UNIVERSITÉ DE TOULOUSE II –

LE MIRAIL

CENTRE D’ÉTUDES DU
TOURISME, DE L’HÔTELLERIE
ET DES INDUSTRIES DE
L’ALIMENTATION

MASTER MANAGEMENT DES INDUSTRIES

DU TOURISME
ET DE L’HÔTELLERIE
MASTER IN HOSPITALITY MANAGEMENT

DISSERTATION

AN EVALUATION of THE
IMPORTANCE of FOOD
SAFETY AND HYGIENE
A HACCP STUDY

Presented by :
CHU Xuan Lai

1
Academic Year : 2009 – 2010 Main supervisor : Dr. Richard BONNE

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

I wish to express my sincere gratitude and thanks to the following persons who have made
it possible for me to complete this study.

· My supervisor, Dr Richard Bonne, for his professional guidance, advice and

generous support.
· Mr Stephen Davidson , The Principal of FSMS, Australia.
· My devoted friend, Ms Hoang Thi Hong, for her constant encouragement and
support.
· UNIS board of directors for allowing me to do my internship at UNIS and evaluate
their canteen food safety and hygiene
· My wife, for her love and support during my study, for taking care my children
while I was busy at work and study.

2
 AN EVALUATION of THE IMPORTANCE of
FOOD SAFETY AND HYGIENE

ABSTRACT
The increasing awareness and demand of consumers for safe and high quality food have
lead many organizations to undertake a comprehensive evaluation and reorganisation of
their food control systems in order to improve efficiency, rationlisation of human resources
and to harmonise approaches. This evaluation in food control systems has resulted towards
the necessity to shift from the traditional approach that relied heavily on end-product
sampling and inspection and to move towards the implementation of a preventative safety
and quality approach, based on risk analysis and on the principles of the hazard analysis
critical control point (HACCP) system.

The study focussed on an evaluation of the importance of food safety and hygiene in the
area of UNIS canteen which serves 880 students and 250 teachers and staffs everyday. An
evaluation was needed to find out whether the food is safe and hygiene and whether the
students, parents and staff are satisfied.

This study showed that how food safety is important to daily meal for more than one
thousand people in UNIS community .

A systematic evaluation of food safety was carried out in the UNIS. The Analysis
consisted of investigating hazards associated with microbial contamination and critical
control points (CCPs) in the preparation and handling of foods in the schools.

3
 GLOSSARY
APPROVED SOURCE: An acceptable supplier to the regulatory authority based on a
determination of conformity with principles, practices, and generally recognized tandards
that protect public health.

CCP: Critical Control Point.

CONTAMINATION: The unintended presence in food of potentially harmful ubstances,

including micro-organisms, chemicals, and physical objects.

CONTRACTOR : Third party contract canteen operator

CONTROL MEASURE: Any action or activity that can be used to revent, eliminate,
or reduce an identified hazard. Control measures determined to be essential for food fety
are applied at critical control points in the flow of food.

CORRECTIVE ACTION: An activity that is taken by a person whenever a critical

limit is not met.

CRITICAL CONTROL POINT (CCP): An operational step in a food preparation

process at which control can be applied and is essential to prevent or eliminate a hazard
or reduce it to an acceptable level.

CRITICAL LIMIT: One or more prescribed parameters that must be met to ensure
that a CCP effectively controls a hazard.

CROSS-CONTAMINATION: The transfer of harmful substances or disease-causing

micro-organisms to food by hands, food contact surfaces, sponges, cloth towels and
utensils that touch raw food, are not cleaned, and then touch ready-to-eat foods. Cross
contamination can also occur when raw food touches or drips onto cooked or ready-to-eat
foods.

DANGER ZONE: The temperature range between 5 °C (41 °F) and 57 °C (135 °F) that
favors the growth of pathogenic micro-organisms.

EXCLUDE: To prevent a person from working as a food employee or entering a food

establishment except for those areas open to the general public.

FIFO : First in first out

FOOD: Raw, cooked, or processed edible substance, ice, beverage, chewing gum or

4
ingredient used or intended for use or for sale in whole or in part for human consumption.

FOOD ESTABLISHMENT: An operation at the retail or food service level, i.e., that
serves or offers food directly to the consumer and that, in some cases, includes a
production, storage, or distributing operation that supplies the direct-to-consumer
operation (satellite kitchens).

FOOD PREPARATION PROCESS: A series of operational steps conducted to

produce a food ready to be consumed.

FOODBORNE ILLNESS: A sickness resulting from the consumption of foods or

beverages contaminated with disease-causing micro-organisms, chemicals, or other
harmful substances.

FOODBORNE OUTBREAK: The occurrence of two or more cases of a similar illness

resulting from the ingestion of a common food.

HACCP: Hazard Analysis and Critical Control Point.

HACCP PLAN: A written document that is based on the principles of HACCP and
describes the procedures to be followed to ensure the control of a specific process or
procedure.

HAZARD: A biological, physical, or chemical property that may cause a food to be

unsafe for human consumption.

HACCP : Hazard Analysis Critical Control Point, A prevention-based food safety

system that identifies and monitors specific food safety hazards that can adversely affect
the safety of food products.

INTERNAL TEMPERATURES: The temperature of the internal portion of a food

product.

MEAT: The flesh animals used as food including dressed flesh of cattle, swine, sheep,
or goats and other edible animals, except fish, poultry and wild game animals.

MICRO-ORGANISM: A form of life that can be seen only under the microscope;
including bacteria, viruses, yeast, and single-celled animals.

MONITORING: The act of observing and making measurements to help determine if

critical limits are being met and maintained.

* NSLP: National School Lunch Program.

OPERATIONAL STEP:An activity or stage in the flow of food through a food

establishment, such as receiving, storage, preparation, cooking, etc.

PATHOGEN: A micro-organism (bacteria, parasites, viruses, or fungi) that causes

5
diseases in humans.

PERSONAL HYGIENE: Individual cleanliness and habits.

PROCESS APPROACH: A method of categorizing food operations into one of three

categories:

Process 1: Food preparation with no cook step, wherein ready-to-eat

food is received, stored, prepared, held and served;
Process 2: Food preparation for same day service wherein food is
received, stored, prepared, cooked, held and served; or
Process 3: Complex food preparation wherein food is received, stored,
prepared, cooked, cooled, reheated, hot held, and served.z

RECORD: A documentation of monitoring observations and verification activities.

REGULATORY AUTHORITY: A Federal, State, local, or tribal enforcement body or

authorized representative having jurisdiction over the food establishment.

RESTRICT: To limit the activities of a food employee so that there is no risk of

transmitting a disease that is transmissible through food and the food employee does not
work with exposed food, clean equipment, utensils, linens, and unwrapped single-service
or single-use articles.

RISK: An estimate of the likely occurrence of a hazard.

RISK FACTOR: One of the factors identified by the Centers for Disease Control and
Prevention (CDC) as contributors to the foodborne outbreaks that have been investigated
and confirmed. The factors are unsafe sources, inadequate cooking, improper holding,
contaminated equipment, and poor personal hygiene.

SEVERITY: The seriousness of the effect(s) of a hazard.

SOP: Standard Operating Procedure.

SPC: Standard Plate Count

STANDARD : UNIS food Safety standard

STANDARD OPERATING PROCEDURE (SOP) –A written method of controlling a

practice in accordance with predetermined specifications to obtain a desired outcome.

TEMPERATURE MEASURING DEVICE –A thermometer, thermocouple,

thermistor, or other device for measuring the temperature of food, air, or water.

UNIS: United Nations International School of Hanoi

WHO :World Health Organization

6
7
 CHAPTER 1
INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY

1.1.INTRODUCTION

The focus of the study is the evaluation of the importance of food safety and
hygiene in the area of UNIS canteen in Hanoi. As an international school, it is vital that all
students, teachers, and visitors are able to consume safe and wholesome food

1.2. RESEARCH BACKGROUND AND PROBLEMS

1.2.1.Research background
In the past several decades, there has been an increase in the occurrence of food-
borne illness linked to fresh fruits and vegetables. Whereas produce-associated outbreaks
accounted for 0.7% of all food-borne outbreaks in the 1970s, they accounted for 6% in the
1990s (Sicapalasingam et al. 2004). This could be related to the overall increase in
consumption of raw fruits and vegetables (Bureau of Census 1996, Beuchat 1996), changes
in human demography (Beuchat 2002), microbial adaptation (Altekruse et al. 1997), and/or
changes in farming or processing practices (Beuchat 2002). Most of the outbreaks are due
to pathogens that have animal reservoirs or zoonoses (Tauxe 1997). Although there are
many different types of bacteria associated with animals, only certain strains or serotypes
are harmful if ingested by humans. For example, there are many types of Escherichia coli
(E. coli) bacteria found in the intestines and feces of all animals. However, only specific
types of E. coli, such as E. coli 0157:H7, are disease-causing, or pathogenic to humans.
Documented outbreaks of E. coli 0157:H7 have occurred from the consumption of apples,
cantaloupe, sprouts, and lettuce. These ‘ready to use’ foods are minimally processed and
retain a large portion of their indigenous microflora (Francis et al. 1999).
Since 1995, there have been 20 outbreaks of food-borne illness from E. coli 0157:H7
on lettuce or leafy greens, and of these outbreaks nine were linked to produce from the
Central Coast Region. It has been difficult to directly trace the cause of outbreaks, and
attempts to identifying specific sources of contamination, ranging from the field to the
kitchen, have been largely unsuccessful. In 1996, a significant outbreak of E. coli 0157:H7
inflicted over sixty people on the East Coast and was linked to lettuce from a San Benito
County farm. Contamination of lettuce or spinach from Monterey County was linked to
one major outbreak in 2002 and two other outbreaks in 2003. An outbreak in Minnesota in
the fall of 2005 was also linked to salad mix grown in Monterey County. Most recently, in
September 2006 an outbreak of E. coli 0157:H7 affected consumers in over 25 states,
drawing national attention. Spinach from this outbreak was also traced back to Central
Coast fields and processing plant.
Overall, food safety has become a critical issue to be addressed by all stages of

8
industry in the region.

1.2.2.Research problems
In the present study, food safety knowledge and attitude of 300 consumers from nine
different categories of food service establishments (FSEs) were assessed. Results revealed
that most consumers (60%) eating at various FSEs were young, in the age group of 18–35
years. Some of the consumers could identify the carriers for foodborne diseases such as
cholera, food poisoning and jaundice, but most of them did not know about the carriers of
typhoid, gastroenteritis and amebiosis. Most of the consumers received information on
food safety from family and friends. A positive association was seen between education of
consumers and frequency of receiving information from various sources such as
magazines, TV/radio, posters/hoardings, newspapers, school/colleges, health workers and
family/friends. Most consumers had a positive attitude toward food hygiene, and they
believed in punishing street food vendors who violated the food safety norms. Most
consumers believed that government intervention would help in improving the quality of
street foods. A lot of better-educated food handlers believed that adherence to norms on the
personal hygiene of the food handler should be made compulsory, and that training of
persons in street food service is essential to ensure quality of food and food safety. In
conclusion, various sources of information should be used to increase consumer awareness
on food safety.
The World Health Organization (WHO) reports that each year two billion illnesses
are caused by unsafe food; globally this number is growing. In Asia 700,000 people die
each year as a result of food poisoning illnesses. Each year in the developing world,
diarrhea illness from contaminated food and water causes 2 million deaths in young
children. Much of this problem could be prevented with better science, prevention tools
and by practicing good food hygiene.
Recent changes in human demographics and food preferences, climate change global
warming, changes in food production and distribution systems, microbial adaptation, and
lack of support for public health control resources and infrastructure have led to the
emergence of novel as well as traditional food borne diseases. With increasing travel and
trade opportunities, it is not surprising that there is now a greater risk of contracting and
spreading a food borne illness locally, regionally, and even globally. Food poisoning
problem requires action by food producers and distributors as well as by consumers, from
the farm to the folk.

Food contamination may occur as food travels through long industrial chains;
production and harvest, initial processing and packing, distribution, and final processing.
However, it is estimated that most cases of food poisoning occur as a result of improper
food handling and preparation by the consumer.

9
1.2.3.Importance and Relevancy of the Study

This study is important because it evaluates a problem that needs to be addressed.

One needs to know how food safety is important to students in UNIS. It is essential for
UNIS community to ensure that 880 students from 53 countries in the worlds feel
comfortable, confident to eat food in the school.

1.3.RESEARCH OBJECTIVES

The primary research objective of the study is to evaluate the importance of food
safety and hygiene in International Enviroment, UNIS, identifying the importance
awarness between Parents, students and teachers and develope a manual for daily operation
to minimize the risk of foodborne illness in children using HACCP principles and SSOP
concepts.
The specific secondary objectives are to

 Indentify who use food safety information resources and understand

how these resources are used.
 Accertain the effectiveness of existing information resources in
educating of influencing the different stakeholder groups (different consumers)
 Accertain food safety information needs, gaps nd preferences of
various stakeholders.
 Indentify preferences for the content, style and dissemination methods of
information resources
 Indentify key factors and barriers that influence stakeholder acceptance, response to
and use of food safety information resources
 Developing a manual for daily operation to minimize the risk of food borne illness
in children using HACCP principles

1.4.BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE RESEARCH METHODS

During this evaluation, different research methodologies and techniques were used.
Secondary reseach methods were used to examine current literature on the subject of food
safety and hygiene , and primary research was conducted to evaluate whether food impacts
positively or negatively on food safety in UNIS
Primary research was conducted according to the following three methods :
 House comsumers survey
 Observation

10
  Personal interview
House consumers survey was carried out in the whole UNIS community with the use
of questionaires
Personal interviews were conducted with students, Parents and bussinesspersons

1.5.CHAPTER LAYOUT
The research study is divided into the following 6 chapters :

Chapter 1 Introduction to the study

This chapter, as seen above, presents the background to the problem that has
prompted the study. It refers to the importance, relevance and objectives of the study and
included a brief explanation of the research methodology used

Chapter 2 Literature Review

Food safety is of critical importance, especially in today’s dynamic, complicated and
global enviroment. The control of foodborne pathogens is difficult because of the
integrated nature of food industry, varities of applications and vulnerability of the human
element.
The literature review address :

 The role of HACCP in ensuring food safety

 HACCP and other prerequisite programs
 The role of government and industry in food safety assurance
 Current situation of HACCP implementation in the world
 Food safety constraints and problems in developing countries

 Techno-managerial approach for food safety and quality management

 Summary

Chapter 3 Food safety and Hygiene

The third chapter provides the theoretical framework and examines the concepts of
and relationship between food safety and food hygiene, the chapter focuses on food safety,
its history, its different forms and its impact on food safety. It also examines the levels,
components and categories of food safety, the way in which it attained and the causes of
food unsafety.

Chapter 4 Food Safety and Hygiene at UNIS

11
 Chapter 4 gives a brief description of UNIS International standard approach
including food issue. It analyses the UNIS’ approach to food safety and hygiene by looking
at its food safety and hygiene policies in the school. The chapter concludes with an analysis
of the general situation in UNIS, the specific area of the study

Chapter 5 Conclusion of the study

This chapter provides a summary of the research study and a conclusion based on the
results of the research. It also discusses recommendations based on the findings and
conclusions of the study.

12
 CHAPTER 2
LITERATURE REVIEW

2.1 INTRODUCTION

Global consumers nowadays are more concerned about the safety of their food
because of a series of food scandals and incidents that have occurred over the last decade
and that see no signs of decreasing. The solution they call for is high food quality and
integrity, safety guarantees and transparency. Governments are imposing new legislation;
retailers are making new demands on their supply chains. Food supply chains are reacting
by implementing systems to improve their product quality in an attempt not only to
guarantee the safety of the products, but also to raise the consumer community’s awareness
of their efforts. Such efforts are performed at the level of either an individual company or a
complete supply chain network (Van Dorp, 2004; Beulens et al., 2005). Food safety (FS),
therefore, is currently considered to be an important issue for all stakeholders in the area of
food production as well as governments in setting new legislation regarding FS.
Quality control has become a cornerstone of food safety policy over the past decade
in the food industry. Much of the focus has been on integral quality management systems.
These systems include all steps in the food production chain, such as supply of raw
materials, food manufacturing, packaging, transportation and logistics, research and
development, maintenance of production equipment, and training and education of staff.
Moreover, “Food quality is associated with a proactive policy and the creation of controls
to maintain a safe food supply. The business community in the food supply chain regards
the call for safety from their customers, consumers, government and other stakeholders as
an important driving force for continuous innovation. These innovations have been focused
on implementing systems to improve the product’s quality, to guarantee its safety as well
as to raise awareness of these innovations throughout their supply chain stakeholders.”
(Folstar, 2001)
One of the important tools used to ensure food safety against hazard infections is the
HACCP system. According to Sperber (2005), HACCP was begun as a voluntary science-
based system within the food industry and it helps provide greater transparency in the food
supply chain. The application of HACCP systems is a means of assuring proper food
handling, processing and retail sale to consumers. The use of HACCP systems in the
fishery industry is now global. Since it first emerged, the concept has increased in
importance through its endorsement by Codex Alimentarius at the international level and
by the EU and the US, two of the most important seafood importers. Currently, over forty
countries have announced HACCP initiatives for the control of fish production, processing
and distribution.

13
 Although quality control in general and HACCP in particular have been used in
manufacturing industries for decades, they are clearly ineffective and almost totally
incapable of detecting food safety defects that occur at a low incidence (ICMSF, 2002).
Coming out with detailed proof of this is Sperber (2005), who reports that the global use
and success of the HACCP system in the food processing industry has created a false
expectation that it could be used successfully in all steps of the food supply chain.
However, this is not necessarily true. There has been a lack of defining of critical control
points (CCPs), which have the function of eliminating or controlling identified hazards. As
a result, there is no effective use of HACCP in all steps of the supply chain. In order to
ensure food safety in the supply chain, it is necessary to combine prerequisite programs
along with HACCP, rather than only CCPs taken from an HACCP system.
In other words, in order to ensure food chain supply safety, a combination of
HACCP implementation and other prerequisite programs is vital throughout the chain. The
reasons for such an emphasis (Billy, 2002; Motarjemi & Mortimore, 2005) lie in the fact
that the food industry is today not only responsible for ensuring the safety of food
production through various measures aimed at safeguarding against its hazards (i.e., the
hazards which have been considered in production and the measures put in place to ensure
the safety of products), but it is also responsible for the development of further HACCP
studies as a part of the food safety assurance system. Thus, the HACCP tool and
prerequisite programs play an important role in supply chain FS from “farm to table,”
especially in both raw and ready-to-eat food products. In addition, the implementation level
of HACCP and other prerequisite programs is different from country to country according
to each country’s own conditions. But to achieve FS objectives and promote international
trade effectively and efficiently, the role of government and industry is crucial in terms of
setting performance quality standards, regulatory issues, implementation of inspection and
audit as well as risk assessment throughout the whole chain.
Generally, the greatest constraints on the implementation of HACCP and
prerequisite programs in developing countries are the limitations of managerial knowledge
and technological investment within the food companies. These limitations are especially
big challenges for SFCs in Vietnam in general, and in the MD in particular, in the effort to
ensure supply chain seafood safety. Therefore, food quality control through the techno-
managerial approach in the food chain is a useful approach used to solve the research
problem in this study.
To conclude, the literature to review here has to do with not only the role of HACCP
itself in food safety assurance, as well as the combination of HACCP and other prerequisite
programs, but also the role of governments and industries, the techno-managerial approach,
and the food supply chain quality and quality management in developing countries.

14
 2.2 The role of HACCP in ensuring food safety

2.2.1 The HACCP system

The grounds for the development of the HACCP system stem from the pathway to
the HACCP system started in 1959 when Pillsbury was asked to produce a food that could
be used under zero gravity conditions in space capsules – food products for space use
should not be contaminated with any bacterial or viral pathogens, toxins, chemicals or any
physical hazards that could cause an illness or injury. At that time, most food safety and
quality systems were based on end-product testing, but it was realized that this could only
assure product safety through testing 100% of the products which, for obvious reasons, was
not workable, since it would result in all products being used up. Instead a preventive
system was required which would give a high level of food safety assurance. However, the
implementation of HACCP approach is not easy to apply completely in the entire chain,
particularly during primary production. As a result, importing countries are still rejecting
products due to infection hazards.
What follows are summaries of the definitions and content of HACCP, HACCP
principles and procedures, and the legal impact of HACCP.

2.2.1.1 HACCP definitions and contents

HACCP is defined by many authors. Some definitions refer directly to food safety,
reflecting the predominant use to date of the HACCP approach in the food sector. Other
definitions are more generic: a step-by-step approach to the identification and assessment
of hazards and risks associated with the manufacture, distribution, and use of products. For
instance, HACCP is defined as a systematic approach to the identification, assessment and
control of hazards (McDonough, 2002). It is widely accepted as being the most effective
means of ensuring food safety because HACCP is a management tool used to protect the
food supply against microbiological, chemical and physical hazards. In other words,
HACCP is a system for identifying, evaluating and controlling the hazards in food
manufacturing, which are crucial for product safety. It is also an analytical tool that enables
management to introduce and maintain a cost-effective, ongoing food safety program.
Peirson (1995) stresses that HACCP has been strongly suggested as an effective approach
to prevent food safety hazards by many national and international scientific groups,
corporations, government agencies and academic organizations.

In other words, HACCP is a proven system, which if properly applied will give
confidence that food safety is being managed effectively. And HACCP is also a preventive
system in quality control. The system when properly applied can be used to control any
area or point in the food system that can contribute to the hazardous situation, whether it be

15
contaminants, pathogenic micro-organisms, physical objects, chemicals, raw materials, a
process, directions for use by the consumer, or storage conditions. Similarly, as Lackova
(2001) has it, the HACCP is a tool which can integrate all elements of production, storage,
distribution, and the preparation of food. And the control points can be used as inescapable
measures to provide hygienic standards and health safety. The basic objectives of the
HACCP concept are to assure the production of safe food products by prevention instead of
by quality inspection (Leaper, 1997; NACMCF, 1998). Furthermore, the HACCP is
basically designed for application in all parts of agri-food production, ranging from
growing, harvesting, processing, manufacturing, distribution, and merchandising to
preparing food for consumption (NACMCF, 1998).
The concept “hazard” in the HACCP terminology is expressed in terms of a danger
to food safety from a biological, chemical or physical point of view. The term “hazard”
refers to any part of a production chain or a product that has the potential to cause a safety
problem. Analysis is the identification and assessment of the seriousness and likelihood of
occurrence of a hazard. A critical control point is a point, step, or procedure at which
control can be exercised to prevent, eliminate, or minimize a hazard. In the HACCP system
specific dangers are identified all along the lifetime of a food product and the measures to
manage (or control) these dangers.

•Biological hazards can be further divided into three types: bacterial, viral, and
parasitic (protozoa and worms). Brown (1995) mentions methods for Microbiological
quality assurance. Especially HACCP system. Many HACCP programs are designed
specifically around the microbiological hazards. Archer and Kvenberg et al. (2000)
estimates that the incidence of foodborne illness ranges from 12.6 to 81 million cases per
year with hazard costs of 1.9 to 8.4 billion dollars. HACCP programs address this food
safety problem by assisting in the production of safe wholesome foods.
•Chemical hazards: Webster defines a hazard chemical as any substance used in or
obtained by a chemical hazard process or processes. All food products are made up of
chemicals, and all chemicals can be toxic at some dosage level. However, certain
hazardous chemicals are not allowed in food and others have had allowable limits
established. A summary of most of the chemical hazards in food has been drawn up
(Bryan, 1984). The two types of chemical hazards in food are naturally occurring ones and
added chemicals. Both may potentially cause chemical intoxications if excessive levels are
present in hazardous food. For additional information, see Foodborne Diseases (Cliver,
1990). Many HACCP programs have been criticized for their relative neglect of chemical
and physical hazards.
•Physical hazards, often described as extraneous matter or foreign objects, include
any physical matter not normally found in food, which may cause illness (including
psychological trauma) or injury to an individual (Corlett, 1991). The most often reported

16
complaint concerning physical hazards is that foreign objects provide tangible evidence of
hazard product deficiency. Regulatory action may be initiated when agencies find
adulterated foods or foods that are manufactured, packed or held under conditions whereby
they may have become contaminated and may be injurious to health.

The hazard analysis portion of HACCP involves a systematic study of the

ingredients, the food product, conditions of processing, handling, storage, packaging,
distribution, and consumer use. This analysis helps to identify the sensitive areas in the
process flow that might contribute to a hazard. This information can then determine the
CCPs in the system that have to be monitored. A CCP is any point in the chain of food
production from raw materials to finished product where loss of control could result in an
unacceptable food safety risk.

2.2.1.2 HACCP principles and procedures

Several articles have described HACCP principles and procedures for the
development and implementation of an HACCP plan (ICMSF, 2002; European
Commission, 1996; Early, 1997; Leaper, 1997; NACMCF, 1992, 1998; Buchenan, 1990;
Bryan, 1990; Bjerklie, 1992). According to them, an HACCP plan is a written document
based on the principles of HACCP and delineates the procedures to be followed. The
HACCP consists of seven principles and is implemented in a 12-step procedure (see
Appendix 6 for details), which outlines how to establish and implement an HACCP plan
for the operation. The HACCP principles have international acceptance and details of this
approach have been published by the Codex Almentarius Commission (1993, 1997) the
European Commission (1994), the National Advisory Committee on Microbiological
Criteria for Foods, US (1992, 1998), and WHO (1996).

•Assembling an HACCP team

•Description of the product and its distribution
•Identification of intended use and consumers
•Development of process flow diagrams
•On-site verification of flow diagram
•A hazard analysis, which involves collecting and evaluating information on hazards
associated with the food under consideration to decide the significant hazards to be
addressed in the HACCP plan (Principle 1).
•Determination of critical control points (CCPs), which are steps where controls can
be applied and are essential in order to prevent or eliminate or reduce a hazard to an
acceptable level (Principle 2).
•Establishing critical limits, which are maximum/minimum values at which a

17
biological, chemical, or physical parameter must be controlled at a CCP (Principle 3).
•Establishing monitoring procedures to assess whether a CCP is under control and to
create an accurate record for future use in verification (Principle 4).
•Establishing corrective actions, in case there is a deviation from an established
critical limit (Principle 5).
•Establishing verification procedures to verify that the HACCP system is working
correctly (Principle 6).
•Establishing record-keeping and documentation procedures to document the
HACCP system (Principle 7).

2.2.1.3 HACCP legal impacts

HACCP has been and is being mandated into law in many nations all over the world.
The EU, for instance, has adopted HACCP through the Directive 93/43 since 1993
(Ziggers, 2000), and is preparing new policies, regulations and laws (Van Plaggenhoef,
Batterink & Trienekens, 2003). In the US, HACCP was mandated for seafood in 1995, for
meat and poultry in 1998, and for the juice industry in 2001 (FDA, 2001). The Australian
Food Standard Code required HACCP-based food safety programs from January 2003
onwards (Food Standards Australia New Zealand, 2002). In New Zealand, the Animal
Products Act 1999 required all primary animal product processing businesses to have an
HACCP-based risk management program in place by November 2002. Generally, the
effects of the legislation on HACCP not only help food chain stakeholders, but also
individuals and customers, and all have responsibilities for the successful implementation
of food safety programs in both developed and developing countries.
According to Cao et al., (2002), as HACCP is increasingly used as a food safety
assurance program, concerns have been put forward about its effectiveness in enhancing
food safety as well as on the impacts it may have on food markets, industry, and
consumers. They also discuss issues associated with the adoption of HACCP and its
impacts, which include: (1) HACCP as food safety regulation; (2) benefits and costs of
HACCP; (3) impact on market structure and in the distribution of regulation costs; and (4)
HACCP as an international trade standard (see Part C, Appendix 6 for details).

2.2.2 HACCP and other prerequisite programs

As mentioned in Section 1, HACCP is a necessary, but not a insufficient, condition

for ensuring food supply chain safety. What that means is that HACCP cannot be effective
when applied as an isolated system. It must be supported by prerequisite programs
(Sperber, 2005). Therefore, each company is required to have its own HACCP plan tailored
to its individual products and required prerequisite programs prior to the implementation of

18
HACCP. Prerequisite programs, such as Good Manufacturing Practices (GMP) and
Standard Sanitary Operation Procedures (SSOP) are an essential foundation for the success
of an HACCP plan (NACMCF, 1997). GMP is standard guidelines set out by the FDA to
ensure drug development is carried out in safe and quality processes, to avoid
contamination and ensure repeatability. GMP to ensure that the products produced meets
specific requirements for identity, strength, quality, and purity. SSOP is applied to all
processing areas, equipment, utensils, storage and parameter areas that require wet or dry
cleaning and sanitizing or verification as under HACCP on known schedules that are
validated through inspections, monitoring and testing recordkeeping protocols. Besides,
SQF (Safe Quality Food) and BRC (British Retail Consortium) standards have relation to
HACCP and food safety. The SQF (Safe Quality Food) provides the food sector (primary
producers, food manufacturers, retailers, agents and exporters) a food safety and quality
management that is tailored to requirements of food safety and commercial quality criteria
in a cost effective manner. BRC is used for all food stuff companies producing private
brand products as well as for food industry organizations selling to Great Britain and being
urged by British food chains to provide evidence of fulfilling their requirements regarding
product safety, quality and legality.
Huss and Ryder (2003) indicate that it is important to point out that the prerequisite
program certainly relates to safety and therefore is an essential part of a total quality
control program. Thus part of a prerequisite program (e.g., sanitation controls) must lend
itself to all aspects of a CCP, such as establishing critical limits, monitoring, corrective
actions, record keeping, and verification procedures. Practical experience has shown that if
the general issues related to the prerequisite program are dealt with first, the HACCP study
will be much more straight forward and the resulting HACCP plan easier to manage. All
issues related to hygiene programs applied to all processing areas, equipment, utensils,
storage, and parameter areas will be dealt with in the prerequisite program. It is noted that
the prerequisite program is a good starting point for companies who have a long way to go
towards implementing an HACCP system. In addition, food safety failures are both failures
of HACCP implementation and of cleaning and sanitation practices or a lack of
management awareness of and commitment to providing the necessary training and
resources. That is why the HACCP cannot be effective when applied as an isolated system.
It must be supported by prerequisite programs. It is suggested that appropriate prerequisite
programs must be paid attention to and applied at each step in the whole chain. Similar
attitudes were mentioned in the studies of Mortimore (2001); Panisello and Quantick
(2001), and Motarjemi and Mortimore (2005). As far as the above reasons are concerned,
Sperber (2005) indicates that it is better to focus on the application of effective food safety
control measures because “Farm to Table Food Safety” (combination of HACCP and
prerequisite programs) is better communication than “Farm to Table HACCP” (only
HACCP applied).
19
 In many countries, the implementation of prerequisite programs is a necessary
condition in order to achieve an HACCP certificate. They refer to measures and
requirements which any establishment should meet to produce safe food. In other words,
HACCP ensures food safety through an approach that builds upon foundations provided by
GMP/GHP. The combination of GMP, SSOP and HACCP is particularly beneficial in that
the efficient application of GMP and SSOP allows HACCP to focus on the true critical
determinants of safety. However, according to the regulations of each country GMP/GP
(most developed countries) or both GMP and SSOP (developing countries like Vietnam,
Thailand, Bangladesh) are used as the prerequisite programs.
In short, HACCP is a system, which ensures food safety through preventive
measures. It is very effective in controlling identified hazards. Most importantly, it relies
upon product design and process control not product testing to ensure food safety. Food
safety is based upon the principles of preventing food safety problems (HACCP) and on
prerequisite programs. To do this, it is necessary to ensure that both the food industry and
government are carrying out appropriate roles and responsibilities as well as setting
regulatory activities to control food safety risks. In other words, HACCP is a necessary, but
insufficient, condition for assuring food safety. Food safety consists of an HACCP system
and other prerequisite programs throughout the whole supply chain. Hathaway (1999) and
Stewart et al. (2002) made similar definitions. An HACCP system can be effective only if
it is based on GMP/GHP. Consequently, it is the responsibility of government agencies to
ensure that these prerequisite programs are implemented before assessing HACCP
implementation in the food companies (Ababouch, 2000). Implementation of the HACCP
program produces the following benefits:

•HACCP offers enhanced safety

•HACCP focuses on essential factors, allows for a better use of resources and is
cost-effective
•HACCP, specific and flexible, provides a more timely response to safety problems
•HACCP is informative for those involved in its implementation
•HACCP provides an appropriate answer to product liability
•The principles of HACCP can also be applied to other quality attributes
•HACCP can aid control by regulatory authorities
•HACCP can promote international trade by increasing confidence in food safety

2.3 The role of government and industry in food safety assurance

Food safety experts from Asia (India, the Philippines, Thailand), Africa (Morocco,
Burkina Faso, Ghana, Mauritania, Senegal), Latin America (Brazil, Costa Rica,
20
Guatemala), and representatives of France, Germany, the United Kingdom, WB, FAO,
WHO, and members of the European research community emphasize that food quality
control cannot be applied successfully in each country without the support of government
and industry (Hanak et al., 2002).
Kvenberg et al. (2000) discuss the role of the government and the industry in
ensuring food safety. The government’s responsibility is (i) to mandate the regulatory
requirements for HACCP implementation; (ii) to establish mandated critical limits when
necessary; (iii) to establish criteria, methods and sampling plans when necessary; and (iv)
to verify that in individual facilities HACCP plans are adequate in order to assure food
safety. Additional government activities should be to use epidemiological and scientific
data to identify hazards and conduct risk evaluations. The evaluation results aim to provide
information which can be used to improve HACCP plans; support research relating to
CCPs, critical limits, and monitoring procedures; cooperate with interested groups in
identifying new food safety hazards and identifying strategies for their control; encourage
and participate in educational programs to promote the use of HACCP; cooperate with
industry in the development of generic HACCP plans; and, finally, exercise whatever
actions are deemed necessary to prevent unsafe food from reaching consumers. In terms of
industry responsibilities, the industry must develop, implement, and maintain an effective
HACCP system, with each facility forming an HACCP team that is responsible for the
HACCP plan.
As an example of the implementation of a governmental role, Hanak et al. (2002)
mention that the government in the UK appears to play a crucial role in developing policy,
promoting legislation, and implementing EU legislation. The role lies mainly in the
Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food (MAFF) and the Department of Health (DoH),
along with the Scottish, Welsh and Northern Ireland Offices. Specifically, MAFF has an
important role to play in promoting the economic interests of the agriculture, fishing and
food industries and this is particularly valuable in the international arena. In Canada, an
important feature of the food safety system is the respective roles of the Federal and ten
Provincial governments. If meat, poultry or seafood is to be moved inter-provincially or
exported, Federal government regulations apply. The annual report of the Auditor General
of Canada released in Nov. 1999 was sharply critical of the lack of coordination between
Provincial governments and other relevant institutions in responding to a nationwide
salmonella outbreak in 1998. Under the Australian constitution, State governments are
responsible for the enforcement of food law, with that responsibility extending back to the
farm, development of national food standards for further processing, distribution and retail
(Jill et al., 1999).
Some aspects that the government, according to Hanak et al. (2002) and Jill et al.
(1999), can support are: quality control programs, training, research, role of consultant, as

21
well as logistical supports. Billy (2002) also adds that industry and government have a very
important role to play in the implementation of FS by setting standards for food safety and
other consumer protection concerns.
According to Billy (2002) and Suwanrangsi (2000), although many food companies
have excellent HACCP programs, they need to improve their performance in conducting
hazard analyses, reassessing their plans, and validating the measures they adopt in
addressing those hazards because there are many gaps and deficiencies in HACCP
implementation. Therefore, discovering areas where improvements are needed, such as in
risk management, infrastructure and resources, communication, training and education and
workplace environment, are all crucial. As noted by Ababouch (2000), the HACCP
principles play a pivotal role in preventive approaches. Their application is the
responsibility of the food industry, whereas the government control agencies are
responsible for monitoring and assessing their proper implementation. The responsibility of
the government inspectors is to ensure that the HACCP program used by the food
processor is properly designed and properly implemented. In this respect, assessment of the
HACCP program can be done in two steps. First, an assessment of the HACCP manual
which is basically a document review. Second, an on-site verification to establish whether
the approved HACCP manual is properly being implemented.
Regarding the industry role, several countries are exploiting the possibility of
privatization of elements of hygiene inspection (especially in the meat, poultry and seafood
sectors) and this requires different legislation and infrastructure as compared with
traditional programs. Traditionally, the industry has had the primary responsibility for
GMP-based process control, and now it has the primary responsibility for HACCP-based
process control (Lee & Hathaway 1999). Moreover, to Motarjemi and Mortimore (2005),
there are many measures that the food industry can use to manage food safety in a more
efficient manner and reassure public confidence in the food supply. Such measures include
regulations and policies, guidance on hazards, risk communication and education, incidents
and crisis management. Industry needs to revisit its approach to training, to recognize that
we have different levels of maturity, to make improvements at the primary production
levels. Primary production is at the start of the food chain and perhaps too little attention
has been focused in this area. Although much has been done in the last few years, much
remains to be done. Although we are not operating to common standards worldwide,
agricultural practices in the industrialized countries may be used to help developing
countries.
Governments in the developing world face multiple demands and have a limited
capacity to respond. In light of governments’ own resource constraints, donor agencies
play a key role in improving developing country food safety management (Hanak et al.,
2002). Regarding fish exports, there are two impacts from developing countries. Positive

22
impacts are anticipated to be a strengthening of ties between government and industry
regarding fish quality, a stronger commitment to improve fish quality, adoption of safety
and quality improvement programs such as HACCP, and more training and education in
quality and fish inspection processes. Negative aspects are lack of trained personnel, lack
of financial resources, lack of communication between inspection authorities and lack of
clear instructions from the importing country on conditions that must be met (Santos et al.,
1993).
Some problems have been identified in some countries as reported by Marthi (1999),
who finds that the Indian FS challenge is a mirror of the situation in most of the developing
nations. Food industry professionals and government regulators must take due cognizance
of this fact. Government, Industry, Academia and the community will meet to work
closely, together with international agencies, in order to develop the most effective food
safety regulations. In fact, there was a lack of adequate infrastructure for handling large
scale food processing. A key issue is development of effective cold chains, given the high
ambient temperatures and significant variability in power availability. Bangladesh also
reported managerial problems that have caused micro-bio contamination, such as
salmonella in frozen shrimp and prawns. To overcome these problems, both industry and
government made major investments in more modern companies, laboratories and
personnel trained in HACCP procedures (Unnevehr, 2000).
Even though the HACCP concept is one of the most effective and efficient ways of
enhancing food safety, food industries in developing countries should be aware that it will
not give complete protection even under the best conditions. This is another constraint:
processors must be ever vigilant and prepared to act if any breakdown in standards is
detected (Jirathana, 1998). To comply with the requirements of export markets, developing
countries’ national governments have developed quality control systems to sustain their
exports. In many developing countries, where food firms’ quality control systems are not
well developed or implemented, both practice and attitude is that inspection and quality
certification for export are the responsibility of the government (Zaibet, 2000).
As a conclusion of this section, for Fearne (1999) the food industry has a vested
interest in supplying better information along the length of the supply chain. Governments
have both a duty and a vested interest in facilitating the process. Besides support from the
government, the food supply chain itself, which consists of production, from processing to
marketing, should be supported by the food industry, support organizations, local
departments and other chain stakeholders in order to achieve product quality control
objectives. Furthermore, Suwanrangsi (2002) notes that the interaction between provincial
government agencies and the fisheries industry is vital for promoting the sector’s
development through the introduction of new technologies, extension, research, training,
regulation and inspection. Finally, McDonough (2002) also concludes that the HACCP

23
experience shows that government has a role to play in its successful introduction, and that
this can be a challenging undertaking for all parties concerned.
2.4 Current situation of HACCP implementation in the world
2.4.1 HACCP and international trade
Changing consumption patterns for food, as well as changing global trade practices,
can make huge impacts on food safety and risk assessment. Several countries have either
mandated or are considering mandating HACCP requirements into their national legislation
and they are specific in their HACCP requirements for particular sectors of their domestic
food industries. The expectation is that exporting countries will meet the same
requirements for internationally traded foods (Hathaway, 1999). In particular, the
introduction of HACCP-based regulations for fish and fish products, particularly in the EU
and the US, has triggered the need for production under the HACCP system in most fish
exporting countries. It is reported that approximately 60% of the international fish markets
require that fish and fish products are processed under HACCP systems, of which the EU
and the US account for 50%, while Japan at 34% has not yet required HACCP compliance
(Lupin, 1999).
Van Veen (2005) also argues that participation in global trade means that countries
have to live by international rules and to consider major investments in food safety
promotion and monitoring. Especially, chain partners of producers need to have a common
standard/policy to ensure the quality and safety of products and to guarantee social
acceptance.
By 1990, HACCP had become the primary approach for ensuring the safety of the
food supply (Buchanan, 1990). Since then, there has been considerable effort to harmonize
the use of HACCP by national and international institutions and to manage food safety
hazards in the food industry worldwide (Panisello & Quantick, 2001). Besides, HACCP is
intended to address hazards which are of such a nature that their elimination or reduction to
acceptable levels is essential for the production of safe foods (Orriss & Whitehead, 2000).
Furthermore, for Gillespie et al. (2001) the effectiveness of the HACCP system is
evidenced by a better microbiological quality of food originating from small
establishments with HACCP in place than from those without. Therefore, many
governments have taken a risk assessment approach to ensuring the safety of the food
supply and have mandated the use of an HACCP system in food industries (Unnevehr &
Jensen, 1999; Ropkins & Beck, 2000).
Lee and Hathaway (1999) mention that “food exporting countries are now
inextricably bound to comprehensive HACCP-based food control systems if they are to
effectively assure the safety of food in international trade, and meet the market access
requirements of an increasing number of importing countries. It remains the primary
responsibility of industry to develop, implement and maintain HACCP systems. The

24
supporting role of the regulator should be to enact supporting legislation, facilitate
scientific design, ensure consistent applications, and verify the integrity of HACCP
systems on a national basis. Further, continuous government effort is needed to improve
the knowledge base relating to emerging hazards such as E.coli O157:H7 and thereby
improve the ability of HACCP plans to meet specific public health goals. As new scientific
approaches to HACCP evolve and risk assessment improves, bilateral and multilateral
recognition of the legitimacy of different approaches to the design of HACCP plans in
different countries is becoming a critical issue for food in international trade”.
Therefore, there is a need to close the wide gap between developing and developed
markets in terms of knowledge and quality of institutions. Above all, to profit from the
emerging opportunities, chain partners in developing countries and emerging economies
must shift from an internal product orientation to an external market orientation. For
instance, adapting HACCP systems and audits to suit local conditions in developing
countries and also help in formulating HACCP for niche products exported from
developing countries. Moreover, avoiding any confusion through the introduction of
obligatory competing or overlapping multiple requirements, such as a mix of HACCP,
BRC or SQF (Safe Quality Food), may make sense in well-organized western markets,
while the costs of such a mix may be prohibitive for small countries and small traders. A
perception of excessive documentation has previously been reported (Orris & Whitehead,
2000; Hathaway, 1999). Furthermore, regarding the role of international organizations in
food safety, a constructive collaboration of consumer organizations with other stakeholders
in the food chain, as well as through a concerted and coordinated approach for
communication with the public, is a key to regaining the trust of consumers in the food
supply chain (Motarjemi & Mortimore, 2005).
It is noted that in response to increasing consumer concerns about food safety,
regulators in the EU, the US and Japan have been raising the bar that food suppliers need to
meet in order to be able to sell on their markets. This includes stricter norms on pesticides
and veterinary drug residues and mycotoxins – some of which are powerful carcinogens –
as well as on microbial contaminants. In addition, Hanak et al. (2002) emphasize that
quality needs to be managed not only in the processing company but also along the whole
supply chain, from the initial stages of raw material production to the final stages of food
preparation for consumption.
In short, while the improved level of food safety associated with the implementation
of HACCP and the leading role taken by the food industry are recognized, the application
of HACCP as a public policy requires a definition of the role of government in the HACCP
process. Recent moves by some importing countries to require application of HACCP
principles by exporting countries to food produced for export may result in significant
trade barriers for countries unable to meet these requirements. The mandatory requirement

25
for HACCP use and any subsequent barriers or other constraints to trade for developing
countries need to be considered and identified.

2.4.2 The implementation of HACCP in the world

One can generalize that the HACCP system in FS for prevention of hazards is now
mandated for some or all of the food sectors in the EU, the US, Canada, New Zealand, and
Australia (Unnevehr, 2002). In fact, the food safety concept may be differently interpreted
in different nations as food preparation and food consumption habits differ. Therefore, the
introduction of food safety management in general and HACCP in particular needs to be
built on local skills and concepts. At the very least it should be built on mutual
understanding of each partner’s perception, and participatory approaches. Mutual
understanding, however, assumes certain minimal skills (farmers, inspectors, veterinary
staff, etc.) and an understanding of the concepts of standards and risk assessment (Van
Veen, 2005).
Focusing on seafood quality and safety, Cato (2000) reports that HACCP was
recommended as the most effective way to monitor the safety of fish before 1985. The use
of HACCP in the seafood industry has taken on a global perspective in the production of
fish and fisheries products (Santos et al., 1998). They report the results of an FAO survey
that categorized the status of countries and the seafood industries in those countries in
terms of their adopting HACCP seafood procedures. Countries whose governments and
seafood industries have adopted or decided to introduce seafood HACCP include Canada,
Uruguay, Brazil, Chile, Ecuador, Australia, New Zealand, Thailand, Iceland, the US and,
more recently, Argentina, Peru, Ireland, Cuba, Morocco, Norway, Sri Lanka, Vietnam and
Bangladesh. A second group consists of countries whose governments have taken
unilateral initiatives to introduce HACCP via regulations with limited success and through
cooperation between the regulatory authorities and the seafood industry. These countries
include Mexico, Venezuela, and many countries of the EU, for example Italy, Germany
and France. In a third group of countries, the private sector is taking the lead in voluntarily
trying to introduce HACCP based programs regarding seafood export production. These
include Madagascar, Venezuela, Honduras, Tunisia, Myanmar, and Portugal. A final group
consists of countries where governments have decided to apply HACCP but have not yet
defined the process, including Japan, Russia and China. The remaining countries where the
status of seafood HACCP is unclear include Pakistan, South Korea, Iran, Colombia,
Panama, some East and Central European countries, and most African States.
Billy (2002) reveals that FS in the US is based on HACCP and SSOP. HACCP is the
industry’s tool for meeting the relevant performance standards. Both FS objectives and
corresponding performance standards are best accomplished through HACCP. FS in
Malaysia combines the implementation of the HACCP along with GMP, hygiene and

26
sanitation, and environment control (Merican, 2000). In Australia the food safety program
is based mainly on HACCP principles. However, it was ultimately agreed that those food
safety standards would not be applied to the entire food production chain as the primary
food industry sector is specifically excluded. It was, however, recognized that the food
safety standards could be applied to a primary food production activity if significant and
unmanaged food safety hazards were identified in this sector (Martin et al., 2003).
In Canada, two food inspection programs have been developed to embody these
internationally recognized principles of safe food processing – The Quality management
Program (QMP) and the Food Safety Enhancement Program (FSEP). Under both QMP and
FSEP initiatives, food manufacturers are responsible for the development, implementation
and maintenance of HACCP food safety management systems to ensure compliance with
health and safety regulations and trade agreements. These food safety management systems
must include a hazard analysis, written procedures for control of hazards and written
procedures for verifications of the system’s effectiveness (Gagnon et al., 2000).
Kvenberg et al. (2000) report the US experiences in dealing with HACCP for
seafood plants from a regulatory perspective. They are (1) GMP, SSOP considerations as a
prerequisite to HACCP implementation; (2) General HACCP principles; (3) verification
methods of industry development, implementation, and maintenance of effective HACCP
systems; (4) performance standards; (5) engagement in internal and outreach programs of
education and training; and (6) sponsorship of research to improve HACCP systems
functionally. Besides, measuring the effectiveness of a new food safety program such as
HACCP is an important consideration if regulatory agencies are to develop information on
the advantage of conducting an HACCP-based audit over conducting a sanitation based
inspection. Both the food industry and the regulatory agency share the same goal of
ensuring a safe food supply. However, there are HACCP implementation difficulties in
some industry segments because the general principles of the HACCP are not fully
understood. Despite these difficulties, however, numerous HACCP program successes
have occurred. These include successful implementation of SSOP in 6000 meat and poultry
plants and a significant reduction in the prevalence of salmonella in poultry plants where
HACCP has been implemented.
According to Lee and Hathaway (1999), New Zealand and other countries (Canada,
Uruguay, Brazil, Chile, Ecuador, Australia, Thailand, and Iceland) consider the
implementation of HACCP systems to be an important component of safety for food in
international trade. Given that the global experience regarding HACCP across all food
sectors, especially in primary production, is relatively new, both importing and exporting
countries have much to learn in assuring that the safety of food in international trade is
underpinned by HACCP systems that are scientifically derived, risk-based and equitable.
However, Eves and Dervisi (2005) note that there is little doubt that HACCP is

27
becoming more widely accepted throughout the UK food industry. Its successful
implementation, however, requires an understanding of its principles and a commitment
thereto by all levels of the workforce. HACCP per se does not make food safe; it is its
correct application that can make a difference. In order for this to be achieved, the barriers
to HACCP should be assessed and their impact evaluated. Until these barriers have been
resolved, HACCP systems will not be able to reach their full potential. Barnes and Mitchell
(2000) made similar observations.
Although there are many papers presented and discussed about experiences of
HACCP implementation as above mentioned, successful experiences of Thai fisheries in
the application of HACCP presented by Suwanrangsi (2002) are good references for
Vietnam’s fisheries industry in general and for SFCs in particular due to the same
conditions of HACCP implementation.

2.5 Food safety constraints and problems in developing countries

The international workshop on food safety management in developing countries, as

reported by Orris, and Whitehead (2000), Hanak et al. (2002) and Van Veen (2005)
emphasizes that prominent food scares and change in the international trading environment
have brought food safety to the forefront of international agri-food policy concerns. Recent
trends include an increased emphasis on food safety regulations in international trade, a
tightening of standards, a reorientation of private sector quality control techniques toward
preventive management, and a corresponding shift by regulatory agencies toward process-
based standards including mandatory HACCP in the food supply chain. In fact, in order to
meet FS requirements in international trade, the application and development of HACCP in
developing countries still encounter constraints in terms of deficiencies in basic hygiene
measures such as environmental controls, management of employee hygiene, investment in
technology, equipment design, and management of cross contamination. These constraints
are managerial as well as technological.

2.5.1 Technological constraints in HACCP implementation

Oriss (1999) and the discussion of world experts on food safety (2002) indicate that
many developing countries have difficulty overcoming the technical deficiencies and
providing new technological investment. They frequently require technical assistance in
order to fully understand and implement the sanitary measures. Besides, there are
differences among food companies in terms of the level of technical expertise, along with
the pressures and incentives for management to adopt the HACCP concept. The
introduction of HACCP systems in developing countries has depended very much upon the
level of technology. The larger companies usually have modern equipment and excellent

28
technical support, but the smaller operations may have no technically trained staff and they
may be using traditional equipment and methods to produce a large range of products
(Jirathana, 1998). Besides this, Panisello et al. (2000) discuss that improving the
microbiological quality of foods alone is insufficient, since food processing technologies
cannot always guarantee the absence of pathogens. Foods can also easily become
recontamination. Therefore, efforts must be made to adhere strictly to hygiene measures by
following GHP, GMP and by stringently implementing HACCP along the whole food
chain. Similar attitudes have been observed in the study of Legnani, et al. (2004).
These issues aside, food processing technologies are also applied to increase
digestibility, enhance the edibility of food, intensify sensory quality, increase shelf life,
improve nutritional quality, and/or render food safe. Food processing technologies
implemented at either the household level (e.g., farms, collectors and wholesale buyers), or
at the industrial level are designed to optimize all of these properties in the final product.
All of the above objectives can rarely be achieved using a single operation (Motarjemi,
2002). For instance, the application of the basic rules of food hygiene will help prevent
contamination, growth and survival of pathogens in foods and will reduce the incidence of
diarrhoea diseases.

2.5.2 Managerial problems of HACCP implementation

Managerial problems in developing countries in HACCP implementation also
encompass the internal and external ones of food companies. A key point of external
managerial problems is issues of HACCP inspection and audit. In contrast, activities
regarding employee hygiene and training are main internal management problems. Eves
and Dervisi (2005) mention the role of management in implementing and maintaining
HACCP. In almost every food company, HACCP management has been implemented.
Managers and most of the head chefs have been trained specially in HACCP because of a
perception that HACCP would be too complicated for their employees. Thus, a major part
of the monitoring has been performed by those who are qualified or trained (quality control
staffs, managers) and the less hazardous jobs are performed by other employees. Managers
at all levels have understood their role to be an important one because they recognized on
the one hand that their attitudes towards the system affected the way their employees
behaved. Which employees are trained and at which level and how their roles for FS are
managed are, on the other hand, managerial problems. The more interest and excitement
they show in their job and the more committed the managers are, the better the result
obtained. A number of other authors (Panisello & Quantick, 2001; Mortlock et al., 1999;
Easter et al., 1994) have also identified the same managerial problems in HACCP
implementation and maintenance regarding management attitudes and commitment to
employees.

29
 In addition, a variety of problems in the application of HACCP have been reported
by Panisello and Quantick (2001), Mortlock et al. (1999), Panisello et al. (1999), and Ward
(2001). The most important problems reported were the level of knowledge shared by
employees, various time constraints and additional documentation. Managers seemed to
find it difficult to make their employees understand the importance of hazard analysis and
why particular operations had to be monitored and controlled. To overcome this they
ensured that adequate supervision was in place and that people who had problems with the
system were identified and retrained. Time-related issues in correctly applying all
monitoring procedures and controls were noticed, especially during busy times. Panisello
and Quantick (2001) report similar issues. During busy times there was a tendency to
forget personal hygiene and the completion of required documentation. An insufficient
identification of hazards was also reported by management as a problem when the HACCP
system was beginning to be introduced in food companies. Panisello et al. (1999)
previously reports that inadequate hazard identification is a major drawback to the effective
implementation of HACCP. The problem seems to have arisen because of the lack of
understanding of what hazards are and how they should be identified and incorporated into
the system. This indicates the sort of background that a manager should have when
implementing an HACCP system.
Moreover, the uncertain authority of employees who are responsible for taking
corrective action is one of the problems that should be considered in developing countries.
In principle, the top management must themselves commit to fully supporting the authority
of those to whom they give responsibility for corrective action. However, sometimes top
management can be governed more by economic factors than by the safety aspects of the
company’s products. It is difficult to convince top management to fully accept the HACCP
principles throughout the whole chain. In addition, there is a shortage of effective and
experienced auditors. Auditing involves more than access to records of CCPs, assessment
of HACCP manuals, sampling at CCPs and verification of records (Dillon & Griffith,
1996). Auditors should also inspect production lines and other facilities to ensure that any
new hazard has been identified and taken into account; also their focus should be extended
to food safety auditing (Peters, 1999; Taverniers et al., 2004; Leaper and Richardson 1999;
and Orris, 1999).

2.5.3 Techno-managerial constraints of HACCP implementation in Vietnam

Like some developing countries, the HACCP implementation of Vietnam’s SFCs in
general and in the MD in particular is facing constraints in terms of management and
technological investment. There is a lack of strict quality management by the government,
industry, support organizations, SFCs, and chain stakeholders from “water to table.” In
addition, restrictions on quality knowledge, techniques, infrastructure, and technological
and equipment investment throughout the chain are a big challenge for seafood quality and

30
safety. Moreover, because the HACCP has not yet been introduced at the primary
production level, the roles of the government (the Ministry of Fisheries, local government
departments), SFCs and support organizations (VASEP and NAFIQAVED) throughout the
chain are vital. Those are the reasons why food safety and quality by means of the techno-
managerial approach, the combination of supply chain management and quality
management, the role of the government, SFCs and other relevant organizations are crucial
in order to provide a detailed understanding of their roles in solving research problems.

2.6.Techno-managerial approach for food safety and quality management

There are many approaches for implementing chain food safety quality control. One,
for instance, is an integrated and science-based approach as presented by Sheridan et al.
(1996). This approach is based on shared responsibility, the use of HACCP
principles/practices and the introduction of leading technologies and detection methods
within government and across the food industry. The process involves defining
accountabilities more clearly across the entire food continuum and working with partners
and stakeholders more closely. Other approaches, such as the FAO approach, as well as the
integrated approach of Kailis et al. (2000), focus mainly on elements of general design and
operation of hygienic premises, and equipment and training of personnel. However, the
techno-managerial approach indicated by Luning, et al., (2002) and Poon & Lijanage
(2003) ranks highly in solving research problems because there is an integration of
managerial and technological sciences.

2.6.1.Techno-managerial approach
Luning, et al. (2002) and Poon & Lijanage (2003) mention that food quality
management embraces the integrated use of technological disciplines as well as the
integrated use of managerial sciences. The following figure describes three different
approaches – the managerial, the technological and techno-managerial approach. They
differ in their extent of integration of managerial and technological sciences.

•The managerial approach means that technological aspects are contemplated as

facts: we can make everything we want to make. In fact, there are no technological
restrictions.
•The technological approach means that management aspects are considered as
boundary restrictions: we cannot make everything we want due to technological
restrictions.
•The techno-managerial approach encompasses integration of both technological and
managerial aspects. Quality problems are considered interactively from both a
technological and managerial viewpoint. This approach is suitable for solving seafood
quality problems in the MD because seafood supply chain problems in general are now

31
faced with technological and managerial restrictions as well as technical and local
infrastructure problems. Moreover, a good example of techno-managerial thinking is the
HACCP system, wherein critical hazards are controlled by human control and monitoring
systems, and consumers’ wishes are translated into technological requirements through an
intensive and organized collaboration of different departments in the company.

Figure 2.1 Different approaches to food quality management

In addition, Banati et al. (2002) emphasize in Food Safety and Quality that the ability
to integrate technological and managerial knowledge is very important for food safety and
quality design, control, improvement, and assurance. With a particular focus on food safety
and quality the quality management skills needed are:

•ability to apply the techno-managerial approach in food productionprocesses

•ability to develop and use models for (statistical) quality control
•ability to solve problems
•communication skills, with a focus on stakeholders
•ability to work in multidisciplinary teams

2.6.2 The food quality management model by means of a techno-managerial

approach
Figure 2.2 shows how the techno-managerial approach resulted in the food quality
management model (Luning et al., 2002).

32
 The model includes:

•the organization in its environment, wherein

•management and technology interact, striving for
•product quality that meets or exceeds customer expectations
•wherein technology is perceived as a technological system, with complex
interactions fulfilling different functions in order to meet product quality requirements, and
•wherein management is perceived as a management system with complex
interactions fulfilling different functions in order to activate the technological system and
give it the right direction, while ensuring that it meets customer expectations.

33
 Figure 2.2 Food quality management model (Luning, et al., 2002)

Furthermore, the objective of quality control is to guarantee that quality

requirements, such as product safety, reliability, service, etc., are realized by the quality
system. On the other hand, quality control should provide confidence to customers and
consumers that quality requirements are being met (ISO, 1998). A quality system is
defined as the organizational structure, responsibilities, processes, procedures and
resources that facilitate the achievement of quality management (NNI, 1999). In the food
industry several quality control systems (QAS) and norms have been developed but they
differ in their quality focus (e.g., food safety, supply guarantee, total quality) and their
approach (Hoogland et al., 1998; Waszink et al., 1995). With respect to approach, GMP
and HACCP mainly focus on assurance by technological requirements, whereas ISO is
more focused on management. Figure 2.3 illustrates how the common QAS are mapped by
means of their technology and management focus.
Because GMP/GHP involves guidelines that are aimed at assuring minimum
acceptable standards and conditions for processing and storage of products (buildings,
processing technology, equipment, and utilities), it has a technological focus and is a basic
condition for other systems like HACCP. An ISO-based quality system, on the other hand,
consists of all activities and handling being established in a procedural way, which must be
followed by ensuring clear assignment of responsibilities and authority. In actual practice,
procedures on all relevant topics had to be established, then carried out, and controlled.
This brings a management focus into the forefront. The role of HACCP is a necessary step
in transforming a technological focus into a management focus and is also a basic
condition for ISO/TQM application and success.

34
 Technological focus

Management focus
Figure 2.3 Common QAS schematically mapped according to
theirtechnological and management focus

This point of view towards quality control systems is also discussed by Nicolaides
(2002), where linkages are established between what are typically viewed as successive
stages of the preventive approach to quality control (GMP, HACCP and TQM) in
individual supply chains. Similarly, Jouve (1998), Huss and Ryder (2003) emphasized that
GMP and SSOP are generic requirements. The HACCP is a specific requirement for food
safety management, while ISO includes all quality elements that need to be assured and
managed and TQM is a long-term managerial strategy. Lackova (2001) also mentions that
the HACCP system is a more narrowly applied system for ensuring the quality of products
and one which is compatible with other systems such as quality systems following ISO
9000 and TQM.
Furthermore, food companies aiming to achieve a certificate for their system of
quality according to ISO 9000 are bound to work out an HACCP system for respective
products, processes and phases of production, which simultaneously observes a certain
progression of steps determining decisive points in this system. Therefore, food companies
have to start work on building up a quality system through implementing just such an
HACCP system for use as a specialized instrument and as a specialized part of the quality
system. On the other hand, construction of an HACCP system does not yet mean the
fulfilment of all requirements of ISO 9000. The common points of both systems lie in
following the elementary points of ISO 9001: a quality control system, requirements for
purchased products, identified ability and the ability to follow the product, operational
management, manipulation, storage, packaging, protection and supply, internal audits,
operational management of quality recording, training and preparation of workers,
statistical methods, etc.

35
 The application of ISO 9000 international norms and the HACCP system are
individual steps toward achieving minimum European quality standards and thus the ability
to compete on the food product market (Lackova, 2001). Although ISO 9000 and HACCP
both focus on preventing not detecting or correcting problems, an important difference is
that HACCP focuses on the product and ISO 9000 on the system. The development of the
HACCP plan identifies critical control points and procedures or activities identified in
order to adequately control them so as to ensure safe production of a food product. The
ISO 9000 quality management system provides the structure and foundation for the
maintenance of the quality system, while, as such, certification for conformity to an ISO
9000 standard will not actually certify the product. What it does certify is that the approved
company has a quality system that meets the scope of the stated standard (Newslow, 2003).
Cato (2000) emphasizes that HACCP programs in both developed and developing
countries often include quality standards as well as safety standards in their program
design. However, in European countries HACCP is more broadly defined as part of an
overall ISO 9000 system because of the better conditions of management, capital, quality
knowledge and technological investment. Therefore, seafood companies can be certified to
meet various ISO 9000 standards. SFCs in Vietnam follow the EU approach. It means that
they have applied HACCP as part of an overall ISO system and as a prerequisite condition
to achieve ISO certification.

2.6.3 Food supply chain management

Food supply chain management covers the management of the food supply system
from the farm, to food manufacturing, to retail and wholesale markets, and to consumer
issues (Bourlakis & Weightman, 2004; Eastham, et al. 2001). Relevant issues to the
management of food chain include (1) The food supply chain management environment,
(2) The food consumer, (3) Public conceptions of risk and product safety in the food supply
chain, (4) Procurement and supply chain management, (5) Food Manufacturing, (6) Food
retail and wholesale, (7) Food strategic alliances and networks, (8) The impact of
information, (9) Technology and electronic commerce in the food supply chain
management, and
(10) The future of food supply chain management (Bourlakis & Weightman, 2004).
Regarding food chain safety and quality, Luning et al., (2002) also mention that food
quality management must attain quality and safety standards stemming from customers’
requirements and expectations. These requirements and expectations are transformed into
the company’s performance quality objectives. To implement these objectives, partnership
relationships between food companies and their chain actors, and even with loyal
customers are crucial. So far, SFCs in the MD do not satisfy the managerial and

36
technological conditions and lack the financial possibilities to implement the ten topics of
food chain management. For instance, internal competition among SFCs still exists, chain
actors’ quality knowledge is low, chain information is insufficient and, especially,
relationships between SFCs and between SFCs and their chain stakeholders are still weak.

2.7 Summary

The literature reviewed has provided grounds for diagnosing a supply chain quality
management framework and a quality improvement process. The theories and concepts
with reference to the HACCP role in the food supply chain safety and food quality
management by means of a techno-managerial approach are described. More especially,
HACCP implementation and the experiences of HACCP application in the world’s food
chains are mentioned in detail. This Chapter has also shown the important role of
government, industry and other relevant organizations in the food chain safety as support
organizations for successful implementation of an HACCP program.

CHAPTER 3
FOOD SAFETY AND HYGIENE
3.1. INTRODUCTION

Food safety and hygiene is the most important factor in cooking. It doesn't matter
how delicious or complicated your recipe is: if the food makes people sick because of
improper cooking or handling, all your efforts will be wasted. You can't tell if a food is
safe to eat by how it looks or tastes. Proper storage, cooking and handling are the only
ways to ensure safe food

3.2. FOOD SAFETY AND HYGIENE

3.2.1. Definition of food and food safety

3.2.1.1. Food

Food is any substance, usually composed of carbohydrates, fats, proteins and water,
that can be eaten or drunk by an animal, including humans, for nutrition or pleasure. Items
considered food may be sourced from plants, animals or other categories such as fungus or
fermented products like alcohol. Although many human cultures sought food items through

37
hunting and gathering, today most cultures use farming, ranching, and fishing, with
hunting, foraging and other methods of a local nature included but playing a minor role.

Most traditions have a recognizable cuisine, a specific set of cooking traditions,

preferences, and practices, the study of which is known as gastronomy. Many cultures have
diversified their foods by means of preparation, cooking methods and manufacturing. This
also includes a complex food trade which helps the cultures to economically survive by-
way-of food, not just by consumption.

Many cultures study the dietary analysis of food habits. While humans are
omnivores, religion and social constructs such as morality often affect which foods they
will consume. Food safety is also a concern with foodborne illness claiming many lives
each year. In many languages, food is often used metaphorically or figuratively, as in "food
for thought".

Almost all foods are of plant or animal origin. However water and salt (both
inorganic substances) are important parts of the human diet. Salt is often eaten as a
flavoring or preservative.

Other foods not from animal or plant sources include various edible fungi, such as
mushrooms. Fungi and ambient bacteria are used in the preparation of fermented and
pickled foods such as leavened bread, alcoholic drinks, cheese, pickles, and yogurt. Many
cultures eat seaweed, a protist, or blue-green algae (cyanobacteria) such as Spirulina.
Additionally baking soda, another inorganic substance, is used in food preparation.

While some food can be eaten raw, many foods undergo some form of preparation
for reasons of safety, palatability, or flavor. At the simplest level this may involve washing,
cutting, trimming or adding other foods or ingredients, such as spices. It may also involve
mixing, heating or cooling, pressure cooking, fermentation, or combination with other
food. In a home, most food preparation takes place in a kitchen. Some preparation is done
to enhance the taste or aesthetic appeal; other preparation may help to preserve the food;
and others may be involved in cultural identity. A meal is made up of food which is
prepared to be eaten at a specific time and place.

Cooking

The term "cooking" encompasses a vast range of methods, tools and combinations of
ingredients to improve the flavor or digestibility of food. Cooking technique, known as
culinary art, generally requires the selection, measurement and combining of ingredients in
an ordered procedure in an effort to achieve the desired result. Constraints on success

38
include the variability of ingredients, ambient conditions, tools, and the skill of the
individual cooking. The diversity of cooking worldwide is a reflection of the myriad
nutritional, aesthetic, agricultural, economic, cultural and religious considerations that
impact upon it.

Cooking requires applying heat to a food which usually, though not always,
chemically transforms it, thus changing its flavor, texture, appearance, and nutritional
properties. There is archaeological evidence of roasted foodstuffs at Homo erectus
campsites dating from 420,000 years ago. Boiling as a means of cooking requires a
container, and was practiced at least since the 10th millennium BC with the introduction of
pottery.

Cooking equipment and methods

There are many types of cooking equipment used for cooking. Ovens are one type of
cooking equipment which can be used for baking or roasting and offer a dry-heat cooking
method. Different cuisines will use different types of ovens, for example Indian culture
uses a Tandoor oven is a cylindrical clay oven which operates at a single high temperature,
while western kitchens will use variable temperature convection ovens, conventional
ovens, toaster ovens in addition to non-radiant heat ovens like the microwave oven. Ovens
may be wood-fired, coal-fired, gas, electric, or oil-fired.

Various types of cook-tops are used as well. They carry the same variations of fuel
types as the ovens mentioned above. cook-tops are used to heat vessels placed on top of the
heat source, such as a sauté pan, sauce pot, frying pan, pressure cooker, etc. These pieces
of equipment can use either a moist or dry cooking method and include methods such as
steaming, simmering, boiling, and poaching for moist methods; while the dry methods
include sautéing, pan frying, or deep-frying.

In addition, many cultures use grills for cooking. A grill operates with a radiant heat
source from below, usually covered with a metal grid and sometimes a cover. An open bit
barbecue in the American south is one example along with the American style outdoor grill
fueled by wood, liquid propane or charcoal along with soaked wood chips for smoking. A
Mexican style of barbecue is called barbacoa, which involves the cooking of meats and
whole sheep over open fire. In Argentina, asado is prepared on a grill held over an open pit
or fire made upon the ground, on which a whole animal is grilled or in other cases smaller
cuts of the animal

Raw food

39
 Certain cultures highlight animal and vegetable foods in their raw state. Salads
consisting of raw vegetables or fruits are common in many cuisines. Sashimi in Japanese
cuisine consists of raw sliced fish or other meat, and sushi often incorporates raw fish or
other seafood as well. Steak tartare and salmon tartare are dishes made from diced or
ground raw beef or salmon respectively, mixed with various ingredients and served with
baguette, brioche or frites. In Italy, carpaccio is a dish of very thin sliced raw beef, drizzled
with a vinaigrette made with olive oil. A popular health food movement known as raw
foodism promotes a mostly vegan diet of raw fruits, vegetables and grains prepared in
various ways, including juicing, food dehydration, sprouting, and other methods of
preparation that do not heat the food above 118 °F (48 °C).

Restaurants

Many cultures produce food for sale in restaurants for paying customers. These
restaurants often have trained chefs who prepare the food, while trained waitstaff serve the
customers. The term restaurant is credited to the French from the 19th century, as it relates
to the restorative nature of the bouillons that were once served in them. However, the
concept pre-dates the naming of these establishments, as evidence suggests commercial
food preparation may have existed during the age of the city of Pompeii, as well as an
urban sales of prepared foods in China during the Song Dynasty. The coffee shops or cafes
of 17th century Europe may also be considered an early version of the restaurant. In 2005
the United States spent $496 billion annually for out-of-home dining. Expenditures by type
of out-of-home dining was as follows, 40% in full-service restaurants, 37.2% in limited
service restaurants (fast food), 6.6% in schools or colleges, 5.4% in bars and vending
machines, 4.7% in hotels and motels, 4.0% in recreational places, and 2.2% in other which
includes military bases.

Food manufacture

Packaged foods are manufactured outside the home for purchase. This can be as
simple as a butcher preparing meat, or as complex as a modern international food industry.
Early food processing techniques were limited by available food preservation, packaging
and transportation. This mainly involved salting, curing, curdling, drying, pickling,
fermentation and smoking. Food manufacturing arose during the industrial revolution in
the 19th century. This development took advantage of new mass markets and emerging
new technology, such as milling, preservation, packaging and labeling and transportation.
It brought the advantages of pre-prepared time saving food to the bulk of ordinary people
who did not employ domestic servants.

40
 At the start of the 21st century, a two-tier structure has arisen, with a few
international food processing giants controlling a wide range of well-known food brands.
There also exists a wide array of small local or national food processing companies.
Advanced technologies have also come to change food manufacture. Computer-based
control systems, sophisticated processing and packaging methods, and logistics and
distribution advances, can enhance product quality, improve food safety, and reduce costs.

3.2.1.2. Food safety

Food safety is an increasingly important public health issue. Governments all over
the world are intensifying their efforts to improve food safety. These efforts are in response
to an increasing number of food safety problems and rising consumer concerns.

Definition of Foodborne illness, commonly called "food poisoning," is caused by

bacteria, toxins, viruses, parasites, and prions. Foodborne illnesses are defined as diseases,
usually either infectious or toxic in nature, caused by agents that enter the body through the
ingestion of food. Every person is at risk of foodborne illness

Roughly 7 million people die of food poisoning each year, with about 10 times as
many suffering from a non-fatal version. The two most common factors leading to cases of
bacterial foodborne illness are cross-contamination of ready-to-eat food from other
uncooked foods and improper temperature control. Less commonly, acute adverse
reactions can also occur if chemical contamination of food occurs, for example from
improper storage, or use of non-food grade soaps and disinfectants. Food can also be
adulterated by a very wide range of articles (known as 'foreign bodies') during farming,
manufacture, cooking, packaging, distribution or sale. These foreign bodies can include
pests or their droppings, hairs, cigarette butts, wood chips, and all manner of other
contaminants. It is possible for certain types of food to become contaminated if stored or
presented in an unsafe container, such as a ceramic pot with lead-based glaze.

Magnitude of foodborne illness: Foodborne diseases are a widespread and growing

public health problem, both in developed and developing countries.

• The global incidence of foodborne disease is difficult to estimate, but it has been
reported that in 2005 alone 1.8 million people died from diarrhoeal diseases. A great
proportion of these cases can be attributed to contamination of food and drinking water.
Additionally, diarrhoea is a major cause of malnutrition in infants and young children.
• In industrialized countries, the percentage of the population suffering from
foodborne diseases each year has been reported to be up to 30%. In the United States of

41
America (USA), for example, around 76 million cases of foodborne diseases, resulting in
325,000 hospitalizations and 5,000 deaths, are estimated to occur each year.
• While less well documented, developing countries bear the brunt of the problem
due to the presence of a wide range of foodborne diseases, including those caused by
parasites. The high prevalence of diarrhoeal diseases in many developing countries
suggests major underlying food safety problems.

While most foodborne diseases are sporadic and often not reported, foodborne
disease outbreaks may take on massive proportions. For example, in 1994, an outbreak of
salmonellosis due to contaminated ice cream occurred in the USA, affecting an estimated
224,000 persons. In 1988, an outbreak of hepatitis A, resulting from the consumption of
contaminated clams, affected some 300,000 individuals in China

Major foodborne diseases from microorganisms

• Salmonellosis is a major problem in most countries. Salmonellosis is caused by the

Salmonella bacteria and symptoms are fever, headache, nausea, vomiting, abdominal pain
and diarrhoea. Examples of foods involved in outbreaks of salmonellosis are eggs, poultry
and other meats, raw milk and chocolate.
• Campylobacteriosis is a widespread infection. It is caused by certain species of
Campylobacter bacteria and in some countries, the reported number of cases surpasses the
incidence of salmonellosis. Foodborne cases are mainly caused by foods such as raw milk,
raw or undercooked poultry and drinking water. Acute health effects of campylobacteriosis
include severe abdominal pain, fever, nausea and diarrhoea. In two to ten per cent of cases
the infection may lead to chronic health problems, including reactive arthritis and
neurological disorders.
• Infections due to enterohaemorrhagic (causing intestinal bleeding) E. coli, e.g.
E.coli O157, and listeriosis are important foodborne diseases which have emerged over the
last decades. Although their incidence is relatively low, their severe and sometimes fatal
health consequences, particularly among infants, children and the elderly, make them
among the most serious foodborne infections.
• Cholera is a major public health problem in developing countries, also causing
enormous economic losses. The disease is caused by the bacterium Vibrio cholerae. In
addition to water, contaminated foods can be the vehicle of infection. Different foods,
including rice, vegetables, millet gruel and various types of seafood have been implicated
in outbreaks of cholera. Symptoms, including abdominal pain, vomiting and profuse
watery diarrhoea, may lead to severe dehydration and possibly death, unless fluid and salt
are replaced.

Other food safety problems: some major examples

42
 • Naturally occurring toxins, such as mycotoxins, marine biotoxins, cyanogenic
glycosides and toxins occurring in poisonous mushrooms, periodically cause severe
intoxications. Mycotoxins, such as aflatoxin and ochratoxin A, are found at measurable
levels in many staple foods; the health implications of long-term exposure of such toxins
are poorly understood.
• Unconventional agents such as the agent causing bovine spongiform
encephalopathy (BSE, or "mad cow disease"), is associated with variant Creutzfeldt-Jakob
(vCJD) Disease in humans. Consumption of bovine products containing brain tissue is the
most likely route for transmission of the agent to humans.
• Persistant Organic Pollutants (POPs) are compounds that accumulate in the
environment and the human body. Known examples are Dioxins and PCBs
(polychlorinated biphenyls). Dioxins are unwanted byproducts of some industrial processes
and waste incineration. Exposure to POPs may result in a wide variety of adverse effects in
humans.
• Metals: such as lead and mercury, cause neurological damage in infants and
children. Exposure to cadmium can also cause kidney damage, usually seen in the elderly.
These (and POPs) may contaminate food through pollution of air, water and soil.

Costs of foodborne diseases

• Food contamination creates an enormous social and economic burden on

communities and their health systems. In the USA, diseases caused by the major pathogens
alone are estimated to cost up to US $35 billion annually (1997) in medical costs and lost
productivity. The re-emergence of cholera in Peru in 1991 resulted in the loss of US $500
million in fish and fishery product exports that year.

Food poisoning has been recognized as a disease of man since as early as

Hippocrates. The sale of rancid, contaminated or adulterated food was commonplace until
introduction of hygiene, refrigeration, and vermin controls in the 19th century. Discovery
of techniques for killing bacteria using heat and other microbiological studies by scientists
such as Louis Pasteur contributed to the modern sanitation standards that are ubiquitous in
developed nations today. This was further underpinned by the work of Justus von Liebig,
which led to the development of modern food storage and food preservation methods. In
more recent years, a greater understanding of the causes of food-borne illnesses has led to
the development of more systematic approaches such as the Hazard Analysis and Critical
Control Points (HACCP), which can identify and eliminate many risks.

What causes food poisoning?

There are many bugs that can cause food to become contaminated.

43
 Many cases of food poisoning are caused by microbes, such as bacteria, viruses,
moulds, yeasts or parasites, in the food we eat or the water we drink. Food poisoning can
also be caused by the toxic substances that these microbes produce, or by natural
contaminants that occur in foodstuffs.

Food poisoning bacteria can grow in food quickly, especially in warm and moist
conditions. Just a single bacterium on an item of food left out of the fridge overnight could
harbor many millions of bacteria by the morning, enough to make you ill if you eat it.
Most bacteria grow best and increase in number in a moist environment between 5°C and
60°C - a range of temperatures known as the ‘growth’ or ‘danger’ zone. Colder or hotter
than this, means those bacteria cannot grow effectively.

Food poisoning bacteria are found in many foods, including:

• Meat and meat products - such as beef, mutton meat, minced meat and pâtés.

• Fish and fish products such as shellfish and seafood.

• Poultry - such as chicken or turkey.

• Eggs and raw egg products (such as mayonnaise).

• Unpasteurised milk (or milk contaminated after pasteurisation).

• Soft and mould-ripened cheeses.

• Cooked foods - such as fried rice.

How is food poisoning transmitted?

Transmission occurs when you eat contaminated food. Different foods may be
contaminated with different bugs, or chemicals. Additional spread may occur from an ill
person to others due to inadequate hand washing after using the toilet.

What are the symptoms of food poisoning?

Many people have had food borne illness and not even known it. It’s sometimes
called food poisoning, and it can feel like the flu. The symptoms of food poisoning vary
since different bugs will cause different symptoms to occur, including stomach pains,
nausea, vomiting and diarrhoea. Food poisoning is usually harmless to an adult, but may
cause quite grave consequences in small children, the elderly or people with some serious
illness. Food poisonings can be prevented. All it takes is some knowledge and skills.

44
 How soon do symptoms appear?

This will be specific to the bug making you sick. Food poisoning from bacteria can
occur in different ways. Some types of bacteria release poisons called toxins while they are
growing in food. These toxins will cause food-poisoning symptoms soon after the
contaminated food is eaten. With other types of food poisoning, the bacteria grow in the
body first before causing symptoms. This leaves a gap between eating and symptoms
called the incubation period. The incubation period varies in length - it can be a few hours
or up to a few days or weeks.

How is food poisoning dianosed?

It is diagnosed when your stool is examined under a microscope. Several specimens

may be sent to the laboratory on different days because the bug making you sick may not
be found in every sample. A sample of the food that made the sickness may also be tested
at the laboratory to see if the bug can be identified. Other tests the doctor may order might
include blood tests and a urine sample.

What is the treatment for food poisoning?

Treatment alternatives vary because food poisoning can be caused by many different
bugs. Your doctor will discuss the treatment with you, depending upon which bug has
made the sickness.

Why is it important to report food poisoning?

If you think your illness has been caused by food from a restaurant or other food
business, the local environmental health department needs to know so it can investigate the
business in question. If the environmental health officers find a problem with the
business’s food hygiene practices, and get the business to improve them, this could help
prevent other people suffering from food poisoning.

The Food Safety Act 1990 and regulations made under it make it an offence for
anyone to sell or process food for sale, which is harmful to health. They also place an
obligation on businesses to ensure that their activities are carried out in a hygienic way.
Your local council is responsible for ensuring that local businesses comply with these
regulations.

The Food Safety Section deals with a wide variety of disciplines such as food
hygiene, food standards, food complaints, food labeling, health and safety in food

45
premises, infectious diseases control, food and water sampling, animal feedstuffs and
licensing. The service may also provides low cost specialist Food Hygiene Training

Recommended measures for ensuring food safety include maintaining a clean

preparation area with foods of different types kept separate, ensuring an adequate cooking
temperature, and refrigerating foods promptly after cooking.

Food safety is a scientific discipline describing handling, preparation, and storage of

food in ways that prevent foodborne illness. This includes a number of routines that should
be followed to avoid potentially severe health hazards. Food can transmit disease from
person to person as well as serve as a growth medium for bacteria that can cause food
poisoning. Debates on genetic food safety include such issues as impact of genetically
modified food on health of further generations and genetic pollution of environment, which
can destroy natural biological diversity. In developed countries there are intricate standards
for food preparation, whereas in lesser developed countries the main issue is simply the
availability of adequate safe water, which is usually a critical item.

3.2.2. Definition of hygiene and food hygiene.

3.2.2.1. Hygiene

The word hygiene derives from the name of the ancient Greek goddess of healthful
living, Hygeia. Initially worshipped in her own right, by the fifth century BCE in Athens
Hygeia was instead depicted as a demi-god, the daughter or wife of the god of healing,
Asclepius. While worship of Asclepius aimed at curing disease through divine intercession,
worship of Hygeia emphasized obtaining health by living wisely in accordance with her
laws. In contemporary Western society the concept of hygiene has become associated with
standards of personal grooming which often have little effect on individual health.

Historical background

Hygiene in the earliest sense was not connected to cleanliness or personal grooming.
Indeed popular attitudes in Western Europe and the US held that frequent bathing was
dangerous to individual health. It upset the physical system, robbed the body of precious
natural oils, and led to debilitating illness. Though individuals such as Benjamin Franklin
urged cleanliness as a necessary component of healthful living, the plumbing technology
required to make this easy was underdeveloped and expensive. Travellers in Europe and
the US during the early nineteenth century frequently commented on the filthy conditions
both of persons and households. One historian has suggested that, in a largely agricultural
community, the dirt of honest labour was associated with both economic and physical well-

46
being, an outlook that applied to both peasant cultures in Europe and yeoman farm life in
the US.

Beginning in the early nineteenth century, the repeated onslaught of diseases such as
cholera began to alter people's understanding of personal hygiene. Since orthodox
medicine seemed powerless in response to these pandemics, a variety of alternative
medicines gained popularity. Many of these alternatives emphasized disease prevention
through healthful living, which included diet and clothing reform, daily cold water bathing,
exercise, regulation of bowel movements, and abstinence from coffee, tea, alcohol, and
sex. In their attack on heroic medicine, reformers emphasized personal and domestic
responses to health crises. For these reformers, living hygienically was essential both
because it led to physical well-being, and because it revealed proper moral character.
Catherine Beecher, the most prominent domestic advice author of the mid-nineteenth-
century US, propounded this view of hygiene. In Letters to the People on Health and
Happiness she called her hygiene precepts, ‘… laws of health and happiness, because our
Creator has connected the reward of enjoyment with obedience to these rules, and the
penalty of suffering with disobedience to them’.

Florence Nightingale, in her efforts to reform English hospital care, provided the
most cogent arguments linking personal and public hygiene with good health and morals.
Like many of her contemporaries, Nightingale believed that unhealthy living made
individuals susceptible to contagion. She rejected germs as a specific causal agent,
however, asserting that dirt, sewer gases, and other environmental contagion produced
illness. Nightingale's system for training nurses reflects this belief, and Nightingale nurses
cleaned the patient and created order in the hospital. Nightingale is, therefore, a transitional
figure linking the idea that the individual has a moral responsibility to live healthfully with
a desire to control external threats to individual health.

As Western society became more urban and industrial, the disorderliness of city life
seemed to threaten the health of even the most dedicated follower of Beecher's ‘laws of
health and happiness’. Gradual acceptance of the germ theory compounded the fear that
right living alone could not prevent illness. The eleventh edition of the Encyclopedia
Britannica reflects this attitude by asserting that hygiene embraces ‘all the agencies which
affect the physical and mental well-being of man.’ Hygiene as a system included not only
personal hygiene related to food, clothing, exercise, cleanliness, and sexual control, but
also sciences such as engineering, meteorology, bacteriology, and public sanitation and
waterworks.

Since social health required both environmental cleanliness and hygienic behaviour
on the part of the masses, reformers sought to extend private middle-class standards of

47
hygiene into the public arena by reforming garbage collection, water delivery, and sewage
disposal. They also sought to change the behaviours of the lower classes. In the US the
effort to transmit hygienic practices to the masses was inextricably linked to
Americanization. The goal was to lift so-called ‘dirty foreigners’ to middle-class American
standards. The lessons of hygienic living were first taught to women through ‘settlement
houses’ and visiting nurses, but the most effective pedagogy of hygiene targeted children
in schools. Hygiene instruction prodded children to swat flies, refrain from spitting, brush
their teeth and hair, clean their clothing, wash all of their body and not just the parts that
showed, eat balanced meals, and abstain from alcohol, tobacco, and sex. Humiliation of
children who did not meet the teacher's standards was frequently used to reinforce these
lessons, and students were expected to carry the lessons home. African- Americans and
immigrants readily embraced hygienic living as a means of uplift. Booker T. Washington,
prominent leader of the African- American community and founder of the Tuskegee
Institute, emphasized the ‘gospel of the toothbrush’. Ironically, African-Americans, many
of whom worked as janitors, maids, and laundresses, were viewed as indelibly dirty and
diseased regardless of their adherence to the hygienic standards of the white middle
classes.

Racial hygiene

The racism inherent in this evaluation of blacks and immigrants was at the root of
the international eugenics movement, also known as the racial hygiene movement.
Proponents of eugenics in the US, Great Britain, Australia, France, Germany, and
Scandinavia maintained that social health and progress would arise from increased
childbearing among presumably superior people and limitation of reproduction for
genetically inferior people. The US led the way in passing legislation which allowed forced
sterilization of ‘undesirables’ in custodial care, such as the mentally ill, criminals, and
racial minorities. By the 1930s, 2000-4000 operations per year were performed in 23 states,
with nearly half of all sterilizations occurring in California.

In 1933 Germany followed the American lead with the passage of two sterilization
laws patterned primarily on California's model. The chief difference was that the law in
Germany standardized procedures for determining eligibility for sterilization and applied
these rules to the entire nation, an ‘advantage’ much admired by many American genetic
scientists and eugenicists. The Nazi use of showers as a façade for the gassing of millions
of Jews, homosexuals, gypsies, and communists ironically underscores this perversion of
hygienic practices.

48
 Advertising cleanliness

The 1920s saw the introduction of a new corporate understanding of hygiene that
wedded the educational approach of the social reformers to the methods of mass
communication. Good hygiene became associated with good business. Metropolitan
Insurance of New York and the Henry Street Visiting Nurses Association reached an
agreement whereby the nurses taught Metropolitan clients to live hygienically. The
Cleanliness Institute, founded by the Association of American Soap and Glycerine
Producers, created lessons for teachers on personal hygiene. They also hired a popular
children's author to create a series of five books with churlish characters called goops,
including the unhygienic characters of Hatesope and Rodirtygus who refused to bathe. The
lesson of each of the tales was that no good child would behave like a goop. Since
corporate promoters of hygiene had two aims, to draw new users into the market for their
products and to encourage greater consumption of their products by current users, they
added new diseases, such as halitosis (bad breath) and body odour, to the list that good
hygiene supposedly prevented. The introduction of these ‘disease states’ indicated a shift in
the understanding of hygiene, which now emphasized a well-groomed personal image and
social acceptability as important outcomes of what was once extolled as the harbinger of
health. In the US this meant that hygiene now included removal of ‘unsightly hair’ from
women's underarms (beginning in the nineteen-teens) and legs (after the 1940s).

3.2.2.2. Food hygiene

The term food hygiene has been defined, by Codex Alimentarius (an international
organisation for the development of food standards and guidelines) as "all conditions and
measures necessary to ensure the safety and suitability of food at all stages of the food
chain."

As will be seen from this definition the term "food hygiene" encompasses a wide
range of measures that can be applied from the growth of food products and the raising of
food animals, through harvesting and slaughter, processing, delivery, storage and final sale.
However, for many, food hygiene will be equated with cleanliness; the cleanliness of food
premises and food handlers

Whilst the cleanliness of those who handle food and their equipment and
surroundings is essential for good food hygiene to occur it is only one of the measures
necessary if food is to be safely prepared. Of equal or perhaps even more importance in
maintaining good standards of food hygiene is the avoidance of cross-contamination and
good temperature control. Cross-contamination is the passing of food poisoning bacteria
from contaminated, usually raw food to ready-to-eat food. Such cross-contamination can

49
occur in three ways, direct contact of e.g. raw meat with ready-to-eat food, the drip of raw
food juices such as blood onto a ready-to-eat food and the use of unwashed hands or
equipment to handle both raw food and ready-to-eat food

Good temperature control is essential if satisfactory standards of food hygiene are to

be achieved. In most investigations that occur following the outbreak of a food-borne
disease a failure in temperature control is identified as one of causes of the event. Foods
which are suitable media for the growth of pathogenic (disease producing) bacteria -
mainly moist high protein foods such as meat, eggs and dairy products - must be kept
either cold or hot. They should not be allowed to languish in the danger zone between 5°C
- 63°C for any longer than absolutely necessary

This means that good food hygiene practices will include the correct storage of cold
food at 5°C or below and hot food at 63°C or above. Good food hygiene will also require
that food is properly cooked and if not used straightaway that it is cooled quickly to 5°C
and if

As far as cooking and reheating temperatures are concerned for potentially

contaminated foods, like raw meat and poultry, the usual recommendations in food hygiene
textbooks is 75°C for 30 seconds. Besides cleanliness, temperature control and the
avoidance of cross contamination food hygiene measures will also include a safe supply of
water for food preparation and cleaning, pest control and the proper training of staff in the
principles of food hygiene.

The modern approach to food hygiene puts considerable emphasis on food safety
management systems, which are designed to provide assurance that the correct food
hygiene practices are always in place. The internationally accepted HACCP approach is
now incorporated as a mandatory requirement in Food Hygiene Regulations across the
globe. HACCP stands for "Hazard Analysis Critical Control Point" and is a system that
establishes the stages in the food business that is absolutely essential (critical) for food
safety and seeks to control and monitor them. Such critical controls might include thorough
cooking of food, avoidance of cross-contamination and adequate refrigeration of perishable
items etc.. So food hygiene really is a wide discipline and its implementation requires
commitment and investment in time and money by those who carry the responsibility of
providing and preparing food for consumption by the public

3.3. Directions and recommendation

In the present study, food safety knowledge and attitude of 300 consumers from nine
different categories of food service establishments (FSEs) were assessed. Results revealed

50
that most consumers (60%) eating at various FSEs were young, in the age group of 18–35
years. Some of the consumers could identify the carriers for foodborne diseases such as
cholera, food poisoning and jaundice, but most of them did not know about the carriers of
typhoid, gastroenteritis and amebiosis. Most of the consumers received information on
food safety from family and friends. A positive association was seen between education of
consumers and frequency of receiving information from various sources such as
magazines, TV/radio, posters/hoardings, newspapers, school/colleges, health workers and
family/friends. Most consumers had a positive attitude toward food hygiene, and they
believed in punishing street food vendors who violated the food safety norms. Most
consumers believed that government intervention would help in improving the quality of
street foods. A lot of better-educated food handlers believed that adherence to norms on the
personal hygiene of the food handler should be made compulsory, and that training of
persons in street food service is essential to ensure quality of food and food safety. In
conclusion, various sources of information should be used to increase consumer awareness
on food safety.

International consensus has been reached on the principles regarding evaluation of

the food safety of genetically modified plants. The concept of substantial equivalence has
been developed as part of a safety evaluation framework, based on the idea that existing
foods can serve as a basis for comparing the properties of genetically modified foods with
the appropriate counterpart. Application of the concept is not a safety assessment per se,
but helps to identify similarities and differences between the existing food and the new
product, which are then subject to further toxicological investigation. Substantial
equivalence is a starting point in the safety evaluation, rather than an endpoint of the
assessment. Consensus on practical application of the principle should be further
elaborated. Experiences with the safety testing of newly inserted proteins and of whole
genetically modified foods are reviewed, and limitations of current test methodologies are
discussed. The development and validation of new profiling methods such as DNA
microarray technology, proteomics, and metabolomics for the identification and
characterization of unintended effects, which may occur as a result of the genetic
modification, is recommended. The assessment of the allergenicity of newly inserted
proteins and of marker genes is discussed. An issue that will gain importance in the near
future is that of post-marketing surveillance of the foods derived from genetically modified
crops. It is concluded, among others that, that application of the principle of substantial
equivalence has proven adequate, and that no alternative adequate safety assessment
strategies are available.

3.3.1. Directions from HACCP and WHO

3.3.1.1. Directions from HACCP in cooking.

51
 The temperature range in which foodborne bacteria can grow is known as the
danger zone. This is typically considered to be between 40°F (4.4°C) and 140°F (60°C),
though often 45°F (7.2°C) is considered the lower temperature of the range. According to
the 2005 FDA Food Code, the danger zone is defined as 41°F - 135°F (5°C - 57°C).
Potentially hazardous food should not be stored at temperatures in this range in order to
prevent foodborne illness, and food that remains in this zone for more than four hours must
be discarded.

"Cooking food until the CORE TEMPERATURE is 75 °C or above will ensure

that harmful bacteria are destroyed.
However, lower cooking temperatures are acceptable provided that the CORE
TEMPERATURE is maintained for a specified period of time as follows :

• 60 °C for a minimum of 45 minutes

• 65 °C for a minimum of 10 minutes
• 70 °C for a minimum of 2 minutes"

Previous guidance from a leaflet produced by the UK Department Of Health

“Handling Cooked Meats Safely A Ten Point Plan” also allowed for:

• "75 °C for a minimum of 30 seconds

• 80 °C for a minimum of 6 seconds"

3.3.1.2. Future directions for food safety at the World Health Organization
(WHO)

In partnership with other stakeholders, WHO is developing policies that will further
promote the safety of food. These policies cover the entire food chain from production to
consumption and will make use of different types of expertise.

The Work of the WHO Department of Food Safety and other WHO programmes and
departments includes strengthening food safety systems, promoting good manufacturing
practices and educating retailers and consumers about appropriate food handling.
Education of consumers and training of food handlers in safe food handling is one of the
most critical interventions in the prevention of foodborne illnesses.

• WHO is promoting in-country laboratory-based surveillance of priority foodborne

diseases in humans and animals, as well as the monitoring of pathogens in food. In co-
operation with its Member States, WHO is working to support the development of
internationally agreed-upon guidelines for data collection in countries. WHO is also
compiling outbreak and surveillance databases, and is broadening its epidemic
surveillance capacity to include foodborne disease outbreaks.
• WHO is expanding its global network of participating institutions to monitor
chemical contamination of the food supply, particularly in developing countries.
• WHO is promoting the use of all food technologies which may contribute to public
health, such as pasteurization, food irradiation and fermentation.

52
 • WHO has undertaken an important new initiative to strengthen the scientific basis
of food safety activities through the establishment of a WHO/FAO (Food and Agriculture
Organization of the United Nations) expert advisory body to assess microbiological risks in
food.
• WHO is increasing its involvement in the work of the FAO/WHO Codex
Alimentarius Commission, whose standards, guidelines and recommendations are regarded
as the international reference for food safety requirements by the World Trade
Organization. WHO and FAO is initiating a thorough review of Codex primo 2002.
• Biotechnology has become a major public issue in developed as well as developing
countries. WHO, jointly with FAO, will convene a series of expert consultations to assess
the safety and nutritional aspects of foods derived from genetically modified plants,
microorganisms, and animals. WHO has initiated work to establish a knowledge base
focusing on a broader evaluation of risks, benefits and other considerations related to the
production and consumption of foods derived from biotechnology.

3.3.2. Recommendation for consumers.

Anyone who owns, manages or works in a food business — apart from those
working in primary food production such as harvesting, slaughtering or milking — is
affected by these regulations. They apply to anything from a hot-dog van to a five-star
restaurant, from a village hall where food is prepared to a large supermarket, or to a
vending machine. This is true whether you sell publicly or privately, in a hotel or in a
marquee, for profit or for fund-raising. The regulations do not apply to food cooked at
home for private consumption.

Every process which deals with preparing or selling food can be classed as a food
business activity, including:

• preparation
• processing
• manufacturing
• transportation
• distribution
• handling
• packaging
• storage
• selling
• supplying

53
 Generally, anyone who handles food, or whose actions could affect its safety, must
follow the regulations. This includes people who sell food (whether to retailers or to the
public) and anyone who cleans articles or equipment which come into contact with food.

Occasionally, food poisoning can be very serious and even cause death. So it’s
important to prevent food poisoning with good food hygiene.

Prevention and control of food born diseases, regardless of the specific cause, are
based on the same principles; avoidance of food contamination or destruction or destroying
the contaminants. Prevention depends on educating food handlers about proper practices in
cooking and storage of food and personal hygiene.

Wash your hands

Good personal hygiene is an important way to stop food bugs from spreading.
Washing your hands frequently is especially important:

• Wash your hands and nails before handling food, when you switch between
handling cooked and uncooked foods, and after going to the toilet

• Use warm water and soap for washing, cold water is less effective

• Rinse your hands well and dry them on a clean hand towel, not on the dishcloth or
your apron

• Cover up cuts and sores with a waterproof plaster

The World Health Organization had developed "Ten Golden Rules for Safe Food
Preparation." These are as follows:

1. Choose foods processed for safety.

2. Cook food thoroughly.

3. Eat cooked foods immediately.

4. Store cooked foods carefully.

5. Reheat cooked food thoroughly.

6. Avoid contact between raw food and cooked food.

54
 7. Wash hands repeatedly.

8. Keep all kitchen surfaces meticulously clean.

9. Protect food from insects, rodents and other animals.

10. Use safe water.

In addition the burden of death and disease from food poisoning or food borne
disease is huge, and yet, a better organisation and communication between authorities
along the entire food chain and with the consumers, could significantly reduce it, making
food safer for consumers around the world.

However food safety experts recommend that everyone think about food safety at
each step in the food handling process - from shopping to storing leftovers. What this really
means is always following these four simple steps:

CLEAN - Wash hands, utensils and surfaces in hot soapy water before and after food
preparation, and especially after preparing meat, poultry, eggs or seafood to protect
adequately against bacteria. Using a disinfectant cleaner or a mixture of bleach and water
on surfaces and antibacterial soap on hands can provide some added protection.

SEPARATE - Keep raw meat, poultry, eggs and seafood and their juices away from
ready-to-eat foods; never place cooked food on a plate that previously held raw meat,
poultry, eggs or seafood. Cross-contamination occurs when raw meats or eggs come in
contact with foods that will be eaten uncooked. This is a major source of food poisoning.
Always double-wrap raw meats and place them on the lowest shelf in the refrigerator so
there is no way juices can drip on fresh produce. Use the raw meats within 1-2 days of
purchase, or freeze for longer storage.

When grilling or cooking raw meats or fish, make sure to use a clean platter to hold
the foods after cooking. Don't use the same platter you used to carry the raw food out to the
grill! I also wash the tongs used in grilling after the food is turned for the last time on the
grill, as well as spatulas and spoons used for stir-frying or turning meat as it cooks.

COOK - Cook food to the proper internal temperature (this varies for different cuts
and types of meat and poultry) and check if food is done with a food thermometer. Cook
eggs until both the yolk and white are firm.

55
 CHILL - Refrigerate promptly. Refrigerate or freeze perishables, prepared food and
leftovers within two hours and make sure the refrigerator is set at no higher than 40°F and
that the freezer unit is set at 0°F

Chilling food is very important. The danger zone where bacteria multiply is between
40 and 140 degrees Fahrenheit. Your refrigerator should be set to 40 degrees Fahrenheit or
below; your freezer should be 0 degrees Fahnrenheit or below. Here's a simple rule: serve
hot foods hot, cold foods cold. Use chafing dishes or hot plates to keep food hot while
serving. Use ice water baths to keep cold foods cold. Never let any food sit at room
temperature for more than 2 hours - 1 hour if the ambient temperature is 80 degrees
Fahrenheit or above.

When packing for a picnic, make sure the foods are already chilled when they go in
the insulated hamper. The hamper won't chill food - it keeps food cold when properly
packed with ice. Hot cooked foods should be placed in shallow containers, covered, and
immediately refrigerated so they cool rapidly.

Special occasions

Even if you are usually careful about food hygiene, extra care required on special
occasions such as a barbeque, preparing a picnic or cooking for a party. Here are some tips.

• If you are cooking for a large party, consider fridge space. An over-filled fridge
may not cool the food sufficiently, so you might need to buy certain foods at the last
minute.

• Party foods that normally need to be refrigerated shouldn’t be left out on the
sideboard for hours while the party goes on - they can easily become contaminated. Serve
individual portions and keep leftovers stored in the fridge.

• When preparing a picnic, take the food out of the fridge at the last minute and use a
cool bag to keep it chilled and covered until you eat. If you are handling food, consider
taking antiseptic hand wipes.

• For barbeques, only start cooking when the charcoals are glowing red with a layer
of grey ash. Move the food around the grill and test the centre with a clean skewer to check
it is cooked through. Charred on the outside doesn’t mean it’s cooked on the inside. Serve
food straight away or keep it in a hot oven until you are ready to eat.

• Take care not to cross-contaminate raw and cooked meat by using separate utensils.

56
 Eating out

You usually cannot inspect the kitchens when you eat out, but there are certain
warning signs of poor hygiene standards: if you are concerned about what you are served,
don’t eat it:

• A dirty restaurant, dirty toilets, dirty cutlery or crockery

• Rubbish and overflowing bins outside the restaurant - these could attract vermin

• Staff in dirty uniforms, dirty fingernails, long hair not tied back

• Hair or insects in food

• Raw food and ready-to-eat food displayed together

• Hot food that is not cooked through properly and cold food that is served lukewarm.

Travelling
Furthermore, all people who are travelling are advised to take certain precautions. This
may include, but is not limited to the following:
• Do not eat from street vendors,
• Eat only cooked vegetables
• Eat only fruit that you have peeled yourself,
• Drink only water you have boiled or treated with chlorine or iodine
• Or drink other safe beverages include tea and coffee made with boiled water and
carbonated, bottled beverages with no ice.
• Eat foods that have been thoroughly cooked and are still hot,
• Do not bring perishable seafood back from your travels.
While food poisoning may be attributable to numerous causative agents, vaccine
protection is not available for all agents causing infection. Immunisation is, however,
available for Hepatitis A. For further information about this vaccine, please refer to your
doctor.
Are there any special concerns about food poisoning?

If you believe that you may have food poisoning, you should seek immediate medical
attention. If you have food poisoning and you are pregnant, you should promptly discuss
this with your doctor. Individuals with food poisoning, which provide care services to
others, particularly elderly or children should not work while symptomatic unless they are
cleared by their doctors. So, don’t risk problems when these simple steps will help you
reduce food-related illness

57
 3.4. Process control and management tools
3.4.1 Process control
Process control can be defined as the management of all elements of a process that
control the legality, safety, contractual, and commercial requirements of the product. The
scope is, therefore, from farm to consumer and embraces raw materials, formulation,
bacteriocidal or bacteriostatic treatments, plant and equipment hygiene, personnel practices
and hygiene, packaging, distribution conditions, and consumer use (Jervis, 2002).
Proper attention to such a broad scope requires a disciplined and documented
approach. It is widely accepted in the food and dairy industry that the required disciplined
approach is best provided by the HACCP procedure applied as an integral element of total
quality management (TQM) principles, which include good manufacturing practice
(GMP), good hygiene practice (GHP), and document control (e.g., ISO 9000 Quality
Systems). HACCP is an internationally accepted hazard management tool that can be
applied to all stages of food manufacture from farm to consumer. Figure 2.1 shows an
integrated approach to the application of process control.

3.4.2. Total quality management

Total quality management schemes address the approach that a manufacturing

organisation needs to take to ensure product quality. They aim to involve every member of
the organisation in the achievement of management objectives to produce safe, wholesome
food, enhance customer satisfaction and confidence, and identify means of ongoing
improvement. The fundamental requirements of the TQM approach are communication at
all levels, so that process and product requirements can be translated from the corporate
quality statement to the operatives running the process. TQM schemes embracing HACCP
and document control form an important framework within which quality requirements can
be communicated effectively and in a way that can be demonstrated and audited.

3.4.3 Risk analysis

Risk analysis is a structured and formalized approach to quantifying risk and setting
levels to which casual agents should be controlled to assure safety. Risk analysis has three
components: risk assessment, risk management, and risk communication. Microbiological
risk analysis protocols are being addressed internationally and at national levels, and they
are becoming a key element in determining the level of consumer protection (Jervis, 2002).
HACCP, correctly integrated into a total quality management scheme is normally the
preferred risk management tool (Figure 2.3).

58
Figure 2.1 Schematic diagram of an integrated approach to the application of process
control (Jervis, 2002).
3.5. HACCP guidelines

The HACCP system offers a structured approach to the control of hazards in food
processing and, properly applied, identifies areas of concern and appropriate control
measures before product failure is experienced. The application of HACCP is systematic
because structured hazard analysis and implementation are provided. The process is also
logical in that each processor understands it own operation and is able to assess controlling
the specific process optimally (Jervis, 2002).

3.5.1. The hazard analysis critical control point system

The origins of HACCP are traced to the 1960’s and the United States of America
when the Pillsbury Company, the United States Army Laboratories at Natick, and the
National Aeronautics and Space Administration collaborated to develop the system as a

59
means of managing safe food production for manned space flights. The outcome was the
HACCP concept, which has been adopted and developed to its current status as the food
safety management tool recommended by the Codex Alimentarius Commission to advise
on consumer protection under Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures (1994) agreed at the
Uruguay round of GATT negotiations. As such, HACCP is a reference point in
international trade disputes, and it is increasingly enshrined in national legislation.

The HACCP procedure is generally targeted at food safety

management (pathogenic micro-organisms and their toxins), but, as an
approach in the context of broader quality management, it can be
effectively applied to microbiological spoilage, foreign-body
contaminations or pesticide contamination. It is preferable to conduct a
HACCP program with a narrow scope (a single pathogen or possibly
pathogens) rather than attempt to cover an extended list of hazard
areas when documentation will become complex. However, an
experienced team might choose to cover the whole spectrum of hazard
areas, depending on (a) the resources available to produce and maintain
a composite HACCP plan and (b) the way in which it is to be
incorporated into the local quality plan and quality system (Jervis, 2002).

3.5.2. Principles of HACCP

In theory, the only way of ensuring that every package of yoghurt from a given
production line is safe, from a chemical or microbiological standpoint, is to test every
package. Clearly, such a suggestion is totally impractical, so that instead, a representative
group of packages is withdrawn against a sampling plan appropriate for the product and the
history of the plant. However, whilst this approach is essential to confirm that preset
standards of hygiene are being met and that potential contaminants are at a low level or
absent, the procedure can never prevent some spoiled packages from reaching the
consumer. Consequently, the emphasis within quality assurance has turned to the
avoidance of problems, a concept that forms the basis of HACCP. In particular, the system
identifies seven aspects of production that merit constant attention and these aspects are
enshrined in seven principles (Tamime and Robinson, 1999).

First – any potential hazards associated with yoghurt production from the
collection of raw materials through to manufacture and distribution must be identified and
an assessment made of:

60
 · the likelihood that a given hazard will arise; and· the preventative measures that
are necessary to reduce any inherent risks.

Second – the precise points in the above sequence that can be controlled in order
to eliminate a hazard or minimise the risk of occurrence must also be identified. If failure
to control a particular hazard is a risk to public health, then the step in the process is
regarded as a critical control point (CCP); if no major risk is involved, the step may be
identified as a control point (CP). For example, the filling machine is a CCP, because
contamination with a pathogen could present a direct risk to the consumer, whereas the
failure to empty a waste bin in the same area could be treated as a CP because, however
undesirable with respect to the growth of potential spoilage organisms, the failure is not
likely to result in a consumer health problem. Similarly, it is important that a manufacturer
has control over the chemical composition of yoghurt and the details on the label, but again
such points need only be graded as CPs.
Third – there must be an established set of targets which must be achieved in order
for a Section to claim control over a CCP/CP, e.g. total colony counts on product contact
surfaces (CCP) or the viscosity of stirred yoghurt with agreed tolerances (CP). Fourth – a
monitoring system must be established to record the particular facets of production that are
under control.

Fifth – if the monitoring procedure indicates that a CCP/CP is not under control,
then an agreed program of corrective action must be capable of immediate implementation.

Sixth – there must be procedures for verification that the HACCP system is
working throughout the factory, e.g. the introduction of supplementary checks to ensure
that the principal components of the system are operating to the required standard.

Seventh – a system of documentation must be in place that records accurately the

details of all operations, e.g. times/temperatures and microbiological parameters, but also
the responsibilities of the individual operators associated with that specific section of the
process.

In any HACCP system it is vital that the different stages, within each principle, be
considered in order and that the required information and conclusion be completed for each
stage before moving on to the next. HACCP is designed as a structured approach, and the
proper sequencing of activities is crucial to obtain an effective output. The seven HACCP
principles and fourteen sequential stages are outlined in detail by Jervis (2002) and will be
referred to in

61
 3.5.3. Benefits of HACCP

The key benefits of HACCP in the food and dairy industry are many, and can be
summarised as follows:

HACCP has the potential to identify all hazards in the manufacturing process so
that controls can be established to assure food safety/quality
HACCP is a systematic approach relevant to all stages of food processing
covering agriculture and horticultural practices, harvesting, processing, product
distribution, and customer practices
HACCP is the preferred risk management tool in total quality management.
HACCP focuses technical resources on critical parts of the process and provides a
cost-effective control of food-borne hazards.
HACCP facilitates the move from retrospective end-product testing to a
preventative quality assurance approach enabling the manufacturer to get it right
the first time and reduce reject waste.
HACCP recognized and promoted by international bodies ( such as the Codex
Alimetarius Commission) as the system of choice for ensuring food safety and is
becoming enshrined in national legislation. Proactive application in the food
industry will facilitate compliance with developing legislation and demonstrates a
diligent approach to food safety (Jervis, 2002).

3.5.4. Application of HACCP

This section addresses in detail what needs to be done at each of the HACCP
stages, and it refers to generic flow diagrams and HACCP plan records that have been
produced in order to illustrate the points made. It is essential that each HACCP study be
based on the specific process and product details, and generic plans should never be
adopted as a shortcut to save time and resources. The different sequential stages are as
follows (SABS, 1999; Jervis,2002).

Stage 1: Define terms of reference

Terms of reference should clearly define the scope of the intended HACCP study
and address the following points:

62
 • the product to be considered;
• the process site and, if relevant, the process line within that site. It is not
advisable to group together apparently similar products and processes where what might be
minor variations in formulation and/or process conditions could significantly change the
preservation characteristics of the product;
• what the study will cover -biological, chemical, or physical hazards (or
combinations of these) -and whether the study will be limited to food safety considerations
or cover broader quality issues (i.e., spoilage). The study will proceed more quickly if the
terms of reference are limited to biological food safety issues, or even the consideration of
one pathogen relevant to the food; and
• the point in the process at with safety or other quality attributes are to meet:
at point of manufacture or at point of consumption?
Stage 2: Select a HACCP team

It is important that senior management in the company be made aware of the

resources necessary to carry out an effective HACCP study (personal time, appropriate
meeting room, secretarial support, and the need to consult outside resources for
information) and are committed to providing these resources. The time required to
complete the study will depend on the complexity of the process and the terms of reference
agreed as Stage 1. If resources cannot be assured to meet the study defined in Stage 1, then
the study should not be progressed. HACCP requires a multidisciplinary approach, and the
HACCP team should include the following skills:

• • a quality assurance/quality control specialist who

understands the hazards and risks for the product and process under
study. Depending on the study terms of reference, this might involve
a microbiologist or chemist; and, if this resource is not available in-
company, consultation with an eternal resource might be necessary to
obtain information relating to microbiological risk and hazards;

• a production specialist to contribute details of what

actually happens on the production line throughout all shift
patterns;

• an engineer to provide information on (a) the operating characteristics of

the process equipment under study and (b) the hygienic design of
equipment and buildings; and

63
 • others co-opted onto the team as necessary. These might include
specialist equipment operators, hygiene manager, ingredient and
packaging buyers, and distribution managers. It might also be appropriate
to consider co-opting specialist technicians from companies to which
various scheduled maintenance and calibration are contracted functions
(e.g., temperature measurement equipment, pasteurizer plate and jacketed
silo integrity, clean-in place systems).

An individual experienced in HACCP should be nominated as chairman to be

responsible for managing the study. The chairman should have received training in the
principles of HACCP and
be experienced in HACCP team work. While HACCP team members will be
selected for their specialist knowledge, it is important that they will also have a working
knowledge of the HACCP procedure so that they can contribute effectively to the study.
Team members may need some training before commencement of the study, and this can
be provided either internally by the HACCP team or externally.

It is important that a HACCP team member or co-opted person is identified to

keep notes as the work progresses and from which both the HACCP plan and the HACCP
study notes can be derived. HACCP study notes should record background information and
the basis for conclusions reached in sufficient detail to be helpful when the HACCP plan is
reviewed. The HACCP study notes might also be used as background information in
trouble-shooting in the event of product failure or inadequate outcome from the verification
program.

Stage 3 : Describe the product

The product under study should be fully described. This stage often tends to be
inadequately covered, but diligent attention to detail here is crucial to the identification of
hazards. The product description should be considered against the following headings and
recorded as HACCP study notes:

Composition. All factors that might influence the preservative characteristics of

the food should be recorded. Basic compositional data should be noted including that on
solids/moisture levels, fat levels, type of preservative, if used, etc. Compositional data
should also be recorded for any additives used, particularly where these are supplied as

64
fresh, hydrated materials.

Processing. All relevant processing parameters should be recorded. They should

be validated as giving the required effect with respect to micro-organisms of concern and
the appropriate operating conditions recorded at this stage in a HACCP study.

Packaging system. The type of packaging should be noted. This note will include
differentiation between shrink wrapping, vacuum packing, and sealed plastic tub packing.
Aseptic or ultra clean packaging regimes should also be noted where appropriate. In the
context of dairy products, it is useful to record the conditions of storage of intermediate
stages of production. The degree of exposure to the process plant environment during
filling should also be recorded.
Storage and distribution conditions. The storage temperature regimes (ambient,
chilled, and frozen) throughout the product shelf life should be recorded where possible,
and this should include anticipated variations (e.g., retail display, customer’s shopping bag,
and home storage conditions).
Required shelf life. The total shelf-life requirement together with “life after
opening,” where appropriate, should be recorded.
Instruction of use. Dairy products are usually consumed without further
processing (heating), so that this section should record instructions given with regard to
refrigerated storage (where appropriate) and ‘use within’ times, after opening, together
with overall “use by or best before” dates.
Stage 4: Identify intended use

The consumer target group for the product should be noted. This will range from
suitable for all consumer groups.

Stage 5: Construct a flow diagram

The purpose of a flow diagram in a HACCP study is to elicit a thorough

examination of the process, which is recorded in a way that assists and directs subsequent
stages. There is no specified format to be used in HACCP flow diagrams, but they should
sequentially set out all steps in the process together with relevant technical data.
Consideration should be given to the following:
• • the sequence of all process steps within the scope or the study including
rework/recycle loops;
• interaction of services (e.g., cooling water, air, compressed air, clean-in-
place systems):

65
 • temperature/time history for all raw materials, intermediate products, and
final products within the scope of the study, together with microbiological and
analytical data with appropriate floor plans and equipment:
• equipment design with particular attention to ease of cleaning and presence
of void spaces that might accumulate contamination; and personnel and hygiene
disciplines.

Stage 6: One-site confirmation of flow diagram

The flow diagram produced at Stage 5 should be confirmed, on site, by the

HACCP team. Points to be confirmed are that any effect of shift patterns and weekend
working are included on the flow diagram, together with circumstances of any reclaim or
rework activity that might be introduced from time to time. If the HACCP study is being
applied to a proposed new process line/product, flow diagram confirmation will not be
possible. In this case the HACCP plan can be completed, but it must be subject to review
as the line/product is finalised.

Stage 7: List all potential hazards associated with each process step, conduct a
hazard analysis, and consider and measures to control the identified hazards

This is the final stage in HACCP Principle 1 (Conduct a hazard analysis), and it
should be emphasised that no attempt should be made to pre-empt HACCP Principle 2
without considering the critical control points. Stage 7 consists of three parts: listing
hazards, conducting a hazard analysis and identifying control measures.

List all potential hazards. The flow diagram (Stage 5) and the product description
(Stages 3 and4), should be used to list all potential hazards relevant to the terms of
reference of the study (Stage1). This activity should involve all disciplines in the HACCP
team (QA/QC, production,engineering) in a “brainstorming” session that identifies all
actual and potential hazards. It isimportant that the following areas are considered:

• hazards in raw materials;

• hazards introduced during the process (cross-contamination, factory
environment, equipment design, equipment cleaning, and introduction by process air or
personnel);
• hazards that survive the process steps; and the microbiological stability of
the product during distribution and in the home.
In these considerations, the intrinsic factors of the product (e.g., pH, structure,

66
preservatives, temperature) will be important from the point of view of both (a) the lethal
effect of a heating or other process and (b) the way in which the potential for pathogen
multiplication might occur before consumption. It is emphasised here that all potential hazards
should be listed. This requirement should not be undermined by the concept of Prerequisite
Programs that is being developed by Codex Alimentarius and actively applied in some cases.

Hazard analysis. The process of collecting and evaluating information on hazards

and conditions leading to their presence and to decide which are significant within the
scope of exercise should be addressed in the HACCP plan. The objective of Stage 7 is to
consider all of the potential hazards identified and identify those that need to be eliminated
or reduced to an acceptable level if food, meeting the established Food Safety
Requirements (or any other objective set out in terms of reference), is to be produced. To a
large extent expert judgement and opinion will be involved and, if the necessary expertise
is not available in house, external experts may need to be consulted or co-opted to the
HACCP team hazard analysis should consider the following points:

• • The consequence of the target micro-organism(s) or toxins being present at

harmful levels in the final product at the point of consumption.
• The likelihood of the target micro-organism(s) or toxins being present at
harmful levels in the final product at the point of consumption. Conclusions for this
and the previous point might be based on previous company or industry
experience, on epidemiological data, or on a microbiological risk assessment
output.
• The survival and/or multiplication of target micro-organism(s) in the
product or the potential for production of the toxin that will persist to the point of
consumption at significant (toxic) levels.
• The hurdle effect (the synergistic preservative effect of two or more
inhibitory factors) is relevant to these It should be noted, however, that unless the
assessments. Conclusions with respect to the ability of a formulation to inhibit the
growth of, or elimate, the target micro-organism is definitie, it might be necessary
to carry out “spiking trials” to validate the formulation.
• The numbers of consumers potentially exposed and their vulnerability.
• Any relevant food safety objectives or manufacturer’s food safety
requirements.

The data from microbiological risk assessments, in the context of risk analysis,
will be useful in the hazard analysis stage of HACCP. In the absence of a formal risk
analysis output, hazard analysis in HACCP will be made on quantitative data with

67
appropriate expert input and/or reference to external data sources.

Identification of control measures. For each of the hazards concluded to be

significant in the hazard analysis, the HACCP team should identify control measures that
will eliminate the hazard or reduce it to an acceptable level. There may be more than one
control measure required to control a hazard. In other cases, one control measure at a single
point can control more than one hazard (e.g., pasteurisation eliminates all vegetative
pathogens and spoilage micro-organisms). One control measure can be relevant to several
process steps where a hazard is repeated (e.g., application of CIP cleaning or
environmental cleaning to control recontamination). Where no control measure can be
identified to control a hazard, redesign or modification of the process or product
formulation may need to be considered. A final point to note is that in identifying control
measures in a HACCP study on an established product and process, the team should not
restrict consideration to measures already in place but should be prepared to propose other
control measures that might be appropriate.

Stage 8: Determine CCPs (Principle 2)

The objective of Stage 8 (Principle 2) is to systematically assess the hazards and

related control measures identified in step 7 by considering each process step (as recorded
in the flow diagram) in turn and reaching a conclusion on its “CCP” status before moving
on to the next process step-that is, to identify process steps at which control can be applied
and which are essential to prevent or eliminate a hazard or reduce it to an acceptable level.
It is useful to be guided by a CCP decision tree as shown in Figure 2.4.

Stage 9: Establish critical limits for each CCP (Principle 3)

A critical limit is a criterion that separates acceptability from unacceptability at

each CCP. It should be measurable in real time (while the process is running) and might
include measurements of temperature/time/pH or acidity, moisture, the phosphatase test for
pasteurised milk, ATP methodology to assess cleaning efficiency, or other observations. A
critical limit might be mandatory (e.g., pasteurisation temperature and time) or based on
data collected under good manufacturing practice where a specific target level and
tolerances are set.

Stage 10: Establish a monitoring system for a CCP (Principle 4)

Monitoring involves a planned sequence of observations or measurements against

68
critical limits to assess whether a CCP is under control. Ideally, monitoring should identify
a trend toward a critical limit maximum or minimum so that corrective action can be taken
before the process is out of control and, in any event, should aim to identify violation of
critical limits as soon as possible to minimize the amount of embargoed/rejected product.
Monitoring can be on-line with automated corrective action (e.g., flow diversion systems
on pasteurisers), or they can be off-line when corrective action might involve the rejection
of any product implicated. Physical and chemical measurements are preferred to
microbiological testing because they can be completed rapidly and often be indicative of
conditions that control the microbiology of the product (e.g., phosphatase test on
pasteurised milk).
Stage 11: Establish a corrective action plan (Principle 5)
This specifies the action(s) necessary when monitoring shows a potential or actual
loss of control at a CCP. The action(s) will aim to bring the process back into control
before critical limits are reached (e.g., a temperature drift from a target of 5ºC to near the
tolerance value of 7ºC will call for an engineer to adjust the refrigerator plant), or it will
specify the disposal of product that has breached a critical limit. Monitoring requirements
and corrective action plans should be considered together by the HACCP team, and a clear
decision should be reached and recorded on responsibilities for corrective actions.
Stage 12: Verification (Principle 6)
Verification applies methods, procedures, product tests, and evaluations other than
monitoring, to determine compliance with the HACCP plan; that is, it demonstrates that
the HACCP plan and its application is consistently controlling the process so that product
meets the food safety or quality requirements. The HACCP team should specify methods
and frequency of verification procedures which might include the following:
Stage 13: Establish documentation and record keeping (Principle 7)

• • microbiological examination of intermediate and final product samples;

• review of complaints from consumers or regulatory bodies and outcomes of

investigations into these complaints, if they were substantiated, indicating that the
HACCP plan did not completely control the process;
• auditing all monitoring and corrective actions records to establish whether the
HACCP plan is fully implemented and demonstrates control; and
• a review of validation records and, if appropriate, the application of more
searching tests at selected CCPs to confirm the efficacy of the control measure.
The complexity and quality of documentation necessary will depend on the size
and type of operation. The key point is that the manufacturer must be able to demonstrate
that the seven principles of HACCP have been correctly applied. To be effective, HACCP
must be fully integrated into the unit quality systems as an element of total quality

69
 management.
The following documentation should be issued as controlled documents:
•The finalised HACCP plan. Process steps assessed as not being CCP’s should also
have critical limits, monitoring procedures, and corrective actions identified on the
HACCP plan, and they can be designated as control points that contribute to good
manufacturing practice.
• Guidelines, procedures and work instructions/records sheets.

Guidelines on good hygienic practice (GHP) are an essential element of the

documentation required. Any issues specific to the HACCP study that are missing can be
covered either by amendment of the guidelines or by inclusion in the HACCP plan.

Procedures cover the following:

• training for hygiene and operation; · personnel hygiene and sickness

reporting; · on-site food services;
* Proceed to the next step in the described process
Figure 2.4A CCP decision tree for the determination of critical points in HACCP
plans (Jervis, 2002).
• use of protective clothing;
•inspection and maintenance of equipment, manufacturing services (water,
compressed air, drainage), and the building/site;
• raw materials/ingredients -specification/audit/sourcing;
• waste disposal; and
• cleaning -equipment/environment; CIP /manual.

In all cases the procedures should state clearly what should be done, how
equipment or materials should be used, and by whom and how defects should be recorded,
remedial action initiated, and action signed-off when completed. As with guidelines,
current procedures should be reviewed in an HACCP study and modified, if necessary, on
the basis of the hazard analysis.

Work instructions give detailed instruction to employees as to what has to be done

at each process step. This will include, as appropriate, equipment manufacture’s
instructions, product recipe (ingredient quantities, process times and temperatures, routing
of intermediate product and final product through the factory), and action to be taken in
abnormal circumstances. Monitoring record sheets should be prepared to support, as
necessary, work instructions, preferably with critical limits shown, and instructions on how

70
 to complete them and action to be taken if critical limits are challenged (process adjustment
and/or notify management). The work instructions should be generated directly from the
HACCP plan, and the monitoring record sheet gives the detail that would otherwise
complicate HACCP documents. Furthermore, there should be a clearly defined mechanism
by which abnormal results are notified on an exception reporting system that calls for a
traceable record of corrective or remedial action taken and the outcome of these actions,
signed-off at a designated management level.

HACCP study notes. While the HACCP plan should be issued as a controlled
document as part of site quality systems, it is important that the background notes made
during the HACCP study be kept as a file for reference in HACCP review or trouble-
shooting exercises. As a minimum, these notes should include the following:

•product description notes (Stage 3);· basis for decisions taken in Stage 7 (Hazard analysis);
•a note of any “judgment” decision taken at Stage 8 (Determination of CCPs), together with
data referred to and/or external expert advice source;
•recommended verification schedule (Stage 12);
• notes on any verification exercise undertaken (Stage 12);
• a schedule of other quality system documents that are derived from/support
the HACCP plan ; and
• data derived from HACCP reviews.

Stage 14: Review of HACCP Plans

The review of a HACCP plan evaluates any changes in process, product, or

manufacturing siteagainst the current HACCP plan to determine whether new hazards have
been introduced that arenot covered by existing control measures at critical control points
or control points. HACCP studynotes will afford a valuable background to the review
process. If new hazards that are notadequately controlled are identified, the HACCP plan
should be amended accordingly and notes ofthe review should be added to HACCP study
notes. HACCP plan reviews should be triggeredunder the following circumstances:

• by routine schedule at a frequency determined by the HACCP team based on risk;

• change in product formulation
• change in process;
• change in raw materials;
• change in consumer use/longer shelf life assigned;

71
 • evidence of health or spoilage risk in the market place;
• emergence of “new” food-borne pathogens;
• change to factory layout and environment;
• modification to process equipment;· changes in packaging, storage, and distribution;
• change in cleaning and sanitation program;
• change in staff levels and responsibilities; and
• verification findings.
3.6. Conclusion
The importance of personal hygiene and food safety in the food industry is that a
lack of both will get people sick, may possibly lead to death, and then law suits. It can
cause food borne illnesses and that is a big thing. Personal hygiene rules to remember are:
shower daily, wear a clean uniform and apron, wash hands when you enter the kitchen and
whenever you touch your face/hair/put your hands in your pockets/ touch dirty towels/take
out the garbage/eat/drink/smoke/use the restroom (remove apron and chef's jacket before
doing so), wear gloves when you have cuts on your hands (change often and wash hands
before putting gloves on and after taking them off), wear a hat or hair net to prevent hair
from getting into food, don't chew gum, use plastic spoons to taste food and then throw
them away

Food safety would be to keep hot foods hot and cold foods cold (meaning out of the danger
zone), avoid cross contamination by using a clean cutting board to prepare raw beef, pork,
seafood, or chicken, wash your knife and sanitize it after use, don't mix raw and cooked
product, observe FIFO, always store raw meat, seafood, and poultry on the bottom of the
fridge, and ... I think the picture is clear. Keep it clean, keep it safe and the health
department won't shut you down and that is very important

Everyone who runs a food business needs to make sure they follow good food
hygiene practices to ensure that the food they serve is safe to eat. Food should always be of
the nature, substance or quality that your customers would expect. Serving food which is
both safe and of sufficient quality will also help to protect your business's reputation

72
73
 CHAPTER 4
FOOD SAFETY AND HYGIENE STANDARD AT
United Nations International School of Hanoi

4.1. Introduction.

4.1.1. Overview

The United Nations International School of Hanoi (UNIS) is a private, non-profit

coeducational English-language day school enrolling students from Pre-Kindergarten
through Grade 12. The school is located in Tay Ho District, about ten kilometres from the
city centre.

UNIS was established through the support of the United Nations Development
Programme in Vietnam (UNDP) in 1988 as a non-profit organisation. Over the past twenty
years, UNIS has built a reputation for offering quality international education, which has
proved to be a crucial element for attracting expatriate professionals and foreign
investment to Vietnam. Accordingly, UNIS Hanoi has played an essential role in the
growth and development of Hanoi's expatriate community. The school has witnessed a
corresponding growth in the size of the school and now having over 850 enrolled students
between our Discovery and Grade 12 classes, representing nearly 48 nationalities. Our
diverse student population comes from families of foreign diplomatic missions,

74
international organisations, international NGOs, foreign business firms as well as
local Vietnamese families.

UNIS Hanoi is dedicated to providing all of students with the fundamental skills
necessary to become lifelong learners: the capacity to think independently, to express
ideas, to seek and discover, and to work cooperatively. The goal of educating the whole
person comes alive at UNIS Hanoi where we strive to instill in students with the ideals and
aspirations of the United Nations, thus preparing them to become responsible global
citizens of tomorrow.

The United Nations International School of Hanoi is the largest English medium
international school in Hanoi. The school’s quest for maintaining high academic standards
are of great importance and accreditation with the Council of International Schools (CIS)
ensures that UNIS is benchmarked against the very highest of international criteria. UNIS
affiliation with the East Asia regional Council of Overseas Schools (EARCOS) also
contributes to the school’s desire for excellence as does prestigious membership as an
International Baccalaureate World School as the school currently are authorised to offer all
three of the IB programmes; the Primary Years Programme (PYP) from Discovery to
Grade 5, the Middle Years Programme (MYP) from Grade 6 to Grade 10 and the Diploma
Programme in Grades 11and 12. Indeed, UNIS Hanoi is the first school in Asia authorized
to offer the three programmes to all grade levels from early childhood to Grade 12.

The school relocated to a brand new, state of the art, custom-built campus in
September 2004. This campus offers a warm, friendly, and spacious environment
conducive to learning. UNIS provides a well-rounded academic, arts, music, and athletics
programme complemented by an incredibly comprehensive library and wonderful
computer facilities with Internet access. In 2008, UNIS introduced students in Grades 10
and 11 and faculty members with the one-to-one tablet program. The tablet program
expanded in Autumn 2009 for students in Grades 6 to 9. Learning does not stop at the end
of the school day, however, and most of our students take advantage of the extensive After
School Activities (ASA) Programme which is offered at no additional cost.

There are 100 full-time faculty members. The faculty is multi-national, including
Americans, Canadians, British, Australians, New Zealanders, French, Belgian, Swedish,
Danish, Korean, and Vietnamese.

75
 4.1.2. School Profile 2009-2010

Head of School Dr.Charles Barder

High School Principal Chris Vincent
Middle\High School Assistant Principal Christina Powers
Elementary School Principal Bob Horton
Elementary School Assistant Principal Dave Porter
School Counsellors Karen Hafner, High School
Meagan Enticknap-Smith, Middle School
Lillian Canada, Elementary School
Total Enrolment (Pre-K to 12 as of Nov,
892
2009)
High (Grades 9-12)
225
Middle (Grades 6-8)
199
Elementary (Grade1 to Grade 5)
341
Elementary (ECC: Discovery to Kindergarten)
127
CEEB Code Number 695360
Accreditation Council of International Schools (CIS)
International Baccalaureate Organisation (IBO)
Memberships Council of International School (CIS)
European Council of International Schools (ECIS)
East Asia Regional Council of Overseas Schools (EARCOS)
Affiliation Mekong River International Schools Association (MRISA)

The United Nations International School of Hanoi (UNIS) is a private, non-profit

coeducational English-language day school enrolling students from Pre-Kindergarten
through Grade 12. The school is located in Tay Ho District, about ten kilometres from the
city centre. The school was established in 1988 by agencies representing the United
Nations to offer an education to the children of UN personnel and children of expatriates
residing in Hanoi. The students come from 51 different countries, including Vietnam,
Korea, USA, Japan, Sweden, UK, Denmark, Germany, Australia, Canada, Switzerland,
Belgium, France, Malaysia, Indonesia, and many more.

There are 100 full-time faculty members. The faculty is multi-national, including
Americans, Canadians, British, Australians, New Zealanders, French, Belgian, Swedish,
Danish, Korean, and Vietnamese.

Curriculum

The school offers the International Baccalaureate (IB) Diploma Programme (Grades
11-12), the IB Middle Years Programme (Grades 6-10), and the IB Primary Years
Programme (Pre K-Grade 5). The Class of 2009 will be the 10th at UNIS to complete the
IB Diploma Programme. All students work towards the acquisition of a UNIS High School
Diploma, however, students may also acquire the IB Diploma or IB certificates. The

76
curriculum does not follow any national system, but draws from a variety of English-
language programs consistent with the needs of an international student body.

Graduation Requirements

Twenty three credits are required for graduation, with 0.5 credits earned for passing
a semester work in a course and 1 credit for a years worth of work. Specific credit
requirements include:

• English (4 credits)
• Math (3 credits)
• Science (3 credits)
• Humanities (3 credits)
• Modern Language/ EAL (2 credits)
• Physical Education (2 credits)
• Senior project (.25 credit)
• Electives (5.75 credits)
Community Service, a Personal Project in Grade 10, and a Senior Project are
required for graduation. The Senior Project can take the form of an IB Extended Essay or a
UNIS-prescribed Senior Project, consisting of a 4000-word research paper on some aspect
of Vietnam.
Credit is given by semesters. One full credit is earned by completing two semesters
of a course that meets for approximately 4 hours per week. The school year consists of 180
teacher-student contact days from mid-August through early June.

Grading Scale
Grading
Credit
Scale
7 superb 0.5
6 excellent 0.5
5 good 0.5
4 average 0.5
3 poor 0.5
2 failure, no credit 0.0
1 failure, no credit 0.0
S satisfactory 0.5
U unsatisfactory 0.0

77
 2007-2008 GPA Distribution

Top 10%: 6.44 to 7.0

Top 25%: 5.85 to 7.0
Top 50%: 5.44 to 7.0

Number
of Diploma Candidates
21
Pass
Rate 95%
Total
Points Obtained
24 - 29 3
30 - 34 5
35 - 39 7
40 - 45 6
School
Average 35
Average
Grade Obtained 5.64

University Acceptances

College and university acceptances from the Classes of 2002 - 2008

Asia United States

De La Salle University American University
National University of Assumption College
Singapore
Ritsumeikan Asia Pacific Boston University
Australia Bowdin College
James Cook University Brown College
University of Melbourne Bryn Mawr College
University of Queensland Brandeis University
University of Sydney Bentley College
Canada Brigham Young University
McGill University Bucknell University
Cal State University at San
Ontario College of Art/Design
Marcos
Queen’s University California Lutheran University
Ryerson University California State Un, San Marcos
University of British Columbia Carlton College
University of Victoria Carson-Newman College
University of Western Ontario City College of San Francisco
University of British Columbia Columbia University
University of Toronto Columbia College
York University Clarkson University
Continental Europe Cornell University
Augsberg University College of William & Mary
Ecola Hoteliere De Lausanne Drake University
Erfurt University Drexel University

78
 Hannover Art/Music College Elizabethtown College
Instituto Maragoni Elon University
Munster University Eckerd College
St Tilburg University Franklin and Marshall
University of Geneva Fordham University
University of Mannheim Georgetown University
Utrecht University Grinnell College
United Kingdom Havard University
Aston University
Hawaii Pacific University
Anglia Ruskiin C.Cambridge Hofstra University
Cardiff University
Ithaca College
Coventry University
James Madison University
Durham College Johns Hopkins University
Edinburgh College of Art Johnson and Wales University
European Business School London
Lafayette College
Imperial C. of Science,Tech & Lehigh University
Medicine
Imperial College of London
Lasell College
Keel University
Manhattanville College
Kings College
Marymount Manhattan College
Kingston University
North Carolina State University
London Guildhall University
New York University
London School of Economics
Marymount College
London Metropolitan University
Mass.Institude of Technology
London South Bank University
Pace University
Loughborough University
Paul Smith’s College
Nottingham Trent University
Pennsylvania State University
Oxford Brookes University Pepperdine University
Queen Mary, University of London
Providence College
St. Andrews, University of Scotland
Pratt Institute
Trinity University
Purdue University
University of Edinburgh
Quinnipiac University
University of Hertfordshire
Randolph-Macon College
University of Buckingham Rochester Institute of Technology
University of Cambridge Rutgers, State U of NJ, Newark
University of Surrey San Francisco State University
University of Reading
School of the Art Institute of
Chicago
University of the Arts London
Stellenbosch University
University of Manchester
Stanford University
University of Northumbria
State U, of NY at Albany
University of Nottingham
St. John’s University
University of Sheffield
Syracuse University
University of Warwick
Temple University
University of York
Tufts University
University of Briston
University of Chicago
University College London
University of Cali, LA
University of Sussex
University of Cali, San Diego
University of Birmingham
University of Pennsylvania
University of Liverpool
University of Richmond

79
University of London, Royal Holloway
University of Rochester
University of Exeter
University of Southern California
University of the West of England, Bristol
University of Vermont
University of Westminster
University of Virginia
University of Leeds
U. C. at Los Angeles
University of Leicester
U. N. C. at Chapel Hill
University of Kent at Canterbury
University of Westminster
University of Hull
University of Illinois at Urban-
Champaign
University of East Anglia
University of Puget Sound
University of Durham
University of Wisconsin, Madison
University of Dundee
University of Wisconsin. Steven
Point
University of Brighton
University of Michigan
University of London
Villanova University
University of Essex
Virginia Commonwealth
University
University of Glasgow
Wesleyan University
University College Falmouth
Warburg College
University of Wales, Aberystwick
Wellesley College
Whittier College
Washington University, St,Lou

Teaching Faculty Demographics

As of August 2008, there are 100 full-time teaching staff representing 17 countries.

Country # of Teachers
Australian 24
Bristish 18
Canadian 11
America 14
New Zealand 7
French 5
Vietnamese 3
Swedish 2
Irish 3
German 2
Korean 2
Latvia 1
Filipino 2
Mexican 1
Dutch 5

80
 Current Enrolment

As o fAugust 2008, there are 858 students representing 51 Nationalities.

Argentina 1 Mexico 2
Australia 68 Nepal 4
Austria 2 Netherlands 46
Bangladesh 1 New Zealand 8
Belgium 1 Nigeria 3
Canada 21 Norway 7
China 5 Pakistan 1
Costa Rica 4 Papua New Guinea 2
Czech Republic 4 Philippines 5
Ecuador 3 Poland 1
Denmark 27 Portugal 2
Finland 4 Russia 1
France 14 Singapore 15
Germany 28 South Africa 5
Greece 2 Sri Lanka 2
India 24 Sweden 27
Indonesia 5 Switzerland 4
Ireland 10 Taiwan 9
Italy 3 Tazania 1
Israrel 4 Thailand 9
Japan 31 Turkey 1
Korea 113 Uganda 3
Kuwait 2 UK 53
Latvia 1 USA 105
Macedonia 1 Vietnam 143
Malaysia 15

School Hours
The Discovery Programme: Mon to Fri 08:15 - 12:00
Pre-Kindergarten to Grade
Mon, Tue, Thu, Fri 08:15 - 15:10
5:
Middle/High School: Mon, Tue, Thu, Fri 08:15 - 15:25
Pre-Kindergarten to Grade Wed 08:15 - 14:15
12:

The school is in operation from Monday to Friday.

Contact UNIS

81
 Mailing Address

United Nations International School of Hanoi ,GPO Box 313 Hanoi, Vietnam

Courier Address

United Nations International School of Hanoi

Phu Thuong Ward

Lac Long Quan Road, Tay Ho District
Hanoi, Vietnam

Telecommunications

Phone: (84 4) 3758 1551

Fax: (84 4) 3758 1542
Email: info@unishanoi.org
website: www.unishanoi.org

Admissions Office (ext: 8217)

admissions@unishanoi.org

For other information other than Admissions:

Communications Manager (ext: 8703)
commmanager@unishanoi.org

82
 United Nations International School of Hanoi

4.1.3. Canteen
With the above background of experiences, UNIS does the best effort to serve their
children with good nutritious meals by applying the highest standards of food safety rules
and also help children experience various kinds of international cuisine. The school
canteen operational plans as the followings :

4.1.3.1. Meal Payment

ECC
Quarterly Bill System
The school canteen will send your billing to your e-mail address.
-Total quarterly meal charge per student
= meal service per day 30,000VND X the number of days
- Payment methods: Cash directly to the cashier in canteen or wiring it to
our company bank account directly.
- Refund will be given only in the case of leaving the school.

83
 G1 to G12, Teachers & Staff
- Buy the canteen coupon in advance and use it to pay for the food.
- Canteen coupons will be sold in the canteen by the cashier.

4.1.3.2. Breakfast Operation Plan

Menu
- Ham and Egg Sandwich

Operation Time
- 07:30 to 08:30

Payment Type
- With Coupon

4.1.3.3. Lunch Operation Plan

Menu
- ECC: set menu: Western or Asian (only one option) 30,000vnd
- G1 to G2: set menu: choice between Western Food or Asian Food
35,000vnd
- G3 to G5: set menu: choice between Western Food or Asian Food
45,000vnd
- G6 to G12 & staff: set menu: choice between Western Food or Asian
Food 50,000vnd

A la carte (Western, Asian, Vegetarian dishes)

Deli (pasta, sandwich, pizza, salad, hotdogs, hamburgers) MSHS can
purchase for lunch; not open to ES students for lunch.

Lunch Time
- ECC: Pre K (12:00 ) Kindergarten(12:20 )
- G1 to G5 (12:25 to 13:20)
- G6 to G12 (11:35 to 12:15)

4.1.3.4. Deli Operation Plan (open before and after school)

Menu
- Bread: Sandwiches, Hotdogs, Hamburgers, Pizza
- Others: Kimbab, Salad, Cookies, Croissant, Brownie, Cake, Snacks, Ice
Cream, Fruit
- Beverages: Fruit Juices, Milk, Yogurt, Water

Operation Time
- 10:30 to 17:00

Payment Type
- With Coupon

4.1.3.5. Canteen Layout

84
 4.2. Canteen Contractor Food Safety Standard
4.2.1. Introduction
United Nations International School Hanoi (“UNIS”) is committed to ensuring
that all products and services within the school’s scope of responsibility are of the highest
possible standard and quality. In order to achieve these levels of standard and quality in
relation to canteen operations, the UNIS food safety standard (“standard”) has been
developed for the third party contract canteen operator (“contractor”) who manages and
operates the school canteen on behalf of UNIS. This standard covers all processes from
the purchasing of the raw materials through to the service of the food to the consumer.
(From paddock to plate)

This standard requires the contractor to have developed and implemented a

written food safety program based on the “international principles of H CCP” together
with internationally accepted good hygiene practices. Accepting and complying with this
standard will ensure that UNIS has the highest confidence in the contractor producing
consistent high quality and safe food.

UNIS policy is to ensure that the school provides clear standards requirements in
relation to food safety. As an international school, it is vital that all students, teachers, and
visitors are able to consume safe and wholesome food. Compliance with this standard is
mandatory for the contractor.

Contractors must ensure that they meet all the requirements set out within this
document and be able to maintain the required standard in both operations and
documentation on a daily basis.

The main objectives of this standard are as follows:

85
 •Ensure that there is provision of safe food for all people who will consume
food prepared and sold by the contractor
•Develop requirements for the contractor to observe and comply with.
•Ensure that the successful contractor can comply with International food safety
standards together with local Vietnamese food safety requirements.

4.2.2. Document Control

The contractor will have the following document control processes developed and
implemented:

4.2.2.1. Food Safety Policy

A policy that states the commitment the contractor has to food safety throughout all
steps in the process. The policy should also include a statement on continuous
improvement. The policy is to be signed by the General Director of the contractor,
who must take ultimate responsibility for food safety.

4.2.2.2. Organizational structure

The contractor will provide an organization chart with responsibilities for food safety
clearly identified. Job descriptions will also be included clearly stating the duties and
esponsibilities of the employees and their responsibility and commitment to the
contractor’s food safety standard. A designated employee of the contractor will be
appointed as the “hygiene champion” for the contractor.

4.2.2.3. Document Register

All documents within the food safety program are to be controlled to ensure that
only the most current version is available to all staff. The authorised contractor
representative shall authorise the issuance of each document and subsequent revision.
This information will be recorded in a register within the food safety program.

4.2.2.4. Amendment Register

Each time a document is reviewed and/or altered in any way the changes are to be
recorded on the amendment register.

4.2.2.5. Liability Insurance Policy

The contractor will purchase liability insurance cover from a reputable insurance
company licensed to insure risks in Vietnam, that covers both product and public
indemnity to a total value of no less than US$ 5 million, for the duration of the contract.

86
 4.2.2.6. Customer Complaints Procedure
All food safety and related complaints will be recorded in a customer complaints
register, and investigated to identify the cause and the most appropriate action to
rectify the complaint.
All food safety related complaints from food served at the school or at any school
related event where the contractor has provided the catering, must be brought to the
attention of the UNIS Administration within 24 hours of notification. This relates to any
allegation of food poisoning, foreign matter, food allergy or chemical complaints. All
actions are to be recorded in the customer complaints register and kept for review.

4.2.2.7. Corrective and Preventative Actions Procedure

The contractor will develop and implement a procedure to identify any “areas of
opportunity” that are identified resulting from regular work practices, and internal and
external food safety audits. The procedure shall state the area(s) of opportunity
identified, the reason it is an opportunity, and the action to be taken to implement the
opportunity.

4.2.3. HACCP
The contractor will develop, record and implement the fundamental rationale for
the company’s food safety program, based upon World Health Organization (“WHO”)
Codex principles. The rationale will be based on the following principles:
• Conduct a hazard analysis.
• Determine the Critical Control Points (CCP’s).
• Establish critical limit(s).
• Establish a system to monitor control of the CCP.
• Establish the corrective action to be taken when monitoring indicates that a
particular CCP is not under control.
• Establish procedures for verification to confirm that the HACCP system is
working effectively.
• Establish documentation concerning all procedures and records appropriate to
these principles and their application.

4.2.3.1. Food Safety Team

A food safety team will be deployed by the contractor. The team will meet on a
pre-etermined frequency to discuss quality and food safety issues. To ensure
transparency, a UNIS Administration team member will be in attendance at these meetings
4.2.3.2. Flow Chart
The production process will be identified in a flow chart identifying all major
process steps and their inputs. This will be required for each product type that is served at
the school. Each CCP will need to be identified on the flow charts. Where a product or
process requires a specific step procedure or handling method, a new flow chart will be
developed.

4.2.3.3. Hazard Analysis

The contractor shall include a documented hazard analysis for each process that is

87
identified
on the flow diagrams. This will include but is not limited to the following processes:
purchase of foods, receipt of food deliveries, storage of foods, preparation of foods,
defrosting of foods, cooking of foods, cooling of foods, reheating of foods, hot holding of
foods, cold holding of foods, hot & cold display of foods, transportation of foods, pot
washing and mechanical dishwashing.
4.2.3.4. HACCP Audit Tables
The contractor shall ensure that the hazard analysis is documented and includes the
following:
• Process step
• Food safety hazard
• Cause of the hazard
• Hazard severity
• Likelihood of occurrence (risk)
• Control measures
The contractor will have documented HACCP audit tables addressing each flow
chart or process that has been identified as a CCP. The audit table will include the:
•Process Step
•Food safety Hazard
•Determined critical control points and quality control points
•Critical limits
•Monitoring procedure – what, how, when, where and who
•Corrective action – product and who is responsible; process and who is responsible
•The food safety monitoring records that are recording the critical limit tolerance
4.2.3.5. Verification Schedule
The contractor will have a written verification schedule.
The verification will include the:
•Verification activity
•Frequency of verification
•Person responsible for verification
•Record of verification.
Verification processes are to include the following:
•Microbial Testing
•Surface, equipment and hand swabbing
•Quarterly internal food safety audits
•Annual on-site review
•Quarterly review of customer complaints.

4.2.3.6. External Food Safety Audits

88
 On at least an annual basis, UNIS will employ the services of an independent
International food safety auditing company to undertake both a systems and operations
food safety audit on the contractor. The first audit will be announced and all subsequent
audits will be unannounced. The audit will be of one-day duration.

The external food safety audit will include an assessment on but is not limited
to the following: approved suppliers, receipt of food, storage of foods, preparation of
foods defrosting of foods, cooking, cooling, reheating, hot hold, cold hold, hot & cold
display, washing up, chemical storage, calibration, preventative maintenance, cleaning
schedules, personal hygiene, pest control, cleaning and sanitation, stock rotation, staff
training, dishwasher wash and rinse cycle temperatures, waste management, the company’s
food safety program desktop assessment and the completion of all monitoring records.
Each food safety audit will be assessed out of a score of 100, with the pass mark for
the 1st audit being 75% and 85% for all subsequent food safety audits. Failure to meet the
minimum benchmarks within this standard could mean cancellation of the contract
between UNIS and the contractor.

4.2.4. Good Hygiene Practices

Support hygiene programs will also be included in the company’s food safety
program and will include at a minimum the following documents:

4.2.4.1. Personal Hygiene

Protective clothing requirements (clean and appropriate), protective head covering
requirements (must cover all hair), hand washing requirements, ensuring only wash hand
basins are used for hand washing, adequate soap and paper towels are available to
every basin, wearing of make-up, perfume, false fingernails or nail polish standards,
illness and injury policy (including preventative measures), eating and drinking policy,
covering of cuts and open wounds, jewellery policy and glove policy.

4.2.4.2. Pest Control

Contract between the contractor and the pest control business, list of chemicals
(pesticides) to be used on site, a copy of the pest control company’s insurances, MSDS
(material safety data heets) on each pesticide used, a map of the school with all rodent
baits, insect killing machines and sticky boards identified for its location.

A pesticide usage record that will include the following information: the date of
treatment, the target pest, the chemical used, the area that was treated, the amount of
chemical used, the method of application, the technician’s name, and the outcome of the
treatment.

4.2.4.3. Calibration

89
 The contractor will develop and implement a procedure to ensure that all equipment
used to inspect, measure or test the product at a critical control point is reading
accurately. The procedure will include the following: a list of all items to be calibrated
including each digital probe thermometer (laser thermometers or analogue thermometers
are not to be used), the frequency of the calibration (at least monthly) and the method
of calibration (ice slurry is compulsory and boiling water may be used as well as the
ice slurry method but is not mandatory). A record is to be kept of each thermometer
calibrated.

4.2.4.4. Cleaning & Sanitation

The contractor will develop and implement a procedure for the cleaning of all
equipment, utensils and surfaces that come into contact or may present a risk to food
surfaces or products. The procedure will include the following: all chemicals are to be
correctly labelled, all chemicals will be stored correctly and safely, only chemical
containers will be used for the storage of chemicals, each area will have a cleaning
schedule developed that includes every fixture and fitting to each food preparation and
storage areas, all cleaning equipment will be commercial and in good condition and stored
correctly when not in use, every chemical is to have an in date (within 5 years) Material
Safety Data Sheet (MSDS), cleaning procedures are to be developed for critical areas
within the food business including but not limited to meat slicers, food mixers, can
openers, hand whisks, food graters and cutting boards. All dishwashers and glass
washers are to have a wash cycle of 60°C - 65°C and rinse cycle of 2°C or above. This is
to be monitored daily and recorded.

4.2.4.5. Food Safety Training and Food Safety Induction Program

All employees shall be made aware of the contractor’s policies on hygiene practices
and shall sign a document stating that they have understood these terms. Food safety
training is to be conducted annually with 100% compliance to attendance by staff. The
company is to develop a food safety training plan. Each food handler is to have a health
check as per the requirements of UNIS.

4.2.4.6. Visitor Policy

Where visitors, including sub-contractors, are moving through or about the
canteen and environs, they may cross-contaminate the product or the environment.
The contractor shall document a procedure for control of contamination by third
parties.

4.2.4.7. Colour Coded Cutting Boards

Colour coded cutting boards are to be used by the contractor. A colour coded sign
is to be displayed in all areas where the colour coded cutting boards are used.

4.2.4.8. Receival of Potentially Hazardous Foods

When receiving potentially hazardous foods, temperatures of chilled foods must be
between 1°C to 5°C. Frozen food must be hard solid and frozen and at a minimum of
-15°C or colder. A procedure for receiving potentially hazardous foods shall be
developed and documented.

90
 Records of receival temperatures and packaging standards are to be kept. A
rocedure of rejecting foods is also required.

4.2.4.9. Food Storage

All refrigeration units and coolrooms will be maintained at a temperature of 1°C to
5°C. All freezer units are to be operating at -15°C or colder. A procedure is to be
developed and implemented to cover the following food safety risks: use of food
containers, labeling and dating of foods, covering of foods, food to be stored at least
15cms off the floor, cold storage units are not to be overloaded to ensure correct air
circulation, no rodent baits in food storage areas and all foods to be in date. All cold
storage units (refrigeration units, coolrooms and freezer units) are to be monitored at least
twice per day (AM and PM at a minimum).

4.2.4.10. Waste Management

Where waste is generated as a result of a process, the waste should be effectively
identified to ensure that it cannot be reintroduced into the process or finished product.
All internal waste will be stored in a pedal operated waste receptacle. All internal waste
receptacles are to be fitted with internal bin liners. All external waste will be stored in
designated lidded bins that are cleaned on a regular frequency.

4.2.4.11. Dropped Product Policy

Any product or packaging to be used for the storage and service of foods that are
dropped on the floor should be discarded. A written procedure is to be developed and
implemented.

4.2.4.12. Glass Policy

An essential list of glass is to be developed and kept up to date. All lights in
food receival, food storage and food preparation areas are to be diffused or
shatterproof. Where the removal of glass from a work environment is not practical, a
procedure will be developed to control the hazard in the event of any glass breakage.

4.2.4.13. Wood Policy

This policy should be developed to help reduce or prevent the use or introduction of
foreign objects to product. An essential list of wood is to be developed and kept up to date.

4.2.4.14. Stock Rotation

In order to protect the quality and safety of product being offered to customers, there
should be an adequate stock rotation policy in place to ensure that the oldest products and
materials are used first and within their ‘use by’ date for product with ‘use by’. The
contractor will operate a first in – first out (FIFO) policy for foods
4.2.4.15. Cooking Procedure
For breakfast, lunch, and snacks (and for any outside events) the contractor is to
monitor one (1) sample of every potentially hazardous food that has been cooked during
that service time, on a daily basis. The temperature of these samples are to be recorded. A
cooking procedure is also to be developed and implemented.

4.2.4.16. Defrosting Procedure

Every potentially hazardous food is to have the following recorded: start time, start

91
date of defrosting and the start temperature together with the finish time, finish date of
defrosting and he finish temperature. A defrosting procedure is also to be developed and
implemented.

4.2.4.17. Cooling Procedure

Every potentially hazardous food is to have the following recorded: start time, start
date of cooling and the start temperature of cooling together with the finish time, finish
date of cooling and the finish temperature. A cooling procedure is also to be developed
and implemented.

4.2.4.18. Food Display Procedure

Every potentially hazardous food on display for each service is to be temperature
checked and recorded. This applies for breakfast, lunch, and snacks (and for any outside
events). The contractor is to monitor one (1) sample of every potentially hazardous food
that is on display on a daily basis. A food display procedure is also to be developed and
implemented.

4.2.4.19. Water Quality

Only potable water can be used in relation to food washing and equipment
washing. A procedure shall be developed to ensure that the water is tested for standard
plate count (“SPC”) and coliforms at least twice per year. The contractor should
coordinate its testing with UNIS.

4.2.4.20. Food Washing

All vegetables, fruits and salad items that are eaten in the state that they are
delivered (i.e. not cooked) are to be washed by a chlorine solution. The chlorine solution is
to be food grade and be at a strength of between 100ppm to 200ppm. A separate area for
food washing is to be identified and used. Testing of the chlorine solution is to be
undertaken and recorded daily. Testing is to be done by chlorine strips. A food
washing procedure is also to be developed and implemented.

4.2.4.21. Approved Suppliers

The contractor will document and implement an approved supplier system relating
to all food and service suppliers. This includes a specific standard to be an approved
supplier and should include one of the following for acceptance as a food supplier to the
business: in date HACCP
ISO certificate or a visit by the contractor to the supplier’s main premises for
assessment. A list of approved food/service suppliers are to be maintained and
include the name of he company, their approval status, a list of the foods or services
provided and their review date.

4.2.4.22. Transport of foods

All potentially hazardous chilled foods must be transported in a manner to ensure
that the foods are maintained at a temperature of between 1°C to 5°C. All potentially
hazardous hot food must be delivered at or above 60°C. Transportation of hot foods are to
be undertaken by commercial hot boxes. A written procedure is to be developed and
implemented.

92
 4.2.4.23. Food Allergies
The contractor is to develop and implement a document in relation to food
allergens that must declare to the consumer the following food allergy groups: cereals
containing gluten, wheat, rye, barley, oats, spelt and hybridized grains, crustaceans and
their products, egg and egg products, fish and fish products, milk and milk products, nuts
and sesame seeds and their products, peanuts and soybeans and their products and sulphite
in concentrations of 10mg/kg or more.

It is the responsibility of the contractor to ensure that the consumer is at no risk from
the use or consumption of their product. Suitable controls to eliminate any cross-
contamination of food allergens is to be undertaken.

4.2.4.24. Preventive Maintenance

The contractor is to develop and implement a preventative maintenance system.
This is to include a reporting system for maintenance defects, assessment criteria for
deciding on the seriousness of the observation and a system of closing off outstanding
maintenance defects.

4.3. Developing the School Food Safety Program at UNIS Canteen

4.3.1. Introduction
All canteens have a responsibility to provide safe food. Safe food means that it is
prepared, cooked, transported and served in such a way as to retain nutrients, and to
minimise bacterial contamination and growth. Handling food poorly can cause food
poisoning. It can also reduce the quality of the food being served. The purpose of the
school food safety program is to ensure the delivery of safe foods to children in the school
meals programs by controlling hazards that may occur or be introduced into foods
anywhere along the flow of the food from receiving to service (food flow). An effective
food safety program will help control food safety hazards that might arise during all
aspects of food service (receiving, storing, preparing, cooking, cooling, reheating, holding,
assembling, packaging, transporting and serving).

There are two types of hazards: 1) ones specific to the preparation of the food, such
as improper cooking for the specific type of food (beef, chicken, eggs, etc.) and 2)
nonspecific ones that affect all foods, such as poor personal hygiene. Specific hazards are
controlled by identifying Critical Control Points (CCPs) and implementing measures to
control the occurrence or introduction of those hazards. Nonspecific hazards are controlled
by developing and implementing SOPs.

The school food safety program should control both specific and nonspecific hazards
and consist of SOPs and a written plan for applying the basic HACCP principles. This
guidance presents HACCP principles adapted to help SFAs develop an overall school food
safety program for their jurisdiction and HACCP-based food safety plans tailored
specifically for each school foodservice site within their jurisdiction

93
 Before developing the food safety program UNIS reviewed the foodservice
operations within the SFA and describe the facility, functions, and standard procedures for
each. Some basic information to consider when doing this initial review includes:
• Types of facilities in your SFA
• Existing SOPs
• Number and type of employees at each site
• Types of equipment
• Processes for food preparation
• Menu items

After describing the operations in your jurisdiction, the following steps will help you
develop your food safety program.

• Step 1. Develop, document in writing and implement SOPs.

• Step 2. Identify and document in writing all menu items according to the
Process Approach to HACCP.
• Step 3. Identify and document control measures and critical limits.
• Step 4. Establish monitoring procedures.
• Step 5. Establish corrective actions.
• Step 6. Keep records.
• Step 7. Review and revise your overall food safety program periodically.

4.3.2. Developing the School Food Safety Program at UNIS

4.3.2.1. Develop, document and implement SOPs.

SOPs lay a strong foundation for the overall school food safety program. SOPs
arestep-by-step written instructions for routine food service tasks that affect the safety of
food (‘nonspecific’ hazards), such as proper dishwashing procedures, or for tasks
that area part of the HACCP-based plan (specific hazards), such as proper cooking
procedures.
Each SOP should include instructions on monitoring, documentation, corrective
actions,and periodic review of the procedures they cover. Adherence to SOPs allows food
service managers and employees to effectively control and prevent hazards.

SFAs may already have SOPs developed and in place. If not, USDA is developing a
series of SOPs applicable to school food service establishments. The final versions of
these SOPs will be posted on the National Food Service Management Institute’s(NFSMI)
website (www.nfsmi.org). NFSMI will also be conducting training sessions subsequent to
the release of these documents on customizing these generic SOPs to fit your specific
operations.

The main categories of SOPs with some example topics for school foodservice are
listed below.

94
 General safety considerations
 Prohibit bare hand contact with ready-to-eat (RTE) foods.
 Store chemicals away from food and food-related supplies.

Personnel
 Require hand washing after restroom use, sneezing, coughing, or after
performing any cleaning activity.
 Develop a policy for restricting or excluding ill employees from food
production or preparation areas.

Product procurement
 Follow recommendations for selecting vendors such as those found in State
distributing agency vendor certification procedures.
 Develop buyer product specifications.

Receiving
 Reject all cans with swollen sides or ends, flawed seals and seams, rust or
dents.
 Put perishable foods into the refrigerator or freezer immediately.

Storing
 Store all food and paper supplies 6 to 8 inches off the floor.
 Label all food with name of the school and delivery date.

Transporting
 Preheat transfer carts prior to use.
 Limit transport travel time to a maximum of 2 hours.

Holding
 Keep hot foods hot (above 135 ºF) and cold foods cold (below 41 ºF).

Preparation
 Do not keep food in the “danger zone” (between 41 ºF and 135 ºF) for more
than 4 hours.
 Handle food with utensils; clean, gloved hands; or clean hands. (Bare hand
contact with food during preparation should be limited. Bare hand contact with
RTE foods should be prohibited.)

Cleaning/sanitizing
 Use clean water, free of grease and food particles.
 Keep wiping cloths in sanitizing solution while cleaning.

Cooking and documenting temperatures

 Record all temperatures when they are taken.
 Use only a clean and sanitized thermometer when taking internal
temperatures of foods.

Cooling
 Cool rapidly by storing food in small batches in individual containers; cover

95
 loosely so that heat can escape quickly.
 Keep cold foods cold by pre-chilling ingredients for salads.

Reheating
 Transfer reheated food to hot-holding equipment only when the food reaches
the proper temperature.
 Use only cooking ranges, ovens, steamers, and microwave ovens to reheat
foods. Use hot-holding equipment only to maintain temperature and not for rapidly heating
food.

4.3.2.2: Identify and document in writing all menu items according to the
Process Approach to HACCP.

The Process Approach to HACCP is a method of classifying food preparation into

three broad categories. These categories are based on the number of times a menu item
makes a complete trip through the temperature danger zone. The way food is prepared at
each site determines into which of the three food preparation processes it will fall.

Temperature, if not controlled properly during food preparation and service, can contribute
to a higher risk of foodborne illness. Therefore, it is critical to manage the temperature of
food. In order to protect foods from potential hazards, it is important to keep hot foods hot
and cold foods cold. It is most important to keep food out of the temperature danger
zone (41ºF - 135º F).

The danger zone temperatures used in this guidance are from the 2001 FDA
Food
Code (as amended August 29, 2003 in the Supplement to the 2001 Food Code).
The temperatures in your State may be different so this guidance should be adapted
as necessary to include State and local public health department code requirements
and school food authority policies and procedures.

To assign menu items to one of the three processes, consider the processes and
procedures used to prepare the food in each of your school district’s facilities. Determine
whether menu items have no cook step involved, undergo a cook step for same day service,
or receive additional cooling and reheating following a cook step. This will enable you to
place each menu item into the appropriate process. Identify the number of times each
menu item goes up (heating) or comes down (cooling) through the danger zone (41ºF -
135º F) and classify items into the following food preparation processes:

Process #1 – No Cook
The menu item does not go completely through the danger zone in either
direction.

Process #2 – Same Day Service

96
 The menu item takes one complete trip through the danger zone (going up during
cooking) and is served.

Process #3 – Complex Food Preparation

The menu item goes through both heating and cooling, taking two or more complete trips
through the danger zone.

You should document the appropriate process for each menu item. This can be done
in a variety of ways, including writing the process number directly on the recipe, or
developing a list of menu items in each of the processes.
In some cases the menu item may not appear to fit into any of the processes.
However, these types of items should still be handled and prepared properly. Salad bar
items, such as fresh fruits and vegetables cut and ready-to-eat on a salad bar or served
whole, should be treated as Process 1 items and kept cold. The goal is to control hazards
associated with Process 1 and to prevent further contamination by ensuring good hygienic
practices are followed by food employees. Keep in mind that for fresh fruits and
vegetables, this includes no bare hand contact on ready-to-eat foods. SOPs to address fresh
fruits and vegetables should be included in your food safety plan. Guidance on receiving,
storage, and preparation of whole fruits and vegetables and salad bar items can be found in
Fruits & Vegetables Galore, U.S. Department of Agriculture, Food and Nutrition Service,
2004. It can be accessed at http://www.fns.usda.gov/tn/Resources/fv_galore.html. It is
especially important to consider all the steps taken when a menu item is prepared at one
site and served at another in order to be aware of potential hazards and control for them. A
combination of central and satellite kitchens is found in many school districts. In these
situations, the SFA must identify and categorize the appropriate overall food preparation
process for menu items and also must develop a plan for each site involved in the
preparation and service of the item to clarify the responsibilities for each site. For
example, a central kitchen cooks Broccoli, Cheese and Rice Casserole (a Process #2 menu
item) and transports it hot to a satellite kitchen for service on the same day. The central
kitchen has the responsibility for following the recipe and adhering to all applicable control

97
points and SOPs. The satellite kitchen has the responsibility for the control points specific
to the site, for example checking the temperature of the food upon arrival and keeping the
food at a safe temperature until service. Both must adhere to all applicable SOPs.

In addition to initial food preparation, some foodservice operations make use of leftovers.
If your State or local authority has allowed for the use of leftovers, a procedure for
handling leftovers should be implemented. Generally, leftovers will fall into Process #3 as
they have most likely been cooked and cooled prior to being stored and used again. A
sample of a procedure for handling leftovers can be found in Appendix II.

4.3.2.3. Identify and document control measures and critical limits.

Control measures are any means taken to prevent, eliminate, or reduce hazards.
Collectively, control measures include SOPs as well as the Critical Control Points (CCPs)
and the corresponding critical limits established in each of the three processes.
Once you identify the appropriate process for each menu item, determine what control
measures are needed to prevent the introduction of hazards at each stage of food
preparation from receiving to service. Decide which of the control measures are absolutely
essential to ensuring safe food.

Identifying CCPs and Implementing Essential Control Measures in the Process

Approach The control measures that are absolutely essential must be applied at key points,
known as CCPs, during the food preparation process to control specific hazards (physical,
chemical, or biological). A CCP is a key point where a step can be taken to
prevent,eliminate, or reduce a food safety hazard to an acceptable level. Loss of control at
this point may result in an unacceptable health risk. You will find that despite the different
specific hazards, the control measures used to prevent, eliminate, or reduce hazards in all
menu items under each of the three processes are similar.

The following are CCPs, related to each food preparation process:

For Process #1 – No Cook:

•Cold holding or limiting time in the danger zone to inhibit bacterial

growth and toxin production (e.g., limiting time would be holding at room
temperature for 4 hours and then discarding)

For Process #2 – Same Day Service:

•Cooking to destroy bacteria and other pathogens

•Hot holding or limiting time in the danger zone to prevent the outgrowth
of spore-forming bacteria

For Process #3 – Complex Food Preparation:

98
 •Cooking to destroy bacteria and other pathogens
•Cooling to prevent the outgrowth of spore-forming bacteria
•Hot and cold holding or limiting time in the danger zone to inhibit
bacterial growth and toxin formation
•Reheating for hot holding, if applicable

CCPs and Corresponding Critical Limits

Each CCP includes boundaries that define safety. These boundaries or critical limits
are the time and/or temperatures that must be achieved or maintained to control a food
safety hazard. When critical limits are not met, the food may not be safe. The 2001 FDA
Food Code (as amended August 29, 2003 in the Supplement to the 2001 Food Code)
provides critical limits designed to prevent, eliminate, or reduce hazards in food. For
example, when cooking chicken, the Food Code sets the critical limit at 165 ºF for 15
seconds. Critical limits (time/temperature) are measurable and observable.

The following graphic demonstrates minimum temperatures and holding

times (critical limits) for some common food service menu items.

99
100
 Documenting CCPs and Critical Limits:
You must document in writing the CCPs and critical limits for each Process
Approach category in your food safety program and in each site plan. Each of the three
processes in the Process Approach has specific CCPs, such as, cooking, cooling, hot
holding, cold holding, and reheating. The CCPs for each of the processes will remain
the same regardless of the menu item. However, the critical limits will vary depending
upon the menu item and the recipe used to prepare each item. Critical limits for
cooking, hot holding, and reheating are demonstrated by the Thermy graphic on page 15
of this guidance. Critical limits for cooling can be found in the Cooling Potentially
Hazardous Foods SOP on page 33 of this guidance in Appendix I. The graphics on
pages 20 – 22 of this guidance provide examples of menu items for each process with
general control measures, CCPs, and critical limits. Also, see Appendix III for a sample
school foodsafety program that includes documentation of control measures.

USDA’s Quantity Recipes for School Food Service was recently revised to
include CCPs and critical limits and is an excellent resource when preparing food by
recipe. These recipes are available through the National Food Service Management
Institute’s website at ttp://www.nfsmi.org/Information/school_recipe_index_alpha.html.
Having the recipes on file and following the recipes exactly will fulfill the requirement
for documenting CCPs and critical limits within the Process Approach specifically for
these recipes.Although CCPs are identified in each of the USDA recipes, it is important
for you to consider the complete process used at each school/site. Considering the
complete process will help determine the need for CCPs when modifying recipes and in
the absence of recipes. For instance, a particular school may cool leftover chicken,
although cooling may not be identified as an operational step in the recipe. Therefore, a
CCP must be determined and documented for the cooling step.

Using SOPs to Complement the Process Approach by Bridging Gaps

SOPs are also control measures and should not be forgotten when using the
ProcessApproach. In addition to the established CCPs for each of the three processes,
applicable SOPs should be followed for the preparation and service of all menu items.
As mentioned earlier in this guidance, SOPs serve as general control measures for
nonspecific hazards. Therefore, SOPs complement the Process Approach by providing
a general safety net. Whereas, the CCPs determined for each of the three processes
safeguard against specific hazards.USDA is developing SOPs for use in the preparation
of food in schools. These SOPs include critical limits, as well as monitoring, corrective
action, verification, and recordkeeping procedures. The final versions will be posted on
the NFSMI ebsite. By accessing the NFSMI website (www.nfsmi.org), you will be able
to customize these SOPs to best suit your particular operation.

101
 4.3.2.4: Establish monitoring procedures.

Monitoring is an important step for an effective food safety program. Control

measures, including CCPs and SOPs, must be monitored, controlled, and documented in
writing. Monitoring involves making direct observations or taking measurements to see
that the food safety program is being followed. For example, the CCPs are managed by
adhering to the established critical limits. Monitoring will identify when there is a loss
of control so that corrective action can be taken. In establishing your monitoring
procedures, consider the following questions:

• How will you monitor CCPs and SOPs?

• When and how often will you monitor?
• Who will be responsible for monitoring?

What you are going to monitor depends on the critical limits associated with each
CCP for a menu item. Final temperature and time measurements are very important,
and you should determine how you will effectively monitor the critical limits for them.
Determining the appropriate means for monitoring is an important factor. If equipment
is selected to monitor a specific CCP, you should ensure that it is accurate. The
equipment you choose should also be appropriate for the monitoring function. When
deciding how often you will monitor, you should ensure that the monitoring interval
will be reliable enough to ensure hazards are being controlled. Your procedure for
monitoring should be simple and easy to follow. Individuals chosen to be responsible
for a monitoring activity may be a manager, line supervisor, or other reliable employee.
Employees should be given the training and equipment necessary to properly perform
the monitoring activities.

Monitoring examples: The CCP for cold foods is cold holding. The critical limit
is holding at 41 ºF or below. Therefore, the temperature of the refrigerator must be
recorded on a refrigeration temperature monitoring chart at least three times daily to
make sure the temperature is 41 ºF or below. A CCP for chicken is cooking. The
critical limit is cooking at 165 ºF for 15 seconds. Therefore, the internal temperature of
the chicken must be monitored and recorded to make sure it is at or above 165 ºF for 15
seconds.

102
 4.3.2.5: Establish corrective actions.

Whenever a critical limit is not met, a corrective action must be carried out immediately.
A corrective action may be simply continuing to heat food to the required temperature.
Other corrective actions may be more complicated, such as rejecting food items that
were not delivered at the right temperature, or discarding food that has been held
without temperature control too long. Your food safety program must include corrective
actions. Employees must know what these corrective actions are, and be trained in
making the right decisions. This preventive approach is the heart of HACCP. Problems
will arise, but you need to find them and correct them before they cause illness or injury.
It is also important to document corrective actions when they are taken. Corrective
action examples:

SOP: If the temperature in the refrigerator is above 41 ºF, then the equipment must be
checked to see if it is working properly. Also, the thermometer that is used to record the
temperature must be calibrated regularly and checked to see if it is working properly.

CCP: When cooking raw poultry, corrective action must be taken if the internal
temperature does not reach 165 ºF for 15 seconds at the end of the designated cooking
period. The corrective action would be to continue cooking the chicken until the
internal temperature reaches 165 ºF for at least 15 seconds. Corrective actions should be
determined for all SOPs and CCPs. A list of appropriate corrective actions must be
included in your school food safety program. See Appendices I and III for sample
SOPs and a sample school food safety program. Both, the appendices and the sample
program, include corrective actions.

4.3.2.6: Keep records.

There are certain written records or kinds of documentation that are needed to
verify that the food safety program is working. These records will normally involve the
food safety plan and any monitoring, corrective action, or calibration records produced
in the operation of the food safety program based on HACCP principles. Recordkeeping
also provides a basis for periodic reviews of the overall food safety program. In the
event your operation is implicated in a foodborne illness, documentation of activities
related to monitoring and corrective actions can provide proof that reasonable care was
exercised in the operation of your facility.

Maintain records of cooking, cooling, and reheating temperatures and other CCPs
in the food preparation process.Keep documentation as simple as possible to make
record keeping easy for employees. You do not necessarily need to develop new
records.
For example, you may use existing paperwork such as delivery invoices for
documenting product temperature when receiving food items. Employees are an

103
important source for developing simple and effective recordkeeping procedures.
Determine what records must be kept, where to keep them, and which staff member(s)
will be responsible for maintaining them. Some of the types of records that should be
maintained include:

• Records documenting the SOPs

• Time and temperature monitoring records
• Corrective action records
• Verification or review records
• Calibration records
• Training logs
• Receiving logs

The clipboard icons in the following visual shows a recordkeeping duty for CCPs
and SOPs for sample menu items in each of the processes. See Appendix IV for more
recordkeeping examples.

104
105
106
107
4.3.2.7: Review and revise your overall food safety program periodically.
There should be an ongoing as well as a periodic review of the activities
described in your food safety program. This step ensures that the food safety program
is operating according to what is specified in each school’s plan. Designated
individuals such as the manager should periodically make observations of employees’
monitoring activities, calibrate equipment and temperature measuring devices, review
records/actions, and discuss procedures with employees. All of these activities should
take place regularly to verify that the program is addressing the food safety concerns
and, if not, checking to see if it needs to be modified or improved. Review and revise
your food safety program at least annually or as often as necessary to reflect any
changes in your facility. These may include new equipment, new menu items, reports
of illness or comments on health inspections, or other factors that indicate how well
your food safety program is working. Determine who will review the current plan,
when it will be done, and how it will be documented

4.3.3. Review of the school food safety program

4.3.3.1. Introduction
The school food service manager will review the school food safety program at the
beginning of each school year and when any significant changes occur in the operation.
The attached checklist will be used for the review
4.3.3.2. Food safety checklist

108
FOOD SAFETY CHECKLIST

Date___________________________ Observer_______________________________________

Directions: Use this checklist daily to determine areas in your operations requiring corrective action.
Record corrective action taken and keep completed records in a notebook for future reference.
___________________________________________________________________________________________
PERSONAL HYGIENE
Yes No Corrective Action
• Employees wear clean and proper uniform including shoes.------------ □ □ _____________
• Effective hair restraints are properly worn.-------------------------------- □ □ __________
• Fingernails are short, unpolished, and clean (no artificial nails). ------ □ □ __________
• Jewelry is limited to a plain ring, such as a wedding band and a
□ □ __________
watch - no bracelets. ---------------------------------------------------------
• Hands are washed properly, frequently, and at appropriate times.----- □ □ __________
• Burns, wounds, sores or scabs, or splints and water-proof bandages
on hands are bandaged and completely covered with a foodservice
glove while handling food. --------------------------------------------------- □ □ __________
• Eating, drinking, chewing gum, smoking, or using tobacco are
allowed only in designated areas away from preparation, service,
storage, and ware washing areas. ------------------------------------------- □ □ __________
• Employees use disposable tissues when coughing or sneezing
and then immediately wash hands. ----------------------------------------- □ □ __________
• Employees appear in good health.----------------------------------------- □ □ ______________
• Hand sinks are unobstructed, operational, and clean.-------------------- □ □ ______________
• Hand sinks are stocked with soap, disposable towels, and warm
water. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- □ □ ______________
• A handwashing reminder sign is posted.---------------------------------- □ □ ______________
• Employee restrooms are operational and clean.-------------------------- □ □ ______________

FOOD PREPARATION Yes No Corrective Action

• All food stored or prepared in facility is from approved sources.---- □ □ ___________

• Food equipment utensils, and food contact surfaces are properly
washed, rinsed, and sanitized before every use. ------------------------- □ □ ___________
• Frozen food is thawed under refrigeration or in cold running
water. ------------------------------------------------------------------------- □ □ ___________
• Preparation is planned so ingredients are kept out of the temperature
danger zone to the extent possible. --------------------------------------- □ □ ___________
• Food is tasted using the proper procedure.------------------------------ □ □ ___________
• Procedures are in place to prevent cross-contamination.-------------- □ □ ___________

109
 • Food is handled with suitable utensils, such as, single use gloves or
tongs. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ □ □ ___________
• Food is prepared in small batches to limit the time it is in the
temperature danger zone. ---------------------------------------------- □ □ ___________
• Clean reusable towels are used only for sanitizing equipment,
surfaces and not for drying hands, utensils, or floor. ------ ------------ □ □ __________
• Food is cooked to the required safe internal temperature for the
appropriate time. The temperature is tested with a calibrated food
thermometer.------------------------------------------------------------------□□ ___________
• The internal temperature of food being cooked is monitored and
documented. ------------------------------------------------------------------- □ □ ___________

HOT HOLDING Yes No Corrective Action

• Hot holding unit is clean.--------------------------------------------- □ □ ___________

• Food is heated to the required safe internal temperature before
placing in hot holding. Hot holding units are not used to reheat
potentially hazardous foods. ---------------------------------------------- □ □ ___________
• Hot holding unit is pre-heated before hot food is placed in unit.----- □ □ ___________
• Temperature of hot food being held is at or above 135 ˚F.----------- □ □ ___________
• Food is protected from contamination.---------------------------------- □ □ ___________

COLD HOLDING Yes No Corrective Action

• Refrigerators are kept clean and organized.----------------------------- □ □ ___________

• Temperature of cold food being held is at or below 41 ˚F.------------ □ □ ___________
• Food is protected from contamination.----------------------------------- □ □ ___________

REFRIGERATOR, FREEZER, AND MILK COOLER Yes No Corrective Action

• Thermometers are available and accurate.------------------------------- □ □ ___________

• Temperature is appropriate for pieces of equipment.------------------ □ □ ___________
• Food is stored 6 inches off floor or in walk-in cooling equipment.-- □ □ ___________
• Refrigerator and freezer units are clean and neat.----------------------- □ □ ___________
• Proper chilling procedures are used.-------------------------------------- □ □ ___________
• All food is properly wrapped, labeled, and dated.---------------------- □ □ ___________

• The FIFO (First In, First Out) method of inventory management is

used. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- □ □ ___________
• Ambient air temperature of all refrigerators and freezers is monitored
and documented at the beginning and end of each shift. -------------- □ □ ___________
110
111
FOOD STORAGE AND DRY STORAGE Yes No Corrective Action

• Temperatures of dry storage area is between 50 ˚F and 70 ˚F or

State public health department requirement.------------------------------ □ □ ___________
• All food and paper supplies are stored 6 to 8 inches off the floor.----- □ □ ___________
• All food is labeled with name and received date.------------------------- □ □ ___________
• Open bags of food are stored in containers with tight fitting lids and
labeled with common name.------------------------------------------------- □ □ ___________
• The FIFO (First In, First Out) method of inventory management
is used.-------------------------------------------------------------------------- □
□ ___________
• There are no bulging or leaking canned goods. -------------------------- □ □ ___________
• Food is protected from contamination.------------------------------------- □ □ ___________
• All food surfaces are clean.-------------------------------------------------- □ □ ___________
• Chemicals are clearly labeled and stored away from food and food
related supplies.--------------------------------------------------------------- □ □ ___________
• There is a regular cleaning schedule for all food surfaces.-------------- □ □ ___________

CLEANING AND SANITIZING Yes No Corrective Action

• Three-compartment sink is properly set up for ware washing.--------- □ □ ___________

• Dishmachine is working properly (i.e. gauges and chemicals are at
recommended levels).------------------------------------------------------ □ □ ___________
• Water is clean and free of grease and food particles.-------------------- □ □ ___________
• Water temperatures are correct for wash and rinse.--------------------- □ □ ___________
• If heat sanitizing, the utensils are allowed to remain immersed in
171 ˚F water for 30 seconds.----------------------------------------------- □ □ ___________
• If using a chemical sanitizer, it is mixed correctly and a sanitizer
strip is used to test chemical concentration.----------------------------- □ □ ___________
• Smallware and utensils are allowed to air dry.-------------------------- □ □ ___________
• Wiping cloths are stored in sanitizing solution while in use.--------- □ □ ___________

UTENSILS AND EQUIPMENT Yes No Corrective Action

• All small equipment and utensils, including cutting boards and

knives, are cleaned and sanitized between uses.------------------------ □ □ ___________
• Small equipment and utensils are washed, sanitized, and air-dried.-- □ □ ___________
• Work surfaces and utensils are clean.------------------------------------ □ □ ___________
 • Work surfaces are cleaned and sanitized between uses.--------------- □ □ ___________
• Thermometers are cleaned and sanitized after each use.-------------- □ □ ___________
• Thermometers are calibrated on a routine basis.------------------------ □ □ ___________
• Can opener is clean.--------------------------------------------------------- □ □ ___________
• Drawers and racks are clean.----------------------------------------------- □ □ ___________
• Clean utensils are handled in a manner to prevent contamination of
areas that will be in direct contact with food or a person’s mouth.---- □ □ ___________

LARGE EQUIPMENT Yes No Corrective Action

• Food slicer is clean.--------------------------------------------------------- □ □ ___________

• Food slicer is broken down, cleaned, and sanitized before and after
every use.--------------------------------------------------------------------- □ □ ___________
• Boxes, containers, and recyclables are removed from site.------------ □ □ ___________
• Loading dock and area around dumpsters are clean and odor-free.-- □ □ ___________
• Exhaust hood and filters are clean.---------------------------------------- □ □ ___________

GARBAGE STORAGE AND DISPOSAL Yes No Corrective Action

• Kitchen garbage cans are clean and kept covered.----------------------- □ □ ___________

• Garbage cans are emptied as necessary.---------------------------------- □ □ ___________
• Boxes and containers are removed from site.---------------------------- □ □ ___________
• Loading dock and area around dumpster are clean.--------------------- □ □ ___________
• Dumpsters are clean.-------------------------------------------------------- □ □ ___________
4.3.4. Other Factors in the Success of the Food Safety Program at UNIS
The success of a food safety program is dependent upon facilities, equipment, and people.
The facilities and equipment should be selected or designed to promote safe food preparation
and handling practices by employees. Review the facilities and correct or modify barriers to
safe food preparation. For example, faulty or out-dated plumbing or lack of appropriate
thermometers could be a barrier to safe food production.

Managers and employees need to be properly trained to successfully reduce the occurrence of
foodborne risk factors. A food safety program is effective when each employee knows
his/her role and is committed to making it work. Also consider obstacles such as high
employee turnover or communication barriers when designing and implementing a food
safety program. The following practices contribute to a successful food safety program:
• Providing on-going food safety training for all employees.
• Reviewing food safety principles, including SOP guidelines, for all employees on an
annual basis.
• Requiring new employees, including substitutes and volunteers, to complete initial
food safety training before handling food.
• Maintaining training and attendance records on all employees at each facility.
• Holding facility managers responsible for maintaining employee training standards.

4.3. Food processing procedure and Food Safety Audit Report at

UNIS
4.3.1. Food processing procedure

This food process flow diagram is a true reflection of the current

process in place at UNIS Hanoi
4.3.2. Food Safety Audit Report
4.3.2.1. Introduction

This is the first food safety audit of UNIS Hanoi. It's current food services
contractor, ADEN Services was on-site and assisted by providing responses to
questions throughout the audit process. The UNIS canteen and food preparation,
storage rocesses and practices were assessed against the standard prepared by EHC as
part of UNIS's food services tender documentation. Whilst detailed information is
ontained with this audit report, the following matters require urgent attention:
• Pre-school food preparation/delivery. Vulnerable populations such as small
children present a particular food safety risk due to their underdeveloped immune
system. This audit revealed a number of concerns with the current management of
food safety with regard to the UNIS pre-school. Food is currently prepared within the
main kitchen and transported to the pre-school within an enclosed trolley. Hot foods
are then re-heated in a microwave or conventional oven. No temperature monitoring is
undertaken as part of this process and the plating of foods is carried out within a
shared room, with no pest control measures in place (open and unscreened windows
and door). It is recommended that either the pre-school children be taken to the main
canteen to eat their meal, or that the issues raised within this report be immediately
implemented, to negate the current food safety risk.
• The sanitising of food contact surfaces and equipment is not being carried out
in any food preparation or storge area. It is essential that an effective sanitising
program be immediately implemented to ensure the effective sanitising of all food
contact surfaces.

4.3.2.2. Food Safety Audit Report

4.4. UNIS Food Safety Program Review 3-4 March 2010

This preliminary report is based upon observations made during the assessment period
and upon discussions with both UNIS and representatives of J&J Catering Co. Ltd. The report
identifies those areas considered a food safety risk and the identification of major risks that
need to be addressed as a priority. The formal report, to be submitted to UNIS in due course,
will also discuss observed good food safety practices by J&J Catering.

OBSERVATIONS:

Canteen Kitchen:

Day 1

• No FSP (required under UNIS food safety standard)

• Using rags to wipe down food preparation benches. Stated by Ms. Sin that rags are
boiled each day. Correct sanitiser method to be used.
• Korean sanitiser used in kitchen for food contact surfaces (check wording)
• Thermometer probes are cleaned with a sanitiser spray (recommend swabs)
• Using a infra-red thermometer for checking milk and frozen products
• Food samples stored in refrigerator for two (2) days (at <5ºC). Product should be
frozen for fourteen (14) days.
• Thermometers are not calibrated correctly (currently calibrated by comparing two
thermometers).
• No MSDS for chemicals
• Refrigerated/Frozen foods not labelled
• Currently relying on ‘air temperature’ reading for cold storage units.
• Unclean bench top can opener
• Dead cockroaches observed in kitchen and sticky board used in food areas.
• Ceiling in need of repair, so as to provide a smooth, impervious surface.

Day 2

• Dead cockroaches observed in kitchen on day 1 still there on day 2.

• No gloves worn by food handler scooping cooked rice from pot with a plate.
• Still using metal tasting spoons
• Observed washing of vegetables carried out without the use of a sanitiser wash.
• Cooking directly below open window (cross contamination risk, dust and insects)
• No exhaust ventilation system in place above cooking appliances
• Meat delivery records revealed 25kg of Beef and Pork delivered at temperatures
between 25-27 degrees Celsius. No corrective action or notation regarding quality was
documented.
Canteen Pot Wash Room:

• No hot water connected to the commercial dishwasher in the wash-up room

• Using a ‘sanitiser cabinet’ for plates, glasses and cups. This unit does not state that it is
a purpose designed sanitising unit and temperature gauge read 74ºC.
• UV unit used for sanitising ceramic bowls
• Very low pressure observed (dribble) at pot wash hot water tap
• Using Sunlight detergent for cleaning pots (stated this was a sanitiser but it is not)

Canteen Servery Counter:

• Mouse faeces observed adjacent to the bakery servery window and a build up of dirt
and grime on floor beneath the refrigerators.
• Food warming cabinet used to store both hot and cold foods. Unit measured at 28ºC
• Plastic forks in open container. Recommend to be stored upside down (fork first) in an
appropriate container
• Food handling staff (not manager) could not demonstrate a reasonable knowledge of
food safety and hygiene
• No allergen advice on menus
• No food safety notices/posters on display
• Drinking straws offered to students who take a straw from an open packet (need to be
stored in dispenser or individually sealed)
• Asian food section – hot food Bain Maries were uncovered and unattended whilst
staff were serving Western food customers. Bain Marie lids need to be provided when
section station is temporarily unattended.

Early Childcare Centre (ECC):

• Meals transported in enclosed metal cabinet. Transported meals are prepared and
served within one (1) hour (good practice)
• Containers of hot cooked rice transported by hand to class rooms
• Container of hot sauce delivered by hand to class rooms (uncovered)
• NOTE: Hot rice and hot sauce observed to be placed on low table in vicinity of small
children (OH&S issue.

Findings:

A meeting was held on Wednesday 3 March 2010 with Mr. Anthony Jin, President of
J&J Catering C. Ltd, regarding their processes and procedures relating to food purchasing,
storage, preparation and handling. Discussions also focused on documentation currently relied
upon by the Caterer in the preparation and sale of food at UNIS.

The following major issues were noted:

• A Food Safety Program, as required by the UNIS food safety standard, was not
available.
• No professional pest control program is currently in place
 • No chemical supplier
• No approved supplier system is in place
• Hot water has not been connected to the commercial dishwasher since its installation
in August 2009.
• No effective sanitising system is in place for the washing of food service cutlery and
plates, the washing of fruits and vegetables or the cleaning of food contact surfaces.
• Staff displayed a limited knowledge of food safety and hygiene (Ms. Shim does have a
general understanding but it needs to be expanded through on-going training).
• No general allergen advice provided on menus
• Potentially hazardous foods (PHF) accepted at temperatures that support the rapid
growth of pathogenic bacteria (meat at 25ºC) This is of particular concern given that
meals are provided for ECC (a vulnerable population group).

NOTE: Although not part of the scope of this contract, it was observed that two (2) large pots
of food (cooked rice and hot sauce) were placed on low tables in the ECC classrooms.
At the time, young children were playing directly adjacent and could easily have been
injured. It is recommended that this practice be raised with J&J with a view to finding
a more suitable alternative to the current practice.
 CHAPTER 5 : CONCLUSION OF THE STUDY
5.1. Introduction
An evaluation of the importance of food safety and hygience was carried out
specially in the canteen of United Nations International School of Hanoi in Viet Nam.
This school was an ideal choice for this evaluation because of its high safety and
hygiene standard. The whole evaluation was based on specific objectives which was to
understand what food safety and food hygience are; to investigate the causes of food
safety and hygience in school canteen, household, restaurants..
This chapter concludes the research. The study introduced the background and
objectives in chapter 1, method of the study in chapter 2 The next chapter focuses on
food safety, using HACCP systens and provides the theoretical framework for this
research study, explored the general concepts of food safety and hygience in chapter 3,
outlined and discussed the researth methodology in chapter 4 and presented and
discussed the recommedation in chapter 5. This chapter makes recommendations on
the basic of the findings and conclusions described in chapter 5.

5.2. Conclusion

The research objectives of the study were to understand what food safety and
food hygience at UNIS; to evaluate the importance of food safety and hygience based on the
HACCP priciples; to evaluate the impact of food safety and hygience on parents, students and
teachers acknowledgement.
The outcome of the evaluation, as discussed in Chapter 4, has been interesting. Food
safety and hygience have had a negative impact on food in the area. The impact of food safety and
hygience in UNIS has been extremely positive, especially in busy time of service. Food safety has
helped save and improve many people’s lives, especially those who live away from home. Food
safety has provided the confidence to the international parents who are living – working in Hanoi
that they can send their children to the school. It has encouraged the creation of community assets
and has provided jobs for distributors employed by non – profit organization.

As pointed out in Chapter 1, UNIS was chosen as a case study and the results of the
evaluation do not necessarily relate to the whole of the operation of the canteen or school
managerment of UNIS even though they could possibly apply to some parts of the area.

Food Safety Web Sites

FDA Center for Food Safety and Applied Nutrition, available at

http://www.cfsan.fda.gov/~lrd/haccp.html
Gateway to Government Food Safety Information, available at
www.FoodSafety.gov

Healthy School Meals Resource System, available at

http://schoolmeals.nal.usda.gov/

“Is It Done Yet?” available at

http://www.isitdoneyet.gov
“Thermy™” available at
http://www.fsis.usda.gov/Food_Safety_Education/Thermy

Thermometer Resource available at

http://www.nfsmi.org/Information/thermometer_resource.html

139