ISO 17020 Accreditation
Gauteng Veterinary Services
South Africa

The Problem

Meat safety regulatory control in South Africa previously involved veterinary officials inspecting privately owned abattoirs to ensure regulatory compliance. This followed a “command and control” (CAC) model of law enforcement. Within this approach there was a high degree of emphasis in responsibility placed on government in ensuring safe food processing. However because abattoir ownership and meat inspection was privatized in South Africa in the late 1980’s, this method of law enforcement was ineffective. This was because periodic monitoring of abattoirs by government was not an effective way for government to ensure public health, because operators may adopt unsafe or risky practices that may compromise the safety of meat in the absence of government presence. An improved method of control was sought. With the promulgation of the Meat Safety Act 40 of 2000, abattoir owners were legally required to implement a basic food safety system called the Hygiene Management System (HMS). Because the HMS was based on the principles of HACCP, abattoir owners were required to identify food contamination risks, set controls points, set control measures and monitor these control points. Records must also be kept to demonstrate compliance to auditors. Abattoir were then audited by government using the Hygiene Assessment System (HAS). Both these systems were adapted from the United Kingdom. However the Department of Forestry and Fisheries (DAFF), the national legislative body, did not provide provincial veterinary services (in the nine provinces), who implement legislation, guidelines on how to facilitate HMS implementation at abattoirs and how to ensure objectivity and consistency using the HAS auditing tool, which is largely subjective. Without standards, HAS audit results were very inconsistent amongst officials and were therefore not very reliable. Without reliable audit results, it was impossible to provide any assurance to the public that meat processed at abattoirs were safe for consumption. Two problems emerged from this (1) the inspector’s role changed from inspector to auditor, yet the auditing competence of inspectors was lacking and (2) abattoir owners were not given guidelines on how to implement the HMS.

Gauteng Veterinary Services (GVS), a provincial department located in the Gauteng Province, decided to create standards to firstly ensure that HAS audit results generated by government officials were reliable, and secondly to ensure that abattoir owners were given guidelines on how to implement and maintain their HMSs. This was accomplished by GVS implementing the ISO 17020:1998 competency management standard. GVS is currently an accredited inspection body. This implies that procedures and standards within procedures are internationally accredited and may be trusted. The implication is that meat inspected by GVS can be assured as safe within the current scope of accreditation. The second aspect of innovation by GVS to ensure safe meat to the public, was to create a scheme, using the HAS results, to award best performing abattoirs on good hygiene management. These scores also provide the public with confidence that meat processed at particular abattoir were of good quality and is safe.

GVS has surpassed its legislative mandate by formally being accredited as a competent inspection body, and further created a link of communication to the public on its auditing results of abattoirs, to allow for freedom of choice of consumers on which abattoirs to trust.

Solution and Key Benefits

 What is the initiative about? (the solution)
The ISO/IEC 17020 management system has been implemented within the Veterinary Public Health (VPH) Directorate of GVS. This scope covers all abattoirs in the Gauteng Province.

While successful accreditation is a measure of success, it is not the only indicator used to demonstrate success. Other indicators used are as follows: (1) internal audits to ensure that procedures and standards are met by veterinary officials, (2) competency audits of veterinary officials to ensure continued competence and (3) surveying of customer (abattoir owners) to gauge if veterinary officials provide advice on HMS implementation, and to identify other needs industry may have with the intention of assisting abattoir operators.

Firstly the system must be set up which required the development of standards, and then procedures to ensure that standards are successfully maintained. Documentation is the most important part of any management system to demonstrate control. Veterinary Services has developed a Quality Manual which constitutes a quality policy, technical and generic system management Standard Operating Procedures (SOPs) and work instructions.

A Quality Management unit that is separate from and independent of Veterinary Public Health (VPH), which is the ISO 17020 accredited line function. The Quality unit is responsible for managing the competency system and conducting internal audits. Quality managers conduct routine internal audits at provincial veterinary service centres to ensure that officials adhere to procedures that relate to administrative and technical requirements. Non-conformances raised during these audits are routed to responsible officials and/or supervisors and senior management who will implement the necessary corrective action. The Quality Management unit was also established and is also responsible for implementing the ISO system, maintaining accreditation, internal auditing, customer surveys and training. Training needs are identified through the internal audits and organising training for inspectors. The sub-programme is independent of the accredited VPH line function and reports directly to the Chief Director of Veterinary Services.

The quality management unit also created an auditing tool that quantifies performance of officials in relation to compliance to procedures. A percentage score is obtained and a procedure was developed to address interpretation of scores. These scores are used to award best performing officials at an awards ceremony hosted by the MEC of the Province.

To maintain an effective system there is need for consistency and standardisation of findings by the inspectors doing the evaluation at the various abattoirs. In order to achieve this, a Meat Safety Technical Committee (MSTC) which consists of a VPH veterinarian, chief meat inspectors, Quality Manager, a DAFF representative and two members from the Meat Industry was established. This committee performs annual audits on the officials in GVS and identifies additional training requirements of inspectors and issues certificates of competency. These audits essentially determines the official’s ability to rate abattoirs per HAS category that must be consistent with the rating given by committee members who conduct joint audits with the official being evaluated. If the deviation is too large, then the official undergoes training, and is supervised during audits for a period of three months.

Actors and Stakeholders

 Who proposed the solution, who implemented it and who were the stakeholders?
Three key civil servants have contributed to success experienced by GVS. Firstly Dr. Malcolm De Budé, Chief Director of Gauteng Veterinary Services actually was the brainchild of ISO accreditation of GVS. He presented the concept to the HOD and MEC and was given funding to implement his vision. He also developed the abattoir awards rating scheme. The essentially proposed the solution.

Mr Andries Venter, Assistant Director: VPH developed the technical procedures within the accredited scope. He also currently serves as a member of the National Abattoir rating scheme, which is a national body, formed by DAFF to essentially benchmark and unroll the procedures of GVS to other provinces. Mr Venter also conducts competency audit on officials as per annual procedures.

Mr Reuben Govender, Deputy Director: Quality Management, who started in GVS in 2005, led GVS to successful accreditation. He currently holds the following degrees, Magister Technologiae: Quality, Baccalaureus Technologiae: Environmental Health, Baccalaureus Technologiae: Human Resource and Baccalaureus Technologiae: Business Administration. His expertise that combines the expertise of veterinary public health, quality management and human resource development has shaped the unit which was created in May 2007, of which he became the first Deputy Director to head the unit. He contributes to the both the technical and quality management aspect of the accredited system. He also developed an internal training programme that specifically addresses audit findings of veterinary officials that is addressed in an annual training event. This is seen as an important training tool towards managing competence of veterinary officials because currently there is no accredited training course for HAS inspections in South Africa. External training providers used, offer training in HACCP auditing. However there are clear distinctions between HACCP and the HMS. His research in the meat industry has also informed policy decisions within GVS. He has researched the level of implementation of the HMS and has identified HMS implementation gaps and constraints to implementation by industry that is currently being used to develop a formal guideline document for HMS implementation. He has also demonstrated through research, critical gaps that impede continual improvement within regulated HMS requirements. He has developed a training model to ensure quality assurance of training provided by poultry operators, which was important because there are very limited accredited training providers that offer training to poultry abattoir personnel.
The two key stakeholders benefiting from GVS innovation are abattoir owners and the general public, who purchase meat from South African abattoirs. Abattoir owners are assisted through advice on compliance provided by veterinary officials working within the competency management standard. Also other provincial veterinary services benefit from the experiences of GVS towards managing competence of their officials by benchmarking GVS procedures.

(a) Strategies

 Describe how and when the initiative was implemented by answering these questions
 a.      What were the strategies used to implement the initiative? In no more than 500 words, provide a summary of the main objectives and strategies of the initiative, how they were established and by whom.
The broad strategy of implementing quality management systems at veterinary services to ensure competence of staff, and quality of services provided to the public was created by Dr Malcolm De Budé. The overall aim is to have GVS accredited as an inspection body as well as a product certification body according to ISO Guide 65. Product certification is currently underway and the project is headed by Reuben Govender. The intention, through accreditation, is to have South African veterinary services recognized as a competent and capable certifier of food products of animal origin. Because gaps exist in the current meat safety control policy in South Africa, which impedes international trade, GVS intended to address this problem through formal accreditation. There is still a long way to go to gain the confidence of stronger first world trading partners, but the work done by GVS is seen as a critical step towards achieving this goal.

The accreditation of GVS according to the ISO 17020 standard was planned in such a way that each of the three service centres would be accredited separately, due to varying levels of compliance amongst the service centres. Reuben Govender formulated this strategy and selected the order of the service centres to be audited by the accrediting body. After the first service centre was accredited in April 2007, his strategy over the next year and half was to create awareness amongst resistant veterinary officials regarding the benefit of accreditation. His success was confirmed through successful accreditation of the remaining two service centres in 2009. GVS was audited through an annual surveillance audit by the accrediting body and passed their audit.

Another important objective set after accreditation was develop a method to quantitatively measure the performance of individual veterinary officials and the performance of the service centres in compliance to accredited procedures. Reuben Govender developed checklists that score officials and service centres out of a percentage. He also used these scores to motivate for awards to be given to best performing officials and service centre to motivate officials to work towards accredited procedures. Currently there is a compliance rate of over 79% for individual officials and a rate of over 85% at service centre level.

In addition the awards rating scheme created by Dr Malcolm De Budé to create communication channels with stakeholders such as the public, abattoir owners and other provincial veterinary services departments has been such an enormous success that it has been benchmarked nationally. Reuben Govender presented the work done by GVS at a local conference hosted by the South African Quality Institute in November 2010 and at the International Symposium for Veterinary Economics and Epidemiology in August 2009.

(b) Implementation

 b.      What were the key development and implementation steps and the chronology? No more than 500 words
In 2000, the Meat Safety Act was promulgated which required the implementation of the HMS and HAS at abattoirs. In 2004, regulations were passed providing specific requirements of the HMS. Only then were abattoirs legally compelled to implement the HMS, and government legally could enforce the HAS auditing tool. Problems mentioned above were experienced. In 2005 Dr De Budé developed a strategy to counteract these problems through ISO accreditation.

In 2005 Reuben Govender was appointed and Dries Venter, employed with the department for more than 20 years, developed the technical procedures. In March 2006, the quality manual was sent to the accrediting body and was passed. In April 2007 one of the three service centres of GVS was accredited as a competent inspection body. Initially all service centres were scheduled to be audited by the accrediting body. However Reuben Govender made a decision to have each service centre accredited separately due to resistance by other service centre personnel. Audit results show higher non-compliance at the Germiston and Pretoria centres. Education and training and awareness workshops were held with resistant centres over the next year and half.

In May 2009 all three service centres within GVS were fully accredited as a competent inspection body.

In March 2010 Reuben Govender entered GVS into the South African Quality Award for the category “best quality service” and won the award. In November 2010 Reuben Govender entered GVS for the Centre for Innovation in Public Service award, a South African award, was awarded second place.

In 2009, the DAFF benchmarked the accredited procedures, and the abattoir awarding scheme, to be implemented in the other eight provinces in South Africa. With the accolades bestowed to GVS, greater co-operation was observed by other provinces in accepting the implementation of these procedures.

(c) Overcoming Obstacles

 c.      What were the main obstacles encountered? How were they overcome? No more than 500 words
Initially senior management commitment was a problem. Officials that were not complying to procedures developed in 2005 were not reprimanded by supervisors as little pressure as exerted by senior management. The two year delay between the start of the project and accreditation of the first service in 2007 was because of resistance by staff and little pressure exerted by senior managers towards compliance. Reuben Govender through constant communication with officials realized that particularly veterinarians felt left out of the process of accreditation and felt that procedures were being given to them even though they had no control over writing them. He then formed the Technical Advisory Committee for Quality Assurance (TACQA), which was a committee that included officials from DAFF and GVS that served as experts to review and recommend technical procedures within the accredited scope. TACQA later was changed to the Meat Safety Technical Committee. Senior managers, after seeing the success of accreditation in 2007, became more involved the work done by the Quality Management unit, and today are actively involved in management review of the accredited system, and are provided with monthly reports on internal audit results and customer surveys to name a few. Through communication and involvement of staff, management commitment and resistance to change was overcome.

Support service at the initial stages of implementation was a major constraint. For example IT personnel were requested to assist in setting up of software that assisted in the maintenance of the electronic quality manual. Commitment from support services was gained by involving staff to attend meetings, training and workshops to sensitize them on the importance of the project, and the practical day to day operations within the project.

Initially equipment resources were lacking, for example light meters and thermometers used during HAS audits by veterinary officials. However after initial accreditation in 2007, senior management were more committed towards provision of resources and budgeted for this and currently do so.

Human resources were also a problem initially. Technical procedures required veterinary officials to inspect abattoirs twice a month and audit them quarterly. However this was difficult due to staff shortages. Again after the 2007 accreditation additional veterinarians and public health officers were appointed. Today GVS is fully staff and has the largest VPH section in the country.

(d) Use of Resources

 d.      What resources were used for the initiative and what were its key benefits? In no more than 500 words, specify what were the financial, technical and human resources’ costs associated with this initiative. Describe how resources were mobilized
Initially a small budget of R50 000 was given to project managers in 2005 to implement the ISO 17020 standard. Project managers used R35000 for training of all veterinary officials with the requirements of the ISO 17020 standard. R10000 was used to pay for a gap assessment audit to gauge the level of compliance of GVS to the ISO 17020 standard. In 2006 the budget was increased to R100 000. This money was used to train veterinary officials conducting HAS audit on HACCP auditing. Money was also spent purchasing equipment and submitting the quality manual to the accrediting body for a document review. In 2007 a Quality Management unit was created with 3 staff members and a Budget of R300 000. This money was used to pay for accreditation audits as well as to fund research projects initiated by Reuben Govender in the meat industry. In 2008 a budget was approved for the unit of R 600 000. Money was spent on accreditation fees, research, paying for conferences attended by Quality mangers to present research findings and training. In 2009 R 1000000 was given to the unit for research, conferences, training, accreditation fees and to unroll the implementation of ISO Guide 65, being the product certification standard. Money was also spent to send quality managers to two provinces in the country to share knowledge and expertise.

Currently Reuben Govender heads the unit. A veterinarian and a microbiologist serve as quality managers within the unit and are supported by administration staff.

The unit is still very small and expansion is required to accommodate implementation of further systems. Reuben Govender has re-shaped the unit to focus more of its time towards research in the abattoir industry. Research is particularly focused on setting microbiological standards for fresh red meat, looking at how consistent HAS scores are with microbiological test results of meat from abattoirs. He has also stated a new project on testing meat quality at butcheries to gauge possible deterioration in quality between the abattoir and the butcher. Most of these projects have been funded by government.
Reuben’s vision and strategy for the future of the unit is to support the accredited system, procedures and competence of veterinary officials, through formal research. He is also currently studying a doctorate degree which is funded by GVS.


Is the initiative sustainable and transferable?
In no more than 500 words, describe how the initiative is being sustained (for example in terms of financial, social and economic, cultural, environmental, institutional and regulatory sustainability). Describe whether the initiative is being replicated or disseminated throughout the public service at the national and/or international levels and/or how it could be replicated.

A dedicated Quality Management unit, with 7 staff members have been established since 2007. The unit has an annual budget of just over R1 000 000. Further GVS has been audited annual since 2007 by the accrediting body and has achieved successful re-accreditation for the last 4 years.

The inspection procedures used by GVS to conduct HAS audits, routine inspections and approval and re-approval inspections were benchmarked by National Abattoir Hygiene Rating Scheme (NARHS) committee for national implementation across the other eight provinces in the country as of 2009. It is envisioned that greater consistency regarding inspection and audit decisions would be achieved nationally by using similar procedures

The DAFF is currently experiencing problems of resistance from some of the provinces. However as a long term vision, DAFF intends supporting accreditation of other provinces in order to foster credibility of South African veterinary services to boost exportation of animal products in the future. GVS currently shares its experiences and knowledge with two other provinces that have shown interest in working towards accreditation.

Sustainability and Transferability

  Is the initiative sustainable and transferable?
A dedicated Quality Management unit, with 7 staff members have been established since 2007. The unit has an annual budget of just over R1 000 000. Further GVS has been audited annual since 2007 by the accrediting body and has achieved successful re-accreditation for the last 4 years.

The inspection procedures used by GVS to conduct HAS audits, routine inspections and approval and re-approval inspections were benchmarked by National Abattoir Hygiene Rating Scheme (NARHS) committee for national implementation across the other eight provinces in the country as of 2009. It is envisioned that greater consistency regarding inspection and audit decisions would be achieved nationally by using similar procedures

The DAFF is currently experiencing problems of resistance from some of the provinces. However as a long term vision, DAFF intends supporting accreditation of other provinces in order to foster credibility of South African veterinary services to boost exportation of animal products in the future. GVS currently shares its experiences and knowledge with two other provinces that have shown interest in working towards accreditation.

Lessons Learned

 What are the impact of your initiative and the lessons learned?
GVS has adopted the eight quality management principles to improve the quality of it’s services and operations to its varied stakeholders. These principles also form the basis of the ISO 9000 series.

Principle 1: Customer focus –GVS has a documented customer service procedure. According to this procedure GVS conducts customer feedback surveys at abattoirs on a monthly basis. The purpose of this survey is to gauge the adequacy, efficiency and effectiveness of its services. Areas that require corrective action and continual improvement are identified and addressed.

Principle 2: Leadership – The HOD of GDARD has expressed commitment in formulating a sub-programme to deal with quality management in GVS. The senior management of GVS has provided strategic vision and support on quality related matters through for example management reviews of the ISO 17020 system.

Principle 3: Involvement of people – people in GVS have been and continue to be involved in the maintenance and continued relevance of the ISO 17020 system. GVS has managed to create a culture of accountability and responsibility towards its customers. Innovative ideas from staff within GVS have led to important schemes that best serve the customer such as Food Forums and abattoir rating awards.

Principle 4: Process approach - GVS has systematically defined the activities necessary to obtain stipulated results within the ISO 17020 system. The process approach was used much broader than the boundaries of GVS, where key activities necessary to ensure holistic meat safety at abattoirs in Gauteng were identified and developed into a HAS auditing tool. This tool is being used to improved the quality of audits at abattoirs and ensure safe processing of meat for public consumption.

Principle 5: System approach to management - GVS has structured a system to achieve its objectives in the most effective and efficient way using a documented ISO 17020 management system. The structured systems approach has harmonized, streamline and integrated core business processes in VPH to ensure best quality service provision.

Principle 6: Continual improvement - GVS has and currently is involved in employing a consistent organisation-wide approach to continual improvement of its performance through mechanisms within the ISO accredited system such as internal audits, corrective action, customer service management (including customer complaints) and management review to name a few. Continual improvement is a never ending journey for GVS.

Principle 7: Factual approach to decision making – This is achieved through research and publication of research as well as using tools that quantify compliance and non-compliance to accredited procedures.

Principle 8: Mutually beneficial supplier relationships - GVS has demonstrated increased ability to create value for its customers and has optimised cost and resource usage thorough provision of adequate human, material and financial resources in its operations. It has established relationships that balance short-term gains with long-term considerations in relation to the public by exceeding the minimum requirements of its mandated function for the benefit of her customers. GVS has inspired and encouraged the benchmarking of its work into what is today national norms.

Contact Information

Institution Name:   Gauteng Veterinary Services
Institution Type:   Government Agency  
Contact Person:   Reuben Govender
Title:   Mr  
Telephone/ Fax:   27 12 3285144
Institution's / Project's Website:   27 12 3284125
E-mail:   pa.dah@daff.gov.za  
Address:   590 Vermuelen Street, Pretoria
Postal Code:   0001
City:   Pretoria
State/Province:   Gauteng
Country:   South Africa

          Go Back

Print friendly Page