1 / 46

The Impact of Letter Grading in NYC

The Impact of Letter Grading in NYC. Reasons to Speak at CASA. THERE ARE THREE THINGS THAT I AM VERY PASSIONATE ABOUT . My daughter Rachel. Who is now 13……. BRUCE SPRINGSTEEN . Who I am going to see tonight …. And the success of the NYC Restaurant Grading System. The DOHMH Landscape.

jared
Download Presentation

The Impact of Letter Grading in NYC

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. The Impact of Letter Grading in NYC

  2. Reasons to Speak at CASA

  3. THERE ARE THREE THINGS THAT I AM VERY PASSIONATE ABOUT

  4. My daughter Rachel

  5. Who is now 13……..

  6. BRUCE SPRINGSTEEN

  7. Who I am going to see tonight ….

  8. And the success of the NYC Restaurant Grading System

  9. The DOHMH Landscape • Approximately 24,000 Restaurants • Restaurant Inspections FY ‘13 = 83,914 • Initial Inspections = 40,050 • Re-inspections = 25,391 • Others (Survey’s Complaints, etc.) = 18,473 • Avg. No. Restaurant Inspectors FY ‘13 = 85

  10. Letter Grading Launched July 2010 GOALS: • Use consumer purchasing power to motivate restaurants • Reduce unsafe food handling practices and improve restaurant hygiene • Publicly reward high-performing restaurants • Increase government transparency • Reduce, over time, foodborne illness

  11. Grading Creates Multiple Incentives for Excellent Performance • A-grade card  posted in window, website, mobile apps • Initial A grade  no inspection for year • Initial or Re-inspection A grade  no fines • Improved performance  less frequent inspections, lower fines • Better practices  protect customers

  12. Adapting Scores to Grades • Earlier Scoring System • Public Health Hazards - 7 Points • Critical Violations – 5 Points • General Violations – 2 Points • Condition Levels - Indicate extent to which violations exist and modifies points • 28 or more combined points – Compliance Inspection

  13. Adapting Scores to Grades • “Administrative” Violations – Scores not counted toward grades. Example: • Permits violations • Calorie labeling • Trans fat

  14. How Restaurant Grading Works • Scores counted toward grade only include sanitary violations • Grading summarizes inspection results into a grade based on a score: • A = 0-13 Points • B = 14-27 Points • C = 28 or more points

  15. How Restaurant Grading Works • Two types of grading inspections: • Initial inspections • Only restaurants receiving an “A” are issued a grade card following this inspection • An “A” grade must be posted immediately • There are no hearings or fines issued to restaurants receiving an “A” following an inspection, providing an additional incentive to perform well • Restaurants scoring 13 or more points are scheduled for a follow-up inspection 2-4 weeks later

  16. How Restaurant Grading Works • Re-Inspection • Restaurants receiving an “A” must post that grade immediately • There are no hearings or fines for restaurants issued an “A” grade following an inspection • Restaurants receiving a “B” or “C,” are issued a grade card reflecting their score, and a Grade Pending card • Either the grade card or the Grade Pending card must be posted at the end of the inspection

  17. How Restaurant Grading Works • Due Process –OATH Tribunal • Restaurants are entitled to a hearing before having to post a grade card • A grade card must be posted on the day of the hearing, unless granted an adjournment • If a hearing changes a score to the extent the grade would change, a new grade card is issued and must be posted immediately • Restaurants receiving an adjudicated “A” grade must pay incurred fines • Only one adjournment is allowed before the grade must be posted

  18. Posted Grades

  19. How Restaurant Grading Works • Inspection Cycles • Inspection cycles include the: • Initial Inspections • Re-Inspections • Compliance Inspections • Compliance Inspections may be assigned to FSEs that have scored poorly on their Initial and Re-Inspections. • May also be assigned in lieu of closing a FSE that has previously performed well on inspections

  20. How Restaurant Grading Works • Inspection Intervals • The amount of time between the end of one inspection cycle and the start of another is determined by the score received following the initial inspection • Inspection Intervals are determined by the higher score of either the Initial or Re-Inspection. • The interval is not affected by a hearing’s outcome • Intervals (+ or – 1 Month) • “A” = 12 Months • “B” = 6 Months • “C” = 4 Months • Closed = 3 Months

  21. Summary • Promotes high food safety standards • Assures restaurants fairness: • Dual-inspections for a grade • Inspection frequency based on performance • Impartial inspection review by a tribunal • Financial incentives • Consumer engagement through greater transparency of inspection results

  22. Overview Evaluate grade program impact on • Restaurant hygiene & food handling practices • Diner behavior • Foodborne illness

  23. Methods: Hygiene Analysis

  24. NYC Restaurant Population • Approximately 24,000 restaurants operating each day • 2007-2013: 43,892 restaurants • 38% in Manhattan, 4% in Staten Island • 11% chain restaurants • 45% quick service with limited seating or take-out

  25. A Grades by UHF42 in 2011 and 2013 2011 2013 Source. NYC Environmental Public Health Tracking Portal, accessed March 2014

  26. Score on Recent Initial Inspection, NYC Restaurants, 2010-2013

  27. Inspection Performance Improvement

  28. Kitchen Cleanliness

  29. Kitchen Managers & Workers

  30. Food Handling and Holding

  31. Pest Control

  32. New Yorkers Overwhelmingly Support & Use Grading Note. July 2011 (n=502) & Jan 2012 (n=511) surveys conducted by Baruch College Survey Research.

  33. Grade Distribution following reinspections

  34. Next Steps • Use results to inform development of educational food safety resources and outreach efforts with operators • Analyze hygiene metrics stratified by restaurant characteristics • Use other data sources to evaluate program impact on foodborne illness

  35. [1 Facts December 2013

  36. Like Any successful program we have our critics

  37. Not our fault • Due to the video that was released, the health department used it as evidence to ask us to re-cement and closed down the bakery for extermination. As a small one-shop bakery, we often feel like we're being looked at under a tremendous microscope. A lot of time people don't see the larger ramifications of their actions and how a tiny video of a mouse running across the screen for 3 seconds can cause harm and damages to an honest, small business that people's livelihood depends on. We of course believe that we run a clean and good operation, but see that we were targeted and will rise to the occasion to be even better. • Chef says we will be doing everything that was asked of us, and hope to reopen on Monday. And he's sadden for our customers who had plans this weekend that we weren't able to welcome them.

  38. Restaurant Grading is a success

  39. A majority of Restaurants are Posting an A 87 per cent of Restaurants post an A 11 per cent of Restaurants post a B 2 per cent of Restaurants post a C

  40. Salmonella • Between 2010 ( the year before grading ) and 2013 there has been a 14 % decline in Salmonella Cases

  41. Questions ?

More Related