Login

News

A short briefing relating to the following paper is given below.

"Food Hygiene Rating Data: Could It Influence the Inspection Model for Retail and Catering Operations in England?", European Food and Feed Law Review, Vol 18 (2023), Issue 5, p282-295

Background

The Covid period (broadly speaking, the two year period commencing in March 2020) resulted in widespread disruption to the regulatory functions of local authorities; especially, those relating to the work of environmental health officers. The author of this paper had been researching food hygiene data for around ten years, prior to Covid and, as a consequence, was able to chart the impact of the Covid response.

After the Covid period it was apparent that inspection outputs had suffered significantly with officers having to "play catch-up". This led to calls for changes to be made to the food hygiene inspection regime. The Food Standards Agency, who are responsible for overseeing the work of food authorities, had already been considering potential changes ("modernisation") to the inspection model under their "Achieving Business Compliance" programme.

This paper underlines the fact that, prior to Covid, environmental health officers were consistency completing a greater number of inspections year-on-year across the board. During this time (continuing over Covid) the number of registered food premises continued to grow on an annual basis; which added to the number of inspections expected to be completed by local authorities. Rather than falling behind, prior to Covid, local authorities were gradually reducing a moderate backlog and increasing outputs each year. Following Covid, the additional backlog has also been slashed by many authorities.

Proposals have been put forward for the implementation of arm's length oversight through the use of third party certification schemes and self-regulation via the FSA's Enterprise Scheme. Some background to why these proposals are being made we can point to the Cabinet Office's Regulatory Futures Review from January 2017. This proposed a general shift towards "regulated self-assurance" or "earned recognition" and away from locally planned interventions by local authorities (the executive tier of the Food Standards Agency are appointed by, and work under the direction of, the Cabinet Office). Subsequent changes were then introduced via CODEX.

Targeting Outputs

The food hygiene rating scheme is often cited as a big success when it comes to focusing minds on improving standards. The research shows that the percentage of those considered 'Not Broadly Compliant' has decreased steadily since the introduction of the food hygiene rating scheme. It would be difficult to see how confidence in the FHRS would be maintained in a situation where the regularity of inspections reduced even further or where compliance was assessed by private sector partners employed by the regulated entities themselves.

For those making the case for self-regulation the Covid backlog provided additional weight to arguments for change. Covid resulted in the doubling of the number of unrated premises and businesses overdue inspections. Public services often see themselves as overstretched and underfunded and claims of continually reducing resources and diminishing staff paint a dismal picture; but are claims of diminishing resources accurate? Based on inspector numbers held by the FSA it does not appear so. LAEMS figures show that the average number of inspectors carrying out official interventions has remained steady; with EHOs achieving more with the same levels of resources. However, having made this point, more recent research by the author has shown that the profession is aging and, potentially, facing significant resourcing issues over the next decade.

Whilst assertions of 'lack of resources' may (sometimes) be overplayed in many professions there may still be valid arguments for change. The research demonstrates that there are areas where there are significant differences in compliance; non-compliance, for example, is much more common in urban environments and the takeaway sector. There are arguments why some authorities, particularly in urban environments with high numbers of food premises, would benefit from proportionately higher resources. Conversely, schools, hospitals and childcare facilities demonstrate consistently high levels of compliance. As well as significant differences associated with urbanity and type of premises there are also differences related to the type of cuisine in catering. These are all areas that can be used to target resources based on risk and steer inspection strategies.

Protecting Outcomes

FHRS data enables analysts to identify outliers fairly easily; local authorities where levels of compliance are unusually low or who are struggling to maintain outputs. It can also be used to identify authorities who demonstrate consistent adherence to food intervention plans and geographical areas where there is a high level of compliance. Food authorities could be given greater freedom from the national intervention plan if they are able to demonstrate consistent standards and if they are able to deliver proposed service plans intelligently; this may also assist local authorities to manage any diminishing resources. Some local authorities are now working more intelligently by utilising their own inspection data; and this is an area that warrants further exposure if diminishing resources are to be targeted more effectively.

Third party certification and primary authority schemes featured prominently in the CIEH's response to the FSA's recent ABC review consultation (with "assurance schemes" receiving a positive affirmation 11 times and Primary Authority 12 times). Self-assurance and third party auditing is a positive development that has enabled the industry, through the help of environmental health practitioners working in the private sector and professional consultancies. Whilst it is true that they serve the same base purpose of increasing standards, the roles played by auditors and local authorities have significant differences; maintaining a suitable representation in both sectors would be the ideal option.

Where to get hold of this research

Issue 5/2023 of the European Food and Feed Law Review is available here: https://effl.lexxion.eu/news/view/838

---

Upcoming research:

Research has been undertaken on the primary authority scheme and will be published in due course. In the meantime, our next article will be a commentary on the emerging "competency crisis" in professional services.

Your feedback or comments:

As always, get in touch via our contact form if you would like to discuss or share any information on the above or a related subject.

============

Contact Us

Who we are

Encentre Ltd

Sunbury on Thames

Registered in England
Company No. 7503516

Encentre Ltd

38 Belgrave Road

Sunbury on Thames

TW16 5NQ

Registered in E&W No. 7503516

 

Email: info@encentre.co.uk

Phone: 01932 761528

Twitter: @encentre

 

Join Our Mailing List

Read our terms & conditions

Read our privacy policy