📋
Extracted from Consolidated Report
This investigation was originally published as part of a larger consolidated report containing multiple investigations. View the consolidated PDF for the complete document.
Sacramento County Grand Jury
• 2002-2003
720 Ninth Street, Department Gonzales Cannon
⚠️ Translation Notice: This content has been automatically translated. The original English text is the official version. Translation may contain errors.
⚠️ Este contenido ha sido traducido automáticamente. El texto original en inglés es la versión oficial. La traducción puede contener errores.
Findings 5 findings
F1
Page 47
In the past the Environmental Health Division has been very lax in its responsibility to provide mandated food inspections in a timely manner. In comparison, San Diego and Los Angeles both have established risk-based programs, which led to more inspections where extensive food preparation occurs and could be potentially hazardous. Sacramento inspectors have to waste time trying to track down mobile food carts who list only their main distribution address but not their site location, causing a backlog of these inspections.
F2
Page 47
The Environmental Health Division needs more staff devoted to food preparation inspections and needs to allocate tasks to maximize the staff they have.
F3
Page 47
The Environmental Health Division is not disseminating its inspection results effectively to the public.
F4
Page 47
The county Environmental Health Specialists (inspectors) displayed a high degree of professionalism during inspections. The inspectors took time to explain violations and to train restaurant employees.
F5
Page 48
The Environmental Health Division does not provide sufficient penalties for food service establishments to improve.
Recommendations 12
-
R1Page 41Risk-based Inspection Frequency—Base the frequency of inspection on the type and amount of food being handled (level of risk associated with same).
-
R1aPage 47Give priority to inspections based on risk assessment, putting resources to work where the risk is highest. Increase inspections to 2 or 3 per year for full food service establishments with complex menus where large amounts of food are prepared.
-
R1bPage 47Require owners of mobile food carts to come to the County office for their inspections during a single month of the year, e.g., January. Schedule them all during that month.
-
R2Page 47Staff should be increased from 11 to at least 22 full time inspectors. Each inspector should be provided personal digital assistant devices (palm pilots) to enter timely results of their inspections. All inspectors should have access to the automated database. Increased inspection fees from risk-based inspections and mandatory re-inspection fees should cover the cost of increased staffing.
-
R3Page 42Enforcement—Develop aggressive enforcement activities at facilities with continuous and repeat violations.
-
R3aPage 47Give the public what it wants and issue letter grades to restaurants inspections, which must be prominently displayed. Certificates or awards of excellence could also be given to restaurants consistently receiving a letter grade of A over 3 consecutive inspections.
-
R3bPage 47The county Environmental Health Division should establish its own Web site to post all food inspections results including grades, enforcement or closure actions, follow-up inspections, and complaint remedies.
-
R4Page 42Public Notification—Improve methods used to notify public of food facility inspection results. The first three areas of food program enhancements received almost 100 percent of consumer and industry support. The fourth received over 90 percent consumer support for notification either by letter grading or the onsite posting of the full inspection report. Industry did not support grading but favored giving an “Award for Excellence” to facilities found to be consistently in compliance with the regulations. At the March 11, 2003 meeting of the Board of Supervisors, the Environmental Health Division requested the following changes in the food inspection program: · To change and prioritize the frequency of inspections for most food facilities from 1 per year to 2 or 3 per year · To hire additional health inspectors and increase fees · To require operators with numerous health code violations to attend “food school” · Beginning July 1, 2003, to publicly display entire health inspection reports 31 Sacramento County Grand Jury June 30, 2003 The Board of Supervisors unanimously approved the changes. There was little opposition to the first three recommendations. However, industry representatives opposed the public display of health inspection reports objecting to a grade based on a single inspection. A comparison of Sacramento County to San Diego and Los Angeles Counties: Sacramento County San Diego County Los Angeles County Inspection Goal Non risk-based Risk-based Risk-based Goal 1/yr for full service 4/yr for full service High risk—3/yr restaurants restaurants Moderate risk—2/yr Low risk—1/yr Repetitive problems -- +1/yr Prioritizing No prioritizing Extensive food Based on risk preparation, potentially assessment hazardous inspected more frequently Grading System No grading system A,B,C A,B,C Considering “award of 200-point grading 3 consecutive A’s excellence” system receives “Certificate of Excellence” Public Satisfaction Public is not aware of Public is aware of Public is aware and inspection results grading system participates by calling Limited access through Restaurants quickly hotline The Sacramento Bee correct violations and Most recognized website request/pay for program in health immediate re-inspection services Facilities 5,000 food preparation 7,000 full service 37,000 retail food businesses restaurants/limited food establishments preparation Staffing 15 positions, 11 full time 63 positions, 33 staff 283 field inspectors equivalents years 37,000/283= 131/ 5000/11 = 454/inspector 7000/33 = 212/inspector inspector 32 Sacramento County Grand Jury June 30, 2003
-
R4aPage 47The county Environmental Health Division should encourage inspection staff development by allowing staff to attend training programs sponsored by government agencies and leaders in the food safety industry. Sacramento County Grand Jury June 30, 2003
-
R4bPage 48The County Environmental Health Division should consider establishing an apprenticeship program to encourage recent college graduates to enter the field. Such a program would allow these individuals to move up to staff positions after they become registered Environmental Health Specialist.
-
R5aPage 48Enforcement actions with severe implications should require immediate closure of the facility and mandatory re-inspections, paid for by the violator. Increase education for minor violations.
-
R5bPage 48Increased enforcement should lead to administrative hearings for repeat violators with ultimate license revocation.