P3S - I should add although it's probably obvious that the Risk score values used in the various Excel columns refer to those specific  "hazards"  found  to generate the highest risk values for the particular raw material other than that derived from the  Vulnerability Assessment which is effectively an averaged datum.

 

P4S (260816) - Word document below contains some additional Forum links/threads on RA/VA which I found useful.

Additional useful RA-VA forum threads RV.1.doc

hello charles, first of all thank you for your great work, but i was wondering what the numbers refers to in the excel work for haccp risks , such 3/6/2/8?? did you established a notation system?

hello charles, first of all thank you for your great work, but i was wondering what the numbers refers to in the excel work for haccp risks , such 3/6/2/8?? did you established a notation system?

Hi selma,

Thanks.

I'm guessing you are referring to the numerical entries in the cells, eg "8" in cell J9

You're right, I probably should have explained the origins.

The numbers are calculated from Table 1 at right hand side, eg for cell J9, I assumed LOW x HIGH = 2 x 4 = 8

(also see comments 1a,1b on same excel sheet)

You can see that the "12" used for the blue "trigger" cells correlates to the minimum risk level for the HIGH range of Tables 1, 2

The first step is where all the hard work comes in of course.

@mlkane,

Sorry late reply, I missed yr Post.

As you can see from recent Forum Posts, SQF have taken a somewhat different approach to BRC.

The SQF audit situation seems to me similar to that which first occurred after BRC's introduction of Food Fraud, nobody is yet quite sure what SQF actually want. Including me. The SQF Guidance potentially involves a lot of work, I'm waiting to see if their audit expectations are rather less demanding.

For both BRC and SQF,  availability of  appropriate databases seems likey to be the biggest handicap. I have yet to see a Safety-specific Food Fraud database as would apparently be convenient for SQF ??

Hi selma,

 

Thanks.

 

I'm guessing you are referring to the numerical entries in the cells, eg "8" in cell J9

 

You're right, I probably should have explained the origins.

 

The numbers are calculated from Table 1 at right hand side, eg for cell J9, I assumed LOW x HIGH = 2 x 4 = 8

(also see comments 1a,1b on same excel sheet)

 

You can see that the "12" used for the blue "trigger" cells correlates to the minimum risk level for the HIGH range of Tables 1, 2

 

The first step is where all the hard work comes in of course.

 

@mlkane,

 

Sorry late reply, I missed yr Post.

 

As you can see from recent Forum Posts, SQF have taken a somewhat different approach to BRC.

 

The SQF audit situation seems to me similar to that which first occurred after BRC's introduction of Food Fraud, nobody is yet quite sure what SQF actually want. Including me. The SQF Guidance potentially involves a lot of work, I'm waiting to see if their audit expectations are rather less demanding.

 

For both BRC and SQF,  availability of  appropriate databases seems likey to be the biggest handicap. I have yet to see a Safety-specific Food Fraud database as would apparently be convenient for SQF ??

hello charles, can you please explain to me when i should ask for a COC and when i should ask for a COA? im a little confused 

hello charles, can you please explain to me when i should ask for a COC and when i should ask for a COA? im a little confused 

Hi selma,

A COA is typically far more stringent than a COC, eg has quantitative analytical data relating to the specific lot or item. COCs tend to be more general ,eg simply stating that the product conforms to its specifications.

Can have a look at this -

http://gsqa.com/cocs...e-really-worth/

COAs tend to be more quantitative than COCs

Thank Charles.C

You always share good knowledge with us. I have cleaned  from your R.A and applied at our factory.

Hi All,

 

In view of the frequent queries regarding BRC7’s Sections (3.5.1.1, 3.5.1.2) on  Raw Material Risk assessment / Supplier Approval I have assembled the attached example to try and illustrate a possible workflow via combining 2 previous posts and adding/generating some numbers.

 

Further details and the original sourced posts are included - linked within the following  Excel file(see Sheets 0,1,2 etc) -

 

BRC7-3.5-Raw Material Risk Assessment 3.0a.xls

(above is current version of file as of 14/05/2016)

 

Comments welcome as usual, especially if Excel errors spotted.

 

PS - in respect to permutations available relating to the mechanics of supplier audit/certification, these 2 fairly recent threads contain some quite useful comments IMO -

 

http://www.ifsqn.com...plier-approval/

 

http://www.ifsqn.com...questionnaires/

 

PPS - some additional comments/info -

 

(1) The procedure illustrated in attached Excel uses a combination of  raw material risk factors related to (a) the process HACCP Plan, (b) the VA of the Raw Material, (c) the Quality/Legality of the finished product.

 

(2) The risk values in (a) are assumed to be interpreted via a decision tree such as shown in this link –

http://www.ifsqn.com...nts/#entry38494

 

(3) The overall raw material risk status (RMR) as given by Sheet 1 of  Excel  may determine the audit frequency for  maintenance of  Approved Supplier Status. Some BRC6 examples from a Procedure by Tony are given here  –

http://www.ifsqn.com...ent/#entry79193

 

(4) Similarly the RMR may also influence the monitoring frequency for acceptance control at raw material reception. The cumulative results of the latter can subsequently provide feedback for item (3).

Examples of an ultra-basic Sampling Procedure and a BRC Guideline document follow -

 

Incoming Raw Material Sampling Program.png

 

BRC6 - Introduction to Acceptance Procedure Raw materials.pdf

 

P3S - I should add although it's probably obvious that the Risk score values used in the various Excel columns refer to those specific  "hazards"  found  to generate the highest risk values for the particular raw material other than that derived from the  Vulnerability Assessment which is effectively an averaged datum.

 

P4S (260816) - Word document below contains some additional Forum links/threads on RA/VA which I found useful.

Additional useful RA-VA forum threads RV.1.doc

Do you have an available version with SQF Requirements? I am using this format for each Raw Material.

Do you have an available version with SQF Requirements? I am using this format for each Raw Material.

Hi Kane,

Thks for the excel. I'm not a SQF user so unfamiliar with specific differences to BRC which no doubt exist. However I generally liked yr format from a haccp POV. Have 3 offhand comments - (1) the textual definitions of low/medium/high risk raw materials seem rather "vague" ( Using matrices offers more clarity IMO but also involves more work), (2) I think you need to include the possibility of "process cross-contamination" in all 3 hazard categories, (3) I asume you are handling SQF food fraud separately, BRC attempt to cram "everything"  together.

IIRC there are some SQF-centric examples of responses to their risk assessment clauses elsewhere in this forum. Every FS Standard seems to choose a different variant of basic haccp unfortunately. Probably not a coincidence.

Dear Charles.C,

I have 1 question about column product legality.

Could you please give me some matrix 3x3 or 5x5 about risk assessment of product legality.

Thank you in advance.

Best Regards,

Saravudh

Dear Charles.C,

 

I have 1 question about column product legality.

Could you please give me some matrix 3x3 or 5x5 about risk assessment of product legality.

Thank you in advance.

 

Best Regards,

Saravudh

Hi Saravudh,

It might depend on the specific Legality requirements.

However it seems to me that, in Principle, using an appropriately approved supplier  the "raw material" can be assumed as legally compliant.

Hi All,

 

In view of the frequent queries regarding BRC7’s Sections (3.5.1.1, 3.5.1.2) on  Raw Material Risk assessment / Supplier Approval I have assembled the attached example to try and illustrate a possible workflow via combining 2 previous posts and adding/generating some numbers.

 

Further details and the original sourced posts are included - linked within the following  Excel file(see Sheets 0,1,2 etc) -

 

BRC7-3.5-Raw Material Risk Assessment 3.0a.xls

(above is current version of file as of 14/05/2016)

 

Comments welcome as usual, especially if Excel errors spotted.

 

PS - in respect to permutations available relating to the mechanics of supplier audit/certification, these 2 fairly recent threads contain some quite useful comments IMO -

 

http://www.ifsqn.com...plier-approval/

 

http://www.ifsqn.com...questionnaires/

 

PPS - some additional comments/info -

 

(1) The procedure illustrated in attached Excel uses a combination of  raw material risk factors related to (a) the process HACCP Plan, (b) the VA of the Raw Material, (c) the Quality/Legality of the finished product.

 

(2) The risk values in (a) are assumed to be interpreted via a decision tree such as shown in this link –

http://www.ifsqn.com...nts/#entry38494

 

(3) The overall raw material risk status (RMR) as given by Sheet 1 of  Excel  may determine the audit frequency for  maintenance of  Approved Supplier Status. Some BRC6 examples from a Procedure by Tony are given here  –

http://www.ifsqn.com...ent/#entry79193

 

(4) Similarly the RMR may also influence the monitoring frequency for acceptance control at raw material reception. The cumulative results of the latter can subsequently provide feedback for item (3).

Examples of an ultra-basic Sampling Procedure and a BRC Guideline document follow -

 

Incoming Raw Material Sampling Program.png

 

BRC6 - Introduction to Acceptance Procedure Raw materials.pdf

 

P3S - I should add although it's probably obvious that the Risk score values used in the various Excel columns refer to those specific  "hazards"  found  to generate the highest risk values for the particular raw material other than that derived from the  Vulnerability Assessment which is effectively an averaged datum.

 

P4S (260816) - Word document below contains some additional Forum links/threads on RA/VA which I found useful.

Additional useful RA-VA forum threads RV.1.doc

Would like to go back this file.

Cell N7 Product Legality.

Please bear with me, I have this elementary question but how do we assess the risk of product legality? 

If a supplier is GFSI certified can I say that the product legality risk is low?

Would like to go back this file.

 

 

Cell N7 Product Legality.

 

Please bear with me, I have this elementary question but how do we assess the risk of product legality? 

If a supplier is GFSI certified can I say that the product legality risk is low?

Hi hadtoregister,

Please note that, afaik, GFSI do not "certify" any supplier or manufacturing facility. GFSI "recognizes"  FS Standards which comply with its benchmarks.

I think yr (general) query is equivalent to post 21 which I attempted to (generally) reply to in Post 22.

Also see Note 1a in the Excel attached to Post 1.

Hi hadtoregister,

 

Please note that, afaik, GFSI do not "certify" any supplier or manufacturing facility. GFSI "recognizes"  FS Standards which comply with its benchmarks.

 

I think yr (general) query is equivalent to post 21 which I attempted to (generally) reply to in Post 22.

 

Also see Note 1a in the Excel attached to Post 1.

Hi Charles,

Yes I read post 21 and post 22, however they are opposite than what I was thinking.

A raw material's legality being accepted is a pre-requisite of its supplier being an ''approved supplier'' ? Why post 22 is indicating the opposite?