Cornerstones of Integration: Food Protection Task Forces and Rapid Response Teams

1. Cornerstones of Integration:Food Protection Task Forces and Rapid Response Teams Brett Weed Project Officer Office of Partnerships Food and Drug Administration

2. Highlights • Understanding the Vision of an Integrated Food Safety System • Programs Supporting the IFSS • Food Protection Task Forces • Rapid Response Teams

3. Integrated Food Safety System • Big Idea: Leverage the participation, coordination, resources, and authorities of all regulatory partners to protect the food supply • Plan and prioritize work to coordinate resources • Use data to inform the development of evidence-based food safety policies and programs, and criteria to evaluate their effectiveness • Implement efficient, prevention-focused, risk-based inspections and sample collections • Share data among strategic partners • Promote use of compliance and enforcement tools for achieving compliance with food safety laws and regulations

4. IFSS Support Programs • Food Protection Task Forces • Laboratory Capacity Building • Partnership for Food Protection • Rapid Response Teams • State Cooperative Programs Activities • Regulatory Program Standards • Manufactured Food (MFRPS) • Animal Feed (AFRPS)

5. IFSS Support Programs • Food Protection Task Forces • Laboratory Capacity Building • Partnership for Food Protection • Rapid Response Teams • State Cooperative Programs Activities • Regulatory Program Standards • Manufactured Food (MFRPS) • Animal Feed (AFRPS)

6. Food Protection Task Forces

7. Task Force Mission • Create greater awareness of potential vulnerabilities in our food supply • Create of foodborne illness prevention programs • Foster opportunities for new surveillance systems for detecting foodborne illness • Enhance ability to respond more quickly to outbreaks

8. Task Force Goals • Provide a forum for all the stakeholders of the food protection • Communicate and disseminate key objectives and mandates (e.g. Food Safety Modernization Act [FSMA], etc.) to relevant stakeholders • Collect, compile, and communicate stakeholder interestsand concerns • Assist in adopting or implementing the Food Code and other food protection regulations (e.g. FSMA, etc.) • Promote the concept of an Integrated Food Safety System (IFSS) • Conduct and present findings to stakeholders regarding researchand investigations relating to the causes or prevention of food related illnesses and injuries in the context of food safety and defense.

9. Task Force Public Presence

10. Visibility of Task Forces • Press Releases by or about a Task Force (ex: Vermont, Minnesota, Guam) • Media coverage (ex: Virginia) • Codified in Statute (ex: Minnesota, Florida) • Created by Executive Order (ex: North Carolina) • Spin-off Commodity-specific Task Forces (ex: New Jersey, North Carolina)

11. Task Force Grant Support • Funding Opportunity Announcement #FD-16-039 • Due Date: July 1, 2016 • More information available at grants.gov

12. States with Supported Task Force

13. Rapid Response Teams

14. Why RRTs? Multiple high-profile outbreaks and food safety scares in the late 1990s and early 2000s

15. Why Continue RRTs? Congressional mandate for an Integrated Food Safety System Multiple high-profile outbreaks and food safety scares from 2008 to present Opportunity for collaboration and integration with other Federal food safety and health initiatives

16. Current RRTs Joined: 2008/2009 2012 2014/2015 2016 –TBD!

17. Building a RRT • State-District collaboration to minimize barriers to effective field response • Improve the effectiveness of multi-jurisdictional food/feed emergency responses • Reduce the time from agency notification  implementation of effective control measures • Multi-agency (District/State) & multi-disciplinary (epi/lab/regulatory) • RRT Structures • Each is different, engage in a common core set of partners • Management structures vary (e.g. Steering Committee) • Common core capabilities (RRT Best Practices) • Focus on collaborative/coordinated response • Joint meetings, training, investigations • Joint or coordinated plans and procedures

18. Phase 1: The first 6-12 months • Vision (Introduction) meeting • Outline RRT structure & membership • Conduct a baseline assessment • Kick Off Meeting

19. Phase 2: Years 1-2 • Exercise prior to developing written SOPs • Prioritize SOP development: • Communications • Traceback • Joint investigations • Sampling • Recalls • AARs

20. Phase 3: Year 3 and Beyond! • Long term activities focusing on continuous process improvement • Maintain trained staff & develop SMEs • Maintain written RRT framework • RRT Manual, SOPs, SOGs

21. What we’ve learned from 8 years of RRT development • The relationships and communications processes are the foundation • Buy-in and commitment start from the top down • District Director/State Food Program Manager • RRT Coordinator/DERC • State investigators/CSOs • Encourage a unique team identity that all agencies/ disciplines identify with; Celebrate success as a team • Communication and information sharing are continuous activities • Strong relationship at the RRT Coordinator/DERC level: Mutual respect and understanding. Be willing to listen and to help. • Weekly check in calls for ongoing & emerging activities • Notify/give heads up before it becomes an ‘official’ issue • Two way street (info needs to go both ways)

22. What we’ve learned from 8 years of RRT development • Mentorship makes a big difference! • Joint capabilities are crucial • Traceback, Sampling, Investigations, AARs, recalls • Joint training helps build strong teams!! • Four factors of mentorship pairings: • Relationships • Agency size • Jurisdiction • Geographic proximity

23. RRT Outcomes

24. Working With Other Agencies Federal – State Cooperative Programs Industry Relations Tools for Program Analysis & Improvement: CIFOR Food Emergency Response Plan Communication SOPs* ICS Concepts in RRTs* RRT Training Tracebacks* Joint Inspections & Investigations Environmental Sampling & Records Collection* Food Recalls After Action Reviews Metrics New - Exercises RRT Manual Chapters *Chapters are undergoing intensive revisions for 2016 Edition

25. RRT Investigations– By the Numbers • 340 incidents investigated • Human illness or outbreak linked (53%) • Positive product investigation (20%) • Recall investigation (20%) Positive product investigation, 18 RRTs reporting data

26. Tracebacks • 180 tracebacks • 56% resulted in successful identification of the source • Informational • 41% source identified • Regulatory • 65% source identified • 45 were both Informational & Regulatory

27. On-Site Investigations • 213 on site investigations • 65% were joint investigations • 67% involved an environmental assessment • 106 (75%): contributing factors were identified • Ill employee with food contact • Improper cleaning/sanitizing of hands/or surfaces • Contaminated raw product during pre-harvest or processing • Cooling and hot-holding issues during preparation • 26% involved environmental sampling

28. Questions? RRT Program Contacts Travis Goodman – RRT Program Coordinator Travis.Goodman@fda.hhs.gov 317-226-6500 Ext. 108 Lauren Yeung – RRT Program Coordinator Lauren.Yeung@fda.hhs.gov 301-796-6623 Brett Weed – RRT Project Officer Brett.Weed@fda.hhs.gov 919-348-3909