Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutFood Safety Program (PDF)Jefferson County Public Health Performance Measures 2014 Year-end Report FOOD SAFETY PROGRAM [1] MISSION: The mission of the Food Safety Program is to minimize the risk of the spread of disease from improperly prepared, stored or served foods handled in commercial retail settings and community events. Goal Objective Task Performance Measure 2012 Actual 2013 Actual 2014 Planned 2014 Actual Goal 1: Better educate food service workers, owners and the public on proper food handling and food safety topics Offer food safety training, educational materials and technical assistance for identified needs Provide food worker education that meets the needs of the community # of food workers trained 1,463 1,521 1,500 1568 Provide business owners facility specific education and information re: Fats, Oils and Grease (FOG) # of FOG inspections completed 60 79 60 10 Provide food safety education and outreach to the public # of outreach events. (Roundtable, presentations, mailings, collaborations with WSU) 10 4 1 2 Organize food program interagency coordination Pass/Fail N/A N/A PASS PASS Goal 2: Improve operational efficiency Ensure effective program management system is in place to ensure ongoing stability of the program Improve Tidemark database to meet program needs post database switch Pass/Fail N/A N/A PASS PASS Organize food program interagency coordination Pass/Fail N/A N/A PASS PASS Jefferson County Public Health Performance Measures 2014 Year-end Report FOOD SAFETY PROGRAM [2] Goal 3: Work to ensure safe food is served to the public Inspect all food service establishments at a frequency adequate to assure compliance with state and local regulatory requirements Timely and accurate inspections % of required inspections completed 100% 97% 100% 98.6% # of critical violations -- 333 180 309 # of repeat critical violations -- 59 35 48 # of establishment re-inspections 16 12 15 13 Timely investigation of foodborne illness and establishment complaints Investigate and respond to all foodborne illnesses and complaints # of foodborne illness investigations 0 11 5 10 # of complaints investigated 26 22 30 40 Inspect all temporary food establishments at a frequency adequate to assure compliance with state and local regulatory requirements Ensure all temporary food vendors are permitted consistently # of temporary food service inspections 159 190 160 186 # of temporary food service permits 146 273 150 185 % of temporary food establishments inspected 93% 70% 100% 92% Jefferson County Public Health Performance Measures 2014 Year-end Report FOOD SAFETY PROGRAM [3] 2014 STUDY/ANALYSIS OF RESULTS Food Workers Training: The total number of food workers trained online has continued to increase steadily over the past 3 years 1463 (2012); 1521 (2013) and 1568 (2014) despite the expected decrease in the attendance of the instructor-led classes at JCPH. In 2014, the instructor-led classes at JCPH was reduced to every other month in order to reflect the reduced number of students per class. Only 54 food workers took the instructor led classes in 2014 compared to 79 in 2013. The instructor-led classes will continue to be offered for food workers who (a) have no access to computers, (b) are unable to use computers (c) have learning disability and can only take one-on-one picture tests with the assistance of the instructor. Special group classes will also continue to be offered for groups of 20 or more people. There was only one special group class for 27 students at Brinnon in 2014. Education on Fats, Oils and Grease (FOG) The Environmental Health (EH) Specialist in-charge of the Local Source Control / Fats, Oils and Grease (LSC/FOG) inspections was only able to conduct 10 (ten) such inspections at licensed food establishments, compared to 79 conducted in 2013. This is due to the staff person leaving the agency and being unable to hire and fully train that persons’ replacement while also accommodating the additional responsibilities of that position. These visits are expected to increase markedly in 2015. The new hire will also serve as back-up for the Food Inspector. Staff Training: The Food Safety Inspector, newly hired EH staff member and another EH Specialist attended a one-day DOH Food Safety Workshop at Tacoma-Pierce Health Department on October 9, 2014. The workshop is educational and is a means for attendees to improve on their knowledge and skills and use the opportunity to network with other regulatory authorities. The Food Inspector also took online training for WCRP Defensive Driving on 2/7/2014. A useful tool since there is a lot of driving involved with the food inspections. A second training was successfully completed on 6/26/2014 on Public Records Act. This was followed by another online training on 7/28/2014 on Open Public Meetings. On 10/20/2014, another on-line course about sexual harassment was successfully completed by the Food Inspector. The online trainings were mandatory for all county employees according to state law and county policies. The Food Inspector and EH Specialist who assists with inspections of large temporary events also attended Quad County Meeting in Jefferson County. This meeting is normally held twice a year but in 2014 it was held only once. Attendees consist of Food Program staff from Public Health Departments of four counties: Jefferson, Clallam, Kitsap and Mason. Other attendees are from DOH, Indian Health Services and WSDA. Special invitation is sent to other regulatory authorities to clarify any new issues; for example, Labor and Industry Dept. and Washington State Liquor Control Board in regards to the regulation on installation of eye-wash in food establishments and the regulations on marijuana infused food items. The Quad County Meeting is also an opportunity to share Food Program challenges and find solutions as a group. Jefferson County Public Health Performance Measures 2014 Year-end Report FOOD SAFETY PROGRAM [4] Inspection of Food Establishments: Entry of inspection reports into Tide Mark (TM) (EH Data Base) A part-time staff member continues to enter inspection reports into TM and JCPH website so that inspections results are publicly available. Annual Food Inspections: Food establishments categorized as complex menu facilities and hence inspected twice a year remained about the same in number compared to 2013. There were 109 of such facilities in 2014 compared to 107 in 2013. Limited menu facilities reduced by 4 (150 (2013) vs 146 (2014). On the whole the total number of annually permitted food establishments remained the same 249 (2013) vs 255 (2014). Routine inspections of food establishments was almost 99 % of the required inspections. Reasons for not attaining 100% of the required inspection goal were as follows: (a) Facility that was upgraded to from lounge to limited menu facility closed for the season prior to the pre-opening inspection. (b) One complex menu facility and a limited menu facility operated between 2 – 5 months without valid permits in latter part of the year (change in ownership). Once discovered, the proprietors were immediately required to complete the application process or be subject to immediate closure. Re-inspections remained about the same as the previous year 13 (2014) compared to 12 (2013). Complaints: Complaints almost doubled in 2014 compared to 2013 (40 vs 22). Some complaints were multiples from two complainants and about the same issue – in this case the presence of dogs in food establishments. There were 10 illness-related complaints -- with one food establishment being cited multiple times. In addition to the 40 complaints for permitted food establishments there were about 7 related to non-permitted facilities such as food banks in Port Townsend and Tri-Area at Chimacum. The inspector investigated all complaints except three that were either anonymous or outside this county. New Food Establishments and Permanently Closed Facilities in 2014: 34 food service permit applications were reviewed in 2014 and 82% (28 of 34) opened for business. 3 have yet to meet all the conditions in the plan review letter and the rest have not continued forward post-plan review determination. Permanent closures were lower in 2014 (15) compared to 2013 (21). Of the 15 closures, 3 food establishments operated less than 1 year. Another abrupt closure was due to the proprietor being evicted by the property owner. Temporary Closure of Food Establishment: One food establishment with two permits -- one for a restaurant and another for a lounge -- was temporarily closed on 7-29-2014 due to lack of hot water (an imminent health hazard). JCPH received a complaint that the facility had been operating without hot water for about a week. A complaint-related inspection Jefferson County Public Health Performance Measures 2014 Year-end Report FOOD SAFETY PROGRAM [5] was conducted at the facility with an inspection score of at least 35 red points. This prompted re-inspection due to the accumulated high risk violations. During the inspection, the proprietor stated that the hot water heater broke down the previous day and not a week ago as stated by the complainant. The restaurant and lounge was closed at lunch time and customers were notified with a closure notice on both doors and on the reader board. The proprietor had new hot water heater installed overnight and was approved to re-open for food service the following day after re-inspection of the facility. Temporary Food Service (TFS) Permit Exemption: A total of 23 TFS permit exemptions were issued in 2014 and almost 70% (15 of 23) were inspected at various temporary events. Until the end of the 2014 permit season, the TFS permit exemption application fee was not printed on the one-page application – this way the forms did not have to be updated any time the fees changed. Unfortunately some vendors submitted the application without the fees – apparently based on the assumption that “exemption” meant “no application fees” -- the Food Inspector had to contact such applicants to remind them to submit the $40.00 application fee. The TFS permit exemption application forms were updated towards the end of 2014 with the application fee printed on it. It is expected that this will solve the problem of non-submittal of application fees. Food Service Permit Renewal – 48-hour closure notice: The Food program continues to experience challenges with proprietors who fail to renew their annual food service permits prior to their expiration. On January 28, 2015, three days prior to the end of the 2014 permit season, four EH staff members had to phone 60 proprietors to remind them that their annual food service permit will expire. 10 other facilities submitted their applications late after phone calls from JCPH. It appears that this was due to a glitch in the permitting database that failed to generate the invoices for these 10 food establishments since the proprietors stated that no invoices were mailed to them. This glitch was not able to be duplicated, but the consulting IT specialist has been notified and, if present, it will be corrected. The time that EH staff members have to spend at the end of each permit season to make phone calls, send e-mails and letters to proprietors to remind them that their food service permit fees are overdue translates into many man-hours – JCPH may have to dispense with the practice of such time-consuming reminders and simply issue 48-hour closure notices at the end of the permit season. Only one such notice was issued via e-mail and via phone in 2014. The food establishments failed to respond to six voice mails from JCPH about the expired permit. The proprietor submitted application and paid the permit fees less than 12 hours after the 48-hour closure notice was issued. Revocation of Food Service Permit: The food service permit of one proprietor was permanently revoked in August 2014 due to repeated violation of the conditions of the food service permit even though JCPH worked with and guided him to ensure he was compliant with the Food Code and the conditions of his permit. The same proprietor had his food service permit suspended in 2012 for non-compliance. Operating without valid annual food service permit: Jefferson County Public Health Performance Measures 2014 Year-end Report FOOD SAFETY PROGRAM [6] Two food establishments operated for 2 -5 months without valid food service permit before JCPH was notified of the violation. In one case, the new owner failed to obtain food service permit in his own name as a result of change of ownership. This is the second time that the facility has changed ownership without the new owner obtaining a permit. In the second case the person-in-charge assumed the food service could be operated under the umbrella of another food establishment although the ownership, management, funding, and operation of the two food services are separate. Food Service Permits are valid only to the party they are issued to and are non-transferrable. Both food establishments that operated without valid food service permits were assisted by the Food Program staff to become compliant. Food Service Upgrades / Downgrades: One mobile food service operator requested a downgrade in permit category from complex menu to limited menu. Five other food establishments had annual food service permit upgrades in 2014. Of the 5 permit category upgrades, one proprietor opted for an upgrade from a lounge to a limited menu facility to operate as a seafood bar. The second upgrade was from a concession stand category to limited menu facility to enable the facility prepare and serve dinner a few times a year. The third food establishment had to upgrade from recurring temporary food service operation to a limited menu facility since it did not qualify as a temporary food establishment. This application dragged on for nearly 9 months until another person took over the application process from the person-in-charge. The fourth upgrade was from a commercial kitchen to a limited menu facility for take-out food. The final upgrade was from temporary food service operation to a mobile food service. It took the Food Program staff over two years to guide the proprietor to make this change. Unfortunately the application is still pending due to issues with inadequate wastewater disposal of the proposed commissary kitchen. Operations and Monitoring (O & M) Inspection of Onsite Septic Systems (OSS): Current O & M inspection reports are required every year in order to renew the annual food service permit – and JCPH encloses reminders with the food service permit invoices in November / December. Unfortunately despite such reminders, 30% (32 out of 90) had to be contacted a second time via e-mail, phone or letter about overdue O & M inspections. Ironically one of the overdue O & M inspections is for the OSS for a property owned by an O & M Specialist! Proprietors might want to contract with O & M Specialists to have their inspections conducted at the same time each year rather than wait the JCPH to send reminders twice between November and February. Again, the time spent on such reminders are costly man-hours. Outstanding Achievement Awards: 23 establishments qualified for the awards in 2014. The awards will be presented in April. Temporary Food Safety Inspections: Total number of TFS permits issued has changed drastically in the past 3 years. The number increased by 127 from 2012 to 2013 (146 vs 273) and decreased by 81 from 2013 to 2014 (273 vs 192). This rise and fall in the total TFS permits could be attributed to economic opportunity or changes in the TFS permit fee schedule. Prior to 2011 total number of TFS permits issued was relatively low --- less than 85. In 2011, additional TFS events were heavily subsidized for both recurring and single events at $16.00 per event. The low fee is reflected in the fact that 3 TFS vendors operated in a total of 40 TFS events in 2013! In 2014, as Jefferson County Public Health Performance Measures 2014 Year-end Report FOOD SAFETY PROGRAM [7] a result of time studies the TFS the fee schedule was updated to reflect the man-hours required for the permitting process and the actual inspection. Recurring TFS permit fees no longer had additional events with same menu. Single TFS event permit fees also changed to $106.00 irrespective of complexity of menu but the additional single event, same menu fee increased from $16.00 to $60.00 per event. Another possible reason for the drop in the total number of TFS permits could be due to the cancellation of the Port Ludlow Friday Market and the Port Hadlock Days. In the case of the Friday market, low participation of both vendors and patrons at the new location prompted event organizers to cancel that event. The location for the Friday Market was changed from Village Way in Port Ludlow to the Port Ludlow Marina. The Port Hadlock Heritage Days was cancelled due to lack of event organizers. A third possible reason for the lower figure for total TFS permits issued in 2014 could also be attributed to the reduced number of vendors at the Chimacum Sunday Market. Some vendors stated that the full fee per location for recurring temporary events was costly. When staff examined further, the fee breaks down to less than $4.00 per market day. 92% TFS inspections were conducted in 2014 (177 of 192). This is 12% higher than 2013. This increase in percentage of inspection could be attributed to regular assistance with TFS inspections especially during multi-vendor events. The assisting EH Specialist also covered for the Food Inspector when the latter went on vacation and also split inspections with the Food Inspector on the few occasions when there are multiple events in different parts of the county on the same day. Finally since the recurring TFS event fee is the full fee per location, each vendor at a recurring event had to be inspected at least once and this could also attribute to the increase in the percentage of TFS inspections. Unapproved Expansion of Food Service: A proprietor expanded food service without going through plan review. This is a critical issue for food establishments operations and wastewater disposal. Menu expansion means increased food storage requirements both refrigerated and non-refrigerated as well as increased demand on the septic system to properly treat and dispose of wastewater. The capacity of the septic system must be adequate for food service activities in order to prevent costly repairs and adverse public health impact due to failure of the septic system. JCPH worked with the owner of the food establishment for about a year to become compliant. It took one final face-to-face discussion at JCPH with the Food Program Team and the Sanitarian in-charge of OSS for the proprietor to understand that the food service permit may be revoked or suspended based on continued non-compliance. The number of seats were reduced to the original approved figure and indirect plumbing for 3-compartment sink was corrected. Comprehensive OSS report based on consecutive waste strength test results is still required to enable the OSS Sanitarian complete the septic review. Based on the results of the septic review, the proprietor may be required to install pre-treatment on the OSS or stop operating the microbrewery. Challenges at end of Permit Season While greatly reduced since years past due to technology upgrades, the period between November and end of February continues to be extremely challenging for the Food Team and the EH Front Desk staff member. This year was particularly challenging because a total of 70 proprietors had to be contacted about the Jefferson County Public Health Performance Measures 2014 Year-end Report FOOD SAFETY PROGRAM [8] overdue permit fees. (60 were sent invoices but failed to submit 2015 permit fees by the dead line and 10 others may not have received invoices because of a possible database glitch). A part-time staff member is required at the front desk to assist with the processing of invoices and renewal forms this challenging period of the permit season. Other Challenges: In 2014, the Food Program was faced with a new and disturbing challenge. An applicant submitted an application to re-open a restaurant that had been closed since 2012. The seller, until that time, operated her catering business from the facility and also rented the facility as a commissary to other vendors. Unfortunately the plan review process was very challenging due to the seller repeatedly giving advice to the buyer who preferred to heed that advice over the advice of the Food Inspector (who when out of her way to guide the applicant about requirements for the existing septic system). Prior to the completion of the review, both the applicant and the seller phoned the front desk staff person to put pressure on her about scheduling a pre-opening inspection even though the establishment had not completed its needed items and was not ready for a pre-opening inspection. Additionally, the applicant submitted a complaint to the EH Director that the Food Inspector and the OSS Sanitarian have delayed the review needlessly – even though the required testing and site inspection results by the applicant had not been submitted so that JCPH could complete its review. Unfortunately, these are not an isolated issues for this seller who has repeatedly convoluted the rather streamlined business opening process of others thus slowing the process down due to misinformation and untimely responses for needed information. It is the hope of the Food Program Team that counter advice by other proprietors or out-going food service operators would not become the trend for future plan reviews. If it does, letters or e-mails may have to be sent to all proprietors about the negative effect of this unfortunate emerging practice. Jefferson County Public Health Performance Measures 2014 Year-end Report FOOD SAFETY PROGRAM [9] FOOD SAFETY PROGRAM STATISTICS BY YEAR FOOD WORKER EDUCATION 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 Planned 2014 Actual Total # of food workers trained 1,205 1314 1,137 1269 1367 1463 1521 1500 1568 # of Food Workers trained in class 1,205 1314 1,137 1,269 674 122 79 75 54 # of Food Workers trained on-line New Category Added in 2011 693 1341 1442 1425 1514 # of Instructor-led classes 87 83 82 92 51 14 14 14 9 # of food worker classes at Health Department 52 52 61 82 42 12 12 12 8 # of food worker classes at other locations 35 31 21 10 9 2 2 2 1 # of Fats, Oils and Grease (FOG) inspections completed New Category Added in 2011 0 34 79 60 10 ANNUAL FOOD SERVICE ESTABLISHMENTS 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 Planned 2014 Actual # of food establishment permits 270 237 228 235 232 241 249 250 255 # of complex menu food establishments New Categories Added in 2011 111 107 99 100 109 # of non-complex menu food establishments 121 134 150 150 146 % of required inspections completed New Category Added in 2009 83% 85% 97% 100% 97% 100% 98.6% # of required routine inspections completed 350 217 299 249 331 351 337 340 364 # of critical violations New Categories Added in 2013 333 180 309 # of repeat critical violations 59 35 57** # of re-inspections required due to violations 45 0 34 6 2 16 12 15 13 # of Pre-opening Inspections done New Category Added in 2011 41 34 25 25 28 # of foodborne illness investigations New Category Added in 2010 2 10 3 11 10 10 # of Complaints received and resolved 33 -- -- 30 44 26 22 25 40 * Routine Inspections Only. Pre-opening inspections and complaint inspections were removed from this category and individually categorized. ** Repeat critical within 2014 for Complex menu. Jefferson County Public Health Performance Measures 2014 Year-end Report FOOD SAFETY PROGRAM [10] TEMPORARY FOOD SERVICE ESTABLISHMENTS 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 Planned 2014 Actual # of temporary food service permits 85 17 74 82 147 146 273 250 192 # of temporary food inspections New Categories Added in 2012 159 190 200 177 % of temporary establishments inspected 93% 70% 80% 92% FOOD PROGRAM ADMINISTRATIVE TASKS 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 Planned 2014 Actual # of establishments receiving Outstanding Achievement Awards 40 89* 38 40 28 18 26 30 23 # of newsletters, press releases and meetings done New Categories Added in 2011 2 10 2 2 0 # of plan reviews done 43 37 28 30 34 # of plan reviews that opened New Category Added in 2010 16 41 34 26 27 28 * Awards not issued this year due to staff changes. Number reflects the would-be recipients.