Michael Koeris, Ph.D. and vice president of operations, Sample6, pathogen detection
FST Soapbox

The True Costs You Endure During a Food Recall

By Michael Koeris, Ph.D.
No Comments
Michael Koeris, Ph.D. and vice president of operations, Sample6, pathogen detection

When you think about the expense of a recall, you probably automatically focus on the costs to pull the affected product from shelves and reimburse customers. Yes, this can be an expensive undertaking. But the true, comprehensive cost of a recall involves immensely more than these obvious financial tolls. Do you fully understand the price to be paid when your organization is up against a food recall?

The recall process in the food manufacturing industry is a highly expensive one, averaging more than $10 million in costs to cover activities such as communicating the recall across the supply chain, retrieving and handling the recalled product, investigating the event and implementing corrective actions to prevent reoccurrence.

Of course, this average doesn’t address the possibility of litigation costs, decreased sales, reputational damage or brand crisis management, which can add up to millions—even billions— of dollars more. The public has become much more informed and aware of food safety events, and a single breach of trust could result in resounding losses to your brand. This makes it critical to understand the true costs you endure when faced with a food recall.

Immediate, Direct Costs

A recall can be a company-defining event. The vast majority of recalls are voluntary and a reflection of conscientious behavior by the retailers, wholesalers and producers, but that doesn’t mean you won’t incur serious expenses. The most obvious, immediate and direct ones include:

  • Pausing production to carry out recall response initiatives
  • Alerting necessary parties within and outside the organization, including regulatory agencies and relevant retailers
  • Managing the logistics of removing affected or mislabeled products
  • Examining the source of the recall, including issues with suppliers, equipment, processes or contamination prevention plans
  • Remediating the identified problems to prevent similar occurrences
  • Planning for expanded human resources to handle recall tasks in addition to routine operations

Again, these expenses could equate to millions of dollars from your bottom line, but the truth is they may be the most minor of your concerns in the face of a food recall.

Compliance Penalties

As you likely know by now, there’s a monumental shift happening in the regulatory arena. FSMA has enacted strict laws that place a greater emphasis on proactive and preventive approaches to food safety. In addition, the USDA has been focusing on strong enforcement of its guidelines for years.

For manufacturers, this means adjusting processes and procedures to comply with legal requirements for monitoring, testing, documentation, risk assessment and more. It is not enough for companies to have a plan for taking corrective action on contaminated products; they must also have a strong preventive plan in place to identify pathogens in the production environment before they affect the product and/or leave the facility. If your company undergoes an FDA or USDA audit or investigation that reveals noncompliance with government-mandated prevention efforts, you could be looking at significant consequences like criminal fines and forfeitures to the U.S. government.

FSMA laws and USDA regulations stipulate that depending on the nature of the violation, and whether the food is adulterated or misbranded, the FDA or USDA may consider regulatory actions, including:

  • Issuing advisory letters
  • Initiating court actions, such as seizure or injunction
  • Implementing administrative detention to gain control of adulterated or misbranded products
  • Mandating a recall of violative food
  • Suspending a facility’s food registration to prevent the shipment of food

Lawsuits and Litigation

According to the CDC, 48 million people get sick from foodborne illness each year, 128,000 are hospitalized and 3,000 die. If your organization is sued on the basis of a contaminated or unsafe product, you can expect to deal with attorney fees, court costs and settlements. In the worst cases, you may even need to pay damages to harmed consumers.

Yes, prosecutions are rare. But they are a reflection of a failure to protect consumers, as well as potential negligence or (in the rarest of cases) malicious intent. The financial effects of these reputational scars go well beyond obvious litigation expenses.

Lost Sales

Once a recall is ordered, a series of actions unfold that drastically impact your income. Manufacturers halt production, and retailers pull products from their shelves. Worse, a loss in consumer trust can initiate a long-lasting sales depression. Your customers want to know that the products they’re buying are safe. In response to a recall, they may change their purchasing, food preparation and consumption practices, or they may avoid the product for months or years after the recall has ended.

Insurance Impacts

Most food companies have recall insurance to protect their assets if a recall occurs. But, are you fully informed on what it means to work through a recall with your underwriter or how a recall affects your premiums? Is there a possibility of losing your insurance? It’s crucial to understand how your insurance is affected by a recall and what is contractually covered under your plan.

Brand Deterioration

Recalls are happening more frequently today than ever before, for reasons including stricter compliance regulations and supercharged government testing regimes using novel technologies like next-generation sequencing. This increased focus on testing by the government has led to a greater discovery rate of contamination, which is a good thing for the public. It means that improvements will be made to yield an even safer food production environment.

Nonetheless, recalls are alarming to your customers, and the last thing you want to risk is their trust in your brand. At the end of the day, your brand is your primary asset. It is a representation of who you are and how you do business. When recalls happen, customers lose faith in your brand, which comes with a hefty price tag for your company. If your brand deteriorates due to consumer mistrust, you’re risking business failure.

Unfortunately for the food industry, stories exposing scandals are a proven way to catch the public’s eye. Therefore, any news of a recall receives immediate and aggressive media coverage from both traditional and social media platforms. In the event of a recall, publicity is inevitable, and it’s an expense that spans every aspect from public relations management to eroded sales.

Karen Everstine, Decernis
Food Fraud Quick Bites

A Look at the Latest Targets

By Karen Everstine, Ph.D.
No Comments
Karen Everstine, Decernis

Recent food fraud news includes the seizure of a million bags of fraudulently labeled and expired rice in Kenya, fraudulent spices found in a warehouse in India, and a U.S. grocery store chain sued for selling manuka honey that wasn’t 100% manuka. In Spain, tuna intended for canning was dyed and diverted to be sold as fresh and in China, 8,000 bottles of counterfeit wine were seized by the local food and drug administration. In Greece, 17 teenagers became ill after drinking alcoholic beverages containing methanol. Recently published journal articles on detection methods have looked at adulteration of honey with sugar syrups, meat adulteration with other species, authentication of products containing truffles, and Arabica coffee authenticity. One group of researchers evaluated a method to authenticate the botanical and geographic origin of hops.

Vanilla prices have been high, increasing the incentive to substitute natural vanilla extracts with similar flavors. A search of the Food Fraud Database shows a range of fraudulent adulterants associated with vanilla extract: Coumarin, ethyl maltol, ethyl vanillin, maltol, vanillic alcohol, and vanillin (natural or synthetic). Recently published authentication methods include GC-VUV and analysis of stable isotopes of carbon and hydrogen (with GC-IRMS).

In 2004 (another period of high vanilla prices), a company that sourced vanilla beans from Indonesia for use in manufacturing vanilla extract identified mercury contamination in two lots of beans they had received. Mercury was presumably added to increase the weight of the beans. The company quarantined all beans and products that had been manufactured from them. They also had to shut down flavor production to clean and decontaminate the processing equipment.

Due to their high value and physical form (they are often sold in ground or liquid extract form), herbs and spices have a long history of fraudulent adulteration. Many countries have publicly reported being affected by food fraud in herbs and spices over the past 10 years.

Food Fraud incidents, spices
Incidents of food fraud reported in the Food Fraud Database for the past ten years in the category “Herbs, Spices, and Seasonings” (68 total).1

Mitigation measures for products at high risk for fraud include putting in place raw material specifications that include authenticity criteria, implementing analytical surveillance, establishing strong supplier relationships and audit programs, and increasing supply chain transparency.

Resource

  1. The Decernis Food Fraud Database is a continuously updated collection of food fraud records curated specifically to support vulnerability assessments. Information is gathered from the scientific literature, regulatory reports, media publications, judicial records, and trade associations from around the world and is searchable by ingredient, adulterant, country, and hazard classification.
Melody Ge, Kestrel Management
FST Soapbox

Supply Chain Management 101

By Melody Ge
No Comments
Melody Ge, Kestrel Management

Supply chain management is becoming more and more relevant to small and entrepreneurial food businesses, particularly related to FSMA requirements that are required to be fully implemented by this September. To meet these requirements, it is important for small businesses to understand:

  • Applicable FSMA requirements
  • How to develop a supplier approval program
  • What challenges companies may encounter and tips to overcome them
  • How to find an appropriate starting point to develop a supply chain management program

Supply Chain Management Program

1. Receiving facility: A facility that is subject to preventive controls and supply-chain program and that manufacturers/processes raw materials or ingredients that it receives from a supplier.
2. Supplier: The establishment that manufacturers/processes the food, raises the animal, or grows the food that is provided to a receiving facility without further manufacturing/processing by another establishment, except for further manufacturing/processing that consists solely of the addition of labeling or similar activity of a de minimis nature.
Food manufacturers need to develop and implement a supply chain management program, including supply chain preventive control, to control those potential hazards identified that shall be controlled by the suppliers when receiving all raw materials and ingredients. As defined in the actual FDA regulation, a supply management program will only be considered as a preventive control when it is linked to a potential food safety hazard in the raw materials and incoming ingredients. It is the supply-chain-applied control (21 CFR 117.3). As a receiving facility, you have the right to ask your suppliers for all related information associated with the food safety hazards that you identified from your own food safety plan.

What should be in your supply chain management program or supply-chain-applied control?

  1. There needs to be a series of credentials for approval. This can be determined by you, depending on the hazards and product risks. For example, a third-party audit result or a certification from a reliable audit can serve this purpose.A few questions can be considered, including whether suppliers have a recall plan, whether suppliers have an existing food safety plan to control hazards, or whether suppliers have a non-conforming products control plan. Often these can be checked and verified when a third-party audit or third-party accredited audit is conducted. Once a supply chain management program becomes a preventive control, the raw materials can only be supplied by an approved supplier.
  2. Monitoring activities and verifications should be applied to those approved suppliers in your supply chain. This can be done throughout the business history and supplier performance. You need to demonstrate how you continue monitoring the supplier approval status, and suppliers must demonstrate how their products remain guaranteed. Public records (e.g., warning letters), sample testing incoming goods, and customer audits are commonly utilized in the industry. However, in FSMA, when an approved supplier is supplying a high-risk raw material, such as one with SAHCODHA (Serious Adverse Health Consequences or Death to Humans or Animal) risks, an onsite (your own audit or third-party (accredited) audit) is required to be conducted as the verification activity. This must be completed annually unless you can provide a risk-based justification of other types validated verification activities.
  3. Afterwards, as a receiving facility, you need to consider and develop procedures for non-conforming suppliers:
  • How do you require your suppliers maintain their “approval” status in your supply chain management program throughout the business years?
  • When one approved supplier is unapproved or experiencing unexpected incidents, how do you manage back-up suppliers?
  • What criteria do back-up suppliers need to meet prior to supplying the product(s)/ingredient(s)?

Melody Ge will be presenting “What Have We Learned After FSMA Implementation?” at the 2018 Food Safety ConsortiumDifferent products will have different approaches based on facility business operations. However, one thing remains the same. The justification must ensure that potential hazards identified from the original approved supplier are controlled when a back up supplier is used.

4. Last but not least, just like all other programs and controls, records and documentation are important! Records must be kept for all parts of the supply chain management program, including plan, monitoring, verification and any corrective actions that have been conducted. These data are precious to your facility over time, as supplier performance and trending could be a strong reference to see whether adjustment or modifications should be applied to your supply chain management.

There may be challenges collecting information or approving suppliers, but never forget the intention of a supply chain management program—to control the food safety hazards of incoming goods. Your supply chain management program will allow you to demonstrate that you have made all efforts to control the hazards that could potentially arise from your supply chain.

Resource

  1. FDA FSMA Preventive Controls to Human Foods. Retrieved from https://www.fda.gov/food/guidanceregulation/fsma/ucm334115.htm
Kimberly Stuck, Allay Consulting
FST Soapbox

Cannabis Edibles and Food Safety: Buy At Your Own Risk

By Francine L. Shaw, Kimberly Stuck
No Comments
Kimberly Stuck, Allay Consulting

Cannabis edibles—i.e., capsules, chewable gummies, lollipops, cookies, etc. —are becoming more popular and commonplace as laws legalizing cannabis are passed in certain states. Some people are consuming these edibles simply for pleasure, while others are ingesting it for medical reasons, such as reliving epilepsy symptoms, easing chronic pain and combating nausea from chemotherapy. While safety regulations are in place for the foods we eat, who is responsible for the safety of these cannabis consumables?

The 2018 Food Safety Consortium features a Cannabis Quality track | November 13–15 | Learn MoreSince customers can order cannabis edibles online from just about anywhere (including Amazon), they assume these products must be safe. But, as it turns out, that’s not necessarily true. Currently, there’s no regulatory standard for edible cannabis products. Very few consumers realize that it is a “buy-at-your-own-risk” market.

The FDA makes certain that foods sold in the United States are safe and properly labeled. But, currently, they do not regulate cannabis edibles.

Cannabidiol (CBD) infused edibles seem to be more “socially acceptable” than smoking cannabis because they sidestep some of the stigmas, such as the odor. This makes them appealing to a wider audience.

It’s entirely possible that some of the edibles you purchase aren’t manufactured from food-grade ingredients. A document from the Denver Department of Public Health and Environment recently noted that some CBD products being sold in the United States are coming from unregulated, unsafe and unsanitary manufacturing facilities. Further, some of these edibles contain unapproved ingredients, have been produced in unsafe conditions, and had unsubstantiated health claims on their labels.

In many cases, the edibles being sold and consumed in the United States may:

  • Not have the desired effect that consumers are seeking.
  • Be dangerous for consumption, due to inappropriate levels of CBD.
  • Contain ingredients that are not food grade and are, therefore, unsafe to ingest.
  • Be hazardous due to cross-contamination or cross-contact issues.
  • Transmit foodborne illnesses due to poor sanitation and hygiene in the facilities where they were produced.

There have been a number of cases of foodborne illness (and potential hazards) in cannabis edibles recently. In August 2017, Dixie Brands voluntarily recalled six cannabis products after the Denver Department of Public Health and Environment discovered they were produced with potentially unsafe, non-food-grade oils. That same summer, The Growing Kitchen recalled MaryMint Tincture, a breath spray product, after a health inspector found it being stored on a shelf at room temperature (not refrigerated). There was concern about whether the oil was shelf stable, and the potential botulism risk from the unrefrigerated oil in this product.

Another company, At Home Baked, made bubble hash, a form of cannabis concentrates, in its cannabis edibles. Their recall included a variety of products, including their brownie mixes, blondie mixes, rice krispy treats, and Stixx candy. It seems they were manufacturing their products in a washing machine that was in poor working condition (eroding, rusted and containing substantial amount of mold.) Unregulated “facilities”— such as old, moldy, rusty washing machines—are dangerous and extremely concerning in terms of public health and safety.

Denver is one of a few areas in the United States that is regulating the production of edibles on a food safety level. And in Denver alone, there has been a tremendous number of cannabis investigations in recent years, many of them ending in recalls. However, most U.S. jurisdictions are choosing not to regulate food safety around the production of cannabis and edibles. As a result, many unsafe cannabis edibles are being produced and sold to the public, which presents a significant risk to consumers.

Since these products (and the cannabis industry in general) are not regulated, many people producing edibles have not had even the most basic food safety training. Numerous production facilities overlook the most basic food safety rules: They don’t wash their hands, they don’t prevent cross-contamination, and they don’t pay attention to critical items like time and temperature control, proper storage, pest control, sanitation, etc. Yet, they are preparing consumable products and selling them to the public, who believe the edibles are safe.

Because there’s no federal regulation, lab testing varies among each state that permits the use of medical and recreational cannabis. Unfortunately, that means there aren’t consistent safety standards in the cannabis industry, as there are in the food service industry.

The FDA requires a (HACCP) plan for most food manufacturing and food service industries. This means that food businesses will take great strides to only sell food that is safe for consumption, and will not cause injury or illness. As the cannabis industry continues to produce cannabis-infused edibles and other products, people in the business can learn from the existing food safety protocols and procedures. Particularly, they should look to maintain compliance with food safety regulations and take all necessary steps to ensure a safe product for consumers (e.g., clean facilities, food-grade ingredients, no cross-contamination, proper labeling, etc.)

Fortunately, there are a growing number of CBD and THC edible producers that are hiring food safety and cannabis experts to help them elevate their safety standards before the FDA starts to regulate. As with all industries, there are many producers that are ready, willing and trying to do the right thing.

As more people purchase and consume cannabis edibles, it’s becoming increasingly important to buy from reputable companies that follow proper safety protocols. Cannabis companies should produce and handle edibles like food businesses produce and handle food – with the utmost attention to safety.

Nick Recht, TEKLYNX
FST Soapbox

Enterprise Label Management for Better Food Labeling

By Nick Recht
No Comments
Nick Recht, TEKLYNX

The concept of a food label is simple. Labels identify products, provide customers with necessary information and enable companies to receive and ship products worldwide. Yet growing customer demands, changing labeling regulations and an increasingly competitive global marketplace continue to have food and beverage manufacturers scrambling to maintain some semblance of simplicity in an increasingly complicated labeling environment. Furthermore, the stakes are high for managing labels. Food recalls continue to make headlines, and a growing number of consumers rely on identified allergens to be properly labeled so they can select food and beverages that are safe to consume.

Now, food and beverage manufacturers of all sizes are re-thinking how they manage their labeling environments to navigate this increasingly complicated labeling landscape. For these manufacturers, doing so often begins with a closer look at how labeling is viewed throughout their enterprise. When labeling is treated as a discrete operation within the food and beverage manufacturing process, the labeling environment often relies too heavily on manual processes and is prone to human error. By contrast, when labeling is viewed as an integrated component of the manufacturing process, food and beverage manufacturers greatly improve labeling accuracy, efficiency and agility.

So what does labeling look like as integrated component of the manufacturing process? Enter enterprise label management (ELM), a centralized approach to labeling that leverages existing business systems, eliminates manual process, and reduces IT overheard and the room for human error. It integrates label design, approval, security and print automation and holds the key to improving labeling speed, accuracy and agility.

ELM centralizes label management and integrates labeling with other business or ERP systems. It consists of these four primary label management components:

  1. The ability to create and print barcode labels used for shipping, inventory, products and more.
  2. Label approval, traceability, security, storage and version control for all labels created and printed.
  3. Print automation to remove human interaction from the printing process.
  4. A configurable browser printing interface for seamless label printing locally and around the globe.

Food and beverage manufacturers of all sizes can benefit from ELM. Typically, companies look to ELM when they are looking to reduce waste, mitigate risk or reduce disparate system management. ELM is also a natural fit within lean manufacturing initiatives because its integrated approach allows organizations to leverage existing business systems and often reduces IT overhead. And because ELM incorporates label approval, traceability, security and version control, food and beverage manufacturers that leverage it are better equipped to respond to and execute a food recall should that situation arise.

From an efficiency standpoint, food and beverage manufacturers realize many benefits from ELM implementations. ELM eliminates manual approval processes that often result in production delays. It also reduces manual, error-prone processes. The use of label templates allows food manufacturers to quickly adjust labels, making it easier to respond to changing label requirements such as the FDA’s new Nutrition Facts requirements or those items required by FSMA.

With ELM, the use of a configurable browser printing interface allows food and beverage manufacturers to manage labels at one location while enabling users to print labels at locations around the globe. This greatly improves a manufacturer’s ability to manage labels across its network of production facilities and distribution centers, and provides a labeling environment that can easily adjust as the company grows.

ELM can also serve as a competitive advantage for food and beverage manufacturers. For one leading consumer goods manufacturer, an ELM solution provided a way to become more competitive in the marketplace. The manufacturer was facing challenges, as its former labeling process relied too heavily on manual processes. Specifically, its manual data entry was time-consuming and error-prone. Its labeling environment was also unable to accommodate label changes without costly, custom development time. Labeling errors meant the company was at risk of losing customers and market share, and the inability to quickly accommodate label changes negatively impacted its ability to comply with changing customer requirements.

With ELM, the manufacturer realized a 75% reduction in label development time, resulting in an equal decrease in labor costs. In addition, access to label templates gave them complete flexibility to quickly respond to business and customer requirements. And because its label creation was now automated and integrated with its existing SAP system as part of the ELM implementation, the company was able to increase labeling efficiency while reducing errors.

For food and beverage manufacturers, the benefits of ELM are too compelling to ignore. Here are four signs your company may benefit from ELM:

  1. Your barcode label printing is manual and disjointed, with many clicks.
  2. Your label templates are decentralized and difficult to manage.
  3. You have manual label approval workflows and can’t apply securities and controls for design vs. print users.
  4. You have many local print installations.

If you’ve answered yes to one or more of these signs, ELM warrants a closer look. ELM implementations can run smoothly when you partner with an experienced barcode labeling solutions provider, and your company will be better positioned to navigate what has become a very complicated food and beverage labeling environment.

Allen Sayler, EAS
FST Soapbox

Fast Track to FDA FURLS—Expediting or Impeding Access to Overseas Markets

By Allen Sayler
No Comments
Allen Sayler, EAS

Is the FDA Unified and Listing Systems (FURLS) system with its newly updated electronic Export Listing Module (ELM) a pathway to overseas markets or just one more regulatory hurdle that has been put in place by the U.S. government to impede export of U.S.-processed foods? A review of the new updates is needed to provide the answer to this question.

Regardless of the answer to this question, whether your company is already participating in this program or is looking for new markets outside the United States in countries that do not require the FDA listing of U.S. food companies, you must understand how the FURLS system works, how to electronically register and better understand the regulatory challenges of the importing country.

The FDA recently released a notification that their FDA Unified and Listing Systems (FURLS) system has been updated to include an Export Listing Module (ELM). This update allows U.S. food manufacturers to electronically submit, and for FDA to receive and process requests for inclusion on the export lists for FDA-regulated food products and present these lists to countries that require them, whether your company is already participating in this program or is looking for new markets outside the United States.

As background, the FDA has established and maintains export lists for countries that require some assurance that U.S. food manufacturers exporting to these countries, at a minimum, meet all applicable food safety regulations enforced by FDA. These lists, in an unofficial way, serve as a “certification” by the FDA, representing the U.S. government, that either included facilities have provided information to the FDA to assert they are in compliance with the importing country’s regulations and requirements or, more likely, that the U.S. food manufacturer is meeting the currently applicable U.S. laws and regulations.

Other options for U.S. food manufacturers that are interested or already exporting to countries that do not require the FDA lists, include the FDA’s export certificates, which give the agency’s official attestation concerning a product’s regulatory or marketing status. The fact that FDA has issued an export certificate does not preclude FDA from taking appropriate regulatory action against a product covered by the certificate. CFSAN issues “certificates of export” for seafood, food additives and food contact substances. CFSAN issues “certificates of free sale” for land food, dietary supplements, infant formula, medical foods and foods for special dietary use. U.S. firms wishing to apply for an export certificate for a food product may log in to FDA Industry Systems and submit an online application through the Certificate Application Process.

TraceGains, verifying suppliers Need to learn more about supplier verification? TraceGains is here to help! Download our Foreign Supplier Verification Program Guidebook to learn the ins and outs of this complicated FSMA addition. TraceGains enlisted the help of Marc Sanchez, regulatory attorney specializing in FDA and USDA law, and Shawn Stevens, a global food safety lawyer, to provide insight and break down some of the confusion.

Back to the FDA list option. It is important to note that companies may request to be included on these lists at any time; however, updates to the lists are only published quarterly by the FDA. Additionally, final listing decisions are made by the competent authority of the importing country. This is to say, there can be a short or lengthy process between the time when FDA updates the list for a particular country and when that country formally accepts the updated list. Since there is no downside for a company to appear on one FDA list or many (lists maintained for each country), this potential delay in official acceptance of the list should drive U.S. food companies to apply to be on all of the country lists, before there is a specific need to do so. Remember the old adage, “When you are in a hurry, inevitably you end up standing in the slowest line.”

Market access for U.S.-manufactured dairy products to the EU, China and Chile, for example, are subject to these listing requirements in order to gain market access. Do ensure you have verified that your dairy product meets the standards and labeling requirements for the country to which you wish to export, as it is likely that a foreign country’s dairy product requirements will not necessarily be the same as what is found in the United States. Another example is that in order to export U.S.-manufactured collagen and gelatin products to the EU, companies must provide a laboratory report from an accredited, private laboratory demonstrating that the products comply with the established criteria. For exporters of U.S.-manufactured/processed seafood products to the EU or China, inclusion on the FDA-maintained list is required, as well as an export certificate which is provided by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) Seafood Inspection Program after FDA listing has been completed.

Finally, U.S.-manufactured infant formula exports to China are also subject to listing requirements. It should be noted that the China Certification and Accreditation Administration (CNCA) defines infant formula as food intended for children up to 36 months of age, known as “infant and young children formula”. This differs from the U.S. definition. Please be advised that CNCA requires new applicants to submit evidence of third-party certification of compliance with Chinese laws and regulations as part of the application process. CNCA also requires that infant formula manufacturers/processors submit an Establishment Registration Application with additional information to CNCA.

One of the most important keys to gaining access to overseas markets is to get your company enrolled on as many of these FDA lists as possible, obtain FDA certificates of free sale ahead of time, and make sure you update your information and keep it current within the various FDA electronic database systems.

Whether your company faces a foreign market access challenge via being a part of the FDA List or needing to get an FDA “Certificate of Free Sale” or just have questions related to moving product out of a U.S. port and into a foreign port, contact a reputable consulting firm for assistance.

Francine Shaw, Savvy Food Safety, Inc.
FST Soapbox

Would Your Team Know How to Handle a Crisis?

By Francine L. Shaw
No Comments
Francine Shaw, Savvy Food Safety, Inc.

In 1993, Jack in the Box put foodborne illnesses and food safety “on the map” when their undercooked burgers led to an E. coli outbreak that infected more than 700 people. 171 people were hospitalized and four children died.

Don’t miss the Plenary Discussion on Crisis Management at the 2018 Food Safety Consortium | Learn moreUnfortunately, this infamous outbreak wasn’t an isolated incident. Foodborne illness outbreaks are on the rise in the United States. The CDC reports that 48 million Americans become sick, 128,000 are hospitalized, and 3,000 die from foodborne diseases each year in the United States.

A string of unprecedented outbreaks at Chipotle occurred at multiple locations, beginning in 2015. Recently, there was widespread concern when romaine lettuce tainted with E. coli was shipped, served and sold at restaurants, stores and institutions nationwide. Earlier this year, approximately 2,000 7-Eleven customers at a Utah location were exposed to hepatitis A due to an infected employee who worked (and handled the convenience store’s food) while sick. The state’s local health department announced that anyone who used the restrooms, drank a fountain drink, ate fresh fruit or any item from the store’s hot food case was at risk for infection from the highly contagious illness.

Keep in mind that a crisis isn’t necessarily a foodborne illness. Think about other unexpected crises that could impact your organization, staff and customers, like natural disasters (hurricanes, blizzards, tornados, etc.) What if there’s a robbery, shooting or bombing at your venue? What if a guest chokes and dies? Perhaps there’s an unexpected power outage or a fire? Yes, unfortunately, these are all real possibilities.

If a crisis were to occur at your establishment, would your team know what to do?

As the saying goes, if you fail to prepare, prepare to fail. It’s extremely important to be prepared for every type of crisis imaginable—before anything bad actually happens.

When developing a crisis plan, consider and implement the following:

  • Form a crisis management team. Assign roles and responsibilities. Ensure all designated crisis team members understand what’s expected of them in the event of a crisis. For most food businesses, the crisis team will consist of a corporate attorney, company leadership, food safety team, crisis management consultant, a public relations expert, a trained media spokesperson and applicable government agencies.
  • Know how your local health department operates. The role of the local health department varies from jurisdiction to jurisdiction, so get to know your local inspectors. Work with your regulatory agencies, who will want to help.
  • Create honest, authentic and apologetic messaging. This will, of course, need to be developed to meet the specifics of your situation. Regardless of what happened, honestly describe the situation and explain the solutions-focused plan you’ve created to move forward. Transparency is important, otherwise key audiences (customers, employees, media, investors, advertisers, etc.) will lose confidence and trust in your company.
  • Work with the media to disseminate information about the incident. The media want to report what has happened, and it’s in your best interest to be straightforward with them. If there was a breakdown in your process, identify it, whether you received tainted merchandise from a vendor or experienced an error in the kitchen. Explain the concrete steps you’re taking to fix it and prevent a reoccurrence (e.g., selecting different vendors, re-training your staff, adjusting your food allergy protocols, etc.).
  • Train (or re-train) your staff on food safety protocols. Be certain that everyone is knowledgeable about food safety (e.g., how to prevent cross-contamination, how to properly prepare allergy-friendly meals, how to cook foods to proper temperatures, etc.) to avoid similar crisis situations in the future.
  • Use social media wisely. Monitor social media (Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, etc.) and respond to negative and/or erroneous comments. Messages on social media (as well as in real life) should always be positive, professional and honest. Don’t get defensive and don’t allow yourself to get sucked into toxic, negative message spirals.
  • Communicate with your customers, employees and other key stakeholders to win back their trust. Be honest, sincere and apologetic. Explain how/why their loyalty is so important to you, and vow to earn their trust again.
  • Change vendors, if necessary. Did a vendor mislabel ingredients, causing an allergic reaction in one of your guests? Did they source tainted products and sell them to you? Change vendors, and be clear in your communications (to media, via social media platforms, etc.) that you identified the vendor as the source of the problem, explaining that you’ve cut ties to them to eliminate similar events in the future.
  • Thank the responders that helped. Perhaps your crisis wasn’t a foodborne illness –it was a customer dying of natural causes, a bomb threat, a weather emergency, or an electrical fire. Use the media and social media platforms to thank the police, fire department and/or paramedics—whichever responders helped defuse the situation.
  • Designate a media spokesperson. When facing a serious crisis, your restaurant’s CEO/owner/president should be the spokesperson. The public wants the head of the company to speak authoritatively about the incident and the concrete plans to resolve the problem. Practice your messages before going in front of the cameras, anticipate the most challenging questions you may receive, and determine how you’ll respond professionally, politely and non-defensively.
  • Stay calm. While it’s upsetting (and terrifying!) to be in a crisis situation, remain calm as you work to recover from the incident. Follow your crisis plan and communicate your key messages. Make certain that important audiences (including customers, prospects, employees, the media, vendors, health inspectors, etc.) recognize how hard you’re working to prevent similar incidents in the future.
  • Debrief after the crisis is over. Regardless of what happened and the severity of the situation, after any kind of incident, get the crisis management team together and debrief. Review your plan and see if there is any room for improvement.

It is critical to have a plan established just in case a crisis occurs. Hopefully, you’ll never have to use it, but it’s always wise to be prepared. A crisis can hit any business at any time—how well you handle the situation could make a monumental difference in the court of public opinion.

Stuart Gavurin, Misson Data
Retail Food Safety Forum

The Internet of Things: More Than Just Food Safety

By Stuart Gavurin
No Comments
Stuart Gavurin, Misson Data

When it comes to food safety and temperature monitoring, the appeal of automation is crystal clear. Why continue to depend on a costly and unreliable manual process with clipboards, binders, spreadsheets and guesswork when the latest Internet of Things (IoT) technology continuously monitors conditions and sends actionable alerts in real time?

Industry experts note that temperature sensors are the most likely IoT devices to scale throughout the enterprise. While food safety and temperature monitoring are critically important and must meet health code regulations, it is not the only information that needs to be tracked and monitored in a restaurant, grocery store or other foodservice facility.

Although the cost of IoT technology has dropped significantly, the challenge for many newcomers to IoT technology lies in building a business case that the C-suite will accept. To solidify an understanding of the value, organizations should consider the variety of critical operations that can be optimized by IoT connectivity.

Beyond installing a few smart devices IoT platforms are designed to provide a set of common but critical functionality and services—broadly, a software-based infrastructure that can be used as a utility. For IoT, this means the software platform can support interactions with distributed sensors and automation. It is the software that tracks and interprets things like temperature, humidity, energy or movement data and then integrates in a manner that can be incorporated into core business processes that are executed by staff.

The platform approach has the effect of reducing complexity, shortening the learning curve, and enabling the enterprise to focus on its core competencies, rather than getting bogged down trying to understand how to implement, use and maintain the IoT components and technology. The benefits of this approach are that it reduces time to deploy, investment and risk. The result is a business operations-focused IoT-enabled platform that abstracts the complex details, is easy to use, and intelligently focused on delivering maximum value.

For instance, consider a large supermarket chain outfitted with a variety of sensors and gateways that goes beyond monitoring cold and hot food storage temperatures. The suite of hardware and software deployed can be expanded to monitor functions such as: lighting and energy usage, HVAC conditions, customer wait times, open/closed doors, water levels, and fluid flow volume at beverage dispensers. All of this data can be integrated with other back-office software, such as employee scheduling, inventory management, business intelligence, and more, achieving a true 360-degree view of foodservice operations.

Condition tracking systems can be combined with task management functionality to ensure that data is not just monitored, but action is taken as needed. Text message (SMS) or email alerts can be set for anomalies based on customizable threshold values and complex rules. Task flow checklists can be automated, and a digital record is available to bring transparency to execution timing, stop violations, and ensure critical problems are remediated.

Ultimately, as IoT evolves, the enterprise becomes focused less on devices and infrastructure and more on platforms supporting functionality and improving customer experience. As your organization considers investment in IoT, look for solutions that go beyond hardware to encompass software platforms, applications and, most importantly, the business goals of delivering great services and products while making and saving money. Before you spend the money and effort to deploy connected things, decide how IoT will help your business increase efficiencies and provide new value propositions.

PattyMcDermott, ThermoFisher Scientific
In the Food Lab

How Digital Solutions Support Supply Chain Transparency and Traceability

By Patricia McDermott
No Comments
PattyMcDermott, ThermoFisher Scientific

Ensuring the safety and authenticity of food is a key responsibility of growers, producers, manufacturers and suppliers. With so many partners involved in the journey from farm to fork, tracking chain of custody data and maintaining a clear, unbroken record are essential to safeguard the quality and provenance of products. However, without proper systems to maintain transparent supply chain audit trails, businesses operating within the food industry run the risk of being responsible for adverse events that could result in health, economic or even legal consequences.

One of the biggest challenges associated with maintaining a clear chain of custody is the need to monitor the flow of raw materials, ingredients and products across increasingly global distribution networks. To successfully track food products throughout the value chain, information on product movements and quality control data must be accessible to those who need it. These systems must also remain compliant with the latest regulations, as well as ensure stakeholders can achieve the highest levels of productivity to meet consumer demand.

For players within the food supply chain to achieve transparent processes and complete traceability, robust information exchange mechanisms and integrated data management systems are key. The latest digital solutions are ensuring the integrity of supply networks by capturing and making available data from any stage of this journey for regulatory or product quality assurance purposes.

Food Safety: A Global Responsibility

The global nature of modern supply networks can make ensuring the safety and quality of food challenging. From honey and juice to yogurt and cheese, tracking the lifecycle of food products is essential to combat food fraud and adulteration, as well as safeguard consumers from harmful food contaminants, such as pesticides and bacteria. Unscrupulous behavior from businesses operating within the supply chain can, for example, cause consumers to purchase products that are not what they claim to be, and even put customers’ health at risk through exposure to potentially unsafe batches.

Given the global expansion of the food supply chain, regulatory bodies are putting increased focus on ensuring that products that pass through multiple channels and regions comply with the same regulations. By focusing on enforcing standards through audits and reviews, it becomes possible to prevent and therefore reduce the potential for adverse events occurring.1 As a result, voluntary standards such as the ISO 22000 guidelines, and mandatory regulations such as FSMA and EU 178/2002, have been put in place to set clear benchmarks for stakeholders’ responsibilities and better enforce food quality and safety.

Regulations such as these require extensive record keeping, transparent audit trails and accountability for all processes. While end-to-end monitoring of one process may be relatively straightforward, ensuring visibility for every process within a complex food supply network can quickly become an overwhelming task. In order to achieve regulatory compliance across all aspects of a supply chain, businesses must be able to integrate their data management systems to achieve full oversight. Moreover, with effective data management tools in place, businesses can organize and incorporate data from all aspects of a food product lifecycle in a compliant manner, enabling them to expand globally.

Integrating Digital Solutions for Better Outcomes

To preserve consumer confidence and brand integrity, businesses operating within the food industry are recognizing the need for automated infrastructures that can manage data, streamline processes, and ensure traceability and accountability for every product. By integrating all monitoring processes into a single system and enabling access to this information via the cloud, the latest digital data management platforms are working to alleviate the challenges associated with operating global supply networks.

Manually organizing inventory management, standard operating procedure (SOP) use, and product traceability can be difficult and time-consuming, especially if operations are on a global scale. Setting up automated processes to manage fail points using a laboratory information management system (LIMS), where they can be itemized and protocols established for potential hazards and preventive measures, can boost speed and efficiency while ensuring the highest levels of data integrity.

Routine food safety testing requires the consistent replenishment of supplies, and the failure to keep on top of inventory use can cause operations to grind to an unexpected stop. Automatic supply level monitoring and automated ordering using a LIMS can eliminate inventory fail points and help to ensure uninterrupted productivity. Furthermore, introducing electronic SOPs as part of a LIMS can define and outline workflows to prevent unintended errors and ensure reliability. Additionally, tracking and logging products using barcode readers throughout their lifecycle gives stakeholders confidence in the products they handle, and can simplify quality control and regulatory review processes.

With the need to monitor so many processes across the food supply chain, there are large volumes of instrument data, workflows and records that must be maintained. Leveraging a LIMS to collect and manage disparate data from all aspects of every process can help stakeholders to streamline workflows. From evaluating potential hazards to eliminating possible issues, having procedures tracked automatically not only transforms processes, but also simplifies quality assessment.

The latest LIMS are able to aggregate all of this data in a single cloud-based system, making this information available at the tap of a tablet or smartphone. Integrating a LIMS with laboratory equipment across food safety testing protocols allows for automated data transfer and increased lab efficiency. Data can be captured from laboratory equipment using a connected scientific data management system (SDMS), which is generated using the approved methods and SOPs available from a laboratory execution system (LES). Interfacing to each instrument using the LES ensures there are no input or copying errors. Subsequently, as process results are entered into the system, any out of specification parameters can be flagged and reported automatically.

The value of an LES within a LIMS can be seen in food safety labs where global demand drives time to market and thus the need for high production efficiency. By giving lab managers control over method and protocol management from any location, the actions of users can be easily recalled for performance monitoring and accountability purposes. And with protocols, regulations and corrective actions defined through the LIMS, labs can achieve faster and more effective decision-making.

Digital solutions such as LIMS are enabling food safety scientists to perform analyses based on readily available SOPs using LES platforms, collect and store data in its original form using an SDMS, and evaluate how the data is being collected, transferred, stored and accessed from a centralized, cloud-based LIMS. These integrated digital solutions offer comprehensive support for the organization of chain of custody data, ensuring full traceability and compliance, and protecting consumer safety and food integrity.

Improved Traceability for Regulatory Compliance

Current regulations are enforcing the quality and safety of food products using well-defined standards for laboratory processes, ensuring the transparency of data handling processes, from raw materials to packaged products. ISO 22000 sets recommendations for food safety management systems and requires businesses to implement hazard analysis and critical control points (HACCP) to ensure the highest levels of quality control and assurance throughout the product lifecycle.

Regulations such as EU 178/2002 and FSMA include mandatory requirements for the traceability of food, feed and any other food-related substance or animal through identification and food tracking programs. Given the unfortunate growth of food fraud, traceability and authentication are becoming increasingly important. The latest regulations are helping the food industry to maintain optimal production practices to safeguard public health, maintain consumer confidence and preserve brand integrity.

Systems that are fully harmonized with these guidelines can be used to maintain data in organized archives, simplify audit trail recording for proof of compliance, and enable easy-access for users to review data. The latest LIMS can support HACCP compliance by automatically alerting users to deviations in expected processing parameters. In this way, issues can be quickly identified, and corrective action can be taken to prevent potentially dangerous products from reaching the consumer.

Digital lab and data management solutions are helping food supply chain stakeholders to simplify tracking, improve transparency and ensure the highest levels of accountability to protect both product authenticity and consumer safety. The integration and implementation of these systems helps to fulfill production demands as well as meet future challenges, allowing the food industry to expand and develop services and checks with the growing global market. Moreover, the potential for food fraud or adulteration is greatly minimized, giving consumers additional confidence in the products they purchase.

Reference

  1. Charlebois, S. Sterling, B. Haratifar, S. and Naing, S.K. (2014). “Comparison of Global Food Traceability Regulations and Requirements,” Compr. Rev. Food Sci. Food Saf., vol. 13, no. 5, pp. 1104–1123.
Deirdre Schlunegger, Stop Foodborne Illness
Food Safety Culture Club

How We Use the Word ‘Recall’ Matters

By Deirdre Schlunegger
No Comments
Deirdre Schlunegger, Stop Foodborne Illness

“Recalls”. This topic got me thinking, what is the literal meaning of recall? So, I looked it up:

Verb

  1. Bring (a fact, event or situation) back into one’s mind, especially so as to recount it to others, remember.
    “I can still vaguely recall being taken to the hospital”
  2. Officially order (someone) to return to a place
    “the Panamanian ambassador was recalled from Peru”

Noun

  1. An act or instance of officially recalling someone or something
    “the recall of the ambassador”
  2. The action or faculty of remembering something learned or experienced.
    “their recall of dreams”

Many people think of FDA when hearing the word “recall”, and many consumers believe that the FDA often or even always orders recalls. In fact, the FDA relies on responsible parties to voluntarily recall food products when a threat exists, but FSMA’s mandatory recall authority allows FDA to mandate a recall only when the criteria under section 423 of the FD&C Act are met.

For most, the word “recall” is all too familiar. We hear it so often that I wonder if we are becoming desensitized to it. Almost daily we hear this item or that item has been recalled due to XXX, allergy, Salmonella, Listeria, foreign matter, and the list goes on. I counted 45 human and three pet food-related recalls just since May 1, 2018—that’s in just 84 days as I write this. So, for consumers (and we are all consumers), how do we hear the word recall and what is our visceral reaction when we hear the word? What actions if any do we take? Does it become too overwhelming? Are we becoming immune from the word? We are required to eat for survival sake and we don’t know if there is a problem with the food we are eating until after it has been recalled. At Stop Foodborne Illness, we send out recall notices every time there is a recall announced, which is typically a few times a week. Recently, a friend asked, “So, do I just quit eating to avoid contamination?”

I wonder if we can start a conversation about the term, how we use it and how to use the word and related action effectively. What does it mean for consumers? Is it only meaningful after the fact? The word and action of the word “prevention” is so much more powerful. Just “food” for thought.