Basildon District Council

The authority had produced a Food Service Plan for 2008/2009, in line with the Service Planning Guidance in the Framework Agreement. The plan was reviewed annually when any variance and associated resource issues were addressed.

The authority had developed and implemented a robust document control system relating to the control and authorisation of the food service policies and procedures and there was evidence available to confirm that relevant procedures had been recently reviewed.

The authority maintained a documented procedure for the authorisation of officers that included the method for the initial assessment of officers' competence prior to authorisation and also identified the additional skills to be assessed in relation to specific work.

There was a fully documented procedure in place for the maintenance of the food premises database. Audit checks specific to approved establishments confirmed that the database contained accurate records of enforcement activity at these establishments.

The authority had developed a comprehensive procedure specifically relating to the approval of establishments, including actions to be taken where a business was found to be non-compliant.

Auditors established that although the authority had identified and recorded significant contraventions at one approved establishment, the findings had not been appropriately reflected in the premises risk rating, resulting in a lower frequency of inspection than required under the Food Law Code of Practice.

The authority’s records on approved establishments were maintained on both electronic and paper-based files. The paper-based files were found to be generally well organised and maintained in chronological order. However, some pre-approval assessment records could not be located in either electronic or paper format. In the absence of the relevant documentation it was not possible for the auditors to determine the basis for the authority’s approval decision.

The authority had developed a procedure for the investigation of food complaints. Audit checks indicated that a complaint referral which had originated from an approved establishment had been fully and appropriately investigated.

The authority had a documented sampling policy and procedure and in addition, a sampling programme had been developed in conjunction with the Essex Food Liaison Group. The authority had undertaken recent food sampling within approved establishments and demonstrated appropriate follow-up action where sample results were found to be unsatisfactory.

The authority had developed a detailed documented enforcement policy, which was supported by several associated procedures. However, auditors noted that the authority had not in all cases taken appropriate and proportionate enforcement action in line with their own procedures following inspections which had repeatedly identified substantial evidence of serious contraventions of legal requirements.

The authority had developed a documented internal monitoring procedure, which included specific target levels of monitoring for officers casework. Although auditors were advised of ongoing qualitative and quantitative monitoring of officers work, the authority was unable to provide any records to demonstrate recent monitoring activity.