Category: Food Safety

  • How to Manage Growers: FSMA Produce Safety Rule for Processors

    Let’s face it, all of our food comes from farms. When it comes to plant-based food there’s always a grower (or many growers!) involved.

    Here at Safe Food Alliance, we work to, help growers implement processes to ensure compliance with the FSMA Produce Safety rule (FSMA is the FDA’s “Food Safety Modernization Act”). Many of our customers are also processors who buy a raw agricultural commodity (‘RAC’) from growers, and are reevaluating how they “manage” these growers as part of their supplier approval/ supplier management program.

    As it stands, if you are a processor that purchases directly from growers you should be considering a review of your company’s grower management programs, with the following objectives in mind:

    1. Meeting FSMA regulatory requirements
    2. Meeting your customer requirements and food safety audit requirements
    3. Protecting your operation by reducing risk

    Assessing Risk & Defining Controls

    At the most basic level, any food processor should be making sure that their suppliers and the products purchased comply with current regulations and are safe. This includes packaging suppliers, ingredient suppliers, and raw materials like agricultural commodities. This doesn’t mean that you have to physically audit all of your suppliers; it doesn’t even mean that you have to get a copy of a third-party audit from all of them. Food safety is always based on risk, so as a processor, you need to determine the level of risk posed by the raw material, then based on that assessment determine what controls are needed.

    If this sounds a lot like HACCP or Preventive Controls, that’s because it is. Based on your hazard analysis you determine what needs to be done to reduce risk and help ensure the safety of your products, and to ultimately protect the future of your company.

    With produce, processors should always identify the risk of pathogens in their hazard analysis. Remember that any produce may bear this risk, since it’s grown outside. Additionally, there may be physical hazards that a company will have to contend with in its internal operations. Lastly, an assessment of likely chemical risks, such as pesticides, has to be done.

    Evaluating Each Type of Risk

    HIGHER RISK

    Products that are higher risk will require the highest level of verification to help minimize any risk. High-risk products might include anything such as  an annual crop grown directly on the ground, or anything eaten fresh without a processing step that would significantly reduce pathogens. Imported items may also bear a higher risk, depending on the country of origin and their local practices and regulations, and may need extra verification activities.

    Examples: Leafy greens, fresh fruit, some imported items

    Potential Controls: Third-party GAP audit, or full on-site review of programs conducted by your company. Confirm compliance with FSMA Produce Safety rule, as well as industry best practices, potentially to include review of growers’ records. Sampling and testing of product on a defined schedule will generally need to be conducted as well.


    LOWER RISK:

    Tree crops or other items grown off the ground, and items with no history of past recalls.  Other factors to consider: local or domestically grown items, or crops over which the processor has direct oversight (vertically integrated companies) may have lower risk.

    Examples: Dried fruit or other items with minimal past food safety issues, some tree nuts, items that are always heat treated or processed in some way prior to consumption. In some cases, these items may qualify for an exemption from FSMA (see below).

    Potential Controls: Grower completes a questionnaire or your employee works with them to complete one; review of the grower’s food safety plan; short on-site visit to review practices / observe.

    Exempt: There are a few exemptions built into the FSMA Produce Safety rule. For these items, an exemption may be taken per the regulation, or they can be treated as low risk as outlined above.  These include:
    1. Produce on the “rarely consumed raw” list
    2. Produce on individual consumption or on-farm consumption (not for sale)
    3. Produce the receives a commercial processing step which would significantly reduce pathogens

    Examples: Tomatoes for paste or canning, peaches or olives for canning, California-grown almonds treated per the marketing order, wine grapes used for wine (not eaten).

    Potential Controls: Documentation to demonstrate qualification for exemption.  This implicitly requires that the processing step be validated as a “kill step”, it can’t just be assumed that it is effective.

    FDA’s Focus Areas for Risk Management in Produce

    There are a few specific focus areas built into the rule, where the FDA and industry working groups have identified potential risks related to agricultural products. These are the focus areas of the Produce Safety rule that can be reviewed with growers you purchase from:

    1. Personnel training and qualification: This section is mainly focused on personal hygiene, harvesting activities, handling product, and relevant employee training.
    2. Agricultural water quality: The most controversial section, this one is still under review by FDA for discussion with the industry as they consider potential changes. Requires growers to establish and maintain a “microbial water quality profile”, utilizing specific test methods for generic E. coli.  Compliance dates for these requirements are delayed for a few more years.
    3. Soil amendments: Focuses mainly on soil amendments of animal origin, and controlling associated risks. This control can be achieved through treatment of those amendments, or timing of application of raw amendments well in advance of harvest.  No soil amendments should ever come into contact with the harvestable portion of the crop.
    4. Domesticated and wild animals: Requires monitoring for animal activity which may put product at risk, and taking appropriate actions if observed.
    5. Growing, harvesting, packing and holding activities: Focused on how activities are carried out related to product risk, such as handling practices.
    6. Equipment, tools, buildings, and sanitation for processing operations: Design and maintenance of equipment, tools and facilities; cleaning and sanitation; pest control; etc.

    Low-Cost Training Available

    If you are responsible for purchasing raw agricultural commodities, or handle the “grower relations” function, consider attending the official one-day produce safety course and become familiar with the requirements of the rule. After attending the course you’ll receive an official certificate from AFDO.  Safe Food Alliance currently offers this course in various locations at low cost this spring.

  • Listeria spp. vs. Listeria Monocytogenes

    When submitting a sample for testing which option should you choose: Listeria spp. Or Listeria monocytogenes?

    That is a good question. One is very broad (Listeria spp.) and will give you a lot of information about the bacteria in the genera and the other is specific (L. monocytogenes) one species in the genera. Think about the tests like this: one is fruit and the other is a granny smith apple.

    Most would choose the more specific granny smith or Listeria monocytogenes. But what doesthat mean for your operations? Let me explain.

    Listeria monocytogenes is the most common foodborne pathogen of Listeria. The pathogen is very specific and the leading cause for major Listeria recalls. If you obtain a negative result for L. monocytogenes, you do not have contamination with the specific species that causes illness.

    If you choose to test for Listeria spp. the lab is going to test for every species of Listeria, pathogenic or non-pathogenic. If you obtain a positive result for Listeria spp. it means you have contamination but it may or may not be the pathogenic species. This is a good way tomeasure sanitation processes.

    Listeria Explained

    Today there are 20 identified species of Listeria. The pathogen received its name from British surgeon Joseph Lister in 1940 but wasn’t first recorded as disease causing until 1924 with the death of a young rabbit. Listeria is found living ubiquitously in soil which often leads to fruit and vegetable contamination.

    L. monocytogenes is contracted by eating food contaminated with the bacteria. This specific pathogen is also very hardy and can grow in a wide range of environments; temperatures from 39°F (4°C) (the temperature of your refrigerator) to 98.6°F (37°C) (your bodies internal temperature), wet damp areas such as drains, and has varying incubation periods of three to 70 days.

    Listeria statistically is one of the most fatal bacteria, with death rates near 25%, this in comparison to Salmonella which has mortality rates of less than 1%. In the US it is estimated 1,600 people are infected each year.

    Deaths Map

     

    www.cdc.gov/listeria/outbreaks/cantaloupes-jensen-farms/index.html

     

    Listeria in the News

    Packaged Salads 2016: 19 people infected in 9 states leading to 1 death.

    Packaged Salads Graph

     

    www.cdc.gov/listeria/outbreaks/bagged-salads-01-16/epi.html.

     

     

    Cantaloupes 2011: 147 people infected in 28 states leading to 33 deaths.

     

    Avocados 2019: Possible contamination leading to a voluntary recall of avocados in 6 states after environmental samples taken at the packing facility were positive.

     

    Testing Methods (PCR vs VIDAS vs Petrifilm)

    When testing, it is always important to determine which testing method will work best for your operation. The test methods have differing advantages and disadvantages.

    Polymerase Chain Reaction (PCR):

    This method is a molecule technique where the DNA is extracted from the bacteria. Copies of the bacterial DNA are made exponentially (see figure below). These copies are labeled with a dye or isotope and are detected in a themocycler by a laser. As time passes the number of copies increases and the DNA is detected or not detected giving the final results.

    PCR Amplification

     

     

    http://www.gmotesting.com/Testing-Options/Genetic-analysis

     

    • Advantages: Time, this method is very fast, with an average turn-around time of 24 to 48 hours. This method is also very specific. The DNA is a molecule “fingerprint” which is specific to the Listeria spp.

     

    • Disadvantages: This method is currently used to detect all Listeria spp. It will not distinguish between pathogenic and nonpathogenic strains.

    VIDAS

    https://www.biomerieux-usa.com/vet-vidas

     

    VIDAS:

    This method uses the proteins on the outside of the bacteria for detection. The detection

    method that is specific for L. monocytogenes is completed by detecting a virulence antigen

    specific to the pathogenic strain.

     

    • Advantages: Time, this method is rapid, with an average turn-around time of 24 to 48

    hours. It can be utilized to distinguish L. monocytogenes verses Listeria spp.

     

    • Disadvantages:While effective, this method may require an additional 24 hours when

    compared to the other methods.

     

    The VIDAS method at Safe Food Alliance

    We currently use LPT VIDAS, which is a 24 to 26 hours analysis with a similar turn around time (TAT) as the PCR method. The method currently being used is approved by the Association of Official Agricultural Chemists (AOAC), and has been peer reviewed, validated and verified under our ISO scope for various commodities. Safe Food Alliance is currently working to complete validation of the LMX VIDAS method which has a shorter 24-hour turn around time.

    Petrifilm:

    Petrifilms are used to grow the colonies of Listeria spp.

     

    • Advantages: Similar to conventional microbiology in that you are able to detect the Listeria spp by actually growing it. It will give you confidence that the pathogen you are looking for is living or dead. Results are fast and usually will be quantifiable (results are given in colony forming units (cfu)/g. This is a major difference compared to methods such as PCR and VIDAS which will only give you a qualitative, positive/negative result.)

     

    • Disadvantages: This method is currently used to detect all Listeria spp. it will not distinguish between pathogenic and nonpathogenic strains. It is a quantitative method compared to the more qualitative methods of PCR and VIDAS.

    Enviornmental Listeria

     Benesh, Deann L, et al. “3M™ Petrifilm™ Environmental Listeria

    Plate.” Journal of AOAC International, vol. 96, no. 2, 2013, pp. 225–228.,

    doi:10.5740/jaoacint.govval02.

     

    Choosing the Method That Works for You

    All in all, the testing you require may vary based on your facility, and your overall goal of the testing. If you want to make sure you have proper sanitation processes in order, selecting the Listeria spp testing might be the best option for your business. If you are more worried about a possible recall, think you might have contamination issues with Listeria monocytogenes or even to ensure your sanitation practices are adequate, selecting for L. mono testing would be your best option.

    The various methods for detections are constantly changing and evolving to make the process easier, more accurate, and quicker. As we move further into the age of genetics, PCR or whole genome sequencing will play a very vital role in detection of microorganisms. Genome sequencing will allow for traceability, helping with recalls and pinpointing the epidemiological impact of a specific illness causing bacteria. The cost of the technology is going down as more and more models are becoming available making it easier for all labs to utilize these tools.

    An Article By: Joseph Nicholl (Safe Food Alliance) 

  • Almond Board Honored for Outstanding Contributions to Food Safety

    The Almond Board of California (ABC) has been selected to receive the GMA Food Safety Award from the International Association for Food Protection, in recognition of the Board’s “preeminence in and contributions to the field of food safety.” The award comes after nearly 50 years of Almond Board-funded research and innovation leading to numerous improvements in the way almonds are harvested and handled to ensure safety.

    “This award is the culmination of many years and countless hours of work by ABC staff, researchers, and industry leaders to elevate California almonds to an honored, best of class, position in the field of food safety,” said Richard Waycott, president and CEO of the Almond Board. “While much of this work often goes on out of the view of the public eye, this recognition will shed some much-deserved light on the work of the dedicated team of food safety professionals at the Almond Board and our colleagues in the industry.”

    ABC’s submission for the award detailed nearly five decades of research and advancements in food safety funded by the almond industry through the Almond Board.

    “ABC is honored to be the recipient of the 2019 GMA Food Safety Award in recognition of our long- term commitment to food safety, and we are truly humbled to be included in the long line of extremely worthy past recipients,” said Tim Birmingham, ABC director of Quality Assurance and Industry Services. “Food safety is a cornerstone of what we do. Since the early 2000s, ABC has been focused on producing the highest quality, safest crop possible through research, food safety programs and industry wide education. We will continue to look for ways to improve, and share what we know, to help ensure the integrity of tree nuts and low moisture foods in general to protect consumers around the world.”

    The most recent advances in almond safety began in 2007 with the establishment of the mandatory pasteurization program under the U.S. Department of Agriculture Agricultural Marketing Service. Since the implementation of the self-imposed pasteurization program there have been no reported foodborne illnesses related to almond consumption.

    “The credit for this award really belongs to the almond growers and handlers who invested their hard earned dollars in the research and the ABC Board of Directors’ willingness to make difficult decisions that put the good of the industry ahead of individual concerns,” said Birmingham. “But while the award is nice recognition, the real payoff is in the foodborne illnesses that have been prevented by the collective efforts of the industry, demonstrating our commitment to food safety from the orchard to the consumer.”

    The GMA Food Safety Award is sponsored by the Grocery Manufacturers Association (GMA) and will be presented on Wednesday, July 24, at IAFP 2019 in Louisville, Ky.

    About the Almond Board of California

    California Almonds make life better by what we grow and how we grow. The Almond Board of California promotes natural, wholesome and quality almonds through leadership in strategic market development, innovative research, and accelerated adoption of industry best practices on behalf of the more than 6,800 almond farmers and processors in California, most of whom are multi-generational family operations. Established in 1950 and based in Modesto, California, the Almond Board of California is a non-profit organization that administers a grower-enacted Federal Marketing Order under the supervision of the United States Department of Agriculture. For more information on the Almond Board of California or almonds, visit Almonds.com or check out California Almonds on FacebookTwitterPinterestInstagram and the California Almonds blog.

  • FDA Announces Enforcement Discretion Policy for Almonds in Action Applauded by the Almond Alliance

    We have goods news on the FSMA front. The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has initiated the regulatory process to put almonds on the “rarely consumed raw” list.  After years of discussions with the Almond Alliance and the Almond Board of California as to why almonds should be on the “rarely consumed raw”  list given the self-imposed pasteurization rule, FDA moved to make this a reality.

    The  California almond industry is a leader in food safety and through education and FDAs understanding on industry practices and requirements, we have worked together to prevent unnecessary regulation for our industry.

    The Almond Alliance President Elaine Trevino said the FDA action, “This is significant for the California almond industry.  The leadership at FDA has accepted the information and evidence that almonds are in fact rarely consumed raw. The industry went through an exhaustive process many years ago to get its pasteurization rule approved. We are pleased the FDA listened to the science and evidence that we presented and took the appropriate action in placing almonds on the rarely consumed raw list.”

    In 2015, FDA created the Food Safety Modernization Act (FSMA). FSMA consists of seven regulations and one of which applies to almond growers, the Produce Safety Rule. The “Produce Safety Rule,” provides standards for the safe growing, harvesting, packing, and holding of fruits and vegetables for human consumption.  Since 2015, the Almond Alliance has been advocating on behalf of the California almond industry, explaining the pasteurization rule and why California almonds should be included on the “rarely consumed raw” list.

    Trevino thanked the Almond Board of California for its work in providing scientific research in support of the FDA’s action to place almonds on the “rarely consumed raw” list, singling out Tim Birmingham Director of Quality Assurance and Industry Services for the Almond Board, for his work.

    The Produce Safety Rule establishes science-based minimum standards for the safe growing, harvesting, packing, and holding of fruits and vegetables for human consumption. The rule does not apply to produce that is considered to be rarely consumed raw (RCR), grown for personal or on-farm consumption, or not a raw agricultural commodity. Commodities considered to be RCR are those that the FDA has determined are typically cooked before consumption. Almond Alliance will continue to educate and encourage safe food and growing practices.

    About the Almond Alliance of California

    The Almond Alliance of California (AAC) was formerly the Almond Hullers and Processors Association and is a trusted non-profit organization with a mission of advocating on behalf of the Almond industry in California. AAC actively advocates for the positions of almond growers, hullers, shellers, handers and processors, while educating the industry about upcoming and existing regulatory changes.  Through workshops, newsletters, conferences and meetings, AAC serves as a clearing house of information that informs the almond industry and continues to position the industry as an agricultural leader in the state.

  • Update on Produce Safety Rule Exemption for Winegrape Growers

    SACRAMENTO – The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) announced Wednesday it will use
    its discretion and not enforce Produce Safety Rule requirements for growers of winegrapes.

    The agency’s announcement follows continued efforts by the California Association of Winegrape Growers
    (CAWG) to exempt winegrapes from the Produce Safety Rule. CAWG worked with the Oregon Winegrowers
    Association and Washington Winegrowers Association to obtain the exemption.

    FDA also announced it will exercise enforcement discretion with almonds, hops and pulse crops.

    “This is great news for winegrape growers,” CAWG President John Aguirre said. “FDA recognizes the fact that
    winegrapes are not consumed raw and winegrape growers should be exempted from the Produce Safety Rule.
    CAWG will continue to work with Congress and FDA to make sure this exemption remains intact.”
    Additional information from FDA:

    FDA in Brief
    https://www.fda.gov/NewsEvents/Newsroom/FDAInBrief/ucm634549.htm
    Constituent Update
    https://www.fda.gov/Food/NewsEvents/ConstituentUpdates/ucm634253.htm
    Guidance
    https://www.fda.gov/Food/GuidanceRegulation/GuidanceDocumentsRegulatoryInformation/UCM634248.htm
    Media contacts:
     John Aguirre, (916) 379-8995, john@cawg.org
     Meredith Ritchie, (916) 984-4473, meredith@cawg.org

  • CDFA Internship Program

    Agriculture is a major industry for the Golden State. With 80,500 farms and ranches, California agriculture is a $44.7 billion dollar industry that generates at least $100 billion in related economic activity. The California Department of Food and Agriculture’s (CDFA) mission is, “to serve the citizens of California by promoting and protecting a safe, healthy food supply, and enhancing local and global agricultural trade, through efficient management, innovation, and sound science, with a commitment to environmental stewardship.”

    In 1919, the California Legislature created a single department responsible for protecting and promoting agriculture. CDFA is now organized into six divisions and operates at more than 100 locations throughout the state. These divisions provide valuable services to producers, merchants, and the public. Many of them are conducted in partnership with local county offices of the agricultural commissioners and sealers.

    CDFA strives to support innovation and agricultural diversity. One way to support these efforts is through working with future generations of agriculturalists. The CDFA Internship Program is designed for college students of all majors and backgrounds who have an interest in agriculture, California government, and public service. Internships are for students looking to gain a better understanding of California agriculture, as well as the role CDFA has among the state’s agricultural systems. Internships are available in a variety of divisions within CDFA.

    Internships are available to students year round and generally last 10-16 weeks. Students should be available for at least 8 — 10 hours per week, up to 30 hours per week, depending on the internship offered.

    Prerequisites may include:

    What Interns Are Saying

    I just wanted to send a quick email to once again say thank you for the internship opportunity over the summer of 2015. I had no idea how much information I had learned from my internship would be invaluable in the classroom. The first-hand experiences and skills I gained during my internship have played such an important role in the classroom! I wanted to express my gratitude to you as I would not be where I am without this amazing opportunity. Please tell everyone I said hello and I hope everyone is doing well!

    Nicole Nelsen
    Master of Public Health-Veterinary Public Health Candidate
    The Ohio State University

    AREAS OF INTEREST

    Administrative Services
    Administrative Services is responsible for planning, organizing, directing, and controlling activities related to fiscal management, personnel, labor relations, budgets, general business services, contract management, and health and safety.

    Animal Health and Food Safety Services
    Animal Health and Food Safety Services protects the safety and security of meat, poultry, dairy products, and other foods of animal origin; public and animal health through the prevention, detection, and eradication of livestock and poultry diseases and dairy contamination incidents; and cattle owners against loss of animals by theft, straying, or misappropriation through ongoing inspections and investigative services.

    For information about Animal Health and Food Safety Services contact:
    Samuel Mercado
    (916) 900-5021
    Samuel.Mercado@cdfa.ca.gov

    Executive Office
    The Executive Office provides oversight of the Department. Its mission is to serve the citizens of California by promoting and protecting a safe, healthy food supply, and enhancing local and global agricultural trade, through efficient management, innovation, and sound science, with a commitment to environmental stewardship.

    For information about the Executive Office contact:
    Josh Eddy
    (916) 654-0462
    jeddy@cdfa.ca.gov

    Fairs and Expositions
    Fairs and Expositions provides fiscal and policy oversight of the network of California fairs and ensures the best use of available funding and provides other consultative services.

    For information about Fairs and Expositions contact:
    John Quiroz
    (916) 900-5025
    John.Quiroz@cdfa.ca.gov

    Inspection Services
    Inspection Services provides professional services that support and contribute to a safe, abundant, quality food supply; environmentally sound agriculture practices; and an equitable marketplace for California agriculture.

    For information about Inspection Services contact:
    Cecilia Baumann
    (916) 900-5197
    Cecilia.baumann@cdfa.ca.gov

    Marketing Services
    Marketing Services assists in the promotion and administrative oversight of agriculture marketing programs in order to promote California agriculture products.

    For information about Marketing contact:
    Jeff Cesca
    (916) 900-5011
    jeff.cesca@cdfa.ca.gov

    Measurement Standards
    Measurement Standards is responsible for the enforcement of California weights and measures laws and regulations. The Division’s activities are designed to ensure the accuracy of commercial weighing and measuring devices; verify the quantity of both bulk and packaged commodities; and enforce the quality, advertising, and labeling standards for products.

    For information about Measurement Standards contact:
    Rebecca Bland
    (916) 229-3042
    rebecca.bland@cdfa.ca.gov

    Pierce’s Disease Control Program
    Pierce’s Disease Control Program is responsible for minimizing the impact of the Pierce’s Disease/Glassy-wing sharpshooter pest-disease complex and its vectors in California.

    For information about the Pierce’s Disease Control Program contact:
    Roger Spencer
    (916) 900-5252
    Roger.Spencer@cdfa.ca.gov

    Plant Health and Pest Prevention Services
    Plant Health and Pest Prevention Services protects California’s food supply from the devastating impact of exotic pests; environment and natural resources from direct pest impacts and increased pesticide use; public from pests that pose human health threats; and position in the global economy.

    For information about Plant Health and Pest Prevention Services contact:
    David Pegos
    (916) 654-0317
    david.pegos@cdfa.ca.gov

  • Salmonella – The Most Common Bacterial Foodborne Disease

    Salmonella – we all know it’s bad for us but why? What is it? Where does it come from? Why
    should we care? Does my company have a plan in place if something tests positive?
    With all the news lately about one recall after another, it is easy to be tormented with endless
    questions. I am here to tell you that with a food safety plan and proper testing, Salmonella is a threat that
    you can handle.

    Background of Salmonella

    Salmonella is one of the most difficult foodborne pathogens to eliminate. Not correctly
    dealing with the pathogen is harmful to your company’s reputation and pocketbook.
    According to an annual study done by Food Safety News, foodborne illness in the United
    States has an annual estimated cost of $77.7 to $152 billion, not including reduced customer
    confidence, recall losses, litigation or the cost from public health agencies who respond to the
    outbreak (8).

    Salmonella itself is a motile, facultative anaerobe bacterium which causes salmonellosis. That
    means that Salmonella is a fast-moving bacterium, that can survive with or without oxygen,
    and causes Salmonellosis (Salmonella infection). Salmonellosis is the way to describe being
    symptomatically infected by Salmonella.

    Salmonella was first isolated in 1885 by an assistant to American scientist, Dr. Daniel Salmon.
    Since then, scientists have discovered many different variations (~2,500 serotypes) of
    Salmonella which can cause infection. The bacteria cause illness for 4 to 7 days. In some cases,
    Salmonella can escape from the intestines and enter the bloodstream. Once in the
    bloodstream, it infects other body sites causing severe infections. Children under the age of
    five, elderly, and people with weakened immune systems are most likely to have severe
    infections. Research has shown that Salmonella infections are more likely to occur during the
    summer months. Therefore extra care must be taken from May thru August to prevent
    outbreaks in your facility.

    Illustration from Food Safety News

    By the Numbers
    In 2018 the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) estimated:

    • 1,027,567 cases of Salmonella
    • 19,336 resulted in hospitalizations
    • 378 of cases resulted in death
    • Roughly 13% of all foodborne deaths come from Salmonella

    How Do You Become Infected?

    Salmonella is in raw and undercooked eggs, poultry, meat, fresh fruits, vegetables, nuts,
    water, and unpasteurized dairy products. To grow, Salmonella colonizes in the intestines of
    animals and spreads through feces. Humans can also spread the pathogen. Not washing
    hands after a bowel movement followed by direct contact with another person, touching a
    surface, or preparing food leads to transmission. If you think not washing your hands is the
    only cause, you thought wrong. Water infected with the bacteria can provide an optimum
    environment for growth. When contaminated water spreads onto irrigate crops, the final
    product delivers the bacteria into the consumers home.

    Why Test for Salmonella?

    • Public health impact (deaths, hospitalizations)
    • Contamination in water (Adulteration of the food supply chain)
    • Company Reputation (Loss of consumer confidence)
    • Recalls, FDA Investigations (Time and lost money, black mark on company name)
    • Economic loss (Bankruptcy, cost of finding recalled product)
    • Lawsuits, prison sentences (Selling food known/unknown to be positive

    As you can see, Salmonella has a genuine impact on the longevity of a business.

    2018 Salmonella Outbreaks and Cost:

    Map

    How to Prevent Salmonella:

    The easiest way to prevent Salmonella in products is by having good manufacturing
    practices, washing hands, and testing.

    Washing your hands is the easiest way to help prevent the spread of Salmonella. Besides
    washing your hands, testing your product for Salmonella is standard practice for most
    companies. Both Safe Food Alliance Lab locations have years of experience helping
    companies test for Salmonella. With Safe Food Alliance, results are readily available 48 to 72
    hours after receipt. If you would like to send in a sample of your commodity for analysis, click
    here.

    Safe Food Alliance utilizes methods validated by the Association of Official Agricultural
    Chemists (AOAC), a group closely linked to the FDA and the USDA. If you receive a positive
    result, confirmation steps are taken to provide you with even more confidence that the
    samples are accurate. All testing is done according to industry standards.

    Another method for detection of Salmonella is testing via swabbing at the facility. Swabbing
    ensures that proper sanitation processes are being met and helps avoid cross-contamination.
    Environmental swabs also detect the pathogen on the surfaces of machinery, walls, floors, or
    anywhere else in your facility. This type of testing needs to be done regularly and at various
    locations. So don’t let it slip by! To learn more about getting swabs for testing, please contact
    Kyla Ihde at kylai@safefoodalliance.com.

    Safe Food Alliance is currently offering an Environmental Monitoring online class which
    outlines the swabbing process and guidelines. For more information about the online course,
    please visit https://academy.safefoodalliance.com/.

  • HACCP Training

    Trainings

    These trainings can be offered either as onsite programs or as public courses. If you would like to suggest a public training or request a quote for onsite training, contact our food safety team and we’ll get back to you as soon as possible.

    These courses are accredited by the International HACCP Alliance as meeting the required standards for content and training for HACCP.

    Advanced HACCP

    This course defines the principles of validation and verification including risk assessment of Hazards. GFSI audit standards require that programs within the Food Safety Management System should be both validated and verified by competent individuals with an understanding of these concepts.  This course explains in depth verification, the act of reviewing programs and systems to determine if what has been planned and documented to maintain safe food, is in fact, operating as expected. Validation, determining if the methods identified to produce safe food are sound and effective, is also explained.

    Intro to HACCP

    This course focuses on developing a preventative approach for controlling potential hazards and for staying in compliance with new industry and regulatory requirements. Our course includes interactive components to help build knowledge of the HACCP process. Delegates will work on products that are similar to their own operations so that they can take this experience back to their facility and put it to work immediately.

    This course is also available as a self-paced online course. Interested? Learn more

    Consulting

    Our Team’s experience as industry professionals allow us to quickly and efficiently integrate our knowledge of the food industry and related support functions with requirements of the many regulatory agencies and industry self-policing organizations who oversee HACCP and other benchmark programs within the food industry. We can develop your entire HACCP and safety programs, ensuring that each of the seven principle steps of HACCP is adequately addressed, including:

    • Identifying Hazards
    • Identifying Critical Control Points
    • Setting up Procedures and Standards
    • Monitoring Critical Control Points
    • Taking Corrective Actions
    • Developing HACCP record keeping systems
    • HACCP Program Verification

    Our HACCP-certified experts have broad knowledge about food safety regulations and how they are enforced. All of our experienced consultants are HACCP accredited and provide affordable HACCP-certified training at either your facility or at a convenient location. We listen to your concerns and prepare a schedule customized to satisfy your unique needs.

  • The Importance of Food Safety Culture

    In my role, I routinely work with facilities pursuing a third-party food safety certification audit for the first time. After four years of assisting and educating people about the audit process, I have noticed that you can recognize early on whether a company’s pursuit is focused more on obtaining the necessary certificate or in ensuring that their products are safe.

    Most facilities fall somewhere in the middle of the spectrum, balancing the desire for food safety with legitimate concerns about profitability. It is not difficult, however, to identify whether a facility sees a food safety audit as another bureaucratic hurdle or an opportunity for growth. That attitude often acts as an indicator of how the company will perform on their audit. Sites that prioritize safety and continuous improvement are likely to have better audit outcomes.

    Of course, this is not news to many people. GFSI-benchmarked schemes intentionally look for this quality through objective evidence, with SQF emphasizing “Management Commitment” and BRC clauses mentioning “Food Safety Culture.”

    Food Safety Culture refers to the specific culture of a facility: the attitudes, beliefs, practices, and values that determine what is happening when no one is watching. If you want to gauge a site’s Food Safety Culture, try asking yourself how the site typically responds to food safety concerns. Does the staff take potential problem seriously, as if its importance is obvious? Or do they view food safety practices as just one more hoop they need to jump through in order to stay in business? Is their response to simply ask, “How much is this going to cost?”

    In reality, no facility can afford not to develop a healthy Food Safety Culture. A strong culture of food safety helps a facility both to prevent and catch deviations in their processes that impact the safety, quality, and legality of their products. This, in turn, has a major impact on the likelihood and severity of a recall impacting that site.

    In 2012, the Food Marketing Institute and the Grocery Manufacturers Association found that “the average cost of a recall to a food company is $10M in direct costs, in addition to brand damage and lost sales[SK1]  according to a joint industry study.” The costs were significantly higher for larger manufacturers as seen below.

    While it is common for there to be tension between Quality Assurance and Operations teams over the allocation of resources in a plant, the data suggests that it is in the interest of both departments to develop a strong Food Safety Culture. Doing so ensures the integrity of food products and protects the bottom line.

    How, then, can you cultivate Food Safety Culture in your facility?

    As suggested by the SQF scheme approach, a change to company culture always begins at the top. Because senior management has final control over resources, their buy-in on food safety is absolutely essential. Ways management commitment can be seen include:

    • proper money and time are allocated to staff receiving necessary food safety training
    • machinery and tools are repaired and replaced accordingly to decrease the risk of health hazards for the product and employees
    • a food safety plan is well developed and acts as a living document that is regularly updated

    Management commitment is also apparent when senior management regularly participate in routine food safety meetings; reviewing customer complaints, results of recent inspections, food safety issue in the industry, corrective actions from previous audits, and progress toward new food safety goals.

    Beyond the above listed actions, a truly robust Food Safety Culture requires creative thinking to help the entire staff understand the importance of food safety. At the root, you want the people in your facility to understand not just what they are doing and how they are supposed to do it, but why. Why does an employee need to follow their assigned procedures and protocols? Why should they report any concerns to supervisors? Most importantly, why does their job matter?

    For instance, it is possible people on the floor of your facility think of their work as tedious or insignificant. How can you help every member of the staff understand their role in manufacturing safe food? How can you can help them to see that their work helps keep people alive and out of the hospital? Changing a company culture is never easy. It takes time and knowledge to move forward. The eight step process featured below acts a helpful first step towards your adoption of a more food safety focused company culture.

    Eight steps to culture change It is important to remember that creating this type of culture is only truly effective when it is backed up with action. Are employees provided with an effective anonymous way to share safety concerns with management? Do they see maintenance and repair tickets being addressed promptly? Are they penalized for doing things right even when that slows them down?

    Cultivating a Food Safety Culture is a never-ending process of continuous improvement, but commitment to this area yields benefits for the bottom line, for employee satisfaction, and for the families who eat your product. You can’t afford to neglect it.

  • Safe Food Alliance Introduces Business Development Team

    Introducing the Business Development Team

    The Safe Food Alliance team is proud to introduce the newest additions to the family. Annette Magee, Juan M. Sanchez, and Joseph Nicholl now represent our Business Development team with Safe Food Alliance. Each member brings with them a unique set of skills which make them a well-rounded team ready to serve the needs of our existing and new customers.

    Annette Magee Annette Magee

    Annette Magee joins us with 20 years of marketing and business development experience in the food industry. A graduate of Boise State University with a Bachelors degree of Business Administration in Marketing, Annette has led successful product launch projects to the United States, managed entire US product portfolios, and directed strategic planning and growth efforts for the foodservice sector.

    Her experience working with big name companies like J.R. Simplot, Basic American Foods, Blue Diamond Growers and Ghirardelli, have given her not only a vast amount of knowledge in the field, but also great insight into the particular needs of food manufacturing. As the Director of Business Development, Annette is “very excited to lead the new business development team. Here at Safe Food Alliance, we have a team with tremendous food safety expertise that works very closely together”. Annette has personally selected her business development team to present a group of well-rounded individuals who together understand every piece of the food industry.

    “The food industry is very unique. It takes years of dedication and learning to truly appreciate the complexities of creating food. My experience in the industry has set me up to be our customer’s go to food safety resource. I can’t wait to get to know our customers and start serving them”.

    Juan Sanchez

    Juan Sanchez – Technical Services Manager

    Juan Sanchez comes to the team as a Technical Services Manger for the San Joaquin Valley. Based out of the Safe Food Alliance Kingsburg Center, Juan is responsible for business development, technical customer service, and customer relation efforts in the area. We are excited to add Juan to the business development team because of his deep-rooted agricultural history. Born and raised in Tulare, California, Juan’s family have been in the dairy industry his entire life. “My dad has worked in a dairy most of my life, so I would go to work with him during my summer breaks. That is where I learned to work with animals and drive ag machinery. I also spent seasons in pistachio fields, examining trees for disease and pruning during the freezing Tulare mornings”. Growing up in the industry inspired Juan to pursue a bachelor’s degree in Animal Science and Production Management at California State University, Fresno. Shortly after graduating, he started his career as an In-Process Quality Assurance Technician for California Dairies Inc., one of the California’s largest Co-Op Dairy Processors.

    For four years, Juan has used his background in agriculture to help him promote a safer food system. He comes to Safe Food Alliance ready to help companies like yours achieve food safety success. “I believe that one of the biggest things that I bring to the team is my thirst for knowledge and need to better myself. By continuously learning and keeping an open mind, I am not only helping myself, but also giving the customers the best experience that I can offer. We are a full-service company and I want to provide the best experience possible.”

    Joseph Nicholl

    Joseph Nicholl – Technical Services Manager

    Joseph joins the business development team as a Technical Services Manager with more ten years of laboratory experience. He will use this experience to assist the agriculture and food manufacturing community in the Sacramento Valley. In his role he will provide technical customer service, drive customer relation efforts, and provide solutions to the area. Joseph will also act as a resource for understanding the often-complicated laboratory industry. “With my passion for agricultural sciences and extensive technical laboratory expertise, I am able to work alongside our clients, assisting them with their needs as well as overcoming and preventing any food safety challenges they may face.”

    Joseph is a graduate of Colorado State University with a Master’s of Science in Agricultural Sciences, Plant Pathology and a Bachelor’s of Science degree in Microbiology, Immunology and Pathology with a minor in Spanish. He is a member of the International Seed Health Initiative and International Seed Testing Association, where he has contributed to developing protocols for pathogen detection, germination methods and seed sampling. Joseph has also conducted extensive testing of water samples under ELAP certification, testing soil, and plant tissues for nutrient needs and nematodes, and is ready to assist anyone who is interested in Safe Food Alliance’s services.