Skip to main content
English Cymraeg
Food Hygiene Rating Scheme (FHRS) Food and You 2: Wave 4

Chapter 2: Understanding and use of the FHRS

This chapter provides an overview of respondents’ understanding and use of the Food Hygiene Rating Scheme (FHRS).

Last updated: 23 November 2022
See all updates
Last updated: 23 November 2022
See all updates

Understanding of the FHRS

Figure 8. Respondents’ knowledge of food businesses covered by the FHRS.

A bar chart showing the percentage of respondents are aware that the Food Hygiene Rating Scheme covers different types of food business.
Column1 Column1
Don�t know 4
Other 2
Other food shops 38
Market stalls / street food 44
Supermarkets 46
Schools, hospitals and other institutions 54
Hotels / B&Bs 77
Pubs 84
Coffee or sandwich shops 85
Takeaways 87
Caf�s 90
Restaurants 92

Download this chart

Respondents were asked which types of food businesses, from a given list, they thought were covered by the FHRS. Most respondents thought that restaurants (92%), cafés (90%), takeaways (87%), coffee or sandwich shops (85%), pubs (84%) and hotels or B&Bs (77%) were covered by the FHRS. Just over half of respondents (54%) thought that schools and other institutions were covered by the FHRS. Less than half of respondents thought that supermarkets (46%), and market or street food stalls (44%) were covered by the FHRS (Figure 8) (footnote 1) .

Use of the FHRS 

Respondents were asked if they had checked the food hygiene rating of a food business in the previous 12 months (either at the business premises or online) regardless of whether they decided to buy food there or not. Around 4 in 10 (41%) respondents had checked the food hygiene rating of a food business in the previous 12 months (footnote 2)

Respondents in Wales (54%) were more likely to have checked the food hygiene rating of a business than those in England (40%), and to a lesser extend those in Northern Ireland (46%).

Checking of food hygiene ratings varied between different groups of people:

  • Age group: younger respondents were more likely to have checked a food hygiene rating of a business than older adults. For example, 59% of those aged 16-24 years had checked the food hygiene rating of a business compared to 18% of those aged 75 years and over.
  • Children (under 16 years) in household: respondents with children (under 16 years) in the household (49%) were more likely to have checked a food hygiene rating of a business than those with no children under 16 years in the household (37%).
  • NS-SEC: full-time students (57%) were more likely to have checked the food hygiene rating of a business than respondents in all other occupational groups for example, those in managerial, administrative and professional occupations (42%) and those who were long term unemployed and/or had never worked (37%).
  • Food security: respondents with low (52%) or very low (52%) food security were more likely to have checked a food hygiene rating of a business than those with high food security (38%). Around 4 in 10 (43%) of those with marginal food security had checked a food hygiene rating of a business.

Figure 9. Food businesses where respondents had checked the food hygiene rating in last 12 months.

A bar chart showing the percentage of respondents who had checked the food hygiene rating of different types of food business in the last twelve months.
Column1 Column1
In other food shops 5
On market stalls / street food 6
In schools, hospitals and other institutions 7
In supermarkets 12
In hotels / B&Bs 15
In pubs 32
In coffee or sandwich shops 33
In caf�s 46
In restaurants 69
In takeaways 70

Download this chart

Source: Food and You 2 Wave 4

Respondents who had checked the food hygiene rating of a business were asked which types of food businesses they had checked the hygiene ratings for in the last 12 months. Most respondents had checked the food hygiene rating takeaways (70%) and restaurants (69%). Less than half of respondents (46%) had checked the food hygiene rating of cafés, 33% had checked coffee or sandwich shops and 32% had checked the rating of pubs (Figure 9) (footnote 3).  

Figure 10. How respondents had checked the hygiene rating of food businesses.

A bar chart showing how respondents had checked the hygiene rating of a food business.
Column1
In a local newspaper 2
On another website 2
On an app (e.g. Scores on the Doors Food Hygiene Rating) 4
On the FSA's website 15
Food business' own website 22
Online food ordering website or app (e.g. Just Eat, Deliveroo, Uber Eats) 23
FHRS sticker displayed at the food business (such as in a business' window or on the door) 83

Download this chart

Respondents who had checked the food hygiene rating of a business were asked how they had checked the rating. Most (83%) respondents had looked at the food hygiene rating sticker displayed at the food business. Almost a quarter (23%) of respondents had checked via an online food ordering website or app (for example, Just Eat, Deliveroo, Uber Eats), 22% had checked the food hygiene rating of a business on a food business’ own website, and 15% of respondents had checked on the Food Standards Agency’s food hygiene ratings website (Figure 10) (footnote 4) .

Most respondents in England (83%), Wales (89%), Northern Ireland (89%) were most likely to have checked the hygiene rating of a food business via a food hygiene rating sticker displayed at the business**. However, respondents in England (24%) were more likely to have checked the hygiene rating of a food business via an online food ordering website or app than those in Northern Ireland (11%) or Wales (13%).

How the hygiene rating of a food business was checked varied between different groups of people:

  • Age group: adults under 34 years (for example, 42% of those aged 25-34 years) were more likely to have checked the hygiene rating of a food business via an online food ordering website or app (for example, Just Eat, Deliveroo, Uber Eats) than adults aged 35 or over (for example, 6% of those aged 75 years or over). 
  • Urban vs rural: respondents who lived in an urban area (26%) were more likely to have checked the hygiene rating of a food business via an online food ordering website or app (for example, Just Eat, Deliveroo, Uber Eats) than those who lived in a rural area (9%).
  • Food security (footnote 5) : respondents with very low food security (33%) were more likely to have checked the hygiene rating of a food business via a food businesses own website than those with high food security (20%).

In some cases, how different groups of people checked the hygiene rating of a food business may indicate the likelihood that the group would use a particular service when eating out or ordering takeaway, such as an online food ordering website or app (for example, Just Eat, Deliveroo, Uber Eats). For example, younger adults were more likely to have eaten food from an online food ordering website or app and to have checked the hygiene rating of a food business via an online food ordering website or app compared to older adults (footnote 6)

Respondents who had checked the food hygiene rating of a business in the last 12 months were asked how often the rating was easy to find. Around 1 in 5 respondents reported that that food hygiene rating was always (18%) easy to find, 62% reported that that the rating was easy to find most of the time and 18% reported it was easy to find about half of the time or less often (footnote 7) .

FHRS usage when eating out or buying takeaway

Respondents were asked which factors, from a given list of responses, they generally considered when deciding where to eat out or order a takeaway from (footnote 8).  

Factors considered when ordering a takeaway 

Figure 11. Ten most common factors considered when ordering a takeaway.

My previous experience of the takeaway was the most popular option at 80%, quality of food closely followed at 75%.
Column1
Whether information about calories is provided 2
Whether allergen information is provided 5
Whether healthier options are provided 8
Whether it is an independent business or part of a chain 11
Reviews, for example, on TripAdvisor, Google, social media, or in newspapers 29
Delivery or collection option 32
Whether food can be ordered online, for example, through a website or app 36
Location of takeaway 37
Offers, deals, discounts available 38
Delivery or collection times 38
Food hygiene rating 38
Recommendations from family or friends 50
Type of food (e.g. cuisine or vegetarian/vegan options) 59
Price (including cost of delivery) 61
Quality of food 75
My previous experience of the takeaway 80

Download this chart

Of those who had ordered food from a takeaway, the factors most commonly considered when deciding where to place an order were the respondents’ previous experience of the takeaway (80%) and the quality of food (75%). Around 4 in 10 (38%) respondents considered the food hygiene rating when deciding where to order a takeaway from (Figure 11) (footnote 9) .

Around 4 in 10 respondents in England (38%) and Northern Ireland (40%) consider the food hygiene rating when ordering takeaways compared to 46% of those in Wales**.

Consideration of the food hygiene rating when deciding where to order a takeaway varied between different groups of people:

  • Age group: respondents aged 44 years or below (for example, 45% of those aged 25-34 years) were more likely to consider the food hygiene rating when ordering takeaways compared to adults aged 75 years or over (22%).
  • Annual household income: respondents with an income of £19,000 or below (45%) were more likely to consider the food hygiene rating when ordering takeaways compared to those with an income above £96,000 (28%).
  • Urban vs rural: respondents who lived in an urban area (40%) were more likely to consider the food hygiene rating when ordering takeaways compared to those who lived in a rural area (30%).
  • Food security: respondents with very low food security (54%) were more likely to consider the food hygiene rating when ordering takeaways compared to those with high food security (35%).

Factors considered when eating out

Figure 12. Ten most common factors considered when eating out.

A bar chart showing the percentage of respondents who considered factors when deciding where to eat out.
Factors considered Percentage of respondents
Quality of food 82
My previous experience of the place 80
Location 68
Price 66
Cleanliness of the place 65
Recommendations from family or friends 64
Quality of service 63
Type of food (for example, cuisin or vegetarian/vegan options) 56
Ambiance/atmosphere 48
Food hygiene rating 41

Download this chart

Of those who eat out, the factors most commonly considered when deciding where to eat were the quality of food (82%) and the respondents’ previous experience of the place (80%). Around 4 in 10 (41%) respondents considered the food hygiene rating when deciding where to eat (Figure 12) (footnote 10) .

How often respondents checked a food business’ hygiene rating upon arrival

Respondents were asked how often they checked the food hygiene rating of a restaurant or takeaway upon arrival. One in 10 (10%) reported that they always checked the food hygiene rating of a business on arrival, 20% of respondents reported that they did this most of the time and 31% of respondents did this less often (i.e. ‘about half the time’ or ‘occasionally’). Just over a third (35%) of respondents reported that they never checked the food hygiene rating of a business upon arrival (footnote 11).