MEASURING THE EFFECTIVENESS OF THE NATION’S FOODSERVICE AND RETAIL FOOD PROTECTION SYSTEM

1. MEASURING THE EFFECTIVENESS OF THE NATION’S FOODSERVICE AND RETAIL FOOD PROTECTION SYSTEM

2. PRESENTATION OBJECTIVES • Purpose of FDA’s Study • Review What the Study ISand IS NOT • Review the Design of the Study • Preview of 2003 Results • Present Recommendations

3. BACKGROUND • FDA National Retail Food Steering Committee • Government Performance and Results Act (1993)“performance plans … measurable indicators”

4. INTRODUCTION AND PURPOSE • Agency effort to change behaviors / practices related to foodborne illness • Identify food safety practices and employee behavior most in need of attention

5. INTRODUCTION AND PURPOSE • Establish a national baseline on the occurrence of foodborne illness risk factors • Effort to collect sufficient data to measure patterns in the occurrence of foodborne illness risk factors over time

6. STUDY TIME LINE • 1998 1ST Data CollectionReport of the FDA Retail Food Program Database of Foodborne Illness Risk Factors (2000) • Established a Baseline for 9 different foodservice and retail food facility types

7. STUDY TIME LINE • 2003 2nd Data CollectionFDA Report on the Occurrence of Foodborne Illness Risk Factors in Selected Institutional Foodservice, Restaurant and Retail Food Store Facility Types (2004) • Begins the process for establishing multiple data collection periods

8. STUDY TIME LINE • 2008 3rd Data Collection will be conductedReport prepared for 2009 will begin the process of analyzing the three data sets (1998, 2003, and 2008) to assess improvement or regression changes from the 1998 Baseline

9. WHAT THE REPORT IS AND IS NOT • IS – a national assessment of the relative strengths & weaknesses of food safety systems designed to control the occurrence of foodborne illness risk factors • IS NOT – a correlation of the occurrence of foodborne illness risk factors with the actual incidence of human illness

10. WHAT THE REPORT IS AND IS NOT • IS– an assessment that used the 1997 Food Code provisions as the standard upon which observations of food safety practices are based • IS NOT– a determination of the industry’s OR a specific establishment’s regulatory compliance with prevailing laws & regulations

11. METHODOLOGY • Scope: 3 Industry segments / 9 facility types: • Institutions • Hospitals • Nursing Homes • Elementary Schools

12. METHODOLOGY • Scope: 3 Industry segments / 9 facility types: • Restaurants • Fast Food • Full-Service

13. BACKGROUNDCONTRIBUTING FACTORS • Food from Unsafe Source • Inadequate Cooking • Improper Holding/Time-Temp. • Contaminated Equipment/Protection from Contamination • Poor Personal Hygiene • Other “Chemical Hazards”

15. METHODOLOGY • Data Collection –Records status for all individual data items IN – In Compliance OUT – Out of Compliance N.O. – Not Observed N.A. – Not Applicable

16. DATA ANALYSIS • Three levels of data analysis are conducted for each of the 9 facility types A. Out of Compliance percentagefor eachindividual data item B.Out of Compliance percentagefor eachfoodborne illness risk factor C.Overall IN Compliance percentagefor all 42 data items

17. Percent Out of Compliance = Total Out of Compliance Observations for a Data Item X 100% Total number of Observations (IN and OUT) for the Data Item Determining the Out of Compliance percentage for each DATA ITEM

18. Determining Out of Compliance Percentages FOODBORNE ILLNESS RISK FACTORS Observations of DATA ITEMS FOODBORNE ILLNESS RISK FACTOR

20. Percent Out of Compliance = Total Out of Compliance Observations for a Risk Factor X 100% Total number of Observations (IN and OUT) for the Risk Factor Determining the Out of Compliance percentage for each FOODBORNE ILLNESS RISK FACTOR

21. ExampleOut of Compliance Percentage Poor Personal Hygiene - Risk Factor Poor Personal Hygiene 5 DATA ITEMS – Data collection Form 12A13A14A15A15B Poor Personal Hygiene - RISK FACTOR

22. Determining Overall IN Compliance Percentages - FACILITY TYPES - 6 RISK FACTOR CATEGORIES Overall In Compliance % Facility Types

24. Foodborne Illness Risk Factorin Need of Priority Attention (2000 Report) • Improper Holding/Time and Temperature • Poor Personal Hygiene • Contaminated Equipment / Protection from Contamination

25. 2004 ReportData Results and Discussion • For each of the 9 facility types the Data Results will present: A. Overall Out of Compliance percentage for each of the foodborne illness risk factors B. Individual data Items that comprise each of the risk factors that are in need of priority attention

26. 2004 ReportData Results and Discussion • For each of the 9 facility types the Data Results will present: C. A national strengths/weaknesses assessment of management systems for controlling the occurrence of foodborne illness risk factors

35. Pathways to Reach the Goals FDA Foodborne Illness Risk Factor Study Risk Factors + Intervention Strategies + Performance Measures Program Standards Standardization & Certification

36. RECOMMENDATIONS FOR INDUSTRY ACTIVE MANAGERIAL CONTROL OF FOODBORNE ILLNESS RISK FACTORS

37. ACTIVE MANAGERIAL CONTROL Purposeful incorporation of specific actions or procedures by industry management to attain control of foodborne illness risk factors

38. RECOMMENDATIONS FOR INDUSTRY • Develop and implement Standard Operating Procedures (SOPs) to address FBI risk factors

39. RECOMMENDATIONS FOR INDUSTRY • Provide employees with specific training and equipment to implement the SOPs

40. RECOMMENDATIONS FOR INDUSTRY • Incorporate critical limits and measurable standards for control of FBI risk factors in SOPs

41. RECOMMENDATIONS FOR INDUSTRY • Establish monitoring procedures that focus on critical processes and practices

42. RECOMMENDATIONS FOR INDUSTRY • Identify methods to routinely assess the effectiveness of the SOPs

43. RECOMMENDATIONS FOR INDUSTRY • FDA guidance document for industryManaging Food Safety: A Guide for Voluntary Use of HACCP Principles for Operators of Foodservice and Retail Establishments www.cfsan.fda.gov/~dms/hret-toc.html

44. RECOMMENDATIONS FOR REGULATORY • Use risk-based inspection methodology- risk factors should be the primary focus of every inspection • Provide flexible work schedules

45. RECOMMENDATIONS FOR REGULATORY • Properly train and equip field personnel • Document compliance determination (IN; OUT; N.O.; N.A.)

46. RECOMMENDATIONS FOR REGULATORY • Establish a dialog with industry foodservice and retail food store operators • Recognize existing industry Quality Assurance Systems and Training Programs

47. RECOMMENDATIONS FOR REGULATORY • Take appropriate corrective action • Obtain immediate corrective action at the time of inspection for risk factors found out of compliance

48. RECOMMENDATIONS FOR REGULATORY • Take appropriate corrective action • Assist in developing Standard Operating Procedure and Risk Control Plans designed to attain long-term managerial control of risk factors

49. IMPLEMENT A CONSISTENT AND EFFECTIVE ENFORCEMENT PROTOCOL • Develop enforcement procedures • Ensure credibility

50. VOLUNTARY NATIONAL RETAIL FOOD REGULATORY PROGRAM STANDARDS Standards of Excellence for Continuous Improvement