Our fantastic free supplier questionnaire will soon be available to purchasers of the Vulnerability Assessment Tool.
Send the questionnaire to your suppliers, then copy their answers straight into the Vulnerability Assessment Tool with the click of a button. Easy!
Buy it today, download it instantly and have your first vulnerability assessment done in no time.
This tool is suitable for food fraud vulnerability assessments of:
This tool is designed for any business that is purchasing food, beverage or supplement ingredients, raw materials, intermediate products or finished products, including:
Yes, this tool has an ‘Initial Screening’ option that allows for a quick assessment of risk. Pre-filter or pre-screening processes are recommended by some experts as a means to quickly prioritise at-risk materials without having to complete a full-vulnerability assessment one each one. Initial screening results may satisfy the requirements of some food safety regulations and standards, but will not be sufficient to meet the requirements of GFSI food safety management system standards. Learn more about initial screening in this 2016 paper by Dr John Spink, Dr Douglas Moyer and Dr Cheri Speier-Pero of Michigan State University’s Food Fraud Initiative: Spink, et al (2016). Introducing the Food Fraud Initial Screening model (FFIS). Food Control (69), pp306–314.
To obtain an accurate calculated result you should answer all the questions. However, if you are short on time you can override the calculated results with your own estimates of likelihood and consequences. This means that if you already have a good understanding of the vulnerability of a material you may choose to simply enter your best estimates instead of completing all the data fields. Note that if you do this the resulting vulnerability assessment reports are unlikely to be acceptable to an auditor because they will not contain a complete explanation of how the assessment was performed. To obtain a complete report, every question should be answered.
Absolutely! You can change your answers at any time, then print or save a new report. It’s simple to review and update your assessments.
It is easy to override the calculated results if they don’t seem right for your product or material. The Vulnerability Assessment Tool calculates likelihood and consequences using information entered by the user, however you can also enter your own estimates. The overall vulnerability is determined by the user’s estimates if they have been entered; if not, calculated results are used.
The tool was created with Microsoft Excel because most of its intended users are familiar with Excel and so can begin entering data as soon as they open the spreadsheet, with no special training. Data can be copied, pasted and searched just as you would in any spreadsheet and results can be easily extracted for use in other documents. The tool can and should be incorporated into a company’s controlled documents and record-keeping systems and Microsoft Excel files are better suited to this purpose than special software or apps.
The tabular format of the data entry pages allows users to have a ‘whole picture’ visual understanding of the data that has been entered and the gaps that need to be filled. Other types of software such as questionnaire-style assessments do not provide a visual overview and require information to be entered in a defined series of steps which can be frustrating. Within the tables of the Vulnerability Assessment Tool, colour-coding functions provide instant feedback about whether an answer affects vulnerability in a positive or negative way, which can be a valuable learning tool.
Yes. The data can be copied, pasted, sorted and manipulated as in any spreadsheet. When copying from the tool use the Excel function ‘paste special – values’, which will prevent pasting formulas that might return error values in a different document.
Password protection has been applied to many of the cells in the spreadsheet. There are a number of reasons for this, the most important of which is so that users do not accidentally ‘break’ the formulas which would be very easy to do if it was unlocked.
This means that users are not able to make changes to the wording of the questions or the automatically generated answers. To get an idea of how the cells are protected, download our free trial spreadsheet: Try it free v3.0s
Want to buy an unlocked version that is fully customisable? Request a quote here.
No, you may make as many copies of this spreadsheet as you need for ONE food business in one manufacturing location. You may not share it with other locations, other food businesses or take it when you change jobs. You may not share it with your suppliers. For complete terms and conditions click here.
Real-time support is coming soon. Until then, please email support@foodfraudadvisors.com with your query, including your preferred contact details and geographical location (for time zone purposes). We will contact you by telephone or Skype or send an email, whichever you prefer.
If you disagree with the results the tool allows you to override them; the reported results are based on the user’s estimates if they have been entered; if not, calculated results are used.
If you think the methodology, including the risk calculations should be amended or you think there is an error in any formula please contact us. We want the Vulnerability Assessment Tool to be the best that it can and value your feedback.
Want to buy an unlocked version that is fully customisable? Request a quote here.
No problem; the Vulnerability Assessment Tool has been created without macros to keep things safe and secure and to prevent headaches with your IT department.
All purchasers receive an itemised receipt in their confirmation email. There are no taxes included in the purchase price, with the exception of purchasers in Australia who have 10% GST included in the purchase price.
Australian purchasers receive a tax invoice for GST purposes in their confirmation email.
Need something else?
Just ask! We love to help.
From the fun food facts files:
Did you know that the Dominos research center in Japan was trialling delivery by reindeer? A statement from the company said that it was a difficult decision to abandon the trial and reindeers are very difficult to control. Uh huh. Also from Japan and the first of its kind: a pen that can be safely used to write messages on banana skin. I never knew I needed one of those.
From Britain comes research that explains why aeroplane food never tastes really good. It isn’t just because it has to be pre-cooked and schlepped from kitchen to airport to thousands of feet in the sky and then reheated before you eat it, it is also due to the conditions inside a passenger plane which actually alter our perceptions of food. Within the cabin the atmosphere is very dry and the air pressure is lower than usual. This affects the way our tastebuds work. Low humidity decreases our sensitivity to odours, which are in fact the main conveyors of flavour. Oddly, the loud background noise also has an effect on how we perceive certain tastes, with salty and sweet tastes perceived less intensely. Loud background noise also makes food sound crunchier, which can change the apparent texture of food.
iPads. We love them. But do we love them enough to eat off them? Restaurants are serving food on the screens of ipads. One establishment serves a dish of truffle croquettes on an iPad that shows video of dogs searching for truffles. I wonder how they clean them afterwards?
Blue wine. It’s a thing. It has a gorgeous neon hue achieved with natural additives. But for Gik, the Basque company that makes blue wine, there are legal headaches on the horizon, as Spanish lawmakers grapple with the question of what can and cannot be called ‘wine’. Last month, Gik was fined by Spanish regulators for breaching European wine laws, which do not allow wine makers to add colourants that are not specifically approved in the oenological regulations. Unsurprisingly, blue colourants are not on the list. Gik is appealing the fine and has filed a petition. In the meantime, they have re-labelled and re-formulated their blue beverage by adding 1% grape must so that the product no longer needs to meet the rules for ‘pure wine’. It’s not available where I live, which is a shame because I would love to have a taste.
Cassia bark, which resembles cinnamon bark has been imported to India from China in large quantities in recent months. Cassia is a common diluent and substitute for cinnamon. Cassia bark is toxic. Just last year researchers found seven of ten samples of cinnamon bark in India to have been adulterated with cassia. India is the world’s largest exporter of spices.
Cinnamon is at very high risk of fraudulent adulteration, substitution and dilution and the increase in cassia trading has increased that risk. Purchasers of cinnamon should remain vigilant, and those purchasing in large volumes should implement authenticity testing regimes. Read more about cassia bark imports
For more news of emerging risks, check out our food fraud reports; no subscription required
There have been reports of illegal dyes found in jars of beetroot in Germany. The preserved beetroot contained Rhodamine B. This follows previous reports of adulteration of ‘natural plant extract’ colourants in Europe. The ‘natural’ extracts were supposedly made from hibiscus and beetroot but contained Reactive Red 195. Illegal dyes, including those designed for textile manufacturing are common food adulterants in developing countries, where they have been used by unscrupulous merchants in large-scale manufacturing, artisan food businesses and at the retail level. Developed countries are not immune. Purchasers of very brightly coloured food should remain vigilant to this risk.
A study in North America found toxic chemicals in one third of food packaging materials that are supposed to be safe for food contact. It is unusual for packaging to be tested for the purposes of fraud detection. The substitution of cheaper low grade packaging materials for food-grade materials would be very profitable. The cost of raw materials for plastic packaging is rising which increases the likelihood of food fraud. There is likely to be significant fraud occurring in the ‘food-grade’ plastics sector and this fraud can be expected to continue.
Free-range milk has been introduced to the United Kingdom by a large supermarket chain. There are no laws that define free-range milk in the United Kingdom. Premium priced ‘free-range’ milk is likely to be indistinguishable from other milks to the average consumer. There is a risk that unscrupulous operators will mis-declare milk as ‘free range’ or take advantage of the lack of legal definition of such. There is also a risk that some dairy brands may inadvertently breach their own claims about the number of days a herd has been outdoors. Milk from less well-known brands and small traders is most at risk of inaccurate claims around ‘free-range’.
Walmart in the USA has been accused of misleading consumers by marketing a mass-produced beer as a ‘craft-brew’. Ironically the beer is sold under the brand name ‘Trouble Brewing’. Craft beer attract significantly higher prices than mass-produced beer and is at high risk of being fraudulently marketed.
Keeping abreast of food fraud and food safety news is a daily activity and one of my favourite work tasks. This week, as I skimmed through food industry trivia and pondered the launch of chocolate cheese (seriously), the two most alarming and unusual food fraud incidents I came across were news of thirty five businesses who were caught by Chinese authorities adding opium to food and a British business that was prosecuted for selling ‘almond’ powder that contained peanut. By the way, you did see that correctly: opium. And just for the record, opium is not a permitted food additive. Peanut-contamination of anything is, of course, a very serious risk to the safety of allergic consumers and has resulted in deaths in recent years. It’s tragic to see that this type of adulteration continues to occur.
Having digested thousands of words of information about prosecutions, investigations, trends in food fashions and the changing regulatory landscape, I began to notice some patterns and found a couple of big red flags for future risks of food fraud.
Halal
Halal certifications are increasingly needed for market access for almost every food type at both the retail and wholesale level. A halal product is often indistinguishable from its non-halal counterpart which means that everyday consumers are not able to verify food sellers’ claims about halal status. Falsely claiming halal for a food item is an easy fraud to perpetrate, especially during the retail sale of un-packaged food in restaurants and takeaway stores. Halal fraud can be as sophisticated as forgery of certification documents accompanying bulk shipments of food or as simple as dishonest signage in a takeaway store. There have been a number of incidences of halal fraud in the news lately and these are almost certainly the tip of the iceberg. I see very high risks in the South East Asian countries of Indonesia and Malaysia; these being some of the world’s biggest markets for halal food and having variable and sometimes chaotic food supply chains accompanied by uneven regulatory enforcement. However, halal forgery can happen even in the most sophisticated markets with a recent prosecution in the United Kingdom in which the fraudster is alleged to have netted a quarter of a million pounds. With this kind of money up for grabs, you can expect halal fraud to continue.
Probiotics
Probiotics are among the hottest food ingredients for the healthy eating market right now. New technology is claimed to enable probiotic bacteria – good bacteria – to survive in an ever-increasing range of food types, taking them beyond traditional yoghurts and ‘Yukult’ style dairy drinks. Probiotic foods command a premium price and, as with many of the most vulnerable food fraud targets, the probiotic components are indiscernible to consumers. There is a real and growing risk that fraudulent claims will be made about the quantity and types of live bacteria in food products, with the possibility of both accidental and deliberate frauds. Any food business can make a mistake with formulations and shelf life, leading to discrepancies between the quantity of live bacteria in the food and what is claimed on the pack. Premium brand owners are less likely to risk their reputation with unsubstantiated claims and these businesses are more likely to have the in-house expertise and resources to properly verify their on-pack claims. It’s the smaller food companies and newer brands that I worry about: they are much more likely to find themselves inadvertently or knowingly selling ‘probiotic’ products that don’t live up to the marketing hype.
Cold Brew Coffee
Can you fake cold brew coffee? Cold brewed coffee appears to be here to stay but it has a high price tag and would be easy to fake. Could the average consumer taste the difference between conventional and cold-brew coffee? I’m pretty sure that I couldn’t, especially when served icy cold or with lots of milk. The production method for cold brewed coffee is slower than conventional brewing, which usually means more costly. And that means food businesses could be tempted to cut a few corners. Even hipster brands that build their messages around product authenticity can find themselves in a scandal when financial pressures increase, as was the case with an ultra-premium bean-to-bar chocolate brand recently. I wouldn’t be surprised to see a few incidences of fraudulent claims about cold-brewed coffee hitting the headlines this year.
Use the information on this page to help answer questions in the Supplier Questionnaire for Food Fraud Advisors’ Vulnerability Assessment Tool:
Trading properties
Raw materials traded on specific properties are those for which the price paid for this raw material is based upon the content of water, dairy fat, nitrogen (protein), cocoa solids or some other key component. Answer ‘yes’ here if
If you are unsure, speak to your purchasing officer.
Direct Sourcing
Answer ‘yes’ in the Supplier Questionnaire if this material or ingredient is manufactured, produced, grown or slaughtered by the business you work for. For fish and seafood, answer ‘yes’ if your business is the first on-shore processing facility. Answer ‘no’ if the material is purchased from a distributor or importer, trader, broker, wholesaler or retailer.
Complexity of supply chain
Do you consider the supply chain of this material to be complex and/or long? An example of a short supply chain is wheat flour purchased directly from a flour mill that processes locally grown wheat. A complex supply chain is one that involves many different businesses handling, processing, storing and transporting a product and its component parts. Most imported materials have a long and complex supply chain.
Ease of access to material
Is the supply chain of a type that allows multiple points of entry for fraudulent material? Entry points for fraudulent materials are points in the supply chain at which a motivated person could adulterate or dilute the material or substitute an inauthentic material in its place. These points are most likely to be places where the material is blended, mixed, ground or where it is stored or transported in a manner that would allow a motivated person to easily gain access to the material.
Price
If the purchase price is more than USD20 per kg or USD20,000 per metric tonne or EUR18 per kg or 18,000 per metric tonne answer ‘yes very expensive’
If the purchase price is less than EUR600 or USD650 per metric tonne, answer ‘no’.
Size of market
Does the international market for this material have a large monetary value? Materials that have markets with large monetary values are those that are traded in very large quantities across many countries or materials that are very expensive. Tea, coffee, cocoa, sugar all have markets with a large monetary value.
Form of Ingredient
Answer ‘yes’ in the Supplier Questionnaire if this material or ingredient is sold to your customer in individual pieces which can be visually identified as such. Examples include chickpeas, whole peppers, chicken wings, bananas, frozen berries, rolled oats, coffee beans, whole cloves. If this material is sold as a powder, liquid, mince, paste, pre-mix, slurry or blend then answer ‘no’.
Special criteria
Answer ‘yes’ here if there are special criteria for this raw material or ingredient such as halal, organic, non-GMO, grass-fed, free-range or if there is a specific country of origin or grade of produce required for this material.
Availability of adulterants or substitutes
An example of a material that has easily available adulterants is honey, which can be adulterated with water, sugar syrups, invert syrups, all of which are easy to obtain.
What is my customer going to do with the information I provide?
The information that you provide about each ingredient or material will be used by your customer to complete a vulnerability assessment for each of the materials they purchase. Vulnerability assessments for food fraud are performed to meet the requirements of food safety management systems and to help businesses manage financial risks from food fraud. Your customer will put the your answers into Food Fraud Advisors’ Vulnerability Assessment Tool (BRC Method), which is a quick and easy way to calculate risks and produce auditor-friendly reports.
Why are some of the questions repeated?
The questions are based on recommendations provided by the British Retail Consortium in their document Understanding Vulnerability Assessment (2015) which requires some elements to be repeated.
May I share the Supplier Questionnaire with other businesses?
If your business has purchased a copy of the Vulnerability Assessment Tool, then you may send the Supplier Questionnaire to any business that supplies you with ingredients or materials. If you are a supplier, then you may not share the questionnaire with other businesses or take it with you when you change jobs: the business that provided you with the questionnaire (your customer) owns the licence for the questionnaire. For complete terms and conditions click here.
Why are some of the questions ‘greyed-out’?
Questions 20 – 23 and 26 are greyed-out because they cannot be properly answered by a supplier. The answers to these questions relate only to the business that is performing the vulnerability assessment (the customer). This is because the vulnerability is related to that business’ ability to detect fraud, not their suppliers’ ability to detect it. Customers: if you need to know about your supplier’s ability to detect food fraud in their products, you should ask them to provide you with a full vulnerability assessment that they have complete themselves. They will need to purchase their own copy of the Vulnerability Assessment Tool, the licence rules do not permit you to share it with your suppliers. Suppliers are eligible for a 40% discount. Contact us to request a discount code for your suppliers to use when they purchase the tool.
Is there a telephone number I can call for help and support with the questionnaire?
Please email support@foodfraudadvisors.com with your query, including your preferred contact details and geographical location (for time zone purposes). We will contact you by telephone or Skype or email an answer to you.
Something is not working properly, what should I do?
If there is an error in the spreadsheet please contact us. We want the Vulnerability Assessment Tool and Supplier Questionnaire to be the best they can and value your feedback.
My security settings will not allow me to run macros, is this a problem?
If you wish to use the Supplier Questionnaire you will need to enable macros.
My supplier(s) only have Microsoft Excel 1997 – 2003, will this be a problem?
If your supplier is using Excel 1997 – 2009 (file extension .xls) or Excel for Mac 2000 – 2008 they will not be able to use the questionnaire. You can contact us to request a free copy of a supplier questionnaire that is compatible with older versions of Excel. Alternatively, create a compatible version yourself by performing a ‘Save As’ and choosing ‘Excel 97 – 2003 Workbook’ from the drop down list. You will be shown a compatibility checker window. The compatibility checker lists functions that will be lost if you proceed. These lost functions relate to the look of the spreadsheet and will not prevent the supplier from answering questions: press ‘Continue’ to accept the loss of functions and create a file that your suppliers will be able to use.
