Introduction to HACCP Principles and CookSafe Food Safety Management System
HACCP Principles
Hazard Analysis Critical Control Point (HACCP) is defined as a system concerned with food safety management (Eves & Dervisi 2005). According to Riswadkar (2000), the system’s major focus is identification and prevention of hazards likely to cause food borne illnesses (FBI).
HACCP is used to overcome the shortcomings associated with manufacturing processes with regards to food items. The system also involves of random sampling of various food products to enhance safety.
Bolton, Meally, Blair, McDowell and Cowan (2008) are of the opinion that HACCP ensures quality and safety are integrated into every step of the food production process.
The system encompasses specifications of the product formulation and distribution. Consequently, safety is ensured even in cases where potential consumers misuse or abuse the food product.
According to Buchanan (1990), HACCP was developed in the 1960s. Over the years, it has emerged as a major approach in securing and enhancing the safety of food products supplied in the market (Buchanan 1990).
The popularity of the system emanates from its preventive approach to food safety. To this end, the system indentifies, evaluates, and controls hazards that are associated with food safety.
CookSafe
CookSafe, on the other hand, refers to a guidance manual for caterers. It was developed by the Food Standards Agency Scotland (Food Standards Agency [FSA] 2004). The manual provides information on the various types of food businesses.
The HACCP working group of the Scottish Food Enforcement Liaison Committee (SFELC) was also involved in its formulation (FSA 2004). The caterers’ guidance manual is designed to help catering businesses understand and implement HACCP based systems.
It is noted that the manual categorises hazards into chemicals, micro-biologicals, and physicals (Bolton et al. 2008). Hazard is considered as anything that may harm individuals who consume the supplied food products.
CookSafe adopts the HACCP approach in managing food quality and safety. It requires all caterers to conduct hazard analysis in their food businesses (FSA 2004).
The analysis takes place where caterers identify the various hazards associated with each process and step in their business. Consequently, anything that can go wrong in the business is highlighted and measures to control or prevent the hazard implemented (Bryan 1999).
According to Riswadkar (2000), the risk management philosophy adopted by HACCP is very basic. The system is used to highlight the critical risk areas. The identification helps the firm to focus on these hazards.
As a result, risk management efforts are maximised in the process. In light of this, HACCP provides a very systematic approach to food safety management.
Outline of the Audit Report
The following report provides a HACCP and CookSafe audit analysis. The report critically reviews the various aspects of these systems that are essential in food safety management. The approach adopted in this review demonstrates the effectiveness of food safety management using HACCP.
The report highlights some of the difficulties related to the application of CookSafe in small and large catering firms. The HACCP based audit investigates the various aspects of the system.
In addition, the report explores the effectiveness of HACCP application in the CookSafe program. The audit also highlights some of the major problems hindering the application and effectiveness of the CookSafe system.
Key Aspects of HACCP Audit
According to Ehiri, Morris, and McEwen (1995), the desire to promote food safety has made HACCP a necessity for the food processors. HACCP has emerged as the preferred mode of achieving total quality management in the industry.
As such, the need for HACCP audit in this industry is made apparent. Many food regulation agencies, such as FDA, have incorporated this system into their programs. For instance, FDA made HACCP part of its audit program in its 1999 Food Code (Riswadkar 2000).
At the heart of most food safety management programs today is HACCP. Auditing the effectiveness of the system in various food safety management programs involves analysing several aspects related to the same (Eves & Dervisi 2005). The aspects are apparent from the process approach adopted by HACCP.
Riswadkar (2000) advances seven principles associated with the implementation of the HACCP model. The first principle involves conducting hazard analysis and risk assessment.
It is noted that this is the most important principle of this system. Effective food safety controls rely on the proper identification and assessment of risks. The first principle entails a very involving and engaging process.
The reason is that all the potential hazards must be identified. Failure to highlight these items can result in unacceptable risks. The risks may manifest themselves in spite of the implementation of the correct control and monitoring systems. As such, this principle is very essential in enhancing the effectiveness of HACCP.
The second aspect of HACCP entails identifying critical control points (CCPs) in food preparation (Gilling, Taylor, Kane & Taylor 2001).
It is a fact that many aspects of the food processing system are considered as control points. However, only very few of them qualify as CCPs. CCPs refer to controllable points in a given process. Failure to control these elements may result in unacceptable risks (Gilling et al. 2001).
CCPs refer to those points, procedures, and steps in the food production process where safety and hazard can be controlled. The various hazards can also be prevented, reduced, and eliminated at such stages.
Most of the control points are defined in relation to consumer protection. However, other steps beyond this basic protection can be identified and dealt with.
The third principle of HACCP entails establishing critical boundaries, specifications, and limits for each of the CCPs (Gilling et al. 2001). The system requires the establishment of critical limits for each of these points.
The limits ensure that the system controls the identified hazards effectively. They also act as safety margins for each of the CCPs, enhancing the control and prevention of the identified hazard in the process (Riswadkar 2000).
Establishing the procedures needed to monitor the CCPs constitutes the fourth principle of HACCP (Riswadkar 2000). Monitoring and review entails a planned set of activities.
It involves conducting tests and carrying out observations. The aim is to ensure that the CCPs are regulated. The principle ensures that the various aspects of monitoring are mapped out.
The fifth HACCP principle entails the establishment of corrective action protocols for each of the CCPs (Gilling et al. 2001). It helps in making corrections in case the monitoring aspect indicates any deviations exceeding critical safety margins.
Riswadkar (2000) provides a working definition of critical deviations. Riswadkar views them as deficiencies that may lead to unacceptable risks with regards to health of the consumer. Such deficiencies need to be addressed immediately.
Establishment of procedures for recordkeeping constitutes the last aspect of HACCP system (Eves & Dervisi 2005). Maintenance of records is very essential to the system.
The records encompass all the other aspects of HACCP, including critical control points and safety limits. Corrective actions, hazard analysis, and verification activities constitute the other components of the HACCP system.
The current comprehensive HACCP audit will take into account all these elements of the system. Evaluation of the key aspects will determine the efficiency of HACCP implementation in a given food safety management system. The presence of all these elements should be highlighted in the CookSafe program.
According to Taylor (2001), an effective and efficient HACCP program involves a systematic approach to the issues associated with food safety management. Effectiveness of HACCP is also reflected in the risk management philosophy of the system.
The philosophy puts emphasis on the reduction of potential hazards, most of which are inherent in food safety (Eves & Dervisi 2005). The strategy enables food processing firms to direct their resources towards the prevention and mitigation of threats to food safety.
HACCP EC 852/2004 Regulation on Foodstuffs Hygiene
The suitability of HACCP in food safety management is made apparent in the wide scope of the system. The effectiveness of this approach is enhanced by various regulations. One of them is the HACCP EC 852/2004 Regulation on Foodstuffs Hygiene.
Caterers and other food producers have are legally obliged to provide safe products to the consumers (Regulation (EC) no. 852/2004 of the European parliament and of the council [Regulation 852/2004] 2004).
The regulations seek to modernise, consolidate, and simplify legislations on food hygiene in the European Union. In addition, HACCP EC 852/2004 regulation focuses on controlling the various public health protection systems.
The regulation clarifies the primary responsibilities of food business operators, ensuring that they conduct their activities safely.
Generally, regulation 852/2004 stipulates what is expected from food business operators. The regulation applies to all categories of operators, including those at the primary production level (Seward 2000).
However, it is important to note that the needs of the primary producers are different from the expectations of other food operators. All food business operators are required to maintain and implement a HACCP based system (Regulation 852/2004 2004).
In addition, the HACCP principles must be implemented. The implementation takes into consideration the flexibility of individual cases. The regulation explores flexibility levels, which simplifies HACCP’s implementation requirements for small businesses.
How CookSafe Works
As already indicated, this system is important in the food industry. A number of adjustments were made on food regulations in 2006. Under the new rules, entrepreneurs operating in this industry were expected to implement safety management protocols in accordance with the HACCP system.
The Food Standards Agency Scotland sought the assistance of HACCP working group (the Scottish Food Enforcement Liaison Committee [SFELC]) to undertake these changes (FSA 2004). SFELC developed a guidance manual for the caterers, drawing from the perspectives of various experts in the food industry.
The outcome of the taskforce was the manual referred to as CookSafe (FSA 2004). The caterers benefit from the new guidebook by following the instructions provided. They are capable of developing HACCP based approach to meet their business needs.
CookSafe program consists of five phases. They include the introduction phase, the flow diagram section, and the HACCP charts part. The others include the house rules and the records sections (FSA 2004). Based on the program, it is apparent that the various aspects of HACCP system are addressed in CookSafe.
The introduction phase provides caterers with guidelines on the various HACCP terms used in CookSafe food safety management program (Taylor 2001). The flow diagram section provides templates to help operators customise their business operations.
The HACCP charts section outlines the steps to be followed in the business process (Eves & Dervisi 2005). The section also highlights what may go wrong. In addition, it provides solutions to the problems. The section provides guidelines and examples that caterers can adapt in their business.
The house rules section of CookSafe program assists caterers to develop their own business regulations. The aim is to enhance the safety of their day-to-day operations (Seward 2000). The section ensures that safety practices are incorporated into the food production processes.
The records part provides caterers with guidelines on the template used to link the sections constituting the entire CookSafe food safety management program (Taylor 2001).
CookSafe provides caterers with a framework to fully implement HCCP in food production activities. The program can also be utilised to enhance good business practices in an already existing system. Ultimately, CookSafe addresses the issue of food safety management by caterers in general.
The system is tailored to suit the needs of most catering businesses. However, the caterers are required to adapt their business records and rules to suit their business operations.
The system manifests this strength by providing guidelines, a template, and recommendations for every step followed in the implementation (Tsarouhas 2012). CookSafe food safety management program is based on the best available information.
Verification and Validation of CookSafe System Elements
Verification of the various CookSafe system elements constitutes a very essential aspect of the program. The process involves performing an overview analysis of the entire HACCP system (FSA 2005).
Verification also includes establishing the effectiveness of the procedures followed in controlling hazards and their applications in operations. Major components of the CookSafe system facilitating the verification and validation of the elements involve documentation and the action plan (FSA 2004).
Documentation ensures that the records of the steps comprising the system implementation are documented. Record keeping facilitates tracking of the system implementation process.
According to FSA (2004), the action plan in CookSafe system records the progress made in the implementation of the five phases. The action plan refers to a documented record listing the completed actions in relation to system implementation (Tsarouhas 2012).
It is maintained by the person utilising the manual. The plan is used to devise a HACCP compliant food safety management system. Documentation provides the mechanism used to ensure that the elements of the CookSafe system work effectively (Pierson & Corlett 1992).
It details the primary intentions and the achievements made in the various sections of system implementation. If some elements exhibit shortcomings, a review is conducted and a different approach adopted.
Some examples of verification elements in CookSafe system include checking for consistency in the application of control measures at CCPs (Taylor 2001). Monitoring the records for consistency and accuracy is another instance of verification in the system.
Conducting CookSafe Food Safety Management System Audit
According to Grujic, Keran, Vujadinovic, and Perusic (2012), employees are an important element in any HACCP system in facilities dealing with food production.
The members of staff make up the primary force that audits the implementation and outcomes of CookSafe system. Business operators can perform the audit function, although they might favour the firm and produce biased results (Seward 2000).
Grujic et al. (2012) are of the opinion that employees need motivation. Incentives facilitate compliance with the regulations, especially in relation to food safety and hygiene.
In addition, providing practical and ongoing training to the staff involved in handling food is very important. The training should enhance their industrial skills and add to the general information available to the system.
According to Pun and Bhairo-Beekhoo (2008), employees need enhanced knowledge on product safety, expertise, hygiene, and HACCP. Several authors have investigated the need for training in enhancing employees’ knowledge on food safety (Holford 2010).
Training the employees is a strategy used to improve food safety and the overall human health. Holford (2010) argues that prerequisite training is inevitable in the successful implementation of HACCP system in the catering industry.
Prerequisite activities are important in the industry, including in the implementation of HACCP CookSafe food safety management system. Other activities include health insurance, hygiene practices, pest control, and competent manufacturing practices (Kane 2011).
Equipping employees in the catering sector with the relevant knowledge and skills on CookSafe food security management supports the success of the system. In addition, employees conduct excellent audit on the entire process. External auditors, such as officials from the Food Standards Agency, can also audit the process.
Auditing the Food Businesses
There are numerous aspects of auditing, especially in the food industry. External auditors uphold the effectiveness of the whole review process.
They must be authorised and knowledgeable about the standards in the industry. As such, auditing the effectiveness of the CookSafe food safety management system is a major undertaking.
According to Paniscello, Quantick and Knowles (1999), the frequency of auditing CookSafe food safety management system is informed by various factors. For instance, determining the CCPs in the flow chart section is subject to debate.
Such factors as sanitation and location are, however, under the control of fixed guidelines (McSwane & Linton 2000). In light of this, the audit process should be carried out regularly. For instance, it can be carried out on a monthly basis. The audit process must be guided by a checklist.
The CookSafe system manual condenses the implementation process into five major sections (FSA 2004). Consequently, the audit checklist must highlight the achievements made in the various sections.
For instance, the checklist can address such issues as the relationship between house rules and temperature control, personal hygiene, training, and cleaning (Mitchell, Fraser & Bearon 2007).
Other aspects that can be addressed include available hazards and risks, as well as the control measures can put in place. The checklist can highlight sub-sections on effective manufacturing processes and work flow in food processing.
According to Pierson and Corlett (1992), there are various methods of collecting and reporting auditing data. Data collection should begin with the documentation feature of the CookSafe system. The information derived from this phase is secondary in nature.
However, the feature is an excellent source of management information. Primary sources of data include observations, laboratory tests, and responses generated from the checklist. The methods used in collecting such information should support the legitimacy and validity of the findings.
Laboratory tests, observations, and checklist findings complement each other. For instance, the documentation section of CookSafe system should enhance the results generated through observations.
Publication of the findings made in the audit is the best alternative for reporting the information generated from the CookSafe food safety management system.
Publishing the findings would facilitate comparisons with outcomes from other parts of the country given that the system is implemented in the whole region. In addition, reporting the findings would help in publicising the CookSafe system.
Using the Audit Approach on a Small and a Medium Business
Using the HACCP food safety management system to audit the sandwich business and the restaurant would be relatively easy. The two businesses fall under the category of small and medium enterprises. Auditing the two ventures will involve a conventional approach.
The process requires the presence and participation of the management teams. Submission of HACCP documentation provides the basis for the audit. Inspection of the business operations in line with relevant regulations, including Regulation (EC) No 852/2004, then follows.
Review of the food safety program will include analysis of such documentations as the process flow charts, monitoring records, and the specifications for the finished product.
Assessment of the hazard analysis reports and CCPs will also feature in the auditing process. Results of tests conducted on various food products, together with verification records, will also be analysed.
The findings of the auditing process are enhanced by inspecting the food business license, observing the production processes, and reviewing the manufacturing practices.
Review of the food safety program and implementation of corrective actions will follow. The process will come to an end following the compilation of the audit reports and inspection notes.
Difficulties in Applying CookSafe Food Safety Management System
The use of the CookSafe Food safety management system and the implementation of the HACCP principles are faced by numerous challenges. It is noted that HACCP is based on scientific and empirical foundations. It is also widely publicised. However, challenges remain as far as its implementation is concerned.
According to Taylor and Taylor (2004), one of the problems affecting HACCP is the bureaucracy behind the system.
For instance, the documentation aspect of the CookSafe system is complex and characterised by various formalities. In addition, some SME operators feel that the system does not address the needs of their businesses adequately.
Kane (2011) argues that the introduction of new legislations in relation to food hygiene poses a major problem to SME owners. For instance, the caterers who fail to comply with the regulations are forced to close down their businesses. Based on this, the system is regarded as limiting and discouraging with regards to entrepreneurship in the food production sector.
The effective implementation of CookSafe system requires the utilisation of time and other resources. According to Taylor and Taylor (2004), time and money are highly valued resources that some players in the food industry cannot afford to waste. Furthermore, some of the businesses consider the system as unnecessary since they are already taking care of their consumers.
Conclusion
The HACCP concept is gaining popularity irrespective of the challenges encountered in its implementation. The system is rapidly replacing traditional approaches, such as health examinations, end product testing, and inspections. However, the future of the approach in the food industry remains unclear.
However, it is apparent that HACCP principles will continue to evolve over time. The effectiveness of the approach in promoting food safety is encouraging. The need for increased vigilance in relation to food borne diseases is on the rise. As such, the continued use of HACCP depends on its effectiveness in food safety management.
References
Bolton, D, Meally, A, Blair, I, McDowell, D, & Cowan, C. 2008. ‘Food safety knowledge of head chefs and catering managers in Ireland’, Food Control, vol. 19 no. 3, pp. 291-300.
Bryan, F 1999, ‘Hazard analysis critical control point approach to food safety: past, present, and future’, Journal of Environmental Health, vol. 61 no. 8, pp. 9-14.
Buchanan, R 1990, ‘HACCP: a re-emerging approach to food safety’, Trends in Food Science and Technology, vol. 1 no. 1, pp. 6-8.
Ehiri, J, Morris, G & McEwen, J 1995, ‘Implementation of HACCP in food businesses: the way ahead’, Food Control, vol. 6, pp. 341-345.
Eves, A & Dervisi, P 2005, ‘Experiences of the implementation and operation of hazard analysis critical control points in the food service sector’, International Journal of Hospitality Management, vol. 24 no. 1, pp. 3-19.
Food Standards Agency 2004, CookSafe: food safety assurance system. Web.
Gilling, S, Taylor, E, Kane, K, & Taylor, J. 2001. ‘Successful HACCP implementation: understanding the barriers through the use of a behavioural adherence model’, Journal of Food Protection, vol. 64 no. 10, pp. 710-715.
Grujic, S, Keran, H, Vujadinovic, D, & Perusic, M. 2012. ‘Knowledge of employees in restaurants about the means and application of HACCP’, Quality of Life, vol. 3 no. 3/4, pp. 76-87.
Holford, D 2010, ‘Knowledge construction and risk induction/mitigation in dialogical workgroup processes’, Qualitative Research in Organizations and Management: An International Journal, vol. 5 no. 2, pp. 127-161.
Kane, K 2011, ‘Evolving methods of HACCP: costs and benefits’, Worldwide Hospitality and Tourism Themes, vol. 3 no. 5, pp. 1-6.
McSwane, D & Linton, R 2000, ‘Issues and concerns in HACCP development and implementation for retail food operations’, Journal of Environmental Health, vol. 62 no. 6, pp. 15-18.
Mitchell, R, Fraser, A & Bearon, L 2007, ‘Preventing food-borne illness in food service establishments: broadening the framework for intervention and research on safe food handling behaviours’, International Journal of Environmental Health Research, vol. 17 no. 1, pp. 9-24.
Paniscello, J, Quantick, P & Knowles, M 1999, ‘Toward the implementation of HACCP: results of a UK regional survey’, Food Control, vol. 10, pp. 87-98.
Pierson, M & Corlett, D 1992, HACCP principles and applications, Van Nostrand Reinhold, New York.
Pun, K & Bhairo-Beekhoo, P 2008, ‘Factors affecting HACCP practices in the food sectors: a review of literature 1994-2007’, Asian Journal on Quality, vol. 9 no. 1, pp. 134-152.
Regulation (EC) no 852/2004 of the European parliament and of the council. 2004. Web.
Riswadkar, A 2000, ‘An introduction to HACCP’, Professional Safety, vol. 45 no. 6, pp. 33-34.
Seward, S 2000, ‘Application of HACCP in food service’, Irish Journal of Agricultural and Food Research, vol. 39 no. 2, pp. 221-227.
Taylor, E & Taylor, J 2004, ‘Perceptions of “the bureaucratic nightmare” of HACCP: a case study’, British Food Journal, vol. 106 no. 1, pp. 23-46.
Taylor, E 2001, ‘HACCP in small companies: benefit or burden?’, Food Control, vol. 12 no. 4, pp. 217-222.
Tsarouhas, P 2012, ‘Reliability, availability and maintainability analysis in food production lines: a review’, International Journal of Food Science & Technology, vol. 47 no. 11, pp. 2243-2251.