17
QS – Report 2012
Outlook 2013
Work groups promote further
development
QS is seeking the advice of scheme participants,
scientists and other experts in the further
development of the guidelines. The advisory
boards are responsible for the determination of
requirements in the QS scheme with the additional
support of various work groups who make concrete
recommendations for the further development of the
guidelines.
In the
poultry work group
,
additional requirements
for catching poultry were prepared last year and were
subsequently discussed and adopted by the advisory
board.
The
salmonella monitoring work group
dealt with
the alternative categorisation of pig production
businesses in accordance with their salmonella
status. There were intensive discussions in the
antibiotics monitoring work groups
.
The
feed work group
is organised by the associations
in the feed sector. The experts from the companies
prepare the documents for the advisory boards and
consult on the feed monitoring control plans among
other things.
Other work groups are set up for specific reasons
or at the initiative of the economic operators. Since
November 2011, industry representatives and
veterinarians have been dealing with the question of
how metal parts in meat and cold cuts can be better
identified and avoided in the
foreign matter in meat
work group
.
QS SIKS – Scheme Integrity System
The work of auditors, certification bodies and
laboratories, as well as the modus operandi of the
QS scheme were scrutinised in 2012 in 478 audits.
More than 300
unannounced random sample audits
were conducted among the scheme participants in
2012.
They were intended to show whether scheme
participants also work reliably when they are not
expecting an audit. The result is pleasing: there were
no negative findings in 96.5 percent of the audits
and K.O. evaluations only had to be given to eleven
scheme participants.
The picture is slightly different for the
audits of special
purpose
conducted in substantiated cases of suspicion
or for clarification in incident and crisis management
where the proportion of K.O. audits amounted to a good
20
percent.
The work of the auditors was verified in 2012 in
parallel
and witness audits
in which specially trained auditors
accompany regular audits or conduct staggered checks
of audit results.
The uniform evaluation of QS requirements is to be
achieved in this way. Although the majority of auditors
performed well, five of them lost their approval for
the QS scheme either temporarily or permanently as
a result of an audit of this kind. QS also checks the
correct implementation of the inspection system on-site
at
laboratories and certification bodies
.
Corrective
measures had to be taken here in several places, but
approval was never in jeopardy at any inspection
institute.
Lore Mauler
LandFrau
All good things come in threes, and this also applies to
controls in the QS scheme. The basis is formed by regular self-
assessments by each company. On the second level, independent
auditors check with the scheme participants on-site whether the
QS requirements have been complied with. On the third level,
the work of the auditors, certification bodies and laboratories is
monitored in the scheme integrity system.