I will never forget my very first restaurant inspection after I graduated from the Environmental Health program. I was this little nervous man geared up and ready to save the world from foodborne illness. Upon strolling into my first restaurant, it turned out that the operators were more nervous than I was. I kind of felt like my hero Bruce Campbell in Army of Darkness ready to unleash fury on them. This should never be the case. Apparently, the establishment did not have a good relationship with the previous inspector.

There are two different types of inspectors, the black and white regulators who essentially enforce the law without explanation and the one who spends time discussing food related issues and guides operators. An inspection, whether announced or unannounced, is a snapshot in time and is not indicative of what actually goes on. It is far more important that inspectors discuss food safety issues in conjunction with health regulations. Inspectors throw words around such as cross contamination or danger zone, but does the operator even knows what those words actually mean? It is easy for an inspector to enter an establishment and tell the cook, listen you need to use a digital thermometer to verify that your burger is properly cooked. In some jurisdictions, an offence notice will accompany that statement. Sure the cook can probe the burger when the inspector is around, but do they know what temperature they should be aiming for? It is important to work with food operators and discuss food safety issues to compel them rather than scare them.

During my high school days I was a proud sandwich artist at the local sub shop, a job I got mainly to socialize with friends who also worked there. Though my days in foodservice are over now, I often think back to them when reading about restaurant inspection. I remember all too well the intense cleaning done the week before an inspector was scheduled to visit, or the mad dash to the hand-washing sink when he/she arrived. Inspection, as I remember it, was not an accurate indication of how things were run in that sub shop most of the time.

Today Times Online has an article about a day with an environmental health officer, Sara Robinson, in the UK.

Every time Sara Robinson calls she is greeted by a look of barely suppressed fright. Caught off guard, the waiters' emotions are always betrayed by their eyes, flicking to the kitchen. They are trying to remember what kind of state they left it in, before the environmental health officer gets a look.

The second thing that happens, moments later, is what Ms Robinson calls “a mad cleaning panic”.

When she arrived at her first stop, a traditional “caff” near Paddington station, the waiter nipped into the tiny kitchen, no bigger than a bathroom. By the time Ms Robinson had donned her white coat and followed, the scrubbing and mopping were in full swing. “It makes them feel better, but doesn't make a huge amount of difference — they can't do enough to hide the serious problems.”

Though inspections in Westminster are surprise, much of the reported employee reactions reminded me of how I acted when the inspector arrived. Even with scheduled visits it was easy to slip up on proper hygiene when the inspector was poking around. Sure the floors were mopped and the pop machine sparkling, but the sub shop still had violations. And after the inspection report was released our manager would discuss where things went wrong, and how to fix them. Sometimes we were even offered incentives (like free subs) for following proper procedures.

Restaurant inspections, scheduled or surprise, have limitations, and though they may not represent the conditions of an establishment at all times, they can get restaurant management and staff talking about food safety.
 

Ball State University has a dining blog, seen here, to “allow the BSU community to interact and stay up-to-date with dining.” The blog, which includes a note on how to make a giant pancake, doesn’t mention that campus dinning halls are long over due for state food inspection.

The Star Press in Indiana is reporting BSU has not been inspecting its food establishments as often as recommended by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration and the Indiana State Department of Health.

According to the story,
 
The dining services at two residence halls went nearly six years without an inspection for compliance with state sanitation requirements. The Atrium, a 400-seat food court, the Alumni Center and Noyer residence hall's dining services were not inspected for more than three years, while LaFollette residence hall's dining facilities did not get inspected for more than two years.

Scott Gilliam, director of the Indiana State Department of Health's food protection program said,

“BSU's residence halls and food courts should be inspected twice a year, possibly three times a year. They're not following the recommended protocols to meet FDA standards. They're not in violation of the law; they're just not following what's recommended by the feds and the state."

During my undergrad at the University of Guelph there was an outbreak E. coli O157:H7 linked to one of the campus food service outlets that sickened at least 5 students. In January 58 students and staff members at UC Santa Cruz were sickened with Norovirus after eating at the campus cafeteria.

Getting the squirts isn’t something students pay for in tuition, but in the past few years many universities have been linked to foodborne illness outbreaks. And though regular restaurant inspection doesn’t necessarily reduce the incidence of foodborne illness, it does get food service personnel talking about food safety.
 

Katie Filion will be giving a departmental seminar this afternoon about restaurant inspection disclosure systems, research needs, and how to make them better. Katie’s been accepted into graduate school at Kansas State beginning in May 2009, and is working in my lab until then.

For those in Manhattan (Kansas), Katie’s talk is at 3:30 p.m. in the Practice Management Center, 4th Floor, Trotter Hall, Kansas State University. The slides Katie will be using are available below.

barfblog.foodsafety.ksu.edu/uploads/file/Show me the score - Feb 2009.ppt