JAS-ANZ Schemes Kylie Sheehan General Manager Operations
Cur Current state • Scheme portfolio currently • Personnel made up of: • Public nil, Proprietary 12 • Inspection • 140 total across five programs • Public 7, Proprietary 1 • Management system • GHG • Public 26, Proprietary nil • Public 2, Proprietary 2 • Product • Public 42, Proprietary 48
Se Sector spread • Public Schemes: • Proprietary Schemes: • Business and Innovation 9 • Business and Innovation 13 • Environment 11 • Environment 4 • Food and Biological 27 • Food and Biological 4 • Health and Human Services 18 • Health and Human Services 1 • Product certification 12 • Product certification 41
How confident are we that sch chemes are being ad adequately ly main aintain ained? • There is currently no agreement with scheme owners that stipulate that schemes need to be maintained • Presently the only review of scheme will occur in one of three ways: • At the time of endorsement if it is a public scheme • At the request of the scheme owner (if JAS-ANZ facilitates development of the scheme through the technical committee process) • By the scheme owner if a proprietary scheme and assessed during assessment (but only if a review has been undertaken).
Are our cr criteria and proce cess for endorsement go good enough? • It appears that in the past the effectiveness of the endorsement process has largely depended on personnel, not criteria and process • The same application and criteria applied by other personnel has not derived similar results, indicating that the current process and criteria do not produce repeatable results
Should we undertake an evaluation of all sch chemes using the endorsement proce cess? • At present proprietary schemes are not evaluated using the endorsement criteria, they are evaluated by assessors during the initial assessment of the CAB • There has been no specific guidance or criteria developed for this process • As most of these schemes are either Product or Personnel schemes the evaluation criteria used are those found in ISO/IEC 17065 and ISO/IEC 17024 respectively. • Up-dates of schemes are rarely reported in assessment reports.
Wh What is the risk profile of our sch cheme portfolio? • At the beginning of this year we introduced a process of undertaking a risk assessment for each scheme we were endorsing, to try to identify any potential risks to either endorsing the scheme or rolling out the scheme in Australia and New Zealand and potentially further afield. • To date two of the 8 schemes that we evaluated for endorsement contained practices that posed a significant risk to the success of the scheme. • So we have risks in the currently endorsed schemes that aren’t being managed effectively?
SC SCI project • Review of existing scheme endorsement criteria Criteria review • Benchmark against other similar criteria used • Re-design process, including identification of Process review competencies of scheme reviewers • Undertake risk assessment of entire scheme portfolio Risk assessment • Identify potential areas of risk to JAS-ANZ Scheme reduction • Identify those sectors where there is potential for opportunities reduction in scheme numbers/JAS-ANZ can lead
Recommend
More recommend
