Quick answer
HACCP hazard analysis identifies what could make food unsafe at each process step, evaluates which hazards are significant and selects suitable controls. Use the actual product, process and intended consumers, with evidence for the decisions. A risk score can help organise reasoning, but an unexplained number does not demonstrate that a hazard is controlled.
Describe the hazard and how it could arise
A useful hazard description connects a specific hazard with a source, condition or process step. “Contamination” alone is too vague to tell the team what must be controlled. Consider hazards already present in ingredients, introduced during handling, surviving treatment or increasing during later conditions.
MyHACCP’s hazard-identification guidance includes microbiological, chemical, physical and allergenic hazards. Work through the confirmed flow rather than relying only on a standard list pasted into every row.
Evaluate significance with evidence
Consider the possible consequence and the likelihood under the circumstances being assessed. Product characteristics, intended use, consumers, process conditions, history and the reliability of existing hygiene controls all matter. Record the basis and the uncertainties, especially where evidence is incomplete.
MyHACCP illustrates severity and likelihood assessment using a scoring method. That example is not a universal legal formula or an excuse to ignore a serious hazard because a low number was entered. Use a consistent method that competent team members understand and can justify.
Build a worksheet that supports a decision
| Process issue | Hazard question | Evidence and control question |
|---|---|---|
| Raw ingredient received | What relevant hazard may already be present? | Which specification, supplier evidence and later control address it? |
| Open food handled after treatment | Could a hazard be introduced at this stage? | How are people, equipment and the environment controlled? |
| Food waits before the next stage | Could conditions allow a hazard to increase? | What evidence supports the permitted conditions and control? |
| Recipe or label changes | Could an undeclared allergen reach the consumer? | How do the actual recipe, specification and information checks connect? |
The table deliberately does not assign CCPs or release limits. Those decisions depend on the actual study. Keep the assessment of significance separate from the next decision about how control is achieved.
Select a control that addresses the mechanism
MyHACCP distinguishes control measures from monitoring. A treatment or separation arrangement may control a hazard; recording a reading only checks an aspect of that control. Explain why the selected measure is suitable, where it acts and which supporting conditions it needs.
Illustrative example: a team identifies an allergen-information mismatch after a recipe substitution. A generic note to “cook thoroughly” does not address that mechanism. The team needs reliable ingredient information and recipe-to-label or service-information control, supported by an assessment of transfer risks.
Challenge omissions and keep the rationale
Ask why a hazard was considered insignificant, whether a later step really controls it, and whether the proposed control is achievable. Seek specialist help where product properties, pathogen behaviour or process validation exceed the team’s knowledge.
Document the evidence and decision, not only the score. Review the analysis after relevant product, process, supplier or intended-use changes. The existing HACCP plan guide shows how analysis connects with the rest of the system.
Next steps
- Confirm the product description, intended use and flow.
- Identify hazard mechanisms at each step.
- Evaluate significance with documented evidence and uncertainty.
- Select justified controls and carry the decisions through to implementation.
Read the official practical guidance — Use the current source alongside the procedures for your own business.