Mycotoxin maturity · Commission Regulation (EU) 2023/915
Your mycotoxin controls, measured against Regulation (EU) 2023/915 and turned into a costed action plan.
10 themes, a 5-level scale. And the action that moves each level to the next.
The framework’s 10 themes, already written from L1 to L5. One company, one business unit, or 300 at once.
Mycotoxin maturity · Commission Regulation (EU) 2023/915
10 themes, 5-level scale.
Nordhavn Industries
53 / 100
They measure their maturity with Datamensio
An example
This could be your situation.
Take one company as an example: three sites, three spreadsheets, no shared answer.
Nobody can consolidate.
Nordhavn Industries, 2,400 people in Hamburg, Lyon and Porto. A client asks where the group stands. Each site answers in its own spreadsheet, with its own scales.
Three weeks, a single base.
One Commission Regulation (EU) 2023/915 of 25 April 2023 setting maximum levels for certain contaminants in food assessment launched across all three sites at once, from the managers’ interview notes. The framework was already written, its 10 themes and levels L1 to L5 too.
Two costs avoided before being committed.
A score of 53 out of 100, with the gap concentrated on three themes. The AI companion spotted that two actions duplicated those of another audit. The committee report took one sentence to request.
What it saved them
- 3sites measured on the same base, instead of three questionnaires to reconcile
- 2duplicate actions caught before the spend
- 1committee report, with no manual rework
These figures are an example. They could be yours.
The standard imposes processes. Datamensio says where you stand.
01
The framework is already written
Themes, questions and levels L1 to L5, all written. You do not start from an empty spreadsheet.
02
The score lands the same day
Online, by self-assessment link or in interview. Theme by theme, comparable over time.
03
The gap becomes a costed plan
Every step up carries its action. The AI prioritises on expected effect, not on the order of the standard.
04
Progress can be demonstrated
Campaign after campaign, against your target and against your own past. That is what your board asks for.
The maturity scale
One level, the next, and the action that links the two.
This mechanism, one level, the level above, and the action that links the two, is what turns an observation into a trajectory.
Is the sampling plan for mycotoxin at-risk lots defined and applied consistently?
- N1
No written sampling plan for mycotoxins. Sampling is done on request, with no rule for constructing the sample.
- N2
A plan exists as a document, but sampling arrangements vary between samplers and records are incomplete.
- N3
The plan specifies, for each matrix, the lot size, the number of incremental samples and the homogenisation method. It is generally applied, with only occasional deviations.
- N4
Samplers are trained and authorised, each sample is traced and linked to the lot, and sampling compliance is checked during quality reviews.
- N5
The plan is revised based on analytical results, harvest campaigns and sector alerts, with a documented record of revisions and their justification.
Action to move from L2 to L3
Formalise a sampling data sheet for each at-risk matrix, specifying lot and sublot size, number and mass of incremental samples and the homogenisation method, integrate it into goods-in instructions and check its application during the monthly quality review.
« With Datamensio, we meet our objectives far more efficiently. The ERDF inspection services and our supervising ministry particularly appreciated an approach that gives them reliable data. »
Director, CCI 94CCI Île-de-France
« We believe this is the most suitable solution to scale our transformation project and measure impact according to our needs. »
Maja SucekChief Operating Officer, Interreg Danube
Rarely on its own
Frameworks combine. Put several together to cover your business, or have the AI write yours.
Take your first measurement
What this framework covers
Regulation (EU) 2023/915 replaced Regulation (EC) No 1881/2006 and brings together in a single annex the maximum levels for contaminants in food. Mycotoxins occupy an entire section: aflatoxins B1 and total, aflatoxin M1 in milk, ochratoxin A, patulin, deoxynivalenol, zearalenone, fumonisins B1 and B2, T-2 and HT-2 toxins, citrinin, ergot alkaloids and sclerotia. The limits come with implementation rules: the foodstuff concerned, the stage of the chain, processed, dried or composite products, and a ban on detoxifying through blending or chemical treatment.
The difficulty is not knowing the values, it is demonstrating that they are controlled continuously. Does the monitoring plan cover the raw material and toxin pairs actually at risk, or does it repeat a list inherited from previous years? Does the sampling plan follow the rules that apply to heterogeneous lots, or are samples taken for convenience at the end of the line? What actually happens when a result exceeds the limit: the lot is blocked, the supplier is informed, the competent authority is notified, or it is discussed case by case depending on how busy the team is?
Two points of context come up often. First, mycotoxin limits evolve through successive amending regulations, notably on T-2 and HT-2 toxins, ergot alkaloids and certain dried fruits: dated and traceable monitoring is part of the system, not a matter of individual goodwill. Second, the confusion between a maximum level and an intervention threshold: the Commission’s recommendations set indicative levels for animal feed and trigger investigations, without being enforceable regulatory limits within the meaning of 2023/915.
A compliance audit is binary: the result is under the limit or it is not, the procedure exists or it is missing. The maturity assessment asks a different question: at what level of control does each part of the system sit, from origin selection to non-conformity management, and what precise action moves it up a level. This is what allows you to weigh up an analytical budget, compare two processing sites, or demonstrate a trajectory to a demanding industrial customer.
Within Datamensio, the framework is ready to use and remains yours. The AI adjusts the themes, questions and levels to your sector, cereals, dried fruit, spices, cocoa, coffee, milk or infant food, or builds a variant from your control plans and customer specifications.
Reference standard: Commission Regulation (EU) 2023/915 of 25 April 2023 setting maximum levels for certain contaminants in food
The themes assessed
Mycotoxin hazard identification and scope
Mapping of applicable matrix/toxin pairs, mapping to the annex entries of the regulation, coverage of processed, dried, concentrated and composite products, infant food.
Regulatory monitoring and version management
Tracking of amending regulations, distinction between maximum levels and indicative levels or intervention thresholds, date of last update of the internal framework, distribution to sites.
Upstream control and origin selection
Agronomic and storage criteria, drying and aeration conditions, goods-in inspection, supplier specifications, history by origin and by season.
Sampling plan
Sampling rules applicable to lots and sublots, number and mass of incremental samples, homogenisation, laboratory sample, traceability of seals.
Analysis and laboratories
Methods used and their performance, accreditation, precision and recovery criteria, allowance for measurement uncertainty in the compliance decision, turnaround times.
Compliance decision and handling of exceedances
Documented decision rule, blocking and isolation of the lot, counter-analysis, sorting, reprocessing or destruction, ban on detoxification through blending or treatment, supplier notification.
Notification and relations with authorities
Withdrawal and recall, notification of the competent authority, coordination with RASFF, files presented during official controls, retention of evidence.
Integration into the HACCP plan and documentation
Positioning of the mycotoxin hazard in the hazard analysis, control measures and associated monitoring, verification, records and retention period.
Skills and awareness
Training of samplers, qualification of inspectors, awareness of limits among procurement and production teams, authorisation for release decisions.
Performance review and improvement
Statistical analysis of results by matrix and by origin, indicators of exceedances and proximity to limits, annual review of the control plan, lessons learned from incidents.
A short version of the framework is available for the online self-assessment.
Frequently asked questions
Can Regulation (EU) 2023/915 be certified?
No. It is a directly applicable regulation, enforced by competent authorities during official controls. The assessment measures your level of control and prepares for these controls as well as customer audits or private schemes, it does not issue any certificate.
What is the difference between this assessment and a compliance audit?
An audit concludes with a gap or a pass against a given requirement. The assessment places each part of the system on a progressive scale and indicates the action that moves it up a level. The assessment prepares for the audit, the audit validates.
How long does the assessment take?
The short version can be completed in 20 to 30 minutes by a quality manager. The full version, run collaboratively with procurement, the laboratory and production, generally takes one to two weeks, most of the time being spent gathering evidence.
Does the framework also cover the other contaminants in the annex?
This one focuses on mycotoxins. The chemical contaminants under the same regulation, notably heavy metals and process contaminants, are covered by a separate framework. A cross-cutting roadmap consolidates both without duplicating actions.
Can the framework be adapted to our sector?
Yes. You can edit the questions, levels and themes, or start from your own documents: control plans, specifications, blocking procedures. The AI drafts the missing questions and refines the levels using the CMMI method, and you remain the owner of the framework.
How can several sites be compared with each other?
The assessment can be rolled out at scale across all sites, with a score by theme. Benchmarking between business units and comparison with your own previous campaigns shows where the gap is widening and where effort has paid off.
Is the action plan costed?
Yes. Each gap opens one or more actions, to which the service catalogue attaches a cost, a timeframe and an expected impact on the score. The AI groups these actions into a prioritised roadmap, ready for use in a quality committee.
Where is the data hosted?
In France, at OVH, with backup at Scaleway. No transfer outside the European Union. The AI models used can be selected, including from European providers.