Posted on

Contents of a Good HACCP Plan & Manual

Written by Safe Food Alliance Team
Originally Published in FOOD SAFETY, HACCP, STARTER SERIES

In today’s food manufacturing environment, basic food safety principles are no longer enough to meet customer and regulatory requirements. The rules have changed, in large part due to the Food Safety Modernization Act (FSMA). In addition to new laws from legislators, the standards and demands of customers now far surpass regulatory requirements. What this means is there is now an expectation to not only master Hazard Analysis Critical Control Points (HACCP) but to go one step further and become Global Food Safety Initiative (GFSI) certified. To gain certification with any of these programs, you need to start in the same place. You start with a HACCP plan.

12 Steps to a Good HACCP Plan

When building out your HACCP plan, follow this specific methodology involving 12 steps. If you are having trouble, just reach out to your friendly neighborhood Safe Food Alliance team.

One thing to remember as you build out your plan – a HACCP Plan is a living document, and as such, should be revisited often as your processes change, your company grows, and you discover better ways to produce your product. Now that we have that covered, let’s begin.

1. Assemble the HACCP Team

Your plan will typically include a table where all the names of the HACCP Team members are written and signed, and the team leader is clearly designated. The team functions best when it’s highly cross-functional and includes members of various departments such as sanitation, maintenance, production, and quality. It’s essential to have these varied perspectives and background knowledge. 

In this section, you should include a brief description of each member’s current position, background, and experience. You’ll also need to have a copy of a HACCP formal training certificate for the HACCP coordinator, from an accredited two-day HACCP course.  There should be some sort of documented HACCP training for the rest of the team as well, whether conducted internally or by someone like us. The more knowledgeable the team, the better the plan will be.

2. Describe the Product

This section should include a full description of each product or family of products within the scope of the plan. Product descriptions should consist of details that impact the food safety of the product, including (as applicable):

  • the recipe or formulation
  • the packing materials and any other information such as the modified atmosphere
  • the conditions in which the product is to be stored (e.g., temperature, light, humidity)
  • the shelf life
  • distribution conditions
  • any potential for abuse in the distribution chain or by consumers, which may put the product at risk.

The better you define the product before starting the hazard analysis, the more thorough the review will be.

3. Identify the Intended Use

The intended use is based on the usual consumption of the commodity by the final consumer or user. Again, defining intended use helps ensure a more thorough hazard analysis later. This section includes both your company’s intended purpose based on product design, as well as potential other applications. The more you know your consumers, the better you can take care of them. A classic example, in this case, is cookie dough: it’s a product you typically cook before consumption, but in some cases, it’s eaten raw. For this reason, several companies have had recalls on their cookie dough due to consumer illness.

4. Construct the Flow Diagram

The process flow diagram must be clear and detailed to describe all process steps. Use this diagram to help ensure the hazard analysis is thorough and as a visual reference as your team considers potential hazards to the consumer. The flow diagram must include every process step that occurs on-site, from the very beginning (e.g., receiving and preparing ingredients, storing packing materials, etc.) to the very end (shipping, warehousing, etc.) The clearer the diagram is to the viewer, the easier to understand the process. Others may also use the table during site visits (e.g., customers, auditors, consultants, regulatory officials). Hence, it’s wise to design it in a way that it’s relatively clear to others who don’t know the process as well as you do.

5. On-Site Verification of the Flow Diagram

On-site verification of the diagram helps ensure its accuracy.  Again, the purpose of this is primarily to ensure a thorough hazard analysis. The site will need to provide proof that the HACCP Team has verified the flow diagram.  Some companies like to keep the first version of the diagram with hand-written notes on it, indicating changes made and initialed and dated by the participants. Ultimately, however, proof of the verification is best done with a final, updated copy that is signed; or meeting minutes indicating approval of the final version and signatures of participants.

6. Conduct a Hazard Analysis

The hazard analysis is part of the plan that typically takes the most time to review and update. Here the team collects and examines all relevant data to the product’s safety, including process performance, product defects, customer complaints, results of internal and third-party audits, and various other relevant information.  The team must take the proper time to conduct a thorough analysis.

A Hazard analysis can vary in format, but needs to include these common elements:

  • List of all process steps and ingredients
  • Identification of potential hazards
  • Assessment of each hazard, with consideration of both severity and likelihood
  • Identification of ‘significant’ hazards
  • Justification of the assessment (detailed explanation as to the team’s reasoning)
  • Identification of appropriate controls for each hazard
  • Now, under FSMA, the identification of any Preventive Controls as well. For more information on this subject, take a look at this article. For training, refer to the PCQI course.

7. Determine Critical Control Points (CCP’s)

This one is a simple concept. Based on the hazard analysis described above, you can quickly identify all significant hazards and CCPs. Critical Control Points are those essential steps designed to control a specific hazard so that the product will be safe to consume. The team should use a decision tree like this one when determining CCPs.

8. Establish Critical Limits for Each CCP

A critical limit is a critical control point’s “go/no go” or “acceptable/unacceptable” criteria.  For some processes, such as metal detection, it is as simple as testing with certified metal test pieces to ensure proper function. For other types of CCPs, it can be much more complex and include parameters such as temperature, humidity, product viscosity, or chemical concentration. All these variables and values have to be clearly defined, including both lower and upper limits, as applicable.

Documents related to the process and relevant sources used to establish the critical limits must be available to support the limits. These documents could be regulatory standards, guidelines, internal or third-party validation, experimental results, literature surveys, and expert guidance. The stricter the validated limits, the higher the potential efficacy.

9. Establish a Monitoring System

This step is where we define the monitoring method for each CCP.  Monitoring is how we ensure the process has met the critical limit, so the product is safe.  The monitoring procedure should contain the following:

  • What will you monitor?
  • How often shall it be monitored?
  • Who is responsible for performing the task?
  • What instruments will you use?
  • How will you monitor? (method)

The clearer the instructions, the fewer chances of failure.

10. Establish Corrective Actions

Each CCP is required to have predetermined and documented corrective actions for deviations that may occur. The corrective actions plan should comprise at least the following elements: the responsibility for each action, disposition of the non-complying product, the correction of the cause of failure, and recording the event. Keep records of activities readily available. If you need help with conducting root cause analysis for your corrective actions, check out our quick root cause analysis course.

11. Establish Verification Procedures

Much of the discussion in our HACCP courses end up centering around how to conduct verification in the context of HACCP properly.  Verification procedures should be activities designed to confirm that the plan is: 1) being followed; 2) effective for its intended use, and 3) adequately maintained. We are looking for defined procedures here, indicating how we conduct routine verification activities like the sign-off of the CCP monitoring records, as well as how you complete the less-frequent validation. The more exhaustive the verification is, the more confident we can be of the plan.  For more on verification, take a look at our article “The 6th Principle of HACCP: Verification”.

12. Establish Documentation and Record-keeping

This final step includes establishing both record-keeping processes and the company’s documentation system (establishing defined procedures, the company’s methods of document control, etc.). Consider:

  • How will you document your system?
  • What should you include?
  • Who is responsible for doing it?
  • How long are you keeping records? Where are you saving them?
  • Who needs to have access to what documents and how are documents controlled?

A better-documented plan helps ensure better execution.

As you may realize by now, developing and documenting an effective HACCP plan is not an easy task. Training on the methodology, experience, and technical elements are essential aspects of effective HACCP Plan implementation. If you need guidance with training or consultation, Safe Food Alliance is here to help.

Posted on

Mitigating Risk through Food Packaging

By George G. Misko and Natalie E. Rainer, Keller and Heckman LLC

Historically, the main function of food packaging has been to safeguard food by providing a physical barrier to help maintain food and beverages in a sanitary condition. Over the years, advances in food packaging technology have resulted in packaging that provides additional protection and other benefits. These more recent innovations include susceptors to aid in the browning of foods cooked in microwave ovens, oxygen scavengers/emitters, ethylene scavengers, time-temperature sensors, and biosensors that can help to prolong shelf life and/or monitor the condition of food.  In fact, it is clear that over the past 100 years or more, packaging technology and food processing equipment has been a major contributor to the manner in which food products of all sorts safely reach the dinner tables of Americans and people throughout the world, while lessening the environmental footprint of this industry.  Indeed, even in these days of the coronavirus pandemic, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has stated that “[T]here is no evidence of food packaging being associated with the transmission of COVID-19.” (1)

(1) See the FDA information sheet, titled, “Shopping for Food During the COVID-19 Pandemic – Information for
Consumers.”

The U.S. and other jurisdictions around the world have implemented food packaging regulations to assure that packaging materials are safe for use and that no off-odors or tastes are imparted from the packaging to food or beverages. And as technological advances in food packaging provide improvements in food quality and safety, some of the regulations governing the composition and use of food packaging regulations have been changed to accommodate these advances. This article will focus on U.S. food laws governing food packaging materials and revisions to those laws necessitated by technological advances. First, though, we provide a brief description of the manner in which food packaging is regulated in the U.S. and the information that is required to assure the safety of food contact materials.

U.S. Food Packaging Laws

The history of formal regulation of food packaging in the U.S. began with the passage of the Food Additives Amendment of 1958.  Prior to 1958, customers sometimes insisted on being assured of a package’s safety and utility by asking to see some documentation from FDA or the U. S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) indicating that it had reviewed and found that the intended use of the materials would not adulterate food or, put another way, were safe for their intended use.  

The Food Additives Amendment of 1958 added, in part, a new section to the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FD&C Act) that defined the term “food additive” as “any substance the intended use of which results or may reasonably be expected to result, directly or indirectly, in its becoming a component or otherwise affecting the characteristics of any food” unless that substance is Generally Recognized as Safe (GRAS) or subject to one of a number of exceptions or exclusions listed in the Act.”(2) As a result, all food contact substances that may reasonably be expected to migrate to food are regulated as food additives. Conversely, food packaging substances that are not reasonably expected to become components of food are not by definition “food additives” and may be used without prior authorization or clearance by FDA.

 (2) See Section 201(s) of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act.

Food contact substances (FCSs) that are considered food additives must be authorized for use in food packaging by FDA through a food additive regulation or a Food Contact Notification (FCN). The food additive petition process entails clearing food additives (including food packaging materials that meet the definition of a food additive) through a notice-and-comment rulemaking process. Information required to submit a food additive petition for packaging materials includes: the identity and composition of the substance of interest; a description of the manufacturing process; information on its intended use (such as food types, temperature conditions at the time of packaging and during use, and the expected duration of contact with food); and chemistry and toxicology data supporting the safety of that food additive for its intended use. The petition should also include test methods used to verify specifications for the raw materials and the finished products. Finally, the petitioner must include an environmental assessment to established whether the manufacture or use of the substance as intended will likely result in any undue impact that will require further study. Once a food additive is cleared through this process, FDA publishes a regulation, which can be relied upon by the petitioner as well as other manufacturers and users of the additive provided any limitations and specifications listed in the regulation are met. 

The FCN process largely supplanted the petitioning process with passage of the FDA Modernization Act of 1997. Data requirements for an FCN are about the same as those for a food additive petition with respect to the need to estimate dietary intake for an additive and establish safety through the provision of toxicity data adequate to support the estimated exposure. In addition, data identifying the FCS, its intended use manufacturing process and the like are very much required as in the petition process. The primary difference between the FCN and FAP process is that FCNs are proprietary, i.e., they can only be relied upon by the manufacturer of the FCS identified in the FCN and by its customers. Third parties who manufacture the same substance are required to submit their own FCN to be enabled to reach the same market. The other major difference is that  where it could take literally years for FDA to grant a petition, an FCN automatically becomes effective 120 days after it has been accepted for filing by the Agency, unless FDA objects in writing prior to the effective date.

Assuring Safety

FDA applies a tiered approach to the toxicity data needed to support safety of food-contact materials. That is, the higher the level of estimated dietary intake to a substance, the greater the toxicity data needed to support safety.  

Another important consideration with respect to safety is the statutory and regulatory requirement that food contact materials be manufactured in such a way as not to result in the adulteration of food, i.e., be of a purity suitable for the intended use, as  required by FDA’s Good Manufacturing Practices (GMP) regulation for food packaging materials. (3)

(3)  See Title 21 of the Code of Federal Regulations, Section 174.5. 

The suitable purity requirement dictates that FCSs may not impart anything to food that may cause it to be harmful or deleterious to health or result in an off-taste or -odor in food. To meet this requirement, the manufacturer must consider the safety of foreseeable impurities in the FCS, including residual monomers, starting reactants, catalysts, and reaction byproducts and degradation products. 

New Technologies

As new types of food packaging are developed based on technological advances, the safety of the materials used in these packages need to be evaluated. In some cases, revisions in food packaging regulations were made to assure the safety of the food in contact with new technology. We will examine some of these technologies and what new requirements, if any, were implemented to assure their safety.

Microwave Susceptors. The introduction of susceptors in microwave packaging resulted in higher cooking temperatures, which could be used to crisp and brown food by cooking it in a microwave oven. FDA food packaging regulations use the term “Conditions of Use” to describe the typical temperature conditions under which food products may be used in contact with packaging materials or articles intended to process or hold food. In April 2006, FDA expanded its list of Conditions of Use to include two additional categories. One of the new categories, Condition of Use J (“Cooking at temperatures exceeding 250°F”), is applicable to microwave heat susceptor materials. The following year, in December 2007, FDA updated its chemistry guidance for preparing FCN submissions. The new chemistry guidance includes specific protocols on testing for dual ovenable, microwaveable, and microwave heat susceptor materials.

Antimicrobial Agents. The safety of antimicrobials used in food packaging is regulated by FDA similar to other food additives; however, they may also require registration with the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) under Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA). Additionally, antimicrobials used in or on permanent or semi-permanent food contact surfaces, which are not intended to have an ongoing effect on the food contact surface, are regulated by FDA as food additives. If, however, the intended effect is ongoing, that is, intended to preserve the article from microbes or the protection of the user, EPA exercises jurisdiction over the use and food safety issue. 

In all cases, except those involving processed food, the antimicrobial used will be considered a pesticide for purposes of FIFRA and will require registration with EPA regardless of FDA’s jurisdiction over the matter. In addition, antimicrobials added to packaging materials with the expressed intent of migrating into the food to increase its shelf life by retarding spoilage may be considered food preservatives by FDA or USDA, if meat or poultry, and require labeling of the food product.   

Biobased and Biodegradable Plastics. As interest in sustainability has increased, the use of biobased and biodegradable plastics in food packaging is expanding. “Biobased” means related to or based out of natural, renewable, or living sources, while “biodegradable” means capable of being broken down naturally to basic elemental components (water, biomass, and gas) with the aid of microorganisms. “Biobased plastics” are plastics manufactured from renewable biomass, such as vegetable oil, cornstarch, pea starch, and microbiota. Biobased plastics can also be biodegradable.

While biobased plastics are required to comply with the same regulations with respect to food safety as fossil-based plastics, there are several regulatory issues that need to be considered for new biobased material or new applications for existing materials. These include determining the appropriate food simulants to be used to estimate the potential for migration and demonstrating that the substance is stable for its intended use. In addition, it may be necessary to consider the suitable purity of the finished product with respect to the potential presence of organic matter, such as cellular debris, and naturally occurring contaminants (e.g., mycotoxins and algal biotoxins). 

Recycled Materials. The growing interest in sustainability is also behind recent initiatives by a number of food companies to increase the use of recyclable packaging and the use of post-consumer recycled plastic content in food packaging. Recycled plastic in food packaging must meet the same safety standards as virgin plastic. 

Companies may independently evaluate the status and safety of a polymer produced through a recycling process. However, many companies will submit their determinations to FDA for review through a voluntary program. If FDA agrees with the company’s determination that a given recycling process is adequate to produce suitably pure recycled food-contact material, it will issue a no objection letter (NOL). To assist recyclers, FDA has issued guidance on recycled plastics for use in food packaging, which provides information on how to establish the safety of recycled polymers for food packaging. With respect to secondary (physical reprocessing) and tertiary recycling (regeneration of purified starting materials), FDA stresses the importance of demonstrating that possible contaminants from prior use of the plastic are sufficiently removed by the recycling process. To accomplish this, FDA provides specific recommendation on contaminant testing.

Conclusion

We have provided several examples of new innovations incorporated into food packaging. The use of antimicrobial is just one example of active and intelligent packaging, or packaging that interacts with food or its surroundings to prolong shelf life or monitor the condition of the food, slow the rate of oxidation, and prevent microbial attack. As advances in food packaging technology continue, further regulatory considerations may need to be addressed.

About the Authors:

George Misko is one of Keller and Heckman’s Food and Drug practice group leaders. Mr. Misko’s practice focuses on food and drug matters and environmental concerns, including pesticide regulation, right-to-know laws, and toxic substance control regulations. He has extensive experience counseling clients on regulatory requirements relating to chemical substances, plastics and food products in the U.S. and other jurisdictions, including Canada, the European Union, Latin America, and the Asia-Pacific region. He also represents trade associations, including acting as legal counsel to the Global Silicones Council.

Natalie Rainer practices in the area of food and drug law. She advises clients on regulatory requirements for foods, dietary supplements, cosmetics, and food and drug packaging in jurisdictions around the world, including North America, Latin America, Europe, Asia, and the Middle East. Ms. Rainer’s practice includes evaluating the regulatory status of food-contact materials, food additives, and color additives; advising companies on advertising and labeling requirements (including claim substantiation, nutrition labeling, menu labeling and environmental/green claims); and counseling clients on the Food Safety Modernization Act and its regulations.

Posted on Leave a comment

Digital Traceability: Reducing Risks and Finding Efficiencies

Written by Alex Lewis, Parity Factory Corp.

The ongoing crisis has shed light on the need for innovation in the food space, even in the most fundamental processes.

If someone were to ask you which industries were most important to our daily lives, what would you say? Along with things like communications, construction, and clothing, one of the first things that likely comes to mind is also one of the most basic: food. The agricultural and food processing industries provide for our most key needs and enables our continued growth. It is unlikely anyone would argue against the importance of the food and beverage industry to our society, however 2020 has brought us a loud and clear reminder of just how crucial it is, in the form of the COVID-19 pandemic. 

In just a few short months, food and beverage manufacturers saw demand increases that haven’t been seen in a lifetime. At the time of writing, sectors of the food industry have experienced spikes in volume ranging from 32% in milk, 30-47% across the snack sector, and a staggering 77% increase in demand for meat, and this trend holds true for nearly every vertical within the industry.

The stay-at-home orders announced by most governments have sent consumers rushing to the store, clearing shelves and placing new strain on food and beverage processors. As they struggle to keep up with their order volume, many manufacturers are looking for new ways to improve their efficiency and reduce their liabilities. As it turns out, one of the most effective methods may also be the simplest: digitizing their lot tracing.

What is digital lot tracing?

All food and beverage manufacturers track their lots. In fact, it is one of the basic requirements for running a food processing business, with the specific standards and protocols defined at the federal level by organizations such as the FDA. By requiring tracking of all material that is involved in making a product, down to the packaging used, it ensures that recalls can be performed swiftly and protects the health of the public. Manufacturers manage their tracing using a variety of methods, from pen and paper, to Microsoft Excel, to fully integrated traceability software, with many using a combination of methods. Digital lot tracing simply means that a company is capturing and managing their tracing data on a digital platform, often integrating scanning and barcoding into the process. This approach has a drastically lower error rate than more traditional methods and tends to be significantly more efficient.

Despite tracing being a common daily task that all processors contend with, there has been surprisingly little momentum towards automated lot tracing in food. By some metrics, only 1 in 5 operations have fully automated their lot data capture, with a bit more having partially implemented the process. The food industry has always been slow to adopt new processes, but as demand and competition skyrockets, many are finally feeling the need for an upgrade.

The risks of a recall

Executing recalls, specifically executing them quickly and efficiently, is one of the biggest challenges that food and beverage manufacturers face. Under current FDA guidelines, food and beverage processors need to be able to perform a recall within four hours. Many of the major retailers demand even more of their suppliers; if you want your product on the shelves in a Walmart or Costco, you must be able to perform the same process in as little as two hours. The unfortunate reality is that for processors tracing on paper, particularly those producing at scale, these targets are difficult to hit. Also, the human element involved in manual tracing can allow errors to find their way into data, and this has become especially true for those who are dramatically increasing their throughput to keep up with new demand caused by COVID-19. Without true, reliable data, a recall can quickly go from difficult to impossible.

The consequences of a botched recall can be dire: the average recall costs a manufacturer $10 million, not including possible fines from regulators, or losing the aforementioned Walmart or Costco contract. One of the biggest losses is one that may not be immediately obvious: consumer confidence. Over half of consumers will quit purchasing a product once it has been recalled, and studies have shown that a company’s stock price will typically drop as much as 22% following a major recall. Once that confidence is gone, it can take months or even years to get it back, if it can be regained at all.

All these problems can be mitigated, if not completely prevented, through digital lot tracing. With a capable solution in place, recall times can be measured in minutes, not hours, as a few quick searches replaces shuffling through endless forms to find the lot in question (if it was recorded correctly at all). This guarantees compliance with even the most demanding of rules and regulations and eliminates all fear when inspectors and auditors show up for routine recall tests. In addition, the ability to execute a speedy yet thorough recall when problems arise minimizes the risk to both consumers, and the manufacturer’s reputation. The bottom line: most food manufacturers are going to face a recall at some point. It is crucial to have the systems in place to react appropriately when that time comes.

How does it increase efficiency?

Due to the huge importance of lot tracing, manufacturers using manual systems often have some of their most competent and experienced employees devoted to the task. Even if these staff would be better suited to other areas, it’s just not worth taking the risk of assigning less experienced employees to the job. Digital lot tracing solves this by drastically simplifying the tracing process. Scanning a barcode and letting software do the rest is far quicker, easier, and less error-prone than meticulously creating and tracking hundreds of lot codes by hand. Meaning that you end up spending less time on tracing, and therefore less money, while winding up with data that is significantly more reliable. This both frees up an operation’s most capable employees to pursue new opportunities and allows anyone in the operation to take part in the tracing process. New employees can be trained and onboarded quickly, which is particularly useful for processors hiring huge amounts of new labor in the wake of COVID-19. 

All of this allows for greatly increased flexibility when it comes to staffing, and as COVID-19 turns the industry on its head the value of that flexibility has become crystal clear. While many of us have had the luxury to transition into working from home, that’s just not an option for many working in the food space. When employees are unable to attend work, for example if they are sick, someone else must step in. This can be a major threat to efficiency when the few people in your operation qualified to handle lot tracking are missing. In dealing with turnover and staff redistribution, there’s tangible benefit to having a system that allows employees to be effective, regardless of their experience level. 

For those looking to digitize their lot tracing, there is no shortage of solutions to accomplish that task. However, a sufficiently robust solution should go beyond just traceability. If you are tracking each lot as it moves through your facility, it creates great possibility to capture additional data such as yields, storage locations, and quality information. In this way, digital lot tracing can be viewed as a foundation on which to build even more extensive efficiency improvements. These additional features are some of the most important considerations for any manufacturer to make when choosing between available systems.

Preparing for an uncertain future

COVID-19 has proven that swift, unpredictable changes can happen in any industry, even one as foundational as food and beverage. With new issues such as shifting demographics, climate change, and the variable nature of trade on the horizon, it is likely that changes will become more frequent and even the smallest efficiencies will be essential to thrive.

Customer consciousness is also changing rapidly, and businesses that want to stay competitive have no choice but to change with it. As consumers and regulators demand ever more transparency and accountability from the food industry, reliable tracing data is becoming ever more crucial.

Manufacturers will undoubtedly rise to these new challenges in the future, just as they are rising to the challenges of today. And along the way, many will find a comprehensive digital lot tracing system to be one of their most valuable tools. 

Sources/Further Reading:

Acorn Surfaces & Treatments
for Concrete Restoration Products and Services

Breaux, Randy. “COVID-19 Shows the Need for Automation.” Foodprocessing.com, Food Processing Magazine, 2020, http://www.foodprocessing.com/articles/2020/power-lunch-covid-19-shows-the-need-for-automation/. 

Deloitte. Recall Execution Effectiveness: Collaborative Approaches to Improving Consumer Safety and Confidence. 2010.

Demetrekakes, Pam. “How the Coronavirus Is Affecting Food Processing.” Foodprocessing.com, Food Processing Magazine, 2020, http://www.foodprocessing.com/articles/2020/how-the-coronavirus-is-affecting-food-processing/.

Lelieveld, H. L. M. Hygiene in Food Processing. Woodhead, 2017.

Stier, Richard F. “How Food Processors Can Create a Plan for Traceability and Recalls.” Food Engineering RSS, Food Engineering, 11 May 2020, www.foodengineeringmag.com/articles/98026-how-food-processors-can-create-a-plan-for-traceability-and-recalls.

Torero, Maximo. “How to Stop a Looming Food Crisis.” Foreign Policy, 14 Apr. 2020, foreignpolicy.com/2020/04/14/how-to-stop-food-crisis-coronavirus-economy-trade/. 

Posted on

The Case For a Makerspace in Downtown Fresno

Written by Janelle Smith Ozeran

Fresno Ideaworks, established in 2012 in downtown Fresno, California, is a source of a myriad of tools and creative opportunities. But, like makers everywhere, we also value our friendships, collaborative projects, the comfort of our “third space”, and the therapeutic value of getting our hands dirty as we mold clay, wood, metal, textiles, electronics, or plastics into something new and wonderful. 

Over eight years Fresno Ideaworks has grown from a small group of friendly hackers into a community workshop full of curious and creative people, eager to learn and hone new skills and share them with anyone who comes through our doors.  But since the 16th of March 2020 our doors have been closed to all regular activity – a crushing situation for people who come to the Shop for any reason, and a threatening blow to our survival as a non-profit, all-volunteer, member-driven organization. 

We immediately joined the ranks of makerspaces all over the country, manufacturing PPE for healthcare professionals and other essential workers. Collaborating with two other non-profits in Fresno – Root Access Hackerspace, and Pi Shop Fresno – we designed, manufactured, and delivered more than 4000 pieces of PPE by the first week of May to everyone from hospital nurses to bus drivers, and from mail carriers to food service workers.  We are very proud of our role in helping protect our neighbors and caregivers, but we are also very proud of the collaborative effort. We are already trying to imagine what new projects we can undertake together when our spaces are open again! 

Meanwhile, we have lost nearly 15% of our membership, and watching our family shrink is breaking our hearts. A goal for the immediate future is to establish a sponsorship fund for those former members facing financial hardship because of the COVID-19 experience. Although our membership fees are among the lowest for similar spaces, they are suddenly an impossible luxury for some, even though the emotional health benefits of making and creating would go a long way to ease the anxiety those same people are experiencing. 

We also have to focus more intently on the facility upgrades that will enable us to welcome more members with a greater diversity of skills and abilities throughout the entire space. Maintaining a historic building is already a huge challenge (one we makers welcome), but opening the whole structure to more makers will require the help of angels that embrace our mission. Downtown Fresno, and our Cultural Arts District neighborhood in particular, have suffered the adversity of economic downturn for several decades now. Ideaworks is relentlessly dedicated to being part of the growth of both the economic health of the neighborhood, and, through skill-building and fellowship, part of the economic and emotional well-being of everyone who comes through our doors. 

Please help however you can. Donations to Ideaworks general fund can also be made through our website at https://ideaworksmakerspaces.org/Donate, through Venmo at @Fresno-Ideaworksthrough, or through Givebutter (https://givebutter.com/KbPYYR). And thank you, in advance, from all of us at Fresno Ideaworks.

Visit Our Website

Like Us On Facebook.

Follow Us On Instagram

Watch Us On YouTube

Posted on

You’ve Received an SBA Paycheck Protection Loan: Now What?

Written by Jeffrey Markarian, CPA: Dedekian, George, Small & Markarian

COVID-19 has had a devastating effect on the American economy, and agriculture has been especially hard hit.  To help provide economic relief, various federal legislation has been enacted, including the Coronavirus Aid, Relief and Economic Security (CARES) Act.  As part of the CARES Act, the Small Business Administration (SBA) received funding and authority to establish the “Paycheck Protection Program” (PPP).  The PPP is a forgivable loan program that was established as an incentive for small businesses to keep their workers on payroll during this financially difficult time.  As of June 5, 2020, the SBA had received total funding from Congress in the amount of $659 billion, and had approved 4,525,081 loans totaling approximately $511 billion.   

If you are one of the many small business owners in the agricultural industry that has received a forgivable PPP loan, you must apply for forgiveness of your PPP loan by submitting an SBA “Loan Forgiveness Application” to the lender servicing your PPP loan, as the loan is not automatically forgiven.  As a result, it is imperative that you plan now to maximize the forgiveness of your loan.  

The SBA has continued to provide additional guidance throughout the PPP in response to ongoing requests for assistance and clarity.  Also, on June 5, 2020, the Paycheck Protection Program Flexibility Act (PPPFA) was enacted, which provides PPP loan recipients with increased flexibility in utilizing PPP loan proceeds.  Most significantly, The PPPFA has extended the period to use funds from eight weeks after the date of receipt of loan proceeds to twenty-four weeks.  Borrowers receiving PPP loan proceeds prior to June 5, 2020, retain the option to use an eight-week covered period if desired.  Please note that all of the following information includes the changes resulting from the PPPFA.

The original intention of the PPP was to keep employees paid for the eight-week period beginning with the date loan proceeds are received.  As mentioned above, recent legislation has extended this to a twenty-four-week period.  Expenses to be paid with loan proceeds include payroll costs and specific non-payroll costs. 

Payroll costs include the following:

  • Salary, wages, commissions, or tips (limited to $15,384.62 per employee for the covered period)
  • Employee benefits (including payments for vacation, parental, family, medical, or sick leave; allowance for dismissal or severance pay; group health care benefits; payment of retirement benefits; and state and local taxes assessed on compensation)

Non-payroll costs include the following:

  • Interest on mortgage incurred before February 15, 2020
  • Rent on lease agreement in force before February 15, 2020
  • Utilities (including electricity, gas, water, transportation, telephone or internet) for which service began before February 15, 2020

To be eligible for full loan forgiveness, at least 60% of the loan must be used for payroll costs and not more than 40% for allowable non-payroll costs.  If less than 60% of the loan is used for payroll costs, the borrower is still eligible for partial loan forgiveness.  The first iteration of the PPP required 75% of the funds to be used for payroll or only part of the loan would be forgiven, but the PPPFA decreased the required percentage.  

What happens if your PPP loan is not forgiven?  Any portion of your PPP loan that is not forgiven will be required to be paid back over a 2-year period at 1% interest, with payments deferred for ten months from the date of the PPP loan disbursement.  However, for PPP loans approved by the SBA on or after June 5, 2020, the PPP loan maturity is increased to 5-years.

Dynamic Coatings Inc.
Industrial and Commercial Flooring Solutions

On May 15, the SBA released its long-awaited PPP forgiveness form and instructions for borrowers to apply for forgiveness (please note that a modified forgiveness form is pending as a result of the PPPFA).   The form also provides detailed information related to the documentation required to be provided with your loan forgiveness application. It is important to review the documentation requirements; as extensive documentation may be required to be submitted depending upon your eligible expenses submitted for forgiveness.  Although the release of the form by the SBA brought with it significant changes to the interpretation of some components of forgiveness that were not previously known, additional guidance and clarity is still needed on some of the components of forgiveness.  Changes were made to the following components of the program based on the release of the form:

Covered payroll periods – Under original guidance, the covered payroll period began immediately after loan disbursement and lasted eight weeks. The PPPFA has increased the covered payroll period to twenty-four weeks.  For those with payroll schedules that did not align with the disbursement and covered period, this generated many questions and concerns. However, this latest guidance indicates that the eight-week period may begin starting with the borrower’s first payroll following disbursement, not necessarily on the day of disbursement. This alternative period only covers payroll costs, not other allowable expenses, although adjustments do exist for other allowable expenses.

Incurred and/or paid expenses – The CARES Act originally indicated that, for costs to be covered under PPP, they would need to be incurred and paid during the eight-week period (increased to twenty-four weeks by the PPPFA). The latest guidance, however, forgives costs that are incurred, but not paid, as long as they are paid on or before regular billing date. This expansion applies to costs such as mortgage interest, rent, utilities, and payroll incurred during the loan period. Payroll costs incurred during the last payroll period but not paid during the covered or alternative periods (mentioned above) may be forgiven if those payroll costs are paid on or before the next regular payroll date. 

Full-time equivalent (FTE) employee counts and wages – The guidance also included several clarifications to the FTE employee count and wage calculations necessary for forgiveness including:

  • FTE calculation can be rounded to the nearest tenth – The formula to calculate an FTE is average number of hours paid per week per employee/40, rounded to nearest tenth (differs from Affordable Care Act calculation).
  • Wage reductions must be analyzed on a per employee annualized basis – Salary or hourly calculations should be done on an average annualized basis compared to period of Jan. 1, 2020, to March 31, 2020. If the average for the twenty-four week period is 25% less than first quarter of 2020, loan forgiveness will be reduced, unless the reduction is restored at equal to or greater levels by December 31, 2020, then forgiveness will not be reduced.
  • Safe harbor exists for borrowers who rehire lost employees by December 31, 2020, at the same level as of Feb. 15, 2020. Forgiveness will not be reduced. 
  • Safe harbor exists for borrowers who made good faith written offer to rehire employees who then refused. Forgiveness will not be reduced.
  • Safe harbor exists for borrowers who fired employees for cause, voluntarily resigned, or voluntarily requested and received reduction in hours. Forgiveness will not be reduced.

Here is a quick rundown of the changes made by the PPP Flexibility Act.

CriteriaPrior GuidanceCurrent Guidance
Covered Period*8 weeks from PPP loan disbursementThe earlier of 24 weeks from date of loan disbursement or Dec. 31, 2020
Usage of FundsMinimum of 75% of funds must be used for payroll to with a maximum of 25% for non-payroll costs to achieve forgivenessMinimum of 60% of funds must be used for payroll with a maximum of 40% used for non-payroll costs to achieve forgiveness. If 60% of loans are not used for payroll, forgiveness is calculated on a sliding scale.
Extension of Safe Harbor for Compensation & FTE ReductionsSalary or hourly wage reductions must be reinstated by June 30, 2020, to avoid reduced forgivenessSalary or hourly wage reductions have until Dec. 31, 2020, to be restored to avoid reduced forgiveness
Deferral of Loan Payments6 months from loan origination dateEarlier of 10 months after the last day of Covered Period or when SBA remits the loan forgiveness funds to lender
Loan Maturity2 yearsLoans originated after June 5, 20205 yearsLoans originated prior to June 5, 2020 – Borrowers and lenders may mutually agree to extend the maturity date of loans to 5 years
Safe Harbors Based on Employee Availability, Rehiring, New HiresNoneForgiveness would not be reduced if borrowers can document in good faith:-Inability to rehire individuals employed on Feb. 15, 2020-Inability to hire similarly qualified employees by Dec. 31, 2020
Safe Harbors Based on Employee Availability in Compliance with HHS, CDC, or OSHA guidelinesNoneForgiveness would not be reduced if borrowers can document in good faith the inability to return to same level of business activity as before Feb. 15, 2020, due to compliance with requirements issued by HHS, CDC, OSHA from the period of March 1, 2020, to Dec. 31, 2020

Also of note:

  • *Borrowers may elect to stick with the 8-week covered period for loans originating prior to June 5, 2020. However, it is not clear if the June 30, 2020, safe harbor deadline still applies.
  • The amount of any Economic Injury Disaster Loan (EIDL) refinanced will be factored in when determining the percentage of proceeds for payroll costs.
  • It is unclear whether compensation limits formerly prorated based on 8 weeks now prorated based on 24 weeks.
  • It is unclear if the covered period may end prior to 24 weeks if funds have been used.

Further rules and guidance are expected to be issued from the SBA, including a modified borrower application form, and a modified loan forgiveness application that will included the changes resulting from the recently enacted PPPFA; however, please do not hesitate to contact us for further assistance with your PPP loan questions and help maximizing your loan forgiveness.  

Dedekian, George, Small & Markarian Accountancy Corporation
8080 North Palm Avenue, Suite 201
Fresno, California 93711-5797
P: 559.431.5500 
Cpaplus.com

Advertise with us in print and digital versions–select ad sizes gain sponsorship mention on our online show.
Go to wcismag.com/advertise for more information about options and their benefits.
Posted on

She Built This City: Demi Knight Clark

She Built This City logo

STEM careers are experiencing low employment due to an industry skills gap. A whitepaper by Alexander Mann Solutions suggests, “While there is overwhelming evidence that women continue to be underrepresented in STEM fields, the reasons go beyond traditional stereotyping. Women may ‘shy’ away from these careers for both cultural and educational reasons, while a lack of role models doesn’t help the cause.”

She Built This City founder, Demi Knight Clark

Demi Knight Clark established She Built This City (SBTC) in December 2019 in Charlotte, South Carolina to address the labor shortage by closing the gender equity gap in construction and manufacturing. SBTC does that through scholarship-based trade
workshops, camps & clubs – hitting the “life cycle” of generations: exposing the trades to girls as young as nine, and women at any age.

SBTC is proud to have momentum thanks to donors who saw their passion and mission – such as Lowe’s Home Improvement, Novocure, and private donors – in January. “We’ve seen our “proof of concept” camps – Explorer Girls and Builder Girls Club have wait lists; and Women@Work Trade Circle & Expo events host over 200 women and male allies in Charlotte.”

She Built This City, Explorer Girls class working with representatives from Lowes.

SBTC’s program is built upon three foundational pillars. The Explorer Girls pillar is a weekend workshop for girls ages nine to twelve, providing foundational math skills, an understanding of scientific theory, and basic power tool etiquette with the opportunity to explore. Their Farm to Architecture unit has been a success by combining the necessary skills with technology. The Builder Girls Club is an in- school program for middle school girls. They spend their last period working on bigger concepts and
projects. SBTC is not targeting high school ages due to the saturation of Career Technical Education (CTE) courses available to this age group. The third pillar is the Women@Work Trade Circle that offers the “power of many” for a consortium of professional women in the construction and manufacturing industries. They also offer apprenticeships to women looking to change careers or networking for those looking to continue to climb within the industry.

SBTC is proud to partner with the following organizations: SEED20, Yale SOM, United Rentals, Duncan Parnell, NAHB, Novacure, and National Association of Women in Construction. They also participate in local events, like Women in Trade Expo, Homeowners Association Women in Building Week, and Rail Lines Classroom America.

She Built This City, Explorer Girls class working with representatives from Lowes.

Clark says that her favorite accomplishment with SBTC is giving girls the confidence for these fields. “By far, it’s seeing the ‘light bulb’ moment come on in girls who have never held a power tool or equipment. They go from being semi-terrified or at least intimidated, to saying, ‘GIMME ANOTHER ONE!’ after drilling their first screw with a power driver. It’s empowering, and it’s definitely affecting that we’re creating ideas in their heads of other things they feel confident to build or spearhead.” She states that the biggest challenge SBTC faces is funding: connecting with the right people to support these programs.

SBTC has a three year plan to scale to five major cities with all three pillars of programming, and hit their first $10M in funding by year three. “It’s the kind of impact we have to strive for if we want to change the statistics shorter-term in the industries. That helps us scale to at least 30,000 women and girls!”

Clark wishes more people knew what the construction and manufacturing industries had to offer in leadership potential. “I’ve always loved the fact that if there’s a job to do, anyone can raise their hand, just like that little girl with a power driver – and say, ‘gimme another one!’ You can rise through the ranks very quickly by taking on tasks that are short-handed or short-staffed, or challenges needing to be solved. It’s how I shaped my career in the industry. So those light bulb moments are prevalent – we need to showcase them and onboard the next generation.”

Please visit their website for more information and a full list of future events http://www.SheBuiltThisCity.org.