The Cutting Edge Food Safety Management Partnership

Similar documents
Adoption of the NEW IL FOOD CODE 2018

TRAINER GUIDE FOOD SAFETY ON THE GO MODULE 2: PROGRAM DIRECTOR 2012 EDITION

New Jersey Department of Children and Families Policy Manual. Date: Chapter: A Office of Education Subchapter: 1 Office of Education

Section II: Food Service. MPR 1 Plan Review

STOP THE FOLLOWING SECTIONS WILL BE COMPLETED DURING THE MEETING

Foodborne Illness ~1,000 RESULTS IN. Personal distress, Preventable illness and death, Economic burden. Reported Outbreaks Annually

REGULATION 4 FOOD SERVICE ESTABLISHMENTS Adopted October 15, 2015

Environmental Health Division 2000 Lakeridge Drive SW Olympia, WA PUBLIC HEALTH AND SOCIAL SERVICES DEPARTMENT.

Status of Prerequisite and HACCP Program Implementation. Sanitarians Perspective

2014 Interpretive Guidelines for 2013 Review Nutrition programs (C1, C2 & NSIP meals)

Summary of Learning Outcomes Level 3 Award in Supervising Food Safety in Catering Qualification Number: 500/5471/5

Goal of Child Nutrition Programs is to serve nutritious and safe food that children will eat within an established budget.

School Nutrition Association:

PRESENTATION OBJECTIVES

Food Service and Pool Sanitation

Abstract. This capstone represents a proposal for the implementation of a standardized

IFPTI Fellowship Cohort V: Research Presentation

Environmental Assessment. Exercise

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY. The Maricopa County Environmental Services Department respectfully submits this application for the

Chapter 2 Management and Personnel

This Standard applies to the essential elements of a training program for regulatory staff.

OFFICE OF THE AUDITOR

Delegation Agreement Between and. Minnesota Department of Health

Observer Report (F10 A) For the Hospitality Industry

Course Syllabus. Level 3 Award in Food Safety for Supervisors. Safer Food Supervisor (Level 3) A. Introduction. B. Food law and responsibilities

Corner: Manager s. PROJECT Liz Dixon, MS. Key Area: 2. Food Safety

FEEDING ASSISTANT TRAINING WEBINAR SERIES. Vanderbilt Center for Quality Aging & Qsource

May 12, 2016 MEMORANDUM. Certain provisions of FSMA are already in effect, namely: Mandatory recall authority (FSMA 206).

The FDA Food Safety Modernization Act of 2009 Section-by-Section Summary

XL Foods Inc. Independent Review Recommendations and Government Action Plan

Are You Ready for FSMA? Janet Raddatz VP Quality & Food Safety Systems Sargento Foods Inc. WAFP June 12, 2013

COMPETENCIES FOR FOOD AND NUTRITION SERVICES EMPLOYEES

Draft 11/3/2017. Crosswalk - Requirements for Foodborne Illness Training Programs Based on Standard 5

FSMA Update. Jennifer Thomas Interim Director for FSMA Operations Center for Food Safety and Applied Nutrition Food and Drug Administration May 2018

Food Safety Management System HACCP

619/

TRAINING CALENDAR MARCH 2018

Butte County Green, Yellow, and Red Placard Program

Crosswalk - Requirements for Foodborne Illness Training Programs Based on Standard 5

FSMA Update. Samantha Shinbaum. October 3, 2017

Operational Approaches for Food Safety Guideline, 2018

FDA Food Safety Modernization Act FDA Proposed Rules & OTA Draft Comments

FOOD FACILITY OPERATOR S GUIDE

District 4 Environmental Health Report

Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposed Collection; Comment Request; Survey on

FSMA User Guide. Food Safety Modernization Act Guide

Risk Based Inspections

ANNUAL SURVEY PREPARATION. For Year-Long Compliance May 21, 2014 Adam Snyder, RVP, Unidine Jenny Overly, Director of Innovation, Unidine

A SUMMARY OF MEDICAID REQUIREMENTS AND RELATED COA STANDARDS

COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES INTERNAL SERVICES DEPARTMENT OPEN COMPETITIVE JOB OPPORTUNITY

What type of retail establishments do we inspect and license? Retail food sales establishments selling to the end consumer, including:

Creating An Effective OSHA Compliance Program

PERMIT/APPROVAL APPLICATION PROCESS

GRANT GUIDANCE CALENDAR YEAR Retail Program Standards Grant Program.

Content Sheet 11-1: Overview of Norms and Accreditation

CHARLOTTE COUNTY PUBLIC SCHOOLS JOB DESCRIPTION. MANAGER / FOOD SERVICE OPERATIONS Pay Grade M

WIRBinar. How to Survive an FDA Inspection. Upcoming Trainings: Contact Us: (360)

FSMA Enforcement: The First Year

Availability of FSIS Compliance Guideline for Minimizing the. Risk of Shiga toxin-producing Escherichia coli (STEC) and

FSMA Implementation FDA s Preventive Controls Rules

BIOSECURITY / SECURITY CHECKLIST For the Food Service Director. School Food Service

Report on the Food Law Enforcement Services

Fatemeh Malekian, Professor. Southern University Agricultural Research and Extension Center

Health and Safety Plan (HASP) Sampling and Handling of Sediments from (Name & location of project site)

LaTonya M. Mitchell District Director, Denver District Director Office of Regulatory Affairs Office of Global Regulatory Operations & Policy U.S.

QUALIFI Level 2 Award in Food Safety in Catering (Catering/Retail/Manufacturing) (AFS2SFG2012)

Food Aid Safety and Quality Management Scheme

Overview. PPLHSL30 - SQA Unit Code HK6M 04. Ensure food safety practices are followed in the preparation and serving of food and drink

REVISING MINNESOTA S FOOD CODE: What Hunger Relief and Healthy Food Advocates and Partners Need to Know

COURSE NAME: FWS115 Sanitation and Safety COURSE DESCRIPTION PLAR INFORMATION COURSE LEARNING OUTCOMES

Request for Proposal for Food Service Vendor for School Meal Program. KIPP Massachusetts. KIPP Academy Lynn Elementary, Lynn MA

FSPCA PREVENTIVE CONTROLS FOR HUMAN FOOD

Child Care Program (Licensed Daycare)

3. Food Safety Standards of Operation. Our Management System for Assured Compliance and Excellence

NN SS 401 NEURONEXT NETWORK STANDARD OPERATING PROCEDURE FOR SITE SELECTION AND QUALIFICATION

Food Preparation Policy

Job Classification: FIREFIGHTER RECRUIT & EMCT - EMT/EMCT - Paramedic

ANSWERING TO A HIGHER CALLING

Purnendu C. Vasavada, Ph.D. Coordinator, FSPCA

EMA & FDA Inspections: Site perspective. Shandukani Research Centre

Executive Summary 56,173 Purpose and Coverage of the Rule 56,173 Summary of the Major Provisions of the Rule 56,173 Costs and Benefits 56,175

Update for Ontario s Modernized Food Premises Regulation. For Industry Stakeholders Modernized Safe Food and Water Regulations May 7, 2018

THE ALMOND FOOD SAFETY PLAN: TEACHING EXAMPLE FOR FSMA PREVENTIVE CONTROLS. Room 314 December

Food Safety Modernization Act

Compounded Sterile Preparations Pharmacy Content Outline May 2018

New Jersey Administrative Code _Title 10. Human Services _Chapter 126. Manual of Requirements for Family Child Care Registration

Hazardous Materials Transportation Security Requirements

Interagency Background Screening Workgroup Report to Governor Rick Scott October 14, 2011

Food Standards Agency in Wales

Food Establishments. Order No ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH DEPARTMENT. Distributed by:

Connie Hoy October 2013

Outage dates (duration): September 5, 1996 to May 27, 1999 (2.7 years) Reactor age when outage began: 8.8 years

GAO. FOOD SAFETY Agencies Should Further Test Plans for Responding to Deliberate Contamination

Impact of Educational Interventions on Hazard Analysis Critical Control Point (HACCP) Program Implementation in Iowa Schools

4 March Attn: Planning Technician, Level 10, Civic Building Auckland Council Private Bag Auckland Proposed Food Safety Bylaw

Health & Safety Policy

EMA Inspection Site perspective

CODE ENFORCEMENT OFFICER I/II

Controlling Office: Director of Clinical Services Effective Date: May 1, Applies to CAMTS: n/a Last Review: January 1, 2018

Alimentación, nutrición y dietética HACCP SYSTEM ASSOCIATED TRAINING.

Transcription:

The Cutting Edge Food Safety Management Partnership Verify Results Train Staff Establish Policy MARICOPA COUNTY ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES DEPARTMENT Maricopa County is the 6 th largest County housing 4 million Maricopa County entertains up to 4 million guests per year Maricopa Environmental Services is dedicated to provide FSIS inspections to 23,000 permitted facilities Maricopa County current business model is to inspect facilities based on Class frequency CLIMB TO IMPROVEMENT IN FOOD SAFETY Cutting Edge program introduced and initiated First county in 2011/12 Arizona to adopt FDA 2009 Code First recipient of the Innovate Food Technology Award by IAFP Introduction of new 2005 Gold-Silver-No Award program Lead the state HACCP Alliance Program utilizing 2003 Industry SOP and inspection driven on Active Managerial Control Samuel J. Crumbine 2001 Award Winning -03 Program Spearheaded statewide 2001 FDA Food Code Adoption First national program to have a web-based 2000- interactive food inspection 01 web site 2010 Initiate hand-held computer inspections 1996 Initial Risk Based Inspection Frequencies 1995 NEHA 2012 AEC June 2012 1

An increasing demand for inspections with limited resources. Increase staffing Would require 12 additional staff ($609,000) to meet inspection demand. NEHA 2012 AEC June 2012 2

Reduce the number of required inspections Public perception reduced inspections = reduced food safety Industry perception Are we getting what we re paying for? An across the board reduction may take away resources from challenged establishments. Implement Active Managerial Control assessments into current inspection program- Work with industry strengths of Active Managerial Control to create efficiencies within the current inspection program. Food Modernization Act wins approval 2009 FDA Food Code adopted NEHA 2012 AEC June 2012 3

Implement assessing degree of Active Managerial Control as the new approach in current inspection program. THE CUTTING EDGE PROGRAM Promote Active Managerial Control & Reinforce Food Establishments Food Safety Systems Create Inspection Efficiency for the Department and Industry Partners 2009 FDA FOOD CODE, ANNEX 4 Active Managerial Control Additional measures must be taken on the part of operators and regulators to better prevent or reduce foodborne illness. (Active managerial control) embodies a preventive rather than reactive approach to food safety through a continuous system of monitoring and verification. NEHA 2012 AEC June 2012 4

2009 FDA FOOD CODE, ANNEX 4 Active Managerial Control Regulatory inspections and follow-up activities must also be proactive by using an inspection process designed to assess the degree of active managerial control regulators must assist operators in developing and implementing voluntary strategies to strengthen existing industry systems to prevent the occurrence of foodborne illness risk factors. 2009 FDA FOOD CODE, ANNEX 5 Risk Based Inspections inspectors continue to have limited time in which to complete inspections. This does not negate the need to thoroughly identify and assess the control of foodborne illness risk factors during each inspection. Even with limited time, inspectors can focus their inspections on assessing the degree of active managerial control an operator has over the foodborne illness risk factors. Three key elements from industry: 1. Criteria for participation and disqualification 2. Keep it simple! 3. What s in it for us? NEHA 2012 AEC June 2012 5

QUALIFICATION CRITERIA Establishment is a permitted Class 2-5 food establishment Establishment has a Certified Foodservice Manager (CFM) on staff, where required. A CFM and/or Person In Charge (PIC) is present during operational hours. Within 30 days of being hired, all Food Service Workers must obtain a Food Service Worker card. Permit does not have any unresolved legal action. QUALIFICATION CRITERIA THREE STEPS TO ACTIVE MANAGERIAL CONTROL NEHA 2012 AEC June 2012 6

ESTABLISH POLICY General Standard Operating Procedures (SOP s) must be developed for the following foodborne illness risk factors, as applicable to the operation: Cooking Temperatures Cooling Reheating Cold Holding Hot Holding Hand Washing / Bare Hand Contact Cross Contamination Food Contact Surfaces Approved Food Source Employee Illness TRAIN STAFF Employees must be trained and demonstrate compliance with the establishment s Standard Operating Procedures, including taking corrective action when needed. VERIFY RESULTS Verification is to ensure the activities described in the food safety Standard Operating Procedures are being performed. The methods for verifying these activities are done properly should be outlined in the Standard Operating Procedures. Verification should occur at a frequency that can ensure the Standard Operating Procedure is being followed continuously. NEHA 2012 AEC June 2012 7

VERIFY RESULTS Verification activities may include Record keeping, such as maintaining log sheets. Periodic self inspections. Observing that person(s) are carrying out the critical procedures correctly. Observing monitoring is being done as planned Reviewing the monitoring records Ensuring that corrective action was taken when the critical limit was not met Confirming that all equipment, including equipment used for monitoring, was operated, maintained and calibrated properly STANDARD OPERATION PROCEDURE REVIEW Enrollment requires a review of the establishment s Standard Operating Procedures. This review can occur one of two ways: 1.The inspector can review the written procedures on site during a routine inspection 2.The operator can submit the written procedures to thecuttingedge@mail.maricopa.gov. NEHA 2012 AEC June 2012 8

STANDARD OPERATION PROCEDURE REVIEW The review will be to ensure the policies meet minimum Maricopa County Environmental Health Code requirements and contain basic procedural steps for ensuring active managerial control over the applicable foodborne illness risk factors. Written copies of the Standard Operating Procedures must be kept on site at the establishment. The Department will not keep copies of these procedures on file. VERIFICATION VISITS Verification Visits will replace the establishment s routine inspection during every other regularly scheduled visit. NEHA 2012 AEC June 2012 9

VERIFICATION VISITS The purpose of the verification visits is to interactively look at the outcome of the active managerial control plan for each of the 10 applicable risk factors. Where active managerial control is lacking, a root cause analysis will be conducted to determine why policy, train, and/or verify. VERIFICATION VISITS The following items will also be evaluated during the Verification Visit: A Certified Food Service Manager is on staff and a Certified Food Service Manager or Person in Charge is on duty at all times. Verify standard operating procedures are still current based on menu and/or procedural changes. Verify active managerial control (policy, training, and verification) related to the 10 risk factors, as applicable, using Assessment Form. If the establishment has a variance requiring a HACCP plan, verify the critical control points as approved by the Department. NEHA 2012 AEC June 2012 10

NON-COMPLIANCE A Verification Visit will be changed to a comprehensive routine inspection when one or more of the following are observed during a Verification Visit: Person in Charge or Certified Food Service Manager is not present at time of Verification Visit. Imminent Health Hazard. Three or more out of compliance risk factors from the Assessment Form. NEHA 2012 AEC June 2012 11

NON-COMPLIANCE A Verification Visit will be changed to a comprehensive routine inspection when one or more of the following are observed during a Verification Visit: Person in Charge or Certified Food Service Manager cannot correct out of compliance risk factor(s) at time of the Verification Visit. Non compliance with critical control points related to variance or conducting operations without a required variance (this only applies to variance processes that require a HACCP plan). NON-COMPLIANCE When an inspection is changed from a Verification Visit to a Comprehensive inspection, the usual routine comprehensive inspection will be conducted, including asking the operator if he/she would like to participate in the Grade Card system. The next visit will be scheduled as a Verification Visit (unless comprehensive inspection results in establishment being disqualified from the Cutting Edge Program). NEHA 2012 AEC June 2012 12

DISQUALIFICATION Disqualification from the Cutting Edge will result when one or more of the following situations occur: An inspection purpose is changed from a Verification Visit to a comprehensive routine inspection during two consecutive visits. An establishment is found in operation with an imminent health hazard present. An establishment has an unresolved legal action. An establishment earns a D grade during a routine comprehensive inspection. DISQUALIFICATION Disqualification from the Cutting Edge will result when one or more of the following situations occur: Lack of active managerial control is demonstrated during Environmental Related Illness investigation where compelling evidence that the point of origin of an outbreak or communicable disease was at the establishment in question. The Environmental Related Illness Program will make this determination and will notify the inspector. The inspector will be responsible for notifying establishment of disqualification. NEHA 2012 AEC June 2012 13

AWARDS AND RECOGNITION Every establishment will receive a Cutting Edge participation seal upon enrolling in the Program. AWARDS AND RECOGNITION Successful completion of a Verification Visit will result in an A under the Grade Card System. AWARDS AND RECOGNITION Participating establishments will be recognized on the Department s website. NEHA 2012 AEC June 2012 14

OUTCOME INDICATORS GOAL Increase active managerial control to decrease the occurrence of food borne risk factors in the establishment. OUTCOME INDICATOR Occurrence of top 10 food borne illness risk factors from 2008 Maricopa County Environmental Services Voluntary Standards Baseline survey compared to results of future survey (big picture view). OUTCOME INDICATORS GOAL Increase active managerial control to decrease the occurrence of food borne risk factors in the establishment. OUTCOME INDICATOR The occurrence of Priority violations observed during routine comprehensive inspections after joining program compared to occurrence of violations prior to joining. NEHA 2012 AEC June 2012 15

OUTCOME INDICATORS GOAL Create efficiency to meet inspection demands by enhancing risk based inspection approach. OUTCOME INDICATOR Overall inspection times by permit class and type. OTHER OUTCOME INDICATORS For which risk factor is a lack of active managerial control found most frequently? (of 10 FBI risk factors) What is the most common reason for lack of active managerial control over a particular risk factor? (Policy, Train, or Verify) CURRENT PROGRAM PARTICIPATION 485 class 3, 4, and 5 permit total Cutting Edge participants 10514 12000 10000 8000 6000 10514 4000 2000 0 class 3, 4, and 5 permit total 485 Cutting Edge participants NEHA 2012 AEC June 2012 16

POLICY REVIEW 477 out of 485 participants benefited by developing policies or modifying existing policies to align with the 2009 FDA Food Code. VERIFICATION VISITS RESULTS 926 Verification Visits have been conducted 99.7% received an A grade card No enforcement action or reports of foodborne illness TESTIMONIAL was very simple to implement. the greatest benefit from this program is the additional review of our policies and procedures it adds a new level of awareness receiving very positive and helpful feedback on best practices in the field for our continued improvement. (Verification) visits (are) a great opportunity to review in detail our current program and converse on any new requirements either recently implemented or in the pipeline. Cutting down on the amount of comprehensive inspections is defiantly a plus however the sharing of knowledge and education through the verification visits is a true benefit. -Paul Carter The Phoenician Resort Scottsdale, AZ NEHA 2012 AEC June 2012 17

John Kolman, R.S., MBA Director Maricopa County Environmental Services Department 1001 N. Central Avenue, Suite 401, Phoenix, AZ 85004 Desk: 602.506.4847 Fax: 602.506.5141 Jkolman@mail.maricopa.gov esd.maricopa.gov Special thanks to Susie Sid, Kathryn Garcia, Michelle Roemersberger, Rebecca Vanderplaats, Tim Hurst, David Morales, Johnny Dilone, David Ludwig, and Doug Kober. NEHA 2012 AEC June 2012 18