In Nigeria's agricultural sector, food safety often breaks down
long before products reach institutional kitchens or consumer
tables. The challenge isn't just about what happens in our
facilities—it's about what happens in fields, storage barns, and
transport vehicles across the supply chain. After years of
managing food safety in healthcare settings, I realized we needed
a fundamentally different approach to working with agricultural
suppliers.
The Problem We Faced
When I started as Food Safety Manager at Prime Comfort Care Home,
our supplier management consisted mainly of visual inspections at
delivery and hoping for the best. We'd reject obviously moldy
maize or discolored groundnuts, but we had no systematic way to
prevent contamination upstream. Our rejection rates were
high—sometimes 15–20%—which hurt both our budget and our
suppliers' livelihoods.
More concerning was what we couldn't see. Mycotoxins don't always
produce visible mold, especially in early stages of contamination.
We were essentially gambling with food safety every time we
accepted a delivery, relying on luck rather than data.
The traditional approach of simply rejecting substandard products
wasn't working. Suppliers had limited understanding of why their
products were rejected, no guidance on improvement, and little
incentive to invest in better practices. We needed something
different.
Developing a Systematic Framework
In 2022, I developed a comprehensive supplier assessment framework
based on a simple principle: partnership over punishment. Rather
than just evaluating suppliers to reject the bad ones, we would
assess them to help everyone improve.
The framework evaluates suppliers across six critical domains,
each directly linked to mycotoxin risk and overall food safety:
1. Production Practices (20% of total score)
This covers everything happening in the field. We assess
irrigation, pest control, harvest timing, and farmer awareness of
crop stress and mycotoxin risk.
2. Post-Harvest Handling (25%)
The highest weighting. We evaluate drying methods, moisture
content, threshing, shelling, and bagging. Proper drying within
48–72 hours of harvest is critical.
3. Storage Infrastructure (20%)
Storage requires good ventilation, pest exclusion, and inventory
rotation. Even traditional storage can work with modifications
like raised platforms and sealed containers.
4. Quality Testing Capacity (15%)
Tiered requirements: from affordable moisture meters to periodic
lab testing to advanced mycotoxin analysis. The key is consistent
commitment to verification.
5. Documentation Systems (10%)
Traceability is essential for rapid response. For small suppliers,
simple harvest logs suffice. Larger ones need batch IDs and
digital records.
6. Continuous Improvement Commitment (10%)
We measure willingness to learn, apply feedback, and improve over
time—not just current scores.
How We Implement the Framework
Assessment happens in three phases:
-
Initial Baseline Assessment: Facility visits,
interviews, documentation review, and scorecards.
-
Development Planning: Supplier meetings to
review findings, create action plans, and identify support.
-
Quarterly Follow-up: Abbreviated progress
checks and annual comprehensive reassessments.
Real Results
-
Quality Metrics: Average supplier scores rose
from 58% to 81%; rejection rates dropped to under 3%;
contamination incidents decreased 60%.
-
Supplier Capability: 8 suppliers now test
moisture routinely; 4 established lab relationships; all 12
maintain basic traceability.
-
Economic Impact: Procurement costs decreased
12%; suppliers gained income stability and new premium markets.
Lessons Learned
Partnership works better than punishment. Start where suppliers
are, invest in education, celebrate progress, and adapt to local
realities.
Broader Applicability
Though developed for healthcare food service, the framework
applies broadly. Institutions in Lagos and even NAFDAC are
considering it.
Looking Forward
My proposed graduate research in Brazil will explore how Brazilian
practices can inform Nigerian improvements. Scaling industry-wide
with government support is key.
Conclusion
Food safety begins on farms, not in kitchens. By investing in
supplier assessment and development, we improve food safety,
reduce costs, raise farmer incomes, and strengthen agriculture
systems. The framework isn't revolutionary—but systematic
implementation and partnership orientation make it work.
Abiodun Temitope Babayode is Food Safety and Quality Control
Manager at Prime Comfort Care Home in Lagos, Nigeria. He holds a
Higher National Diploma in Food Technology and has over eight
years of experience in food safety management.
Agriculture
Food Safety
Supplier Development
Nigeria
← Back to Blog