What makes up the budget of an IFS Food project?
Five items, and the audit quote is often not the largest. The real cost of a project is decided at the gap analysis, when the distance between the site and IFS Food Version 8 is measured requirement by requirement.
Item | What makes it vary | Who sets it |
|---|---|---|
Internal time | Availability of the IFS project lead and deputy, the HACCP team and senior management; starting level of the system | The site |
Site upgrades | Floors, flow separation, condensation, glass and foreign material control, detection, laboratory testing | The gap analysis, then supplier quotes |
Training | Number of people, levels (management, HACCP team, internal auditors, operators), seasonal workers | The training plan; CSF funding possible in Morocco |
Consultancy (optional) | Depth of support: gap analysis only, documentation, mock audit, presence on audit day | The site’s terms of reference |
Certification audit | Calculated duration, auditor travel, language, any extra audits | The certification body |
Internal time is the item most often underestimated. The official text requires all requirements to be in place and validated, through internal audits and a management review, before an initial audit. That work cannot be delegated: a consultant helps structure it, but the site team makes it live.
How is the IFS Food audit duration calculated?
By a mandatory calculation tool published by IFS, then by the certification body’s decision. The official IFS Food Version 8 text sets three criteria for the minimum time spent on site: the maximum total number of people on site over a year (part-time, shift, temporary and administrative staff included), the number of product scopes and the number of processing steps.
That minimum is always at least two days, or 16 hours. One audit day equals eight hours, excluding the lunch break, and never exceeds ten hours. At least 50% of the time is spent in the production areas, or one third for some sites with simple processes. On top of this come at least two hours of preparation and 0.75 days, or six hours, of report writing.
The processing steps (P1 to P13 in Annex 3 of the standard) are used only to calculate the audit duration; the technology scopes (A to F) determine which auditors are qualified for the site. A precise description of what the site does therefore matters twice: for the duration and for the choice of auditor.
Factor | Official effect on duration | What the site can do |
|---|---|---|
Maximum headcount over the year | Calculation tool criterion | Declare the real peak, seasonal workers included: an understated figure distorts the quote |
Product scopes and processing steps | Calculation tool criteria | Describe the scope precisely from the quote request onwards |
Initial audit | May justify extra time | Expect longer opening and closing meetings |
Lines, complexity, size and age of the site | May extend the audit | Prepare an up-to-date site plan and flow diagrams |
Language | Communication issues cited as a factor; when an interpreter is needed, the doctrine adds 20% of the total audit duration | Confirm the working language before the auditor is chosen |
Site preparation and deviations at the previous audit | May extend the audit | An organised file and closed deviations |
Audit team | At least two hours added | Ask why a team is planned |
Combined IFS audit, multi-location, simple repetitive processes | Possible reduction of 0.5 days, not cumulative | Check that the case is on the standard’s list |
Simple handling of fruit and vegetables, simple processes in certain product scopes | Possible reduction of 0.75 days, not cumulative | Same, with the justification written in the report |
The standard is explicit: only the reasons it lists allow a reduction, and the IFS Integrity Program regularly reviews these justifications. An unusually short quote should therefore be questioned, not celebrated. The interpreter rule comes from the IFS Food 8 doctrine, version 5, which also lists the languages for which no interpreter is allowed, French and English among them.
How long does it take to be ready for the audit?
As long as it takes to produce evidence over a real production cycle, which only a gap analysis can estimate. We do not give a standard duration: it depends on the starting gap, the works, the team’s availability and the production calendar.
The official rules that weigh on the timeline:
- a new site: IFS recommends at least three months of operations before the first audit;
- a validated system: internal audits covering all requirements and a management review completed before the initial audit;
- a seasonal site: the main audit takes place when the most hazardous processing step is carried out, and lines must be running;
- after the audit: action plan within two weeks, evidence of corrections within four weeks, certificate in the IFS Database six to eight weeks after the last audit day.
What most often lengthens a project, in our gap analyses: infrastructure works discovered late, an IFS project lead absorbed by production, supplier specifications that have to be rebuilt, and a harvest season that pushes the audit back by a year.
What makes the project more expensive after the audit?
The result. Every non-conformity has a cost in extra audits, in time and sometimes in a lost certificate.
Situation | Consequence according to IFS | Effect on the budget |
|---|---|---|
One Major non-conformity only, score ≥ 75% | On-site follow-up audit, no earlier than six weeks and no later than six months after | One more audit; certificate at Foundation level only |
Several Majors, a KO scored D or a score < 75% | Audit failed; full new initial audit no earlier than six weeks later | One more full audit; at recertification, the certificate is withdrawn |
Seasonal products not seen | Extension audit, every year | One extra audit a year |
Access denied to the auditor at an unannounced audit | Certificate withdrawn within two working days | Total cost of the audit invoiced to the site |
Audit stopped before the checklist is completed | Audit cancelled, certificate withdrawn, new initial audit no earlier than six weeks later (doctrine) | One audit lost |
Recertification outside the window | Break in the certification cycle | A new initial audit |
The most cost-effective lever is therefore upstream: a mock audit under real audit conditions, KO requirements first, costs less than a follow-up audit and a season without a certificate.
What can be funded, and how should you compare quotes?
Training, not the audit. In Morocco, the special training contracts (contrats spéciaux de formation, CSF) run by OFPPT, the Office de la Formation Professionnelle et de la Promotion du Travail, Morocco’s vocational training office, cover training actions. In an IFS project, HACCP, IFS Food Version 8, hygiene or internal auditor training may be eligible; the certification audit and the site works are not. The rules are set out on our page on CSF and OFPPT funding. Only OFPPT decides the reimbursement; we run a simulation on your data, without promising any amount.
On each certification body quote, check these points:
For the complete path, see our guide to IFS Food certification in Morocco; to reduce the risk of an extra audit, read our how-to on IFS Food audit preparation.