Templates and records · IFS Food · Clause 2.2.3.8

IFS Food CCP monitoring record

Daily evidence that each critical control point is under control. In IFS Food it is a KO requirement: if it fails, there is no certificate.

In one sentence

In IFS Food the CCP monitoring record captures, for each critical control point, the value measured, the time, who measured it, the comparison with the critical limit and the action taken if it deviates, and it must be signed by the person responsible and reviewed by an authorised person, because clause 2.2.3.8 is one of the standard's ten KO requirements.

Content reviewed on 17 October 2026

Where the standard requires it: IFS Food · Clause 2.2.3.8 Clause references follow the numbering of IFS Food Version 8. Where a record underpins a KO requirement, its sheet says so.
Type of information: Mandatory record IFS Food KO requirement (2.2.3.8)
Who fills it in: Operator trained on the CCP Verified by the shift or quality manager, with signature and date
When: At the frequency in the HACCP plan Continuously where the equipment allows; otherwise at intervals that allow a reaction before the batch is released
How long it is kept: Shelf life plus one year, at least IFS Food requires records to be kept in line with legislation and for at least one year after the specified shelf life; if the product has none, the period must be justified (2.1.2).

What the standard requires

What IFS Food demands and what it leaves to your judgement

IFS requires a specific monitoring system for each CCP that detects any loss of control in time. Records must be kept, identify the person monitoring and be verified by someone with authority, so that a deviation does not go unnoticed until the end of the shift.

What makes this record a KO is not its format but the fact that it is completed when it should be: the auditor compares the recorded time with the frequency set in the plan and with what they see on the line. A record filled in all at once at the end of the day is easy to spot.

The common HACCP methodology — what a CCP is, how the limit is set, how monitoring is defined — is explained in the HACCP monitoring template; here we cover what IFS adds: signature, verification and the weight of the requirement in the scoring.

Read it in context: Food safety and quality management system, in the IFS Food Academy

Structure

Fields the template should include

CCP, process step and hazard controlled
Critical limit and, where applicable, operating limit
Batch or lot and line
Date, time and value measured or observation
Measuring equipment used and its calibration status
Person monitoring
Result: conforming or deviation
Corrective action applied and disposition of product, if there is a deviation
Verification: who reviews the record and when

Example

Example: pasteurisation CCP at a fictitious juice plant

Company, people and figures are fictitious: the example only shows what a properly completed record looks like.

Field	Content
CCP	CCP-2 · Pasteurisation · biological hazard (vegetative pathogens)
Critical limit	≥ 72 °C for 15 s · operating limit 74 °C
Batch	ZN-26-0912 · line 1
Readings	Continuous chart recorder; manual check every hour from 06:00 to 14:00
Deviation	10:20 · 71.4 °C for 40 s · the diversion valve returns the product to the tank
Action	600 l produced between 10:15 and 10:25 held · reprocessed and new reading conforming
Monitored by	Pasteuriser operator (CCP training up to date)
Verified by	Quality manager · 14:30 the same day · signed

At the audit

Mistakes auditors commonly flag

Readings in the same handwriting at the same round time all day long.
Deviations noted with no corrective action and no decision on the product affected.
Nobody reviews the record until the internal audit.
The monitoring thermometer is not in the calibration plan.
Operators monitoring a CCP with no recorded training on that point.

In Kimobox

How this record is kept in Kimobox

1Each CCP is configured with its critical limit, frequency and owner.
2The operator records the reading from the line terminal with the actual time; if the equipment is connected, the data arrives automatically.
3An out-of-limit reading opens the corrective action on the spot and blocks the affected batch until its disposition is decided.
4Verification sits in the same record, with an electronic signature, and the auditor can consult it with a read-only user.

Frequently asked questions

What people ask us before getting started

Why is CCP monitoring a KO in IFS?

Because it is the last documented barrier against a significant hazard. If it is not monitored, or cannot be shown to have been, the standard considers product safety not to be assured, regardless of the rest of the system.

Is an automatic equipment log acceptable?

Yes, and it is usually more reliable. What IFS asks is that the system detects loss of control, that someone reviews the record and that it is clear what was done about each deviation. Automatic data does not exempt you from verification.

Who can verify the records?

A designated, trained person other than the one monitoring. In many plants it is the shift manager daily and quality periodically.

Keep your IFS Food records without loose templates

We'll show you the module running with data similar to yours.

Request a demo

Keep exploring

Sources

Where each figure comes from

References to the official text in force. If a standard is revised, this page is updated and the review date says so.

IFS Food Version 8 — Standard for auditing product and process compliance in relation to food safety and quality IFS Management GmbH · Version 8, April 2023
General Principles of Food Hygiene, CXC 1-1969 Codex Alimentarius (FAO/WHO) · 2020 revision
Regulation (EC) No 852/2004 on the hygiene of foodstuffs EUR-Lex · 29 April 2004