Hazard analysis
Identify the product or process, step, hazard category, rationale, likelihood and severity approach, preventive measure, and why a control is required.
Connect hazard analysis, critical limits, monitoring, failed results, affected product, corrective action, review, and reanalysis in one daily operating flow.
HACCP software should preserve the logic behind the control and make abnormal results impossible to bury in a log. The first question is not whether a form was submitted, but whether the right product was controlled and the response was verified.
Start with Jodoo’s Free plan for up to five users. No credit card required.
The software should preserve the approved analysis while giving operators and reviewers a practical record path.
Identify the product or process, step, hazard category, rationale, likelihood and severity approach, preventive measure, and why a control is required.
Record whether the control is a CCP or another food safety control, its critical limit or acceptance criterion, validation status, and approved plan version.
Tell the operator what to observe, how, when, with which method or instrument, against which limit, and for which product or batch.
When a limit is not met, record immediate correction, product containment, affected lots, cause, action owner, due date, and disposition.
Review monitoring completeness, supporting evidence, deviations, action implementation, effectiveness, plan change needs, and next verification.
Keep plan changes, evidence, decisions, recurrence, verification findings, and management action available for reanalysis and audit.
An alert alone is not control. The record must make the affected scope, temporary protection, decision owner, and next step explicit.
Identify the failed monitoring check, affected lots, quantity and location, potential distribution, immediate correction, and whether product is held.
Record release, rework, diversion, rejection, destruction, or another approved disposition with the responsible owner and supporting rationale.
Require evidence for implementation, reviewer approval, effectiveness result, closure rationale, and return incomplete work to the action owner.
Structured plan records let the correct control, limit, owner, and review date appear in forms and dashboards.
Product, intended use, process step, ingredients or materials, relevant population, flow context, and plan applicability.
Hazard category, description, reasoning, evidence source, control measure, control classification, and validation reference.
Limit or criterion, monitoring procedure, frequency, owner, method or instrument, predefined correction, and corrective-action expectation.
Verification activity and frequency, responsible reviewer, evidence, plan status, effective date, version, next review, and change rationale.
The mobile experience should reduce effort without stripping the record of the product, limit, method, result, and evidence reviewers need.
Use product, process, site, or batch selection to present the relevant limit, unit, method, instructions, and evidence prompt.
Keep the observed value or result basis, time, performer, method or instrument, and comparison with the approved criterion.
Reveal containment, hold, escalation, and deviation fields when the result fails or a scheduled check is missed.
A chart is useful when every count can be traced to the records and decisions behind it.
Results by control, product, line, site, shift, method, pass or fail, missing check, and verification status.
Open and overdue deviations, severity, affected product, hold age, cause, repeat issue, action owner, and returned reviews.
Upcoming reviews, validation status, verification coverage, changes awaiting analysis, and recurring evidence that may require reanalysis.
The no-code advantage is fast adaptation of records, workflow, roles, views, and dashboards around an approved method.
When teams need configurable HACCP records, monitoring, exception routing, action review, mobile capture, dashboards, and connected quality or operations work.
When guided hazard-content libraries, regulator-specific packaged programs, integrated sensors, laboratory systems, or certification-specific validation are the deciding requirement.
Test a normal check, a failed limit, a missed check, a returned corrective action, held product, an effectiveness failure, and plan reanalysis with real roles.
Prepared by Jodoo’s product and content team and reviewed on September 21, 2026. Product behavior was checked in the working app shown on this page. Qualified food safety personnel must confirm the requirements, hazards, limits, and evidence that apply to your operation.
It should connect the current hazard and control plan to monitoring, abnormal results, affected product, correction, corrective action, verification, records, review, and plan reanalysis. It should make exceptions and responsible decisions visible rather than merely digitizing a paper log.
Jodoo can structure, version, route, and report the plan and its operating records. Qualified food safety personnel must perform the hazard analysis and define valid controls, limits, corrective actions, verification, and applicable requirements.
No. The example supports manual or scan-assisted entry and mobile forms. Native device telemetry, calibration integration, offline hardware behavior, and automatic alerts require separate integration and validation.
Use representative normal, failed, missed, returned, held, disposed, ineffective, and reanalyzed cases. Confirm the correct plan version appears, incomplete work cannot close, affected product stays visible, and management measures open the underlying checks and decisions.
Open the populated application and follow a control from plan through monitoring, deviation, review, and verification before adapting it to your approved program.