Sunderland City Council

The authority had developed a food service plan for 2010/11 that was broadly in line with service planning guidance in the Framework Agreement. The plan should be expanded to include monitoring activities at the port. The plan had been approved by the appropriate member forum.

The authority had recently developed and implemented procedures involving imported feed that provided useful guidance for officers carrying out imported feed law enforcement activities. The authority had also developed and implemented a procedure to ensure that imported feed procedures were reviewed and updated on a regular basis.

Not all officers, including the lead officer for feed, had completed a full 10 hours of continuing professional development (CPD) training in accordance with the Feed Law Enforcement Code of Practice (Great Britain). Auditors were informed that relevant courses had been identified to address the shortfall. Records of qualifications and CPD were generally available. However, not all training records had been retained in line with the Framework Agreement.

There were systems and arrangements in place in relation to the control of imported feeds. The authority had developed a system, in co-operation with the port, for the identification of incoming consignments of feed through the systematic checking of ship arrival lists. Auditors discussed the benefit of expanding the system to include the systematic checking of ships' manifests and developing and implementing a procedure to cover the monitoring arrangements.

As part of the audit, a reality visit was carried out at the port. Although there were no relevant feed imports arriving at the port there were suitable facilities and equipment for the inspection and sampling of imported feed available should they be required.

No documentary checks, identity checks or random physical checks had been carried out due to the lack of relevant imported feed activity at the port.

The authority had 12 farms in the annual inspection programme for feed premises. None of the premises had been in receipt of imported feed products.

Records in relation to imported feed were maintained and easily retrievable.

There were extensive liaison arrangements with central government, other enforcement bodies, professional organisations and other external stakeholders. The authority had ensured that the port and businesses using the port facilities had been advised in regard to imported feed control requirements.

The authority had carried out some quantitative and qualitative monitoring of its imported food and feed activities, annual officer performance and development appraisals, regular documented team meetings, and officer ‘one-to-one’ meetings. Auditors discussed the benefit of extending the monitoring procedure to ensure that risk-based monitoring of all areas of imported feed enforcement was carried out on a regular basis. Records of such monitoring should be maintained.