GIFSQ Tools · Module 13 — HACCP, Food Safety & Regulatory Compliance · Tool 257 of 500
Score a food defence assessment: checkpoint compliance, the defence score after critical gaps are deducted, and the overall strength rating.
Try sample values — fills the form with the worked example below.
–
Compliance (%)
–
Defence score
–
Defence rating
Equation: Compliance (%) = checkpoints passed ÷ checkpoints assessed × 100. Defence score = compliance (%) − critical gaps × 5, floored at 0. Rating: 90 and above Strong, 70–89 Adequate, below 70 Weak.
Method: Food defence assessment per the food defence plan requirements of the FDA FSMA Intentional Adulteration rule (21 CFR 121) and the threat assessment approach in PAS 96:2017 (Guide to protecting and defending food and drink from deliberate attack). Food defence is distinct from food fraud: defence covers intentional harm, fraud covers economic gain.
Assumptions: each checkpoint is assessed once; a critical gap is a gap that would let an attacker reach the product or the process.
Limitations: the score summarises the assessment — it does not replace the site’s food defence plan, and a single critical gap needs fixing whatever the score says.
Rounding: compliance and score to 2 decimal places; intermediates unrounded.
This is a calculation aid, not a laboratory report — confirm against your accredited method before citing a value.
Method: Food defence assessment per the food defence plan requirements of the FDA FSMA Intentional Adulteration rule (21 CFR 121) and the threat assessment approach in PAS 96:2017 (Guide to protecting and defending food and drink from deliberate attack). Food defence is distinct from food fraud: defence covers intentional harm, fraud covers economic gain.
Assumptions: each checkpoint is assessed once; a critical gap is a gap that would let an attacker reach the product or the process.
Limitations: the score summarises the assessment — it does not replace the site’s food defence plan, and a single critical gap needs fixing whatever the score says.
Rounding: compliance and score to 2 decimal places; intermediates unrounded.
This is a calculation aid, not a laboratory report — confirm against your accredited method before citing a value.
Worked example: 25 checkpoints, 21 passed, 2 critical gaps: compliance 84.00%, defence score 84 − 10 = 74.00 — Adequate.
Enter values above to see results.
A critical gap is fixed first, before the score is discussed — access control and insider-threat checks are the usual weak points. Tool 257 of 500 — GIFSQ
