Appendices: Future Delivery Model report

Appendix 1: Achieved sample

Table 2: Summary of achieved participant numbers by key quotas

Location	Number of participants	Gender	Age	Ethnicity	Socio-economic group
England	11 participants	5 females and 6 males	4 aged 25 to 34 4 aged 35 to 54 3 aged 55+	7 white and 4 ethnic minority participants	Mix
England	22 participants	11 females and 11 males	1 aged 18 to 24 6 aged 25 to 34 9 aged 35 to 54 6 aged 55+	16 white and 6 ethnic minority participants	Mix
Northern Ireland	23 participants	12 females and 11 males	1 aged 18 to 24 8 aged 25 to 34 6 aged 35 to 54 8 aged 55+	23 white participants reflective of the local population	Mix
Wales	22 participants	13 females and 9 males	1 aged 18 to 24 3 aged 25 to 34 8 aged 35 to 54 4 aged 55+	18 white and 4 ethnic minority participants	Mix

Appendix 2: Research materials

2.1 Initial workshops discussion guide

Note: this discussion guide is intended to inform the discussion in each workshop.  Questions may not be asked in the order below, and not every question will be asked in each workshop. 

Key:

• CAPITALISED = instructions for moderators
• bold lower case = key questions 
• non-bold lower case = follow up questions and prompts

Workshops Schedule:

Initial workshops (week commencing 12th July)

Session number	Date	Time	Region	Workshop number	Number of break-out groups	Total number of participants
1	Monday 12 July 2021	6pm to 8pm	England	1	2 5 to 6 participants each	10 to 12
2	Tuesday 13 July 2021	6pm to 8pm	England	2-3	4 5 to 6 participants each	20 to 24
3	Thursday 15 July 2021	6pm to 8pm	Northern Ireland	4-5	4 5 to 6 participants each	20 to 24
4	Saturday 17 July 2021	10am to 12pm	Wales	6-7	4 5 to 6 participants each	20 to 24

Total number of participants: 70 to 84

 

Arrival (before start), 15 to 20 minutes

Participants enter the ‘zoom room’ and any that have not already done so are asked to change their screen name to first name and initial of their surname.

Section 1: Introductions and warm up, 10 minutes

Plenary

SHOW STIMULUS: SLIDES 1-5

Chair introduction:

• thank participants for taking part
• introduce self and Ipsos Mori, moderators, observers, and note-takers
• the discussion will last two hours and we’ll have a short break part way through

Explain purpose of the discussion: This research is being carried out on behalf of the Food Standards Agency. They are looking at the way the food industry (specifically meat, dairy, and wine) is currently regulated and how they might change it in the future. For this purpose, they’re running a public consultation with stakeholders in the food industry and they have also commissioned us to run this research, as they are interested in gaining a better understanding of public views. Today we’re going to talk in more detail about how the meat industry is currently regulated and what it might look like in the future. 

• talk through the ground rules/ housekeeping. TOTALLY VOLUNTARY

WHEN INTRODUCING OBSERVERS, PLEASE SPECIFY: We’re also joined tonight by observers from the Food Standards Agency, but please rest assured they don’t have any other information about you, other than what can be seen on the screen.
SHOW STIMULUS: SLIDE 6.

Objectives covered

• introduce participants to the research
• introduce moderators, observers and note-takers
• clarify audio recording
• collect informed consent for participation

Section 2: Introducing the 'Farm to fork' journey exploring awareness about regulation in the food industry and introducing the current FDM, 10 minutes

Break-out groups

Reiterate ground rules

• we will be audio-recording this discussion in line with the MRS Code of Conduct. The recording will be stored on our secure servers and no one outside of the research team will have access to this.
• following these groups, we will be writing up our findings into a report for the FSA, and these will be published alongside results from the public consultation. However, no findings will be attributed to you and we will not include your name in any reports. 
• any questions?
• can I check you are happy to take part in this research? 

Ask if everyone is happy for the recording to begin TURN ON RECORDING and record consent that everyone is happy to participate in the workshop, that they understand the aims of the research, that their participation is voluntary and that their responses will remain confidential and anonymous.

Introductions around the group. Please tell us:

• your first name 
• where you’re from (ROUGHLY, WE DON’T NEED SPECIFIC POSTCODES)
• what’s your favourite meal 

TURN ON RECORDER NOW

We want to start by talking about what happens before food arrives at the supermarket.

What do you know about where food comes from? This isn’t a trick question!

• who do you think is involved? PROBE: farmers, different types of food businesses, inspectors? 
• how do you think this is regulated?
• what do you think happens to make sure the food you can buy in the shops is safe to eat? 

Objectives covered

Ice breaker exercise to get participants to know each other and build discussion dynamic.

Section 1: continuation, 10 minutes

BREAK-OUT GROUPS

MODERATOR INTRODUCES THE FOOD JOURNEY 

SHOW STIMULUS: SLIDE 7

How much of this information feels familiar to you? 

• what had you heard about before? From where? 
• is anything surprising? Unfamiliar? Confusing? 
• do you have any questions?  

What role do you think the FSA plays in this process? 

• what do you think the FSA wants to achieve through this? 
• is there anything else you think the FSA does? 

Is anyone else responsible for regulating the safety of food? 

• who do you think is involved? 
• what do you think they do? 

Objectives covered

Gauge awareness levels of regulation in the food industry and the FSA's role in this.

Section 1: continuation, 25 minutes

Break-out groups

MODERATOR INTRODUCES THE CURRENT APPROACH 

SHOW STIMULUS: SLIDES 8-14

MODERATOR TO PROBE FOR SPONTANEOUS REACTIONS:

Does the model make sense to you? Do you have any questions? 

MODERATOR TO NOTE DOWN QUESTIONS TO BE ASKED IN THE PLENARY SESSION. 

Is anything clear/ unclear about the current approach? 

• is anything confusing? 
• is anything surprising? 

What do you think this approach is trying to achieve? 

PROBE: food safety, supporting businesses etc.

What might be the benefits of this approach? 

What do you like about it? Do you find anything reassuring? 

What might be the challenges?

What concerns do you have?

PLENARY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS BEFORE THE BREAK

Objectives covered

Gauge understanding and concerns about the current FDM.

Section 2: Introducing the proposed FDM, 5 minutes

PLENARY
Moderator to give a brief introduction of the proposed Future Delivery Model
SHOW STIMULUS: SLIDES 15 and 16
Opportunity for questions and initial reactions from participants. 

Objectives covered

Present participants with a broad overview of the proposed FDM and the changes it involves

Section 2 continuation: spontaneous reactions to the proposed FDM, 5 minutes

BREAK-OUT GROUPS
Initial responses to the presentation introducing the FDM:
IF NECESSARY, SHOW AGAIN STIMULUS:  SLIDES 15-16

What do you think about the presentation about the Future Delivery Model? 
Was anything confusing or unclear? 
Was anything surprising? 
What was the most interesting thing that you heard? 
What there anything you particularly liked? Or disliked? •    

Objectives covered

Explore spontaneous reactions to the proposed FDM

Section 3: Brief introduction of the four main elements, 35 minutes

BREAK-OUT GROUPS

MODERATOR INTRODUCES THE FOUR MAIN ELEMENTS OF THE FDM IN TURN

• tailored presence
• clearer accountability
• robust assurance regime
• transparent compliance

PLEASE SHOW STIMULUS FOR EACH ELEMENT: SLIDES 19-30.
MODERATOR TO SHOW STIMULUS AND READ OUT THE DESCRIPTION OF EACH ELEMENT. 

General prompts for all elements:
What do you think about this element? 

• does the element make sense? Is anything unclear? 
• do you have any questions about this? 
• what do you think it is trying to achieve? 

How is this different from the current model? 

• what do you think are the key changes? 
• what is clear/unclear about it?

What do you think the changes might mean for: 

• the FSA?
• food businesses? 
• consumers? 

What might be driving the FSA to make this change? 
What makes you say that?

What might the potential benefits be to this approach? 
Who might this affect? 
Are there any other benefits you can think of? 

What might be the potential risks or challenges of this approach? 
Who might this affect? 
Are there any other risks you can think of? 
IF NEEDED, MODERATOR TO DRAW ON THE BENEFITS/CHALLENGES SLIDE.

REPEAT FOR THE REMAINING ELEMENTS

Objectives covered

To help participants understand how each element fits within the FDM and how it contributes to ensuring food is safe for consumption
To explore public views on the role of each element.

Section 3 continuation, 5 minutes

BREAK-OUT GROUPS
MODERATOR TO EXPLORE OVERALL REFLECTIONS ON THE DISCUSSION 

• what stood out to you most? What stood out to you least?
• what do you think about the FSA and their role as a regulator now you know a little more? 
• what should the FSA consider/ focus on in future?
• do you have any questions about what we’ve discussed today? 

MODERATOR TO NOTE DOWN ANY QUESTIONS AND EXPLAIN WE WILL ANSWER THEM AT THE NEXT WORKSHOP. 

Objectives covered

Summarise discussions and provide a chance to reflect.

Section 4: Final reflections, 5 minutes

PLENARY 
Each moderator to give a brief summary of the most important take-aways from each group

• chair to sum up most important priorities for FSA when considering rolling out the new FDM
• thank participants and explain next steps including date of their next workshop 

CHAIR TO SHARE SIGNPOSTING SLIDE ON SCREEN SHOW SLIDE 31
If anyone has any questions about food safety at home, you can contact these places. I’m going to leave this slide up, so you can take a note of their names and contact details if of interest. Please let me know if you would like me to send you a copy of this.

Thank and close.

Objectives covered

Sum up the discussion and thank participants for their time.

2.2 Reconvened workshops discussion guide

Note: this discussion guide is intended to inform the discussion in each workshop.  Questions may not be asked in the order below, and not every question will be asked in each workshop.

Key:

• CAPITALISED = instructions for moderators
• bold lower case = key questions 
• non-bold lower case = follow up questions and prompts

Workshops Schedule:

Workshop 2 (week commencing 19th July)
 

Session number	Date	Time	Region	Workshop number	Number of break-out groups	Total number of participants
1	Monday 19 July 2021	6pm to 8pm	England	1	2 5 to 6 participants each	10 to 12
2	Tuesday 20 July 2021	6pm to 8pm	England	2-3	4 5 to 6 participants each	20 to 24
3	Wednesday 21 July 2021	6pm to 8pm	Northern Ireland	4-5	4 5 to 6 participants each	20 to 24
4	Thursday 22 July 2021	6pm to 8pm	Wales	6-7	4 5 to 6 participants each	20 to 24

Total number of participants: 70 to 84

Arrival (before start), 15 to 20 minutes

Participants enter the ‘zoom room’ and any that have not already done so are asked to change their screen name to first name and initial of their surname.

Section 1: Introductions and reminder of the topic of discussion, 15 minutes

Setting the scene: 

• reminder of the current model and the FDM
• presenting the case for change

PLENARY
SHOW STIMULUS: SLIDES 1-5

Chair introduction:

• welcome participants back and thank them for taking part
• introduce self and Ipsos MORI, moderators, observers, and note-takers
• the discussion will last two hours and we’ll have a short break part way through

Explain purpose of the discussion: This research is being carried out on behalf of the Food Standards Agency. They are looking at the way the food industry (specifically meat, dairy, and wine) is currently regulated and how they might change it in the future. For this purpose, they’re running a public consultation with stakeholders in the food industry and they have also commissioned us to run this research, as they are interested in gaining a better understanding of public views. Today we’re going to continue our conversation from last week in a bit more detail about how the meat industry is currently regulated and what it might look like in the future. 

Talk through the ground rules/ housekeeping. TOTALLY VOLUNTARY

WHEN INTRODUCING OBSERVERS, PLEASE SPECIFY: We’re also joined tonight by observers from the Food Standards Agency, but please rest assured they don’t have any other information about you, other than what can be seen on the screen.

CHAIR PROVIDES A REMINDER OF THE OFFICIAL CONTROLS PROCESS AND THE FDM INCLUDING RESPONDING TO KEY QUESTIONS FROM THE PREVOUS WORKSHOP

SHOW STIMULUS: SLIDE 5-9

CHAIR INTRODUCES THE CASE FOR CHANGE

SHOW STIMULUS: SLIDE 10-11

Objectives covered

• introduce participants to the research
• introduce moderators, observers and note-takers
• clarify audio recording
• collect informed consent for participation

Section 2: Capture spontaneous views on the case for change and any differences in views since the last workshop, 10 minutes

BREAK-OUT GROUPS
Ask if everyone is happy for the recording to begin TURN ON RECORDING and record consent that everyone is happy to participate in the workshop, that they understand the aims of the research, that their participation is voluntary and that their responses will remain confidential and anonymous.
TURN ON RECORDER NOW

Any questions?

Can I check you are happy to take part in this research? 

Since the last workshop, have you thought more about food and where it comes from? 

Have you talked to any friends or family about the discussions? 
Have your thoughts changed at all? 
Do have any questions about what we discussed last time?

What do you think about the presentation on the case for change we just heard?

Does it make sense to you? Do the motivations seem reasonable? 
Do you have any questions about this? 

MODERATOR TO NOTE DOWN QUESTIONS TO BE ASKED IN THE PLENARY SESSION. 

MODERATOR PROVIDES A REMINDER OF THE CASE FOR CHANGE IF NEEDED

How do you feel about the Future Delivery Model now you’ve heard more about the reasons for making these changes? 
Has this changed how you feel at all? 
What do you think the benefits might be? PROBE: for the FSA, food businesses, consumers
What about the downsides? Do you have any concerns? 

Objectives covered

Reminder of last week's conversation.

Section 3: Exploring the benefits and challenges for different groups, 20 minutes

BREAK-OUT GROUPS

MODERATOR INTRODUCES THE FSA PERSONAS 

1.    THE OFFICIAL VERTERINARIAN (OV) PERSONA
2.    THE MEAT HYGIENE INSPECTOR (MHI) PERSONA

REPEAT THESE PROBES FOR EACH PERSONA

How might this person’s role change under the Future Delivery Model?
How might they feel about this? 
Could the new approach provide opportunities for them? 
Could the new approach create problems for them? 

What might be the benefits for this person? 
What might be the benefits for other FSA employees? For the food business? For consumers? 
What might be the challenges for this person?
Is there anything that might reassure them about the proposed changes? 

1.    Arthur, Meat Hygiene Inspector 
Arthur is nearing the end of his career. How might someone starting their career as a Meat Hygiene Inspector feel about the changes? 

The role at the moment can be quite monotonous as it involves checking carcases for 8-10 hours a day on the production line. 
What opportunities might there be for Arthur and other Meat Hygiene Inspectors if they no longer need to spend as long on the production line? 

Improvements in technology also mean that the processing of animals is getting faster, with more animals physically passing an inspector’s eye in a given time. There is already technology available that can use cameras to detect things that an MHI is looking for at a much greater speed. 
In what ways do you think these technological changes might affect the role of Meat Hygiene Inspectors? 
How feasible is their inspection role as the production line speeds up?
Do you think there are any benefits or downsides to relying more on technology in this way? 

2.    Sarah, Official Veterinarian 
Sarah may be able to focus more on supporting food businesses to improve their procedures and ensure they are meeting legal requirements. 
What do you think about this change?
At the moment, Sarah spends most of her time in the same food business. She has good relationships and regularly socialises with the team outside of work. 
What do you think the benefits might be for Sarah spending more time at different plants?
What could be the downsides to spending less time in the same plant?   

AFTER DISCUSSING ALL PERSONAS IN THIS SECTION, MODERATOR TO REFLECT ON THE OVERALL IMPLICATIONS FOR THE FSA/ FSA EMPLOYEES

Overall, how do you feel about the proposed changes now? 
What do you like about these changes? What concerns you?

What might be the benefits for the FSA/ FSA employees? What might be the challenges for the FSA / FSA employees? 

MODERATORS TO MANAGE THEIR OWN BREAK DEPENDING ON PROGRESS – CHANCE TO BREAK HERE OR AFTER THE NEXT DISCUSSION. PARTICIPANTS REMAIN IN BREAKOUT GROUPS.

Objectives covered

Gauge reaction for the implications of the FDM changes for different actors

Section 3 continuation, 20 minutes

BREAK-OUT GROUPS
MODERATOR INTRODUCES THE FOOD BUSINESS OPERATORS (FBO) PERSONAS  

REPEAT THESE PROBES FOR EACH PERSONA

What might the changes mean for this business? 
How might the business owner feel about this?
How might the people who work for the business feel about this?  
Could the new approach provide opportunities for them? 
Could the new approach create problems for them? 

What might be the benefits for this business? 
REFER TO SPECIFIC PROBES ON THE STIMULUS

What might be the challenges for this business?
REFER TO SPECIFIC PROBES ON THE STIMULUS

1.    Jameson’s Meat (High compliance FBO)
Under the new system, the business has to do more to demonstrate their compliance. The plant manager can find it difficult to find certain pieces of information that are required. 
How might the business feel about this? 
Could this affect smaller businesses to the same extent as larger ones? 

What do you think the incentives are for Jameson’s Meat to continue to comply with the regulations? 
PROBE: transparency could lead to increased business, reduced regulatory burden could provide opportunities for trying different approaches, additional support from MHIs/ greater unannounced inspections/ changes to the audit regime. 
What would reassure you/ consumers that high standards are being maintained? 

2.    Smith Brothers (Low compliance FBO)
What do you think the incentives are for Smith Brothers to comply with the regulations? 
PROBE: transparency could lead to increased business, reduced regulatory burden could provide opportunities for trying different approaches, additional support from MHIs/ greater unannounced inspections/ changes to the audit regime. 
What would reassure you/ consumers that high standards are being maintained? 

As a small business, Smith Brothers does not have the resources to fund new technologies which could help them improve their compliance. The plant manager worries further about being left behind and may have to consider closing if the business stops being viable.  
What do you think the impact of the changes might be on small businesses? How does this compare to larger businesses? 
Could there be opportunities for high performing small businesses as a result of the regulatory burden being more proportionate for them? 
It might be more difficult for smaller businesses to fund the training of plant staff in inspection duties. What might be the impact of this?  
AFTER DISCUSSING ALL PERSONAS IN THIS SECTION, MODERATOR TO REFLECT ON THE OVERALL IMPLICATIONS FOR DIFFERENT BUSINESSES/ EMPLOYEES

Overall, how do you feel about the proposed changes now? 
What do you like about these changes? What concerns you?

What might be the benefits for food businesses and the industry overall? What might be the challenges for food businesses? 

Objectives covered

Gauge reaction for the implications of the FDM changes for different actors

Break, 10 minutes

Section 3 continuation, 20 minutes

BREAK-OUT GROUPS

MODERATOR INTRODUCES THE CONSUMER PERSONAS
REPEAT THESE PROBES FOR EACH PERSONA

What might the changes mean for this person/ business?
How might they feel about this? 
Could the new approach provide opportunities for them? 
Could the new approach create problems for them? 

What might be the benefits for this person/ business? 

What might be the challenges for this person/ business?

1.    Tim, household shopper 
Tim is concerned that the FSA has a reduced presence in some abattoirs. Even though they score highly, he feels this may mean businesses have an opportunity to lower their standards.
What might reassure shoppers like Tony that standards have not been lowered? 

What might be the impact on businesses of consumers preferring to buy meat with high performing labels? 
Could there be any benefits?
Could there be any downsides?

How could increased transparency apply to other places including institutions, like schools or hospitals, or restaurants and takeaways?  
Would you want to know more about how the meat they serve has been processed? 
What could this look like? 

2.    Fast & Fresh supermarket
What changes might the supermarket make as a result of the new approach? 
What might this mean for their customers? 

How do you think Fast & Fresh will feel about sharing compliance data with the FSA? 
Could there be any benefits? Or downsides? 

AFTER DISCUSSING ALL PERSONAS IN THIS SECTION, MODERATOR TO REFLECT ON THE OVERALL IMPLICATIONS FOR DIFFERENT CONSUMERS

Overall, how do you feel about the proposed changes now? 
What do you like about these changes? What concerns you?

What might be the benefits for consumers and supermarkets/retailers overall? 

What might be the challenges? 

Objectives covered

Gauge reaction for the implications of the FDM changes for different actors

Section 4: Priorities for the FSA in the future, 15 minutes

BREAK-OUT GROUPS
MODERATOR TO EXPLORE VIEWS ON PRIORITIES FOR THE FSA IN FUTURE 
Overall, what do you think about the FSA’s plans for the Future Delivery Model? 
What do you think are the main benefits? 
What are your key concerns? 

What would you want the FSA to prioritise as they develop their plans? 
IF NEEDED PROBE ON:

• •    targeting FSA resources towards the least compliant food businesses?  
• •    creating system that supports small businesses to flourish? 
• •    increasing transparency for consumers and retailers? 
• •    taking a consistent approach towards regulating the meat industry? 
• •    maintaining levels of FSA presence in food businesses? 

What would you want to be in place to reassure you that food is safe to eat? 
What are your expectations for the FSA and their role as a regulator? 

Do you have any final thoughts for the FSA? 

Objectives covered

Explore views on what the FSA should prioritise in the future. 

Section 5: Final reflections, 10 minutes

PLENARY 
Opportunity to answer any questions raised during the group. 

Each moderator to give a brief summary of the most important take-aways from each group
Chair to sum up most important priorities for FSA when considering rolling out the new FDM
Thank participants and explain next steps

CHAIR TO SHARE SIGNPOSTING SLIDE ON SCREEN SHOW SLIDE 
If anyone has any questions about food safety at home, you can contact these places. I’m going to leave this slide up, so you can take a note of their names and contact details if of interest. Please let me know if you would like me to send you a copy of this.

THANK AND CLOSE

Objectives covered

Sum up the discussion and thank participants for their time. 

2.3 Initial workshops stimulus

PDF

View Appendix 2.3 Initial workshops stimulus presentation slides as PDF(Open in a new window) (689.39 KB)

The text from the presentation slides has been transcribed below:

Slide 1: The Food Standards Agency wants to better understand consumer (public) views on their Future Delivery Model

We are interested in your thoughts, views, concerns and questions!

You, FSA (the client), Ipsos Mori, observers, note takers. 

Slide 2: Ground rules

1. Listen respectfully without interrupting.
2. Listen actively and with an ear to 'understanding others' views. Don't just think about what you are going to say while someone else is talking.
3. Any question is a good question,
4. Criticise ideas, not individuals.
5. Commit to learning, not debating. Comment in order to share information, not to persuade. 
6. Stay on topic and try to be concise. 
7. Avoid blame, speculation and inflammatory language.
8. Allow everyone the chance to speak.
9. Avoid assumptions about any member of the group or generalisations about social groups. Do not ask individuals to speak their (perceived) social group. 
10. Be patient with other participants and the team - we have a lot of information to get through. 
11. Feel free to share your thoughts about this event with friends and family. 

Slide 3: The project and who is involved

Workshops with the general public across England, Wales and Northern Ireland

Workshop 1: 2 hours

• Session 1: England (12 people)
• Session 2: England (24 people)
• Session 3: Northern Ireland (24 people)
• Session 4: Wales (24 people)

Workshop 2: 2 hours

• Session 1: England (12 people)
• Session 2: England (24 people)
• Session 3: Northern Ireland (24 people)
• Session 4: Wales (24 people)

Slide 4: Housekeeping

• keep distractions to a minimum (for example, mobile phones)
• take a break if you need to (for example, use the bathroom, or to attend to anything urgent)
• we will have an official break for 10 minutes

Slide 5: Food journey from source to consumer

UK meat producers and import supply

• UK farms
• Imports: the UK imports 26% of its meat supply

Meat processing facilities

• Abattoirs, meat processing businesses
• storage businesses

Meat distribution services

• transport vehicles adapted for the safe delivery of meat products

Retail and catering businesses

• butchers, supermarkets, small shops, online retailers
• restaurants, takeaways, institutions for example, schools

Consumer

• consumer purchases meat products for consumption

Slide 6: the current official

Every year 2.6 million cattle, 10 million pigs, 14 million sheep and lambs and 950 million birds are slaughtered in the UK. 

1. meat processing facilities: abattoirs, meat processing businesses and/or storage businesses
2. animals arrive at an abattoir/slaughterhouse
3. slaughter and dressing: carcasses are skinned and cleaned
4. preservation by either chilling, freezing or further hygienic processing
5. cutting plant: cutting carcasses into smaller parts or 'cuts'
6. meat distribution services: transport vehicles deliver meat products for further processing or to retailers

This process is regulated by the FSA under their 'official controls'.

The FSA is an independent government department working to protect public health and consumers' wider interests. Official veterinarians (OV) and Meat Hygiene Inspectors (MHI) employed by the FSA must have a presence in ever slaughterhouse to ensure the safety of fresh meat and high welfare standards are maintained. 

The same approach is taken for all relevant businesses. 

Slide 7: The current official controls process

1. Approvals for new premises

2. Inspections, sampling and verification and audits

3. Enforcement action

Slide 8: Approvals

• initial approval of Food Operating Business premises to operate
• vital in ensuring that food businesses are run by suitable individuals, in appropriate premises capable of operating an effective Food Safety Management System with proper processes and controls

Slide 9: Inspections

• working with more than 1,200 food establishments to ensure meat entering the food chain is safe for human consumption
• approximately 1.2 million hours a year are spent on inspection
• inspection is necessary to ensure that products consistently meet the appropriate hygiene, safety and where appropriate, welfare standards. 

Slide 10: Sampling and verification

• a proportion of meat is selected for sampling
• sampling provides a snapshot that certain specific standards are being met
• usually takes place at the end of a production process
• results are checked and meat is declared fit or unfit for human consumption

Slide 11: Audits

• risk-based audits of processes take place during on-site visits
• audits checks that food businesses have all the necessary systems and controls in place to comply with food safety law
• the frequency of audits is determined by previous performance. Further inspection is required if one or more major non-compliance areas are found during the audit.

Unannounced inspections

• tend to be of businesses without a continuous FSA presence
• unannounced inspections take place between full audits
• the findings will influence the following audits.

Full or partial audits

The outcomes are:

• good
• generally satisfactory
• improvement necessary
• urgent improvement necessary.

Slide 12: Enforcement

• enforcement procedures can result from the inspection process, sampling and verification activities and audit findings
• procedures allow the FSA to support businesses to rectify any areas of non-compliance and halt product if required
• serious non-compliance found at unannounced inspections can require formal enforcement

Slide 13: The Future Delivery Model

• seeks to take a more tailored, risk-based approach
• clearly sets out the role of the FSA in providing assurance activities with food businesses responsible for producing safe food
• greater focus on joint initiatives and sharing knowledge across the sector

Slide 14: The Future Delivery Model (continued)

1. Tailored presence based on the risks: reducing FSA presence with compliant businesses could drive greater overall compliance, and remove the burden from compliant food businesses leading to growth
2. Clearer accountability between industry and the FSA: taking a collaborative approach could improve compliance levels and consumer trust
3. Robust assurance regime linked to intelligence led evidence: a greater assurance regime will provide more intelligence that will help the FSA ensure food safety and better target FSA resources
4. Transparent compliance: greater transparency could improve the ability of retailers and consumers to make informed choices and improve levels of compliance.

Slide 15: 1. Tailored presence

Current model

• there is an FSA presence at all food businesses regardless of their level of compliance.
• this contributes to a largely 'one-size-fits-all' approach to regulation

Future delivery model

• FSA presence at food businesses will be tailored in line with the assessed risk of individual establishments
• risk-based assessments will be determined by a segmentation tool where we will categorise establishments on a risk scale
• this will use robust data and evidence gathered from multiple risk factors including compliance and animal welfare,

Slide 16: 1. Tailored presence (continued)

Inspections and sampling verification

• the FSA maintains a presence in food businesses
• more proportionate and measured assurance activities take place for lower risk establishments
• Official Veterinarians and Meat Hygiene Inspectors may spend more time in higher risk establishments

Slide 17: 2. Clearer accountability

Current model

• industry is accountable for producing safe food. The FSA as the regulator is responsible for checking this.
• food businesses are sometimes unclear where their accountability ends as the FSA is always present through Official Veterinarians and Meat Hygiene Inspectors.

Future delivery model

• industry will have responsibility and accountability for elements of carcass inspection
• industry remains accountable for producing safe food. The FSA will monitor and verify this as the regulator
• this will allow both the FSA and industry to be clearer about accountability and work more effectively together in the consumer's best interests. 

Slide 18: Clearer accountability (continued)

Inspections, sampling and verification

The FSA plays an assurance role during these processes and can intervene where needed for example, providing training, guidance, identifying risks, sharing good practice as well as enforcement activities. 

Stronger collaboration between the FSA and food businesses. 

Food businesses are more involved in day-to-day implementation for example, inspecting carcasses.

Slide 19: Robust Assurance Regime

Current model

• FSA conducts a range of audits activities including full and partial audits
• these are carried out by Official Veterinarians and Meat Hygiene Inspectors
• in addition they also undertake unannounced inspections of food business establishments.

Future delivery model

• the FSA will use robust and clear techniques to ensure a high level of assurance across all stages of food production
• the FSA will work with other assurance organisations and retailers to share data and intelligence to better target out assurance activities.

Slide 20: Robust Assurance Regime (continued)

Approvals, inspections, sampling and verification, audits and enforcement

• the FSA will continue to provide on-site and remote assurance including through: unannounced inspections, remote audits, one to one relationships, sharing best practice
• the FSA will work more with other organisations including collaborating with: Red Tractor, British Retail Consortium, RSPCA Assured and large supermarkets
• there will be a greater use of multiple sources of data.

Slide 21: Transparent compliance

Current model

• compliance data is currently recorded by the FSA but details of the areas of non-compliance are not published
• compliance data is currently not shared between organisations

Future delivery model

• the FSA intends to work with the industry on how best to publish and share compliance information to encourage improved standards and provide consumers with increased confidence

Slide 22: Transparent compliance (continued)

Audits and enforcement

The approach for publishing and sharing information has not been decided. Options could include:

• sharing information amongst a smaller group for example, industry stakeholders or similar food businesses
• publishing all information online for consumers and businesses to access
• could look similar to the Food Hygiene Rating Scheme.

Slide 23: Thank you for taking part in this discussion.

If you would like any more information on food safety, or other food-related issues, please visit the following websites. 

For UK-wide advice please visit:

• Food Standards Agency
• NHS: how to prepare and cook food safely
• NHS: Food poisoning

If you are located in Wales, please visit:

• Public Health Wales

Food bank resources:

• Citizens advice
• The Trussell Trust (UK-wide)
• FareShare (also operates in Cardiff and Belfast)

2.4 Reconvened workshops stimulus

PDF

View Appendix 2.4 Reconvened workshops stimulus presentation slides as PDF(Open in a new window) (507.63 KB)

The text from the presentation slides has been transcribed below:

Slide 1: The Food Standards Agency wants to better understand consumer (public) views on their Future Delivery Model

We are interested in your thoughts, views, concerns and questions!

You, FSA (the client), Ipsos Mori, observers, note takers. 

Slide 2: Ground rules

1. Listen respectfully without interrupting.
2. Listen actively and with an ear to 'understanding others' views. Don't just think about what you are going to say while someone else is talking.
3. Any question is a good question,
4. Criticise ideas, not individuals.
5. Commit to learning, not debating. Comment in order to share information, not to persuade. 
6. Stay on topic and try to be concise. 
7. Avoid blame, speculation and inflammatory language.
8. Allow everyone the chance to speak.
9. Avoid assumptions about any member of the group or generalisations about social groups. Do not ask individuals to speak their (perceived) social group. 
10. Be patient with other participants and the team - we have a lot of information to get through. 
11. Feel free to share your thoughts about this event with friends and family. 

Slide 3: Housekeeping

• keep distractions to a minimum (for example, mobile phones)
• take a break if you need to (for example, use the bathroom, or to attend to anything urgent)
• we will have an official break for 10 minutes

Slide 4: the current official controls process

Every year 2.6 million cattle, 10 million pigs, 14 million sheep and lambs and 950 million birds are slaughtered in the UK. The FSA regulates the meat industry through their Official Controls. 

1. Approvals for new premises
2. Inspections, sampling and verification and audits
3. Enforcement action

Slide 5: The Future Delivery Model

• seeks to take a more tailored, risk-based approach
• clearly sets out the role of the FSA in providing assurance activities with food businesses responsible for producing safe food
• greater focus on joint initiatives and sharing knowledge across the sector

Slide 6: Your questions answered

What checks take place for meat being imported from outside the UK?

Imported meat is checked as part of border controls by the Port Health Authorities. It is up to the overseas plant and the overseas regulator to meet another country's standards. Meat imported into the UK has to meet the standards we set for domestic meat producers. 

How long has the FSA being inspecting businesses?

The Meat Hygiene Service was established in 1995. The FSA was created in 2000 following the BSE outbreak. 

Slide 7: Your questions answered (continued)

How does inspection differ depending on the animal involved?

All carcasses are visually and manually inspected to some degree for signs of pathology or other indicators of unfitness for human consumption. There are some variations between species as to whether inspection is visual only or also physical for example, feeling the carcase/cutting into it. 

Do inspectors change or rotate between businesses?

FSA employed inspectors have a base plant. They are required to move around their area if needed, but this is normally infrequent. 

Slide 8: Your questions answered (continued)

What enforcement activities can the FSA carry out?

The FSA can force businesses to shut permanently if there is sustained non-compliance and a clear threat to public health. They can also issue fines and take further legal action against a business owner. In some cases, this could result in a prison sentence.

What happens if a business is found to be non-compliant?

If a business is non-compliant, essentially all work stops until it an prove that it is compliant again. This would remain the case under the new approach. 

Slide 9: The case for change

• developments both domestically and worldwide are rapidly reshaping the UK's food system and putting pressure on the current delivery model
• the FSA must adapt to these changes in order to ensure continued high standards of food safety and consumer protection
• there is also a need to more strongly incentivise compliance in order to further improve standards

Slide 10: Three key factors

• technology is changing the speed and methods of food production. There has also been an increase in data collection across the industry
• the COVID-19 pandemic has highlighted challenges caused by the resource-intensive nature of the current model and has offered up opportunities to work differently. This includes remote audits and certain qualified plant staff undertaking some inspection duties
• the UK's exit from the EU has had a significant impact on the resources required to provide our trading partners with necessary assurances about the UK's food control system. For example, Official veterinarians have been involved with additional assurance activities around exported meat and meat products.

Slide 11: Arthur, Meat Hygiene Inspector

• Arthur has worked in plants across the Northern Region since he first began his career over 25 years ago.
• as he is not stood on the production line for 8 to 10 hours a day anymore, he has time to do things he previously struggled to fit in like Health and Safety training and performance management. For example, he can now carry out more animal welfare spot checks and sampling activities
• he can now download his day's duties directly from the system to his smartphone. Since he's had training and used it a few times, he really sees the benefits of this new technology
• as a long-serving Meat Hygiene Inspector, he believes that there should be 100% independent meat inspection in every plant and challenges the view that highly compliant plants should do some of their own carcase inspection. He feels this is how it has always been done and he is concerned about the impact on his job of the new approach.

Slide 12: Sarah, Official Veterinarian

• Sarah has worked as an Official Veterinarian for four years. She enjoys the variety of her role and the opportunities to learn about new things
• she provides guidance to food businesses to improve their procedures in the production of safe food. An important part of her job is to ensure that changes to legal requirements are followed up and implemented
• however, she is concerned that she will lose some control if food businesses have more accountability in certain processes and she spends less time on-site
• if she only attends the plant for audits and unannounced visits, she worries about losing her knowledge of the plant. She is also concerned that her relationship with the business employees may not be as good as it was.

Slide 13: Jameson's meat

• Jameson's meat is a slaughterhouse that specialises in beef and lamb. The business prides itself on meeting high standards related to hygiene and animal welfare, building on its long history in the industry
• it has had consistently excellent audit and unannounced inspection results for many years. The team are always striving to improve and maintain their reputation
• Because of their record of compliance, some staff at the plant have been trained in conducting aspects of carcase inspection and have started to do this as part of their role. A Meat Hygiene Inspector from the FSA still attends the the plant every day. But instead of inspecting the carcases on the line, they carry out other activities instead. The plant is also audited and receives unannounced inspections. 

Slide 14: Smith Brothers

• Smith Brothers has had a number of concerns identified at audits and unannounced inspection over the last few years. Although there has been some improvement recently, the plant receives a low score in the risk assessment tool. This means a Meat Hygiene Inspector will remain permanently present on the production line to inspect every carcase
• another Meat Hygiene Inspector from a high performing plant is now able to attend the business more frequently for unannounced inspections. They have received training from this MHI and they have started to put together a plan for improving their compliance
• although the plant manager is hopeful things will get better, he feels the system is unfair as their score does not reflect recent improvements. He also worries about the public having access to their compliance score as this could reduce demand for their products. Some retailers have already chosen not to use the business because of this. 

Slide 15: Tim, household shopper

• Tim is a father of two who tries to buy organic ingredients when he can. He tends to do the weekly shop in his household and often looks at the labels of food before buying something
• he likes the way meat products now have a label showing the performance of the abattoir that the meat came from
• he will always buy meat with a high performing label. However, he worries about what his children eat at school as he doesn't know the performance of the plant where the meat came from.

Slide 16: Fast and Fresh supermarket

• the fast and fresh buying team know the power of consumer demand and expectations. They want to meet a range of consumer shopping budgets, ensure that the meat they source is safe for everyone and is traceable. They recognise the importance to some customers of high animal welfare standards
• regardless of the product range, consumer safety is their number one priority. They feel that the inclusion of the meat plant's compliance score on the packaging is valued by their customers
• the FSA shares its compliance data with the supermarket's own assurance teams and vice versa. This means they can check that the results are consistent and any issues and trends can be more easily identified. This helps the supermarket to act on any issues quickly and provides additional assurance about their supply chain. 

Slide 17: Thank you for taking part in this discussion.

If you would like any more information on food safety, or other food-related issues, please visit the following websites. 

For UK-wide advice please visit:

• Food Standards Agency
• NHS: how to prepare and cook food safely
• NHS: Food poisoning

If you are located in Wales, please visit:

• Public Health Wales

Food bank resources:

• Citizens Advice
• The Trussell Trust (UK-wide)
• FareShare (also operates in Cardiff and Belfast)