Customer Asked for SQF? Prepare a Brief for Your First Consulting Review

A customer request for Safe Quality Food (SQF) certification can create several unanswered questions: which activities must be covered, what is already working, what evidence is missing and who needs to do the work? Preparing an SQF consulting brief helps a New Zealand food business turn that request into a defined engagement.

Start with the actual request and your operation. Buying a document set before those details are clear can leave the key decision unresolved. This guide focuses on the first consulting review and its agreed outputs; the SQF certification guide covers the broader scheme and certification process.

Clarify what the customer is asking for

Ask the customer to confirm the requirement in writing. Retain the original message, supplier questionnaire or specification instead of relying on a colleague’s summary. Separate what the customer has confirmed from what your team assumes.

• Which named scheme, programme or Code is requested, and for which products and site activities?
• Is the customer asking for an existing certificate, evidence of a preparation plan, an audit date or another specific item?
• What deadline has the customer set, and what exactly needs to be available by then?
• Are there additional customer conditions to discuss with the consultant and certification body?

These questions are AFVA’s recommended briefing approach, not a universal SQFI application form. A desired supply date does not establish that a certification audit can be arranged or that the site is ready.

SQFI’s site-registration guidance identifies audit scope, certification body and facility information as part of registering a site. It also explains that preparation and timing depend on the operation. Use the correct programme and actual site activities when defining the project.

Separate the site, consultant and certification-body roles

Your business needs a person who can provide information, approve decisions, allocate resources and make changes happen. The consultant’s scope should support that person and the site team. SQFI describes SQF consultants’ advisory role as guidance to sites seeking certification, rather than management of the site’s programme.

SQFI-licensed certification bodies conduct SQF audits and issue certificates. A consultant’s gap report, completed project or readiness opinion is not an SQF certificate. Arrange certification-body quotations and audit scheduling with that body; keep those responsibilities visible in the project plan.

Check any claimed professional status separately. If a provider describes someone as a registered SQF consultant, ask for the current registration and relevant sector scope. Relevant experience, the agreed consulting work and formal certification authority are different questions. For wider provider comparisons, use the food safety consultant selection guide.

Keep New Zealand regulatory work distinct too. MPI’s guidance on hiring a food consultant says a consultant who writes a plan or programme cannot evaluate or verify what they created. Disclose previous advisory work when arranging any separate recognised evaluation or verification. An SQF preparation engagement does not remove the business’s other applicable obligations.

Prepare a brief that connects the request to the operation

Use a short cover note with an indexed set of existing files. Identify current versions, label proposals as proposals, and make missing information explicit. The aim is to let a reviewer understand the decision and scope without pretending the evidence is complete.

• Customer requirement: attach the exact request and name the unresolved questions. Identify who can clarify it with the customer.
• Site and activities: describe the products, processes, production lines, shifts, storage and relevant outsourced activities. State which site or sites the request concerns.
• Programme and scope: provide the proposed or existing Code, edition and certification scope where known. Mark anything still awaiting confirmation.
• Current arrangements: identify the responsible manager, existing food safety system, relevant regulatory registration and any certification already held.
• Available evidence: index current procedures, process information, representative records, audit reports and relevant corrective actions. Explain which activities and versions they cover.
• Changes and limitations: flag new products, equipment, production arrangements, unavailable records or other factors that may affect the review.
• Timing and resources: distinguish the customer’s deadline, your preferred review date and any confirmed audit appointment. State who is available to answer questions and implement actions.
• Requested output: say whether the immediate need is scope clarification, a gap assessment, help with known actions or another defined review.

Ask how the consultant wants sensitive information supplied. A clearly indexed sample of relevant evidence is more useful for initial scoping than an unexplained file dump. The engagement may require further information or observation; agree that after the initial brief.

Choose the first review around the unresolved decision

A useful first engagement is proportionate to what is unknown. The following are suggested ways to frame the discussion; they are not interchangeable assessments or prescribed SQFI packages.

If an internal audit is part of the intended work, specify it explicitly. Agree the criteria, activities, competence, independence and reporting arrangements rather than assuming that any advisory visit counts as a completed internal audit. AFVA’s internal audit support can be discussed as a defined engagement.

Agree deliverables your site can act on

Describe the output before comparing the price. “Help us get SQF” leaves too much uncertain. A proposal should identify what will be reviewed, what the site will receive and which decisions remain open.

• Scope and criteria record: the site, activities, Code and edition used, review limits and any customer-specific requirements considered.
• Evidence-based findings: what was examined, the particular gap or uncertainty, and whether further records or observation are needed.
• Action plan: priorities, responsible people, dependencies and how completion or effectiveness will be checked. Do not give an unresolved item an artificial completion date merely to fit a customer deadline.
• Handover: the files and explanations included, review rounds, document access and actions the site must maintain.
• Follow-up: what further assistance is included and which work needs a separate agreement.

Keep evidence that has not been examined clearly separate from evidence that was unavailable, and distinguish a proposed action from one implemented and checked. A report can make a useful next decision possible while still recording limits; it should not give a whole-site readiness conclusion from a review of one isolated area.

Compare the scope and quote on the same basis

Give providers the same brief and resolve differences in their proposed work. Ask whether site observation, document review, meetings, report preparation, revisions and follow-up are included. Clarify travel, GST treatment and any external testing or specialist work rather than assuming the headline price covers them.

Separate consulting costs from certification-body and scheme-registration charges. Confirm who requests and approves additional work if the site, products, criteria or evidence change. No standard AFVA consulting fee, fixed completion period or guaranteed certification result is stated here.

• Who will perform and check the work, and what relevant sector experience can be demonstrated?
• What information or access must our site provide before the review can proceed?
• What exactly will we receive, and what will the consultant leave for our team or another provider?
• How will assumptions, evidence gaps, scope changes and additional costs be recorded?
• Who communicates with the customer and certification body, and who has authority to make the site’s decisions?

Discuss an SQF preparation scope with AFVA

AFVA’s published SQF consulting service includes gap assessment, help identifying the relevant Code or food sector category, documentation review and development, internal audit support, corrective-action planning, staff awareness and pre-audit readiness review. The specific work, outputs and responsibilities should be agreed for your operation.

AFVA provides consulting and readiness support; it does not issue SQF certificates. Send the customer’s request, a site/process summary, current-system information and the main question you need resolved. This gives the first discussion a practical purpose and helps identify the next piece of work.

Frequently asked questions about an SQF consulting brief

Start with the request, the scope and the next decision

Bring those three items together before buying an undefined readiness package. A clear brief helps the site and consultant agree useful work, retain responsibility for implementation and identify what the customer or certification body still needs to confirm.

General information only: Consulting scope and SQF requirements depend on the site, activities, applicable Code and edition, customer requirements and current scheme arrangements. Confirm those details with the relevant parties. Advice, a gap review or a completed consulting engagement is not certification or a substitute for applicable New Zealand regulatory obligations.