| Now we are getting into the multiple levels of control | | | | time. This allows you to see if actual situations allow |
| that make a HACCP program so effective. Level 1 is | | | | for the monitoring guidelines to be followed properly. |
| monitoring: people who are directly involved with the | | | | It also allows the verifier to see if the monitor is |
| food product at the Critical Control Point checking to | | | | doing things the right way. |
| make sure Critical Limits are met. These people have | | | | Review records and ensure they are being recorded |
| taken direct responsibility for the Critical Limits | | | | accurately and consistently. It's all too easy for |
| assigned to them and have been given clear | | | | someone in a monitoring position to flub a |
| guidelines on how often to monitor, what to monitor, | | | | temperature record in the interest of time during a |
| and the corrective action to take if a Critical Limit is | | | | busy rush. More innocent mistakes are also entirely |
| not met. | | | | possible, like reading a thermometer incorrectly or |
| But how do you know for sure your monitors are | | | | placing the instrument in the wrong place when trying |
| carrying out their very important duties accurately? | | | | to read temperature. These mistakes will be revealed |
| Despite best intentions, human error is a very real | | | | as you check records against observations. |
| possibility, and one the success of your HACCP | | | | Check actual practices against guidelines. What's |
| program cannot afford to allow. Principle 6 in the | | | | different between the guidelines and practice? Is |
| HACCP program adds another layer to the safety | | | | there a problem with the guidelines or with the |
| net designed to catch every violation of a Critical | | | | practice? Remember, your HACCP program should be |
| Limit. | | | | an evolving creature, not a rigid set of rules. |
| Verification is different from monitoring in two | | | | Were corrective actions carried out properly? When |
| important ways: it should be carried out by someone | | | | a corrective action needed to be taken, was it |
| other than the monitor, and it should follow a less | | | | identified correctly and in a timely manner? Was the |
| frequent but very thorough schedule than monitoring. | | | | corrective action successful? Was it recorded |
| Monitoring is carried out multiple times every day. | | | | properly? Is monitoring equipment up to snuff? Finally, |
| Verification should be carried out maybe once a day | | | | make sure the tools your monitors use are properly |
| or once a week. The person conducting verification | | | | calibrated and in good working order. There's no point |
| should keep the following in mind: | | | | in monitoring with a broken thermometer or one |
| Observe monitoring as it is being carried out in real | | | | that's 15 degrees off. |