Final CFP / ISO Comparison Of Standards

Final CFP / ISO Comparison of StandardsCFP Standards for Accreditation of FoodProtection ManagerCertification Programs (2012)and CFP Required DocumentationISO/IEC 17024:2012International Standard:Conformity assessment – General requirements for bodiesoperating certification of persons andISO Required DocumentationDemonstration of ComplianceSubstantially Equivalent?EvaluationCommittee’sEvaluation6.1.7 The certification body shall require its personnel tosign a document by which they commit themselves tocomply with the rules defined by the certification body,including those relating to confidentiality, impartiality andconflict of interests.NOTE Where permitted by law, an electronic signature isacceptable.6.1.8 When a certification body certifies a person itemploys, the certification body shall adopt procedures tomaintain impartiality.4.0 Food Safety Certification ExaminationDevelopment4.1 Food safety certification examinationsadministered by accredited certificationorganizations shall comply fully with allcriteria set by the CFP and shall meet explicitand implicit standards to protect the publicfrom foodborne illness. The accreditedcertification organization shall provide a foodsafety certification examination that:6.2.2.1 Examiners shall meet the requirements of thecertification body. The selection and approval processesshall ensure that examiners:a) understand the relevant certification scheme;b) are able to apply the examination procedures anddocuments;c) have competence in the field to be examined;d) are fluent, both in writing and orally, in the languageof examination: in circumstances where aninterpreter or a translator is used, the certificationbody shall have procedures in place to ensure that itdoes not affect the validity of the examination;e) have identified any known conflicts of interest toensure impartial judgments are made.Page 6 of 87YESYESWhile CFP is food safety specific, theoverall intent of these clauses is thesame.This basic standard is consistent.There is often confusion with the useof food-specific terminology in the CFPstandard but ultimately the goal is tocertify an individual's basic knowledge.In the case of CFP it is food safetyspecifically. In the case of ISO 17024it is directly related to the skills definedby the scope of the program but is notinconsistent with a scope specificallydesigned for a food manager.

Final CFP / ISO Comparison of StandardsCFP Standards for Accreditation of FoodProtection ManagerCertification Programs (2012)and CFP Required Documentation4.1 A conforms to all CFP Standards forAccreditation of Food Protection ManagerCertification Programs;ISO/IEC 17024:2012International Standard:Conformity assessment – General requirements for bodiesoperating certification of persons andISO Required Documentation6.2.2.1 Examiners shall meet the requirements of thecertification body. The selection and approval processesshall ensure that examiners:Demonstration of ComplianceSubstantially While CFP is food safety specific, theoverall intent of these clauses is thesame. This basic standard isconsistent. There is often confusionwith the use of food-specificterminology in the CFP standard but,ultimately, the goal is to certify anindividual's basic knowledge. In thecase of CFP it is food safetyspecifically. In the case of ISO 17024it is directly related to the skills definedby the scope of the program but is notinconsistent with a scope specificallydesigned for a food manager.YESYESThe CFP is specific in this regards.CFP must be specific in this standard.Because trainers have unfetteredaccess to certificate candidates thereis an unavoidable exposure of testitems due to interaction betweenproctor/ trainer and examinee. Thelarger bank of questions mitigatessome of the risk of exposurepresuming the CB converts them to awider variety of test forms over a morefrequent period of time. The industryloses, however, because the need tomaintain the bank size mandatesmeetings throughout the year addingto the cost of certification.f) understand the relevant certification scheme;g) are able to apply the examination procedures anddocuments;h) have competence in the field to be examined;i) are fluent, both in writing and orally, in the languageof examination: in circumstances where aninterpreter or a translator is used, the certificationbody shall have procedures in place to ensure that itdoes not affect the validity of the examination;j) have identified any known conflicts of interest toensure impartial judgments are made.4.1 B has been developed from an item bankof at least 1000 questions; andPage 7 of 87

Final CFP / ISO Comparison of StandardsCFP Standards for Accreditation of FoodProtection ManagerCertification Programs (2012)and CFP Required DocumentationISO/IEC 17024:2012International Standard:Conformity assessment – General requirements for bodiesoperating certification of persons andISO Required Documentation4.1 C on a quarterly basis is provided in atleast two new examination forms in theEnglish language.Demonstration of ComplianceSubstantially The CFP is specific in this regards.CFP Must be specific in this standard.Because trainers have unfetteredaccess to certificate candidates thereis an unavoidable exposure of testitems due to interaction betweenproctor/ trainer and examinee. Thelarger bank of questions mitigatessome of the risk of exposurepresuming the CB converts them to awider variety of test forms over a morefrequent period of time. The 2-formquarterly change is an insufficientfrequency when compared against thetotal volume of candidates. Theinevitability of exposure will Reviewerdid not finish sentence .4.2 Each certification organization shallprovide evidence that it meets the followingprofessional requirements:4.2 A ability to conduct or otherwise use alegally defensible and psychometrically validjob analysis;9.3.1 Examinations shall be designed to assesscompetence based on, and consistent with, the scheme,by written, oral, practical, observational or other reliableand objective means. The design of examinationrequirements shall ensure the comparability of results ofeach single examination, both in content and difficulty,including the validity of fail/pass decisions.Page 8 of 87YESYESThe overall intent is the same howeverISO does not use the term “legallydefensible”.The expectation of specificallyidentifying "legally defensible" as aterm relevant tothe standard in that the body of law

Final CFP / ISO Comparison of StandardsCFP Standards for Accreditation of FoodProtection ManagerCertification Programs (2012)and CFP Required DocumentationISO/IEC 17024:2012International Standard:Conformity assessment – General requirements for bodiesoperating certification of persons andISO Required DocumentationDemonstration of ComplianceSubstantially ing validly developedcertification programspresumes legal defensibility. Theweakness in the CFP standardnecessitated specifically identifyinglegal defensibility.4.2 B demonstrated experience in thedevelopment of psychometrically validcompetency examinations;4.2 C demonstrated capability to develop andimplement thorough procedures for securityof the item bank, printed, taped orcomputerized examinations, examinationanswer sheets, and examinee scores:8.4a The certification body shall have documents todemonstrate that, in the development and review of thecertification scheme, the following are included:the involvement of appropriate experts;7.4 SecurityYESYES7.4.1 The certification body shall develop and documentpolicies and procedures necessary to ensure securitythroughout the entire certification process and shall havemeasures in place to take corrective actions whensecurity breaches occur.7.4.2 Security policies and procedures shall includeprovisions to ensure the security of examinationPage 9 of 87NONOThe terms used here are experiencevs. appropriate experts. One couldargue that if the experts areappropriate that they will havedemonstrated the proper experiencenecessary in the development of theexams.The use of "demonstrated experience"and "appropriate experts" can beinterchanged. Certification assessorsworking with ANSI understand therelationship of the language andassess CBs accordingly.Security is an important issue for bothorganizations however, each groupdetails different aspects.First, let's make sure that weunderstand that we're dealing with"standards'" not groups. That said,"Demonstrating capability todevelop." is very different from

Final CFP / ISO Comparison of StandardsCFP Standards for Accreditation of FoodProtection ManagerCertification Programs (2012)and CFP Required DocumentationISO/IEC 17024:2012International Standard:Conformity assessment – General requirements for bodiesoperating certification of persons andISO Required Documentationmaterials, taking into account the following:a) the locations of the materials (e.g. transportation,electronic delivery, disposal, storage, examinationcenter);b) the nature of the materials (e.g. electronic, paper,test equipment);c) the steps in the examination process (e.g.development, administration, results reporting);d) the threats arising from repeated use of examinationmaterials.7.4.3 Certification bodies shall prevent fraudulentexamination practices by:a) requiring candidates to sign a non-disclosureagreement or other agreement indicating theircommitment not to release confidential examinationmaterials or participate in fraudulent test-takingpractices;b) requiring an invigilator or examiner to be present;c) confirming the identity of the candidate;d) implementing procedures to prevent anyunauthorized aids from being brought into theexamination area;e) preventing candidates from gaining access tounauthorized aids during the examination;f) monitoring examination results for indications ofcheating.Page 10 of 87Demonstration of ComplianceSubstantially ping document policies andprocedures as prescribed in17024. ISO 17024 is very clear in thedevelopment of a documentedmanagement system that ensures theintegrity of the entire certificationprocess.For consumers there is the assurancethat an individual taking that exam iscertified by a program that has beendocumented and approved.The CFP standard remains weak in amore simplistic application.

Final CFP / ISO Comparison of StandardsCFP Standards for Accreditation of FoodProtection ManagerCertification Programs (2012)and CFP Required Documentation4.2 D data handling capabilitiescommensurate with the requirements foreffective processing, reporting, and archivingof examinee food safety certificationexamination scores; andISO/IEC 17024:2012International Standard:Conformity assessment – General requirements for bodiesoperating certification of persons andISO Required Documentation10.2.4 Control of recordsDemonstration of ComplianceSubstantially Equivalent?EvaluationYESThe certification body shall establish procedures todefine the controls needed for the identification, storage,protection, retrieval, retention time and disposition of itsrecords related to the fulfillment of this InternationalStandard.The certification body shall establish procedures forretaining records for a period consistent with itscontractual and legal obligations. Access to theserecords shall be consistent with the confidentialityarrangements.NOTE For requirements for records on applicants,candidates and certified persons, see also 7.1.Committee’sEvaluationNOCFP 4.2 D is specific to archivingexam scores while ISO 10.2.4describes overall procedures for allrecord keeping including exam scores.First, let's make sure that weunderstand that we're dealing with"standards'" not groups. That said,"Demonstrating capability todevelop." is very different fromdeveloping document policies andprocedures as prescribed in17024.ISO 17024 is very clear in thedevelopment of a documentedmanagement system that ensures theintegrity of the entire certificationprocess.For consumers there is the assurancethat an individual taking that exam iscertified by a program that has beendocumented and approved.The CFP standard remains weak in amore simplistic Reviewer did notfinish sentence .Page 11 of 87

Final CFP / ISO Comparison of StandardsCFP Standards for Accreditation of FoodProtection ManagerCertification Programs (2012)and CFP Required Documentation4.2 E demonstrated evidence of anunderstanding of and willingness to abide bythe principles of fairness and due process.4.3 The certification organization shall providecomplete information about the food safetycertification examination, including thatrelated to procedures and personnel involvedin all aspects of the examination developmentand analysis. The information required foraccreditation will include but is notnecessarily limited to:ISO/IEC 17024:2012International Standard:Conformity assessment – General requirements for bodiesoperating certification of persons andISO Required Documentation8 Certification schemesDemonstration of ComplianceSubstantially Equivalent?EvaluationYES8.4 The certification body shall have documents todemonstrate that, in the development and review of thecertification scheme, the following are included:a) the involvement of appropriate experts;b) the use of an appropriate structure that fairlyrepresents the interests of all parties significantlyconcerned, without any interest predominating;c) the identification and alignment of prerequisites, ifapplicable, with the competence requirements;d) the identification and alignment of the assessmentmechanisms with the competence requirements;Page 12 of 87YESCommittee’sEvaluationNONOThese are essentially the samehowever, the wording is different.Terms such as demonstrate anddocument and implement are usedrespectively. I’m not sure the intent isthe same for these two sections. TheISO Standard speaks specifically tothe “fairness” of the exam, while theCFP Standard seems more directed tothe overall process.Demonstrated evidence is, in of itself,a lower demonstration of performancethan the specific proceduresdemanded of CBs under 9.3.5While these clauses are similar, ISOdetails more information concerningthe development of the certificationscheme, the CFP document givesmore specific direction in the followingsub clauses.Again, ISO is more prescriptive inaligning measurement tools, industryexperts, etc., as part of the policiesand procedures.ANSI holds ISO accreditedorganizations to a higher standard inidentifying subject matter experts anddevelopment processes in the exam

Final CFP / ISO Comparison of StandardsCFP Standards for Accreditation of FoodProtection ManagerCertification Programs (2012)and CFP Required DocumentationISO/IEC 17024:2012International Standard:Conformity assessment – General requirements for bodiesoperating certification of persons andISO Required DocumentationDemonstration of ComplianceSubstantially Equivalent?EvaluationCommittee’sEvaluatione) a job or practice analysis that is conducted andupdated to:-creation. The CFP standard remainsopen- ended and open to looseinterpretation by both CBs andassessors.identify the tasks for successful performance;identify the required competence for each task;identify prerequisites (if applicable);confirm the assessment mechanisms andexamination content;identify the re-certification requirements andinterval.While, at face value, it may not seemlike a weakness, it opens the door toless reputable firms achievingaccreditation under CFP but deliveringa program that may not effectivelycertify individuals.NOTE Where the certification scheme has beendeveloped by an entity other than the certification body,the job or practice analysis might already be available aspart of that work. In this case, the certification body canobtain details from the scheme documentation forverification.4.3 A complete description of the scope andusage of the examination;8.2 A certification scheme shall contain the followingelements:a)b)c)d)e)f)scope of certification;job and task description;required competence;abilities (when applicable);prerequisites (when applicable);code of conduct (when applicable).NOTE 1 A code of conduct describes the ethical orPage 13 of 87YESNOAgain, CFP states “complete descript”and the ISO document gives specificdirectives.The open-ended nature of the CFPrequirements leaves the standardopen for interpretation and risks.

Final CFP / ISO Comparison of StandardsCFP Standards for Accreditation of FoodProtection ManagerCertification Programs (2012)and CFP Required DocumentationISO/IEC 17024:2012International Standard:Conformity assessment – General requirements for bodiesoperating certification of persons andISO Required DocumentationDemonstration of ComplianceSubstantially al behavior required by the scheme.NOTE 2 Abilities can include physical capabilities suchas vision, hearing and mobility.4.3 B job analysis task list, with knowledge,skills, and abilities (KSAs);NOYESThe following CFP sub clauses givespecific details that are not included inthe ISO document.I would say yes here, that the intent issubstantially equivalent to section 8.4(e) of ISO4.3 C examination specifications;NONOThe CFP Standard is specific to foodsafety and, because of the specificity,mandated development related to foodmanagers. The more in-depthapproach of 17024 allows CBs todevelop against a specific scheme/scope.The following CFP sub clauses givespecific details that are not included inthe ISO document.Section 8.4 (e) of ISO covers “a job orpractice analysis”, “identify tasks”,“required competence for each task”,etc. Section 8.4 (e) of ISO covers “ajob or practice analysis”, “identifytasks”, “required competence for eachtask”, etc.Page 14 of 87

Final CFP / ISO Comparison of StandardsCFP Standards for Accreditation of FoodProtection ManagerCertification Programs (2012)and CFP Required DocumentationISO/IEC 17024:2012International Standard:Conformity assessment – General requirements for bodiesoperating certification of persons andISO Required DocumentationDemonstration of ComplianceSubstantially Equivalent?EvaluationCommittee’sEvaluation4.

Final CFP / ISO Comparison of Standards CFP Standards for Accreditation of Food Protection Manager Certification Programs (2012) and CFP Required Documentation ISO/IEC 17024:2012 International Standard: Conformity assessment – General requirements for bodies operating certification of persons a