Banner XE Registration: Challenges and Success
Delve into the obstacles faced and triumphs achieved during the implementation of Banner XE Registration system. Overcome hesitancy, drive change, and witness the system's success in action with real university data.
Download Presentation
Please find below an Image/Link to download the presentation.
The content on the website is provided AS IS for your information and personal use only. It may not be sold, licensed, or shared on other websites without obtaining consent from the author.If you encounter any issues during the download, it is possible that the publisher has removed the file from their server.
You are allowed to download the files provided on this website for personal or commercial use, subject to the condition that they are used lawfully. All files are the property of their respective owners.
The content on the website is provided AS IS for your information and personal use only. It may not be sold, licensed, or shared on other websites without obtaining consent from the author.
E N D
Presentation Transcript
Training course on Control on contaminants in food Phase 2 This presentation has been produced under the contract with the Consumers, Health, Agriculture and Food Executive Agency (CHAFEA). The content of this page is the sole responsibility of NSF Euro Consultants Consortium and can in no way be taken to reflect the views of the Consumers, Health, Agriculture and Food Executive Agency or any other body of the European Union. The Consumers, Health, Agriculture and Food Executive Agency or any other body of the European Union will not be responsible under any circumstances for the contents of communication items prepared by the contractors. Food safety
3.2 Setting up control programmes on contaminants in feed and food Risk cascade Elements of risk based planning (input process output) Risk based inspections: risk categorisation and risk ranking Risk based sampling: sampling strategies and goals Mr. kos J zwiak 1 Food safety
Risk cascade Inherent Product Risk Legislative Risk Compliance Risk Official Control Risk Audit Risk Consumer Risk 2 Food safety
Elements of risk based planning Input Process Output principle Input: it is divided into 4 broad categories: entities for categorisation, features of those entities, control parameters criteria (or rules) for categorising entities and assigning control parameters for the categories. Process: several processes may be needed Output: is essentially a mapping between entities and a (set of) control parameter(s) 3 Food safety
Input 1. Entities for categorisation Decide which entities to categorise. Hazards, commodities, FBOs, etc. Examples of possible entities for categorisation Commodities or groups of commodities; Hazards; FBOs; Various stages in the production chain; Types of establishments, activities or processes; Requirements of the AH, AW, PH, feed and food law 4 Food safety
Input 2. Features Choose a set of key features of the selected entities These are usually data or information collected for planning Examples of possible features and data sources Import/export data Trading patterns, structural data Volume of production vs. raw materials Market or other surveillance data Rapid Alerts Scientific evidence TDS Pricing, advertising, labelling FBO records Quality of operators own-controls including, accreditation and certification schemes Results of official audits of FBO HACCP systems Changes in management or ownership 5 Food safety
Input 2. Features One of the possible sources to use: Total Diet Studies (TDS) TDS is often used as a risk assessment tool to evaluate exposure to hazards TDS is designed to measure the average amount of each chemical ingested by different age/sex groups living in a country. TDS data differ from other chemical surveillance programmes: focus on chemicals in the diet, not individual foods the foods are processed as for consumption in the home; so they take into consideration the impact of home cooking on the decomposition and formation of chemical substances assessment of background, rather than regulatory, concentrations of the chemicals 6 Food safety
Input 3. Control parameters Set of control parameters to be used in the output These need to be chosen before the actual process Examples of control parameters Control frequency or maximum time between two controls; FTE (full time equivalent) used for each control, sector or type of operator; Scope of the control i.e. are all aspects of an operator to be covered; Control methods and techniques e.g. inspection, sampling, (desk?) audit etc. Full control or a control based on a sample (of documents, processes etc.) Legal requirements to be covered (all relevant rules or a sub-set) 7 Food safety
Input 4. Criteria for categorisation and setting control parameters Criteria = thresholds, sums or some sort of algorithm Process the set of features for each entity and place it in an appropriate risk category Alternative approach: ranking of entities Similarly, criteria/rules need to be established for assigning control parameters to risk categories. These inputs should be documented at a level sufficient to an external (uninitiated) reader to understand the inputs and preferably providing some degree of justification or rationale behind the choices. 8 Food safety
Process Criteria (algorithm) Criteria (algorithm) Risk Control parameter category/ Risk ranking Entities Features (data/information) 9 Food safety
Process Several processes may be needed, for example: at national, regional and local level. At national level a process may consider e.g. Inherent Product Risk, Legislative Risk and Compliance Risk At regional and local level some components of Compliance Risk and local knowledge on own-control Risk may be more relevant. The scope of planning may also vary between these levels i.e. which sectors are included in the planning process. Need to have: resources allocated (including working groups, task forces etc.), methods and procedures to be applied documentation to demonstrate the existence of a process 10 Food safety
Output Output is a mapping between entities and a (set of) control parameter(s) Or in other words: 1. targeting of controls and 2. applying the most appropriate methods/frequency to the target groups At national level of planning this could take the form of allocating resources into certain control areas either in absolute FTE terms or in percentages or possibly some kind of principles and/or guidance to be applied locally. Output from this level would typically feed into another prioritisation process at a lower level At a more local level the mapping may be between individual establishments and for example control methods and frequencies. 11 Food safety
Purpose (objective) of control activities Sampling strategies 12 Food safety
Objective sampling Definition: strategy based on the selection of a random sample from the population that is the object of the control activity. Random sample: a sample in which each unit of the population has the same probability to be included. This strategy provides data enabling the realisation of statistical inference. This strategy is one of those generally used for planned monitoring programmes intended to provide an overview of the situation regarding a certain food safety aspect. The method used to drawn the sample (establishments or commodities) could be any method (pure random, systematic, stratified, cluster 13 sampling) Food safety
Selective sampling Definition: strategy based on the selection of a sample determined on a risk assessment basis. The criteria used to select the sample is based on a scientific basis or on the basis of a suspicion This strategy provides data which does not enable the realisation of statistical inference. Not comparable across countries Used for planned monitoring and control programmes intended to reduce non-conformities. 14 Food safety
Suspect sampling Definition: selection of an individual product or establishment in order to confirm or reject a suspicion of non-conformity. Guidelines: the sampling is deliberately biased and is focused on particular products or manufacturers. The samples obtained from this procedure are not randomly extracted. The sample is selected based on the judgement and experience regarding the population, lot, or sampling frame. Results can not be generalised and refer only to the individual 15 product or establishment. Food safety
Examples for different sampling strategies Objective sampling: Controls for the level of aflatoxin M1 in raw milk, from a random selection of producers of raw milk. Purpose: to have a statistically relevant overview of the aflatoxin M1 levels in raw milk. Results are provided for all producers of raw milk. Selective sampling: Controls for aflatoxin M1 in raw milk in animal farms using feed from geographical areas potentially affected by aflatoxin production. Purpose: to prevent the presence of aflatoxin in feed and thus in milk. Results are provided for the farms with high risk of presence of aflatoxin. Suspect sampling Checks for the presence and levels of aflatoxin M1 in raw milk from a specific farm, as a consequence of previous non-conformity results on this farm. Purpose: to verify if non-conformity persists or not. Results refer exclusively to the specific farm and the batch of milk. 16 Food safety
This this presentation has been produced under the contract with the Consumers, Health, Agriculture and Food Executive Agency (CHAFEA). The content of this page is the sole responsibility of NSF Euro Consultants Consortium and can in no way be taken to reflect the views of the Consumers, Health, Agriculture and Food Executive Agency or any other body of the European Union. The Consumers, Health, Agriculture and Food Executive Agency or any other body of the European Union will not be responsible under any circumstances for the contents of communication items prepared by the contractors. NSF Euro Consultants Consortium Thank you for your attention! Any questions? Avenue Pasteur,21 1300 Wavre Belgium +32 10 84 97 95 2016.96.05@euroconsultants.be Better Training for Safer Food BTSF European Commission Consumers, Health, Agriculture and Food Executive Agency DRB A3/042 L-2920 Luxembourg Food safety
