Case study 05: Meat processing company

Objective:

To know how to write findings and rate deviations based on a company description.
Note: this case has been taken from an Integrity on-site check.

Task:

1. Establish Assessment findings based on the information of the company

2. In case of non-conformities and/ or deviations, score and describe them according
to IFS Food requirements

Documents:

 Company description
 Key information from the company’s food safety management system and product
shelf life parameters.
 IFS Food V7 check list

Results:
 Assessment findings according to respective chapters/requirements of IFS Food
 Score according to chosen IFS requirements

Steps:

First part: 40 min – in working groups Eliminato: 20

 Read the documents
 Decide on a team leader
 Establish findings and score

Second part: 10 min - all together

 plenary presentation/ discussion of results

CS_05_a_ Meat processing company_Food7_V1_01102020 1/10

Description of the company:
Fresh Meat GmbH is a family business established in 1984 and dedicated to the production,
slicing and packaging of cured meat products. The company started its activity as a small
butcher's shop in the city, and later on, in the year 2000, they acquired the assessed
premises.
Fresh Meat GmbH has been IFS Food certified since 2013. In the last Assessment, the
company achieved the higher level certification with a score of 96.25%.
Scope of the IFS Food certification is: “Fermentation and curing of raw cured whole pork
sausages (Salami, Chorizo). Slicing and packing in vacuum or modified atmosphere of raw
cured pork and turkey sausages, raw cured pork hams and pork shoulders. Besides its own
production, the company has outsourced products and/or processes".

The company profile in the IFS report includes the following data:
The surface of the assessed site is 5.000 square meters.
The number of employees is 144 and they currently work in two shifts, except in the slicing
section, where they work in three shifts.

The company has 18 dryers for the maturation and curing of the products, and 7 slicing and
packing lines. The products are packaged in a modified atmosphere or vacuum packed.

The turnover for 2019 was 91 million euros. Fresh Meat GmbH sells products in EU countries
and exports to countries such as Chile, Brazil or Mexico.
The company labels its products with its own brand (15%) and with private labels (85%),
including retailer brands.

Fresh Meat GmbH produces its own products from the reception of raw materials to the
packing of finished products, but during specific seasons of the year where the sales
increase (e.g. Christmas time), the company also purchases finished packed products such
as cured ham, sliced chorizo or sliced salami from other companies. In all cases where the
product is purchased by other producers, these products are sold under their own brand
“Fresh Meat GmbH”.

After the opening meeting, the auditor asks the quality manager for the site plan, product
and process flow diagrams and the HACCP plan, to check the CCP´s defined in the process.

After a thorough hazard analysis and risk assessment, the company has applied the
decision tree and the following CCP´s have been defined:
CS_05_a_ Meat processing company_Food7_V1_01102020 2/10
 CCP 1:
Products drying (critical limits: different
values depending on the products to ensure
aw<0.92).
Monitoring: every lot is checked for weight
loss, resulting in a positive release of the
product.
Sample records of the last months have
been checked and the differences in weight
between the product before drying and after
drying were correct to ensure product
safety, according to the limits established.
aw has been validated. Several
microbiological analyses were performed
(over time) to ensure product safety with
this defined value.
CCP 2:
Metal detector in product stuffing step and
at the end of the lines for the sliced
products.
Critical limits: 2.5 mm Fe/ 3 mm No Fe/
5mm Inox.
Monitoring: Metal detectors are tested at
the beginning and end of the shift, as well
as every hour during production.
During the visit, metal detectors of different
lines were tested and worked properly.
Also, some CCP monitoring records were
reviewed randomly, as for the following
dates: 17/10/18, 26/09/18, 03/08/18,
11/12/18, 13/01/19 and 17/02/19. No issues
were detected.

Records of different CCP checks are filled in by employees and then verified by the Quality
department.

In addition, the company has defined several control measures, as the temperature control
in the intake of raw materials and the control of oxygen percentage in the packaging of the
final products (residual O2 %).

During the on-site tour, the auditor asks to see the specification of a vacuum-packed salami
produced for one of the retailers.
Among other aspects, the specification refers to the ingredients to be used in the recipe, the
treatment of the product, commitment to absence of GMO´s, declaration of allergens,
microbiological characteristics, physical-chemical characteristics (aw<0,92), weight of the
product, packing method (O2 residual <0,6%), nutritional values, etc.. There is evidence that
this specification has been agreed with the retailer.
During the visit to the internal laboratory, the auditor asks to check the analysis of residual
%O2 of different batches and the results are shown below:
Date Product Lot number Brand Result Hour

18/01/19 Salami 200 g A1234 Retailer 1 0.2% 9 am

20/02/19 Salami 200 g A2323 Retailer 1 0.9% 8.15 am

23/02/19 Salami 200 g B2212 Retailer 1 0,8% 12.20 pm

28/03/19 Salami 100 g A3122 Retailer 1 0,9% 13.15 pm

02/04/19 Salami 200 g A3301 Retailer 1 0.25% 16.30 pm

12/04/19 Salami 200 g A3333 Retailer 1 0.19% 19.00 pm

The auditor asks about the results that are above 0.6%. The laboratory technician explains
CS_05_a_ Meat processing company_Food7_V1_01102020 3/10
the following: “It is very important for these vacuum-packed products to have as little residual
oxygen as possible, to avoid oxidation reactions which may cause physical, chemical,
microbiological and sensory degradations. However, the limit you mention (<0.6%) is not
the operative limit we have documented in the HACCP plan. According to our HACCP plan,
we have defined that the %O2 has to be <1%. Regardless of what our commercial
department has agreed on regarding the residual oxygen value, from our experience, the
value we have established in the laboratory is <1%. For that reason, we don´t need to take
any corrective action, we only take corrective actions when levels of O2 are ≥ 1%. We don’t
have the specification and no one from the sales department has communicated to us this
customer requirement.

The auditor also requests the specifications for other products such as cured ham, sliced
ham, as well as chorizo. These were completed and the stated requirements were met by
the company.

During the visit of the production area, the auditor observes that, in general, the state of
cleanliness and equipment is adequate. However, he finds some dirty drains in both the
slicing area and finished product warehouse area. To check how cleaning is scheduled in
these rooms, the auditor asks for the cleaning schedule, which refers to objectives,
responsibilities, areas to be cleaned, cleaning methods, products and doses, when
applicable. When the auditor asks about the frequencies, the person in charge indicates
that they are reviewing the plan and that they have not yet defined the final frequencies.
According to the schedule, in addition to the regular daily inspections to verify cleaning (pre-
operative procedures), several surfaces are randomly sampled every month to analyse
Listeria, TVC and Enterobacteria. The results of the last three months were correct,
according to the records.

Since the HACCP plan refers to a risk coming from the chemical cross contamination of the
products due the use of cleaning and maintenance products, the auditor asks how the
company manages this to minimise the risk. The production manager answers that they
have been following the same methods for many years and that the cleaning methods have
proved to be adequate; therefore they do not consider as necessary to additionally verify
this aspect.

Continuing the visit, the auditor observes some plastic containers with numerous finished
product packs (sale unit) of sliced chorizo and sliced salami in the room close to the
packaging area.

All the containers are labelled with the name

of the product, date of slicing and best before
date (BBD). The production manager explains to the auditor that the products are packed
CS_05_a_ Meat processing company_Food7_V1_01102020 4/10
 and stored in these containers and then labelled by employees.

The auditor observes the containers with the following information attached to them:
- Sliced salami: lot: B12712. Sliced and packaged: 10/02/19. Best before: 05/08/19.
- Extra sliced chorizo: lot A12882. Sliced and packaged: 28/02/19. Best before:
27/08/19.

The auditor then goes to the end of the line, where the workers are labelling the products,
and cross-checks the data that the workers are indicating in the labels of the relevant packs.
He observes that, for the salami, this product is being labelled with the following BBD:
05/10/19.
The auditor asks the worker why he is changing the
dates which were attached to the container. The worker
shows the auditor the production order, where it is
BBD: 5/10/19

written that the BBD that has to appear on the label is

LB12712

that one (05/10/19). The auditor doesn't ask more

questions at this stage.

After visiting the facilities, the auditor asks for a traceability test for a production of sliced
chorizo (packs of 225 grs) with batch number 6666.
According to the delivery records of this batch, 7980 units were packed on 04/02/2019. The
company shows records of the reception of different raw materials such as different types
of meat, paprika, garlic, salt, casing, packaging material, etc. The documents are available
and indicate the date of receipt, temperatures if necessary, etc.
The records of the CCP´s monitoring are available and correct, as well as the ones of the
CP´s. The daily water analysis results (free chlorine and organoleptic tests) are also
available, as well as the cleaning records, temperatures of the dryers, and others.

The auditor asks to see the weight checks of the final products. The finished
product is marked with an "e" on the label. The company shows him a record
where the weight of 23 samples is recorded; no more weight check data is
available.

Results of weight checks are as following:

Weight checks
Check 1 215,8 225,7 225,8 227,1 226,1
Checkl 2 215,6 225,4 226,3 225,3 226,9
Check 3 226,8 225,9 215,8 224,5 226,2
Check 4 226,3 225,3 225,2 226,3 215,7
Check 5 226,1 225,4 227,3

After statistical analysis the batch was approved.

CS_05_a_ Meat processing company_Food7_V1_01102020 5/10

X Average 224,21 gr
Qn Weight 225 gr
n Samples 23
Standard
S 4,03 gr 225 gr > 224,16 gr
deviation
t student (1-alfa) =
t
0.995

The traceability system is managed manually, but some records are shown in the computer
support. The system allows a rapid recall of the documents and is adequately supported.

The auditor asks to see the traceability to the customer for this particular batch. According
to the output delivery notes, 6.870 units have been sold to different customers, which are
correctly identified.
The auditor wants to verify where the rest of the units are stored and the dispatch manager
indicates that they are in the final product storage area, ready to be supplied to other
customers. The auditor wants to count the stored packs and check the quantity balance,
but once there, the person in charge is not able to find the remaining goods. No one is able
to give an explanation. In a check of random records of the weight control of the last four
months, in all cases the number of samples was adequate, and the results after performing
the necessary statistical techniques were correct as well. No further incidents were found.

The auditor asks the R&D manager for the shelf life studies of the sliced chorizo and salami.
The manager shows him the organoleptic, physical-chemical and microbiological results for
the salami, which does not include Listeria. According to the study, the product proves to
be within the specifications and regulations with a shelf life of 6 months. There was no data
for the chorizo, although the company claims that they are going to do the shelf life study
shortly, but by now, the BBD has been determined based on the data obtained for the salami.
The external laboratory in which the analysis was conducted is accredited.

CS_05_a_ Meat processing company_Food7_V1_01102020 6/10

 IFS Food V 7 check list

N° IFS Food Requirements Scoring Finding

2.2.3.6 Determine critical control points and other

control measures:
The determination of relevant CCPs and other
control measures shall be facilitated by the
application of a decision tree or other tool(s),
which demonstrates a logical reasoned approach.
2.2.3.7* Establish critical limits for each CCP:
For each CCP, the appropriate critical limits shall
be defined and validated to clearly identify when
a process is out of control.

2.2.3.8.1* KO N° 2: Specific monitoring procedures in

terms of method, frequency of measurement or
observation and recording of results, shall be
established for each CCP to detect any loss of
control at that CCP. Each defined CCP shall be
under control. Monitoring and control of each
CCP shall be demonstrated by records.
2.2.3.8.2 Records of CCP monitoring shall be verified by a
responsible person within the company and
maintained for a relevant period.
2.2.3.8.4 Control measures, other than CCPs, shall be
monitored, recorded and controlled by measurable
or observable criteria.
4.1 Contract agreement

4.1.1 All requirements related to food safety and

product quality, within the defined agreement with
customers, and any revision of these clauses,
shall be communicated to and implemented by
each relevant department.

4.2 Specifications and formulas

4.2.1.2 A procedure to control the creation, approval and

amendment of specifications shall be in place
and shall include, where required, the acceptance
of the customer(s). Where required by customers,
product specifications shall be formally agreed.
This procedure shall include the update of finished
product specifications in case of any modification
related to:
• raw materials
• formulas / recipe
• processes which impact the finished products
• packaging materials which impact the finished
products
CS_05_a_ Meat processing company_Food7_V1_01102020 7/10
 N° IFS Food Requirements Scoring Finding

4.2.1.4 Specifications and / or their contents shall be

available on site for all relevant personnel.

4.2.2 Formula / recipes

4.2.2.1* KO N° 5: Where there are customer agreements

related to:
• product recipe (including raw materials
characteristics)
• process
• technological requirements
• packaging
• labelling
these shall be complied with.
4.3 Product development / Product modification
/Modification of production processes
4.3.3 Shelf life tests or adequate validation through
microbiological, chemical and organoleptic
evaluation shall be carried out and consideration
shall be given to product formulation, packaging,
manufacturing and declared conditions. In
accordance with this evaluation, the shelf life shall
be established.
4.10 Cleaning and disinfection

4.10.1* Based on hazard analysis and assessment of

associated risks, cleaning and disinfection
schedules shall be available and implemented.
These shall specify:
• objectives
• responsibilities
• the products used and their instructions for use
• dosage of cleaning and disinfection chemicals
• the areas to be cleaned and / or disinfected•
cleaning and disinfection frequency
• documentation requirements
• hazard symbols (if necessary).

CS_05_a_ Meat processing company_Food7_V1_01102020 8/10

 N° IFS Food Requirements Scoring Finding

4.10.5 The effectiveness of the cleaning and disinfection

measures shall be verified and justified by risk
assessment. The verification shall be based on an
appropriate sampling schedule and shall
consider:
• visual inspection
• rapid testing
• analytical testing methods.
Resultant corrective actions shall be documented.

4.18 Traceability
4.18.1* KO N° 7: A traceability system shall be in place
that enables the identification of product
lots and their relation to batches of raw
materials and primary packaging materials. The
traceability system shall incorporate all
relevant records of:
• receipt
• processing
• use of rework
• distribution.
Traceability shall be ensured and documented
until delivery to the customer.
4.18.6 Labelling of semi-finished or finished product lots
shall be made at the time when the goods are
directly packed to ensure a clear traceability of
goods. Where goods are labelled at a later time,
the temporarily stored goods shall have a specific
lot labelling. Shelf life (e.g. best before date) of
labelled goods shall be established using the
original production batch.
5.3 Process and working environment validation
and control
5.3.1* The criteria for process and working environment
validation and control shall be clearly defined.
Where the control of process and working
environment parameters (temperature, time,
pressure, chemical properties, etc.) are essential to
ensure the food safety and product quality
requirements, such parameters shall be monitored
and recorded continuously and / or at appropriate
intervals.
5.5 Quantity control monitoring
5.5.1* The company shall define compliance criteria to
control lot quantity. A frequent and methodological
approach for quantity control shall be in place to
meet legal requirements of the destination country

CS_05_a_ Meat processing company_Food7_V1_01102020 9/10

N° IFS Food Requirements Scoring Finding

/ ies and customer specifications.

CS_05_a_ Meat processing company_Food7_V1_01102020 10/10