Transcript Regulators’s Compliance Code and Food Safety Enforcement

Food Hygiene Enforcement
Interventions
Aim

To provide delegates:


with an understanding of the food enforcement
interventions provided for in the Food Law Code
of Practice and;
practical guidance on their use.
Objectives

The course will seek to provide delegates with:





A brief review of Regulatory Reform and how this has
influenced changes to the Food Law Code of practice.
A summary of the range of food enforcement interventions.
Suggestions on how these interventions can be used to
drive up business compliance with food law.
Guidance on preparing service planning for the effective
delivery of a food safety enforcement service.
Practical help with promoting consistency in the use of
enforcement interventions.
Programme
09.30 Registration
10.00 Introduction
The changing nature of food regulation
10.45 Food Hygiene Interventions
11.15 Coffee
11.30 Selecting Interventions
13.00 Lunch
13.45 Selecting Interventions
Service planning
15.00 Coffee
15.15 Ensuring consistency
16.15 Questions
Introduction
The changing nature of food regulation
Regulatory Reform

Hampton Report (2005)


McCrory Review (2006)


Sanctions
Davidson Review (2006)


Reducing administrative burdens: effective inspection and
enforcement.
Compliance with EU law
Rogers Review (2007)

Priorities
Regulatory Reform
Regulatory Reform
Hampton
McCrory
Rogers
Davidson
Legislative and Regulatory
Reform Act 2006
Regulatory Enforcement
and Sanctions Bill
National Priorities
EC Implementation
Compliance Code
Food Law
Code of Practice
LBRO
Primary Authority
Scheme
Sanctions
Hampton Report
Reducing administrative burdens:
effective inspection and enforcement.
Hampton Principles
“Regulators should recognise that a key
element of their activity will be to allow, or
even encourage, economic progress and
only to intervene when there is a clear case
for protection;”
Hampton Principles
“Regulators, and the regulatory system as a
whole, should use comprehensive risk
assessment to concentrate resources in the
areas that need them most;”
Hampton Principles
“Regulators should provide authoritative,
accessible advice easily and cheaply”
Hampton Principles
“No inspection should take place without a
reason;”
Hampton Principles
“Businesses should not have to give
unnecessary information or give the same
piece of information twice;”
Hampton Principles
“The few businesses that persistently break
regulations should be identified quickly and
face proportionate and meaningful sanctions”
Hampton Principles
“Regulators should be accountable for the
efficiency and effectiveness of their activities,
while remaining independent in the decisions
they take.”
Regulatory Reform Act 2006
Compliance Code
Legislative and Regulatory Reform Act 2006

Regulatory functions:





transparent,
accountable,
proportionate,
consistent, and
targeted only at cases in which action is needed.
Compliance Code

S21 of Act, in force:


Legislative basis to


April 08
Hampton Principles
Approved by Parliament
Compliance Code
Purpose
“to promote efficient and effective
approaches to regulatory inspection and
enforcement which improve regulatory
outcomes without imposing unnecessary
burdens on business, the Third Sector and
other regulated entities.”
Compliance Code
Definitions

“Regulatory outcomes”

‘end purpose’ of regulatory activity for example:


Improvement of compliance with food law
Reduction in food poisoning
Compliance Code
Overview
Code requires regulators to:

“adopt a positive and proactive approach
towards ensuring compliance by:



helping and encouraging regulated entities to
understand and meet regulatory requirements more
easily; and
responding proportionately to regulatory breaches”
Regulatory functions


Based on risk assessment.
Compliance Code

Certain Regulators required to have regard to
the Compliance Code when:




Writing policies,
Setting standards
Providing guidance
Code only applies to policy making.

Not to inspections, investigations, prosecution and
other enforcement activities.
New Local Performance Framework

New ways of working:





public sector organisations working together more to
deliver better, more responsive services to local people;
public, private and third sectors striving together for
improved prosperity with plenty of ambition for the future;
central and local government agreeing the priorities for an
area and working together to improve outcomes;
opportunities for local people to influence decisions about
services and how they are delivered.
Focusing scarce resources on priority outcomes
New Local Performance Framework

National Indicators




NI 184
Local Strategic Partnership (LSP)
Sustainable Community Strategy
Local Area Agreements (LAAs)
Objectives of Food Hygiene Service

National Indicator 184:

Food establishments in the area which are
broadly compliant with food hygiene law
Comprehensive Area Assessment (CAA)


Introduced from April 2009.
Each year’s CAA will have four elements:




an area risk assessment identifying risks to outcomes and
the effectiveness of their management;
a scored use of resources judgement for public bodies in
the area;
a scored direction of travel judgement for each local
authority in the area; and
publication of performance data for each area against the
set of national indicators.
Implementing the changes.
“CAA will see a shift from cyclical to risk-based
inspection only when it’s deemed necessary
or likely to aid improvement.”–
Michael O’Higgins
Chairman Audit Commission
Source: “Food matters at
your council”
LACORS/FSA
Food Law Code of Practice
Food Law Code of Practice
Introduction

Revision necessary:



Bring food law enforcement in line with Regulatory
Reform.
Some omissions in previous code
Reflect changes in EU law.
Food Law Code of Practice
Introduction

Main changes:






Section 4 “Interventions”
Risk rating of approved establishments
Enforcement arrangements at primary level
Revised food registration form
live bivalve molluscs permanent transport
authorisation
fishing vessel hygiene checklist
Food Law Code of Practice
Interventions
“activities (by the local authority) which are
designed to monitor, support and increase
Food Law compliance within a food
establishment.”

Divided into


“Official Controls”
Other interventions
Interventions
Official Controls
Other interventions
inspections
education
audits
advice
sampling visits
coaching
monitoring visits
information and
intelligence gathering
surveillance visits
verification visits
Official controls

Regulation (EC) 882/2004



Lays down general rules for performance of
official controls
Introduced to improve consistency
Official controls should be:



Carried out regularly
On a risk basis
With appropriate frequency
Regulation (EC) 882/2004

‘Official Control’

“any form of control that the competent authority
performs for the verification of compliance with
food law…”
Official controls

Official controls should take account of:





Identified risks
FBO’s past record
Reliability of own checks
Any information that might indicate noncompliance.
Should be unannounced

Flexibility to pre-arrange visits where necessary.

For example some audits.
Official Controls






Inspections
Audits
Sampling
Monitoring
Surveillance
Verification
Official Controls
Inspections
“the examination of any aspect of feed,
food,animal health and animal welfare in
order to verify that such aspect(s) comply
with the legal requirements of feed and food
law and animal health and welfare rules”
Official Controls
Audits
“The systematic and independent
examination to determine whether activities
and related results comply with planned
arrangements and whether these
arrangements are implemented effectively
and are suitable to achieve objectives.”
Official Controls
Sampling
“Taking …. food or any other substance
(including from the environment) relevant to
the production, processing and distribution
of… food…. in order to verify through
analysis compliance with … food law..”

Official control if

Submitted to official control laboratory.
Official Controls
Monitoring
“Conducting a planned sequence of
observations or measurements with a view to
obtaining an overview of the state of
compliance with … food law..”
Official Controls
Surveillance
“The careful observation of one or more food
businesses, or food business operators or
their activities”
Official Controls
Verification
“The checking, by examination and the
consideration of objective evidence, whether
specified requirements have been fulfilled”
Other interventions





Advice
Education
Coaching
Information &
intelligence gathering
Monitoring form





Inspections/audits
Verification/surveillance
Sampling
Advice/education
Information/intelligence gathering
Selecting Interventions
Selecting Interventions
“Intensive regulation should be directed by
Food Authorities at those food businesses
that present the greatest risk to public
health;”
“those that are compliant with Food Law
should be subject to interventions that reflect
the level of compliance that has been
achieved by the food business operator”.
Selecting interventions
Strategic approach

Intervention strategy should:





Top down approach


Recognise factors influencing non-compliance
Consider risks resulting from non-compliance
Focus on outcomes/outputs not inputs
Seek to secure compliance with food law
Centrally set
Bottom up approach

Local control
Selecting interventions
Factors influencing non-compliance

FSA funded research


Robin Fairman, Kings College
Different types of non-compliance



Inability to recognise own non-compliance
Lack of management controls
Wilful non-compliance
Selecting interventions
Barriers to compliance

Lack of:





Knowledge
Interest
Skill
Money
Time
Selecting interventions
Risks resulting from non-compliance

Need to match interventions to causes of
non-compliance.

High risk business/low risk of non-compliance



Medium risk business/high risk of non-compliance


Inspection
Medium risk business/low risk of non-compliance


Audit of systems
Sampling
Verification
Low risk business/low risk of non-compliance

Minimal (if any) intervention
Selecting interventions
Measuring outputs
Inputs
Inspection
LA Returns
Processes
Training
Training levels
Output
Compliance
Interventions
Outcomes
Reduced
Food poisoning
IID Surveillance
Selecting interventions
Measuring outputs

Best to measure outcomes




Less desirable to measure inputs


No data on effectiveness
Process measurement unreliable


Difficult in practice
IID data unreliable
IID multifactorial
No strong link between training and reduction in IID
Output measurement


Measurable improvement in compliance with law
Not perfect
Selecting interventions
Factors influencing compliance with food law
Awareness of legal requirements
Technical ability to identify non compliance/relate requirements to own business
Managerial motivation to identify non-compliance
Technical ability to identify necessary changes to achieve compliance
Managerial ability, resources and motivation to implement changes
Managerial ability to monitor and review changes
Food Law Code of Practice Interventions
Risk Rating
Category A or B
Audit/
Inspection
C
Broadly
Compliant?
Yes
Official controls as
Appropriate every
18 months
No
Audit/
Inspection
D
E
Alternate between
Official controls
Other Interventions
Alternative
Enforcement
Strategy
“Broadly Compliant”

No more than 10 in “Hygiene”, “Structure” or
“Confidence in Management” scores
Score
Guidance on the Scoring System
25
Almost total non-compliance with statutory obligations.
20
General failure to satisfy statutory obligations – standards generally low.
15
Some major non-compliance with statutory obligations – more effort required to prevent fall in
standards.
10
Some non-compliance with statutory obligations and industry codes of recommended practice.
Standards are being maintained or improved.
5
High standard of compliance with statutory obligations, industry codes of recommended practice, and
minor contraventions of food hygiene regulations. Some minor non-compliance with statutory
obligations and industry codes of recommended practice.
0
High standard of compliance with statutory obligations and industry codes of recommended practice;
conforms to accepted good practices in the trade.
“Broadly Compliant”
“Broadly Compliant”

FSA Strategic Plan


75% food businesses “fully compliant” by 2010.
Full compliance

Score 0/5 for confidence in management.
Official control decisions

Officer should record:


Type of official control selected
Justification for this
Factors influencing decision
Promoting food law compliance

Targeted assessment of compliance

Influencing behaviour of FBO


Change bad practice
Endorse good practice
Factors influencing decision
Compliance Code

“Should only adopt a particular approach if the
benefits justify the costs and it entails the
minimum burden compatible with achieving
their objectives.”
Factors influencing decision
Compliance Code

“Regulatory efforts should be targeted where
they would be most effective by assessing the
risks to their regulatory outcomes.”
Factors influencing decision
Compliance Code

Greatest inspection effort focused on
businesses where risk assessment shows
that both:


a compliance breach or breaches would pose a
serious risk to a regulatory outcome; and
there is high likelihood of non-compliance.
Factors influencing decision
Compliance Code

“Reward businesses that have consistently
achieved good levels of compliance.”
Factors influencing decision
Effective use of resources

More resource available for failing premises
Alternative enforcement strategies

Research suggests:


Commonly used
Preferred method:


Other methods:




Business forums
Use other inspectors
Random inspection
Advantages:



Questionnaires
Contact with low risk businesses
Targeting of resources
Disadvantages


Reduced face-face contact
Administration
Information capture
Information capture

Essential that sufficient information:




Collected
Recorded
Retained
To permit:


Monitoring
Subsequent selection of intervention.
Communicating with businesses

Interventions should seek to influence
behaviour of FBO



Change bad practice
Endorse good practice
Explanation of:


Type of intervention
Why specific intervention selected.
Selecting Interventions
Workshop
Case 1
Changes to Risk Rating

Only permitted following:



Inspection
Audit
Partial inspection/audit
Changes to Risk Rating

Where new information arises about
premises


justified complaint or poor sampling result
Should consider whether an inspection,
partial inspection or audit is appropriate,

which may lead to a change of both the
intervention rating and appropriate intervention
choice.
Internal monitoring of interventions

Monitoring should include:









Adherence to the Food Authority’s planned intervention programme;
Priority given to interventions with businesses according to Intervention
ratings;
Compliance with the Code of Practice, the Practice Guidance and other
Agency guidance;
Consistent assessment of Intervention ratings;
Appropriate use of relevant inspection forms;
Compliance with internal procedures, policies and the Food Authority’s
Enforcement Policy;
Interpretation and action taken by officers following an intervention is
consistent within that Food Authority and is consistent with Agency and/or
LACORS guidance;
That officers are aware of and have access to other published industry codes
of practice relevant to the businesses within the area of the Food Authority;
That officers have due regard to published UK or EU Guides to Good
Practice
Service Planning
Purpose of service planning

Identify






Target


Objectives of food service
Links with corporate and national priorities
Demands on service
Resources required
Partnership working
Resources to meet stated objectives.
Communicate to:


Members
Staff
Communicating with elected Members.

Food Law Code of Practice

Promotes


Facilitates


Effective use of resources
Use of resources to meet local and national priorities
Permits

Transfer of resources to areas requiring intervention.
Service planning workshop
Fulchester Council


Population 98,929
885 food businesses

8% FBOs non-English speaking



Turkish
Polish
Chinese
Corporate Priorities
1) Make a positive local contribution to tackling the causes and effects
of climate change
2) Enhance the vitality of Fulchester town centre
3) Give priority to involving and meeting the needs of young people
4) Achieve a cleaner, smarter and better maintained 'Street Scene' and
open space environment
5) Promote, encourage and provide opportunities for healthy living
6) Enhance the lives of the elderly.
Service aims and objectives
Fulchester Council

Ensure that all food intended for human consumption that is
manufactured prepared or sold in the District complies with food safety
requirements;

Undertake programmed inspections of food businesses in accordance
with minimum levels specified in the Food Law Code of Practice.

Advise and educate consumers, businesses and other service users on
food safety matters.

Promote food and health issues generally

Investigate and take appropriate action on all complaints relating to food
safety matters;

Carry out a planned food sampling programme;
Food business profile 2007/08
Fulchester Council
Category A
18 (8)
Category B
57 (32)
Category C
303 (318)
Category D
122 (135)
Category E
291 (237)
New businesses
89 (81)
Approved establishments
5 (6)
Total
885
Food business profile 2007/08
Fulchester Council

Based on historical data:

62% category C premises “Broadly compliant”
with food law.
Enforcement activities
Inspections 2007/8
Category A
24
Category B
48
Category C
278
Category D
94
New businesses
42
Approved establishments 12
Total
498
Enforcement activities
Sampling and advice/education

246 Micro samples taken


12 adverse results
6 SFBB seminars held



2 in Turkish
1 in Cantonese
3 in English
Fulchester Food Team
Food Team
Leader
TO
PEHO
SEHO (P/T)
EHO (vacant)
EHO
Ensuring Consistency
Where can inconsistencies
arise?
Consistency strategies


Training
Monitoring
Summary


Food Hygiene Interventions
Focus on achieving compliance in food
businesses.

Broadly compliant businesses


Less invasive interventions
Target resources

Less compliant businesses
Questions?