Tag Archives: Focus Article

Question mark

Return of FSMA IQ Test: Part V

By Food Safety Tech Staff
No Comments
Question mark

Two years ago, Food Safety Tech published a series of six FSMA IQ tests to “test” industry’s knowledge about FSMA. It seemed appropriate, as at that point in time, folks still had a lot of unanswered questions. Now that we have a couple of years under our belt, how much to we know? We will publish each section of the test every week for the next six weeks. Then at this year’s Food Safety Consortium, the creators of the test–Bill Bremer, principal of food safety compliance at Kestrel Management, LLC and his team–will compare 2016 vs. 2018 during an interactive session. And if you have questions or comments on any of the elements brought up in the IQ test, please include them comments section below the test, so Bremer’s team can address them either live on our site or during the Consortium session.

Take Part IV here.

Create your own user feedback survey

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.

McDonalds, golden arches

FDA Investigation of Cyclospora Outbreak Linked to Salads Continues

By Food Safety Tech Staff
No Comments
McDonalds, golden arches

Yesterday FDA provided an update on the multistate outbreak of Cyclospora infections “likely” linked to people who consumed salads from McDonald’s. The outbreak spans across 15 states and has infected 476 people, 21 of whom have been hospitalized. According to FDA’s latest release, the agency is reviewing distribution and supplier information for romaine lettuce and carrots.

Last month, USDA’s FSIS issued a public health alert on beef, pork and poultry salads and wraps, distributed by Caito Foods, LLC, that were potentially contaminated with Cyclospora. Fresh Express, Caito Foods’ supplier, had notified the company that the products with romaine lettuce were being recalled. However, no products related to this particular outbreak have been recalled, according to FDA. In addition, McDonald’s has reportedly ceased using the Fresh Express salad mix at restaurants impacted by the outbreak.

FDA stated that it currently does not have evidence suggesting that this Cyclospora outbreak is connected to the Cyclospora outbreak linked to Del Monte vegetable trays.

Kroger

Kroger to Sell Groceries in China Via Alibaba

By Food Safety Tech Staff
No Comments
Kroger

The Cincinnati-based supermarket chain Kroger has entered into a pilot partnership with Alibaba’s Tmall Global platform to sell its “Our Brands” products online to consumers in China. This platform is China’s largest business-to-consumer marketplace, and helps retailers that don’t have physical operations in the country build virtual storefronts and send products to China.

The pilot will start with Kroger’s Simple Truth products, which are positioned as natural and organic, and are also the second-largest brand sold in Kroger stores. This year alone the brand generated more than $2 billion in sales, earning it the title of largest natural and organic brand in the United States, according to Kroger.

“Kroger is the world’s third largest retailer by revenue–$122.7 billion in sales in 2017,” said Yael Cosset, chief digital officer at Kroger in a news release. “We are creating the grocery retail model of the future by focusing on digital and technology.”

The partnership also supports the company’s “Restock Kroger” pillars of redefining the grocery customer experience by elevating “Our Brands” and creating customer and shareholder value through promoting top line growth via alternative revenue streams.

Question mark

Return of FSMA IQ Test: Part IV

By Food Safety Tech Staff
No Comments
Question mark

Two years ago, Food Safety Tech published a series of six FSMA IQ tests to “test” industry’s knowledge about FSMA. It seemed appropriate, as at that point in time, folks still had a lot of unanswered questions. Now that we have a couple of years under our belt, how much to we know? We will publish each section of the test every week for the next six weeks. Then at this year’s Food Safety Consortium, the creators of the test–Bill Bremer, principal of food safety compliance at Kestrel Management, LLC and his team–will compare 2016 vs. 2018 during an interactive session. And if you have questions or comments on any of the elements brought up in the IQ test, please include them comments section below the test, so Bremer’s team can address them either live on our site or during the Consortium session.

Take Part III here.

Create your own user feedback survey

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.

Question mark

Return of FSMA IQ Test: Part III

Question mark

Two years ago, Food Safety Tech published a series of six FSMA IQ tests to “test” industry’s knowledge about FSMA. It seemed appropriate, as at that point in time, folks still had a lot of unanswered questions. Now that we have a couple of years under our belt, how much to we know? We will publish each section of the test every week for the next six weeks. Then at this year’s Food Safety Consortium, the creators of the test–Bill Bremer, principal of food safety compliance at Kestrel Management, LLC and his team–will compare 2016 vs. 2018 during an interactive session. And if you have questions or comments on any of the elements brought up in the IQ test, please include them comments section below the test, so Bremer’s team can address them either live on our site or during the Consortium session.

Take Part II here.

Create your own user feedback survey

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.

Question mark

Return of FSMA IQ Test: Part II

By Food Safety Tech Staff
No Comments
Question mark

Two years ago, Food Safety Tech published a series of six FSMA IQ tests to “test” industry’s knowledge about FSMA. It seemed appropriate, as at that point in time, folks still had a lot of unanswered questions. Now that we have a couple of years under our belt, how much to we know? We will publish each section of the test every week for the next six weeks. Then at this year’s Food Safety Consortium, the creators of the test–Bill Bremer, principal of food safety compliance at Kestrel Management, LLC and his team–will compare 2016 vs. 2018 during an interactive session. And if you have questions or comments on any of the elements brought up in the IQ test, please include them comments section below the test, so Bremer’s team can address them either live on our site or during the Consortium session.

Take Part I here. 

Create your own user feedback survey