Tamworth Borough Council

The authority had developed a Food Service Plan for 2009/2010 that had been structured broadly in line with the service planning guidance in the Framework Agreement. The plan required further development to include more detailed information specified by the service planning guidance, in particular a detailed breakdown of all the statutory demands placed upon the service and a reasoned estimate of the resources required to deliver these duties effectively, against those available. The plan had been approved at the appropriate council member forum.

The authority had recently updated the procedure for the review and updating of documented policies and procedures. A number of policies, procedures and documents had recently been updated. However, the authority acknowledged that some of the policies and procedures had not been updated recently.

The authority had a documented procedure for the authorisation of officers based on their individual qualifications, experience and competency. However, at the time of the audit, officer authorisations had not been reviewed to take account of legislative changes and it was not clear that officers had been appropriately authorised to undertake the full range of duties required of them. Auditors noted that the authority took immediate steps to ensure that their officers were properly authorised.

Although officer training needs were identified on an annual basis through the staff appraisal process, the authority would benefit from developing a more systematic method of identifying and prioritising staff training needs based on their level of authorisation and required competencies, in accordance with the Food Law Code of Practice. Record checks showed that, generally, officers had undertaken the required number of hours of continuing professional development (CPD) and recent HACCP training. However, the Lead Officer for Food would benefit from further core HACCP training to enable him to fulfil competency requirements for the monitoring of officers. Generally, records of officer qualifications and training were incomplete.

Record checks showed that the authority had a substantial backlog of overdue inspections. Auditors were informed that the backlog was due to staff absences and the reallocation of resources. Auditors were concerned that the authority was unable to demonstrate that it had allocated sufficient resources to deal with the current backlog of inspections and to cover the full range of food law enforcement activities.

The authority had developed a food premises inspection procedure. The procedure provided useful guidance to officers carrying out food law interventions. File checks showed that officers were generally carrying out their activities in line with the procedure.

The authority had developed a useful and appropriate general food premises inspection aide-memoire that enabled officers to fully record their detailed findings in relation to assessments of food safety management systems.

Product specific aide-memoires had not been used to record detailed findings following approved establishment inspections. Therefore it was not possible to determine from the records whether the approved establishments complied with legislative requirements, and if appropriate inspections had always been carried out or to establish the basis for officers’ decisions regarding business compliance. Generally, approved establishment files were disorganised and the information listed in Annexe 12 of the Food Law Code of Practice Guidance was difficult to retrieve or missing.

The service had developed an enforcement policy which was generally in line with centrally issued guidance. The policy contained useful food specific guidance on the graduated use of enforcement actions. The authority had developed several documents for officers related to enforcement actions, but needed to further develop these enforcement procedures to cover the full range of enforcement activities, including the use of simple cautions and prosecution.

Although there was clear evidence that the authority was willing to take appropriate and effective enforcement action when required, including the use of hygiene improvement and emergency prohibition notices, there was evidence that the authority had on occasion struggled to bring about timely business compliance with regard to HACCP related issues.

Records confirmed that complaints about food and food premises were investigated effectively with appropriate follow-up action being taken. Complaint records were found to be complete and accurate.

Records relating to unsatisfactory food sample results showed that the authority had notified food business operators (FBOs) of the results and had taken appropriate follow-up action in all cases.

The authority had developed a procedure for internal monitoring, and there was some limited evidence that documented quantitative and qualitative monitoring was being carried out. However, the monitoring needed to be extended to cover the full range of food law enforcement activities.

A reality check visit at a food business was undertaken during the audit. The main objective was to assess the effectiveness of the authority’s assessment of food business compliance with food law requirements. The visit confirmed that the checks carried out by the officer in relation to HACCP and food safety management systems (FSMS) requirements were generally thorough and covered the majority of food law requirements.