EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
A meeting was held in Baltimore, Maryland the week of December 8-11,
1998 with federal, state and local officials to continue work to develop
plans for an integrated national food safety system. The meeting, hosted
by the Food and Drug Administration, continued the theme MEETING CHALLENGES
TOGETHER and focused on follow-up activities from the "50 State meeting" held
in Kansas City in September 1998. Representatives from the Centers for
Disease Control and Prevention, the USDA's Food Safety Inspection Service
and the Cooperative State Research, Education and Extension Service,
and the Environmental Protection Agency also participated in this meeting.
At the 50 State meeting, attendees had discussed a vision for food safety
in the future, identified obstacles and recommended action items, including
formation of Work Groups to develop the ideas presented in Kansas City.
This week, the participants were asked to suggest ways to overcome obstacles
and to identify short and long range goals to make this vision a reality.
Over 70 federal, state and local officials were named to six Work Groups
and issues were discussed in the following areas: Roles and Responsibilities
- Capacity and Resource Needs; Coordinating Outbreak Responses and Investigations;
Information Sharing and Data Collection; Communication; Minimum Uniform
Standards; and Laboratory Operations and Coordination. The Work Groups
elected chairpersons and presented reports on December 11. Each Work
Group is working on detailed plans and timelines for proposed projects
that will cover a 5-10 year period. The Federal agencies will be considering
these plans and funding as we jointly pursue the vision of an integrated
food safety system.
A Coordinating Committee, which was recommended at the Kansas City meeting,
met on December 10. The Committee is composed of 18 individuals: 5 federal
and 13 state and local (6 of whom are Work Group chairs) and includes
a broad geographical mix, with representation of agriculture, health
and epidemiology disciplines from federal, state and local agencies.
The role of the committee will be to set direction, liaison between work
groups and agencies, assign tasks, develop a plan based on reports from
the Work Groups and to set priorities from Work Group recommendations.
The Committee selected a chair and three vice-chairs: Janice Oliver,
FDA (chair); and Stuart Richardson, California Department of Health Services,
Doug Saunders, Virginia Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services,
and Dean Sienko, Ingham County (Michigan) Health Department (vice-chairs).
The Committee selected the vision statement for the Food Safety Initiative's
Strategic Plan as the vision for this project. The Committee also recommended
that a mission statement be developed for the integrated food safety
system. Other topics discussed included planning outreach and public
meetings and a timeline for next steps. The Committee presented a report
to the Work Groups on December 11.
I. INTRODUCTION
The meeting was opened by Mr. Ralph Stafko, Senior Policy Analyst, U.S.
Department of Agriculture (USDA), Food Safety Inspection Service (FSIS).
He said that participants at the 50 State meeting in Kansas City had
discussed a vision for food safety in the future, identified obstacles
and recommended action items. This week, Work Groups have been asked
to find ways to overcome these obstacles to make this vision a reality.
Mr. Stafko introduced members of the following Work Groups:
- Roles and Responsibilities - Capacity and Resource Needs
- Coordinating Outbreak Responses and Investigations
- Information Sharing and Data Collection
- Communication
- Minimum Uniform Standards
- Laboratory Operations and Coordination
[Note: The list of Work Group participants are included as an attachment]
Ms. Janice Oliver, Mr, Gary Dykstra, Ms. Leslie Kux, and Mr. Joe Levitt
from the Food and Drug Administration provided opening remarks to help
kickoff this meeting. The Work Groups met from Tuesday, December 8 through
Thursday, December 10. Members of the Coordinating Committee also met
on Thursday, December 10. On Friday, December 11, the six Work Groups
and the Coordinating Committee presented reports to all the participants.
Each Work Group is working on detailed plans and timelines for proposed
projects that will cover a 5-10 year period. The Federal agencies will
be considering these plans and funding as we jointly pursue the vision
of an integrated food safety system.
II. WORK GROUP REPORTS
Group 1 - Roles and Responsibilities - Capacity and Resource
Needs
Chair: |
Joseph Corby, Assistant Director, New York Department of Agriculture |
Co-Chair: |
Kenneth Kolano, Program Director, New Jersey Department of Health |
Mr. Corby discussed some attributes of an integrated food safety system:
uniformity, filling gaps, having confidence in imports, centralized research
and data, equal standards and policy and sharing information. He said
the only way to have these attributes is to integrate the food safety
system.
This Work Group developed a table of food safety activities from production
to harvest and identified who has the primary role now. (See Table below)
Roles Now |
Research |
Education |
Risk
Assessment |
Inspection/
Enforcement |
Production
Harvest |
F |
FS |
Fs |
sf |
Transportation |
|
sf ? |
? |
sf |
Processing |
Fs |
FS
Fs-standards
fS-Delivery |
F |
FS |
Storage |
- - |
- - |
- - |
Sf |
Retail |
fs |
FSL
Fsl-standards
fSL-Delivery |
f |
fSL |
Consumer |
fs |
FSL |
- - |
- - |
Key: F = Federal; S = State; L = Local. Capital letter indicate primary
role;
small letter indicates smaller role
Mr. Corby presented the same table but with roles for a proposed food
safety system.
Proposed Roles |
Research |
Education |
Risk
Assessment
| Inspection/
Enforcement
|
Production
Harvest |
F |
FS |
Fs |
Sf |
Transportation |
- - |
sf |
Fs |
Sf |
Processing |
Fs |
Fs-standards
fS-Delivery |
F |
Sf |
Storage |
- - |
- - |
- - |
S |
Retail |
fs |
Fsl-standards
fSL-Delivery |
F |
fSL |
Consumer |
fs |
FSL |
-fs |
- - |
Key: F = Federal; S = State; L = Local. Capital letter indicate primary
role;
small letter indicates smaller role
This Work Group proposed the following activities should be enhanced
and improved at federal, state and/ or local levels:
Federal Government
- Risk Assessment
- Research
- Adoption of Standards Uniform Regulations
Codex
Lab practices
Additives / Packaging Approvals
State / Local Government
- Inspections Processors / Warehouses (state)
Retail (Local)
"Oklahoma Partnership" model (Suggest this model be reviewed to see
if could be an applicable model
- Complaints
- Issues to be Addressed (Roles to be determined)
- Training ? (certification of inspectors)
- Program Evaluation?
- Imported Foods?
- Lab Support? (Will liaison with the Lab Work Group)
- Funding?
- Implementation?
- Changing roles in the Future? (What happens if a state is not able
to carry out a role?)
Work Group Recommendations
- Resource Assessment
- Model Partnerships
- Subcommittees will be formed
Budget: (resources would be needed for the following
activities)
- January / February 1999 Work Group meetings
- Subcommittee conference calls
- Information Gathering Resource Assessment (Contract)
Surveys (Contract)
Roles and Responsibilities Work Group Liaisons
William Keene |
- Coordinating Outbreak Responses and Investigations |
Lee Bowers |
- Information Sharing and Data Collection |
Dan Sowards |
- Communication |
Don Kraemer |
- Minimum Uniform Standards |
William Cusick |
- Laboratory Operations and Coordination |
Group #2 - Coordinating Outbreak Responses and Investigations
Co-Chairs: |
Jerry Gibson, State Epidemiologist, South Carolina Department
of Health
Jeff Farrar, Chief, Food Emergency Unit, California Department
of Health |
This Work Group's initial plan has three major areas:
- Traceback Coordination
- Communication
- Roles, Processes, Evaluations
Sub-Work Group: Traceback Coordination
Five tasks are proposed in this area:
- Develop and test criteria for initiating and prioritizing tracebacks
- Develop/test process for deciding who does tracebacks
- Develop/test process for approaching industry and press during tracebacks
- Recommend how government can promote record-keeping that facilitates
tracebacks
- Consider legal issues
How will this work group do its job?
- Need buy-in from stakeholders (federal, state and local representatives)
- the first task will be to do a tabletop multi-state simulatio n
- Assure evaluation of process during multi-state outbreak
- evaluate effectiveness and write report
- Budget: propose 5 in-person meetings
Sub-Work Group: Communication
Effective outbreak response requires that accurate information gets
to the people who need it in a timely fashion. Obstacles to effective
communication include:
- Information bottlenecks (information flow through a single person
who may not always be available)
- Information overload: extraneous, unnecessary, irrelevant information
- Uncertainty about who needs to know what and when
- Inaccurate, incomplete, untimely information
Goal: Develop a model communications plan for coordinating
responses to outbreaks, recalls and other situations (e.g., water, chemical,
bio-terrorism) that states can utilize to create uniformity and consistency
in response and to enhance interaction with other entities (federal agencies,
other states, other state agencies, local health departments). This model
can stimulate states to develop their own system based on their own administrative
structure.
Short-Term Project - Needs Assessment
- Utilize a questionnaire to assess mechanisms already in place for
communications
- Questionnaire to determine:
- Who needs to be notified in each state
- Notified by what means
- When do we need to be notified
- Need to know vs nice to know
- What information should be sent. Consider a variety of outbreak
scenarios
- Recommend pilot project: initial distribution of draft needs assessment
in selected states (use states on Work Group)
Timeline: There are questions that need to be addressed. The answers
to these questions will help determine the timeline.
- Who will develop the questionnaire for the needs assessment?
- When should the questionnaire be developed?
- Is this subgroup the appropriate work group to develop the questionnaire?
- By when should it be sent out?
- By what means will it be sent?
- To whom?
- When should the network be in place?
Follow-up on the Needs Assessment
Implementation of a basic notification network will
be based on questionnaire responses.
- Short-Term: Pilot needs assessment project in selected
states
- Intermediate Term: Needs assessment in all states.
Develop model communication system
- Long-Term: Look into a intranet and other more sophisticated
and elegant options for timely and accurate communications
Budget (resources would be needed for the following
activities)
- People to do the needs assessment questionnaire (include support
staff)
- Supplies to distribute questionnaire
- Data entry of questionnaire results
- Analysis of questionnaire results
- Develop a rough budget and funding sources for the long-term project
Sub-Work Group: Roles, Process and Evaluation
Objectives
- Identify leadership roles
- identify criteria - need measurable parameters
- Evaluate performance
- Provide feedback
Short-Term Goals (1 Year)
- Outline the process and roles in an outbreak
- Assemble existing documents regarding outbreak response
- Develop a checklist for core criteria for an outbreak response
Long-Term Goals (3 Years)
- Pilot program to evaluate the effectiveness and timeliness of out
break activities
Group # 3 - Information Sharing and Data Collection
(Note: this Group changed its name from Data Sharing and Collection)
Co-Chairs: |
J. Douglas Park, State Epidemiologist, Michigan Department of
Agriculture
Judy Lee, Consumer Safety Officer, FDA/CFSAN |
This group felt that it should be a "listening post" with the other
work groups and needs to hear from the other groups about information
sharing and data collection needs. Also requested comments from other
Work Groups budget representatives to make sure activities are not redundant.
Assumptions that will affect the goal:
- Funding to pay for all hardware, telecommunications
- The Food Safety Initiative will fund/support these activities
- States are going to buy-in to this enhanced system with a no state
fund provision
- There will be continued funding
- Contract procedures for surveys/questionnaires
- Coordinating Committee empowered to "push things through"
- Survey questionnaire is a stand alone
Short-Term Goals
- Propose initial development of FORBIN (Food Oriented Relational Basic
information Network)
- Search other National models for information pertaining to federal/state
integration computer systems: e.g., LEIN (Law Enforcement Information
Network); CLEO
- Obtain data needs from the various work groups that would fit within
the following 5 categories: Surveillance
Complaints
Entity ID (source)
Outbreak Information
Enforcement
- Obtain information from the following short and mid-term projects
to determine integration and accessibility levels of performance:
- FSIS initiative - access to FSIS data bases (e.g. performance
based inspection system) by all states
- CDC mandate from states to develop integrated epidemiology
surveinllance system (i.e., CSTE)
- 2 pilots in the FDA (Dallas District) - in conjunction with
the Texas Department of Health (additional funding):
- to provide training and access to the FDA FACTS system
- to compare the Texas Department of Health Official Establishment
Inventory with the FDA Dallas District Office Official
Establishment Inventory
- Fund MDA pilot Electronic FBD Surveillance System
Contract Needs (On-going list needed for each of the 5 categories
of data from state, local and federal governments involved):
- Telecommunications and equipment
- Determine current program applications
- Data needs
Proposed Timeline for the Food Oriented Relational Basic Information
Network (FORBIN)
2/5/99 |
Contract negotiations / specifications |
8/1/99 |
Distribution of survey questionnaire |
2/5/00 |
Telecommunications / equipment report from contractor |
3/15/00 |
Full contractor report |
5/1/00 |
Group recommendations |
Budget:
Short-term budget needs: |
Funding for meetings
Proposed FDA/Texas pilots
Proposed Michigan pilots
Contracts needed to develop FORBIN |
Long-Term (10 years): |
Funding for all hardware, software, telecommunication, and contract
needs. |
Work Group Liaisons
Dennis Baker |
- Roles and Responsibilities |
Kate Glynn |
- Outbreak Coordination |
Don Walker |
- Communication |
Bill Brooks |
- Minimum Uniform Standards |
Judy Lee |
- Laboratory Operations and Coordination (microbiological) |
J. D. Warren |
- Laboratory Operations and Coordination (chemical) |
Group # 4 - Communications
Chair: |
Sharon Greenman, Food Protection Coordinator, Seattle County
Department of Health (Washington) |
Vice-Chair: |
Becky Shreeve, Supervisor, Utah Department of Agriculture |
Vision: Systems and contacts are in place allowing
for both routine and emergency communications to be utilized by all.
Prioritized Work Group Charges
- Propose methods to improve coordination of the current communication
systems across local, state and federal agencies.
- Develop a plan for obtaining stakeholder input and outreach efforts
for the integrated system concept.
- Identify standardized communications procedures needed for industry
and media.
- Propose how to facilitate partnering with industry and consumers,
and local, state and federal agencies to optimize resources.
Short-Term Action Items
By 12/31/98
- FDA to give directive to each District Director to survey states
regarding relationship, response to requests, inquiries, etc.
- Obtain stakeholders list derived at 50 State Meeting, Kansas City,
Missouri.
- Identify existing state/industry working relationships by each FDA
district Public Affairs Specialist.
By 1/15/99
- FDA perform an e-mail and fax distribution effectiveness test to
see who is on the distribution list; ask for reply to test; lists will
be checked annually.
By 1/31/99
By 2/1/99
-
Check with the President's Food Safety Council regarding outcome
from their meetings and inform them of our desire to hold more grassroots
meetings.
-
Develop a plan to identify grassroots groups who might be interested
in discussing/ hearing about this concept.
-
Solicit op-ed pieces in editorial pages, particularly in local newspapers.
Include Web address in piece.
-
Obtain infomercial air time on public access television; cable commercials;
National Public Radio; banner advertising on the Internet; solicit
interviews with local radio, particularly on television morning shows.
-
Complete feasibility study on development of an Internet Home Page.
-
Work with CSTE to find out what restrictions are in each state regarding
the holding of proprietary information.
-
Solicit op-ed pieces in editorial pages, particularly in local newspapers.
-
Complete feasibility study on development of an Internet Home Page
for food safety and link to other food safety pages. A part of the
home page, ask for input from readers.
-
Review current policy regarding media contacts to determine how
much they prohibit interaction with local media.
By 2/28/99
By 3/1/99
By 9/30/99
By 1/1/2000
-
Include state and local e-mail addresses on regional FDA e-mail
directories - individual names and group lists - state and local
officials.
-
Establish a working electronic, current Web directory available
to all government officials which is constantly updated and includes
function and/or expansion of FDA Gold Disk, Eureka System.
-
Provide pagers to appropriate officials in each agency.
-
Institute annual meetings of local (cities and counties), state
and federal officials in each state to discuss the integrated food
safety system.
-
Bring Internet capability to all state and local governments.
-
FDA / USDA to be included in all existing meetings.
-
Include academia from Schools of Public Health, food and animal
sciences in meetings with states and industry.
Long-Term Action Items (Beyond FY 2000)
-
Establish an early warning system, similar to Canadian Incident
Tracking System, when potential outbreak information occurs in different
locations.
-
By 2002, implement systems and contracts for both routine and emergency
communications.
-
Establish USDA / FDA / CDC 24 hour toll-free Hotline as a single
point of contact for state and locals for all issues.
Budget:
Short-Term activities/items that will require resources: Conference
calls - 2 per month; Interim calls among group; Meeting - 2/1-5/99 in
Dallas; Chair/co-chair meeting(s) with Coordinating Committee; Use of "Meeting
Works" type meetings; Fax transmittals; and Express mail documents.
Long-term activities/items that will require resources: Work with CFSAN
(cost/year); Pagers (cost/year); Internet capability to all state and
local governments; and Annual meetings of local, state and federal officials.
Work Group Liaisons
Al Bugenhagen |
- Roles and Responsibilities |
Mary Proctor |
- Outbreak Coordination |
Dave Rodeheaver |
- Information Sharing and Data Collection |
Roger Holbrook |
- Minimum Uniform Standards |
Allen Craig |
- Laboratory Operations and Coordination |
Group # 5 - Minimum Uniform Standards
Chair: |
Susan Grayson, Head, Food and Lodging Sanitation Branch, North
Carolina Department of Health |
Co-Chair: |
Charlene Bruce, Director, Food Protection Branch, Mississippi Department
of Health |
The Work Group selected an acronym: MUST - Minimum Uniform Standards
Team. The primary priority for this group is to develop and maintain
nationally accepted uniform standards. The first activity will be to
develop an overall program standard and then have subcommittees develop
inspection and compliance standards for 6-7 programs.
Tentative Sub-Work Groups
- Seafood
- Meat / Poultry
- Retail
- Manufacturing
- Produce
- Milk and Dairy
- ?????
[Note: the first three were selected because some elements may already
exist]
Assumptions
- Funding will be available
- Personnel will be available
- Statutes, rules and regulations will need to be changed
- All standards will be science and risk-based, practical and prudent
- All standards developed will have opponents. Not all stakeholders
will be able to meet the standard
Short-Term Goals
- By January 15, 1999, draft of general definitions to be used by sub-work
groups
- By February 1, 1999, finalize definitions
- By June 1999, establish a review process for the work of the subgroups
- By March 31, 1999, establish and charge the first 3 sub-work groups
- By December 31, 1999, establish and charge all sub-groups
Long-Term Goals
-
By January 1, 2001, establish a system to maintain standards (review,
update, frequency, other issues to keep the standards up-to-date)
-
By January 1, 2001, establish a quality program to assure that regulatory
bodies are meeting the standards.
-
By January 1, 2002, all standards drafted for review
-
By January 1, 2005, all standards accepted
Budget: During the next year, funding is needed for
1 meeting of the work group and for 1 meeting with each subcommittee.
Group # 6 - Laboratory Operations and Coordination
Chair: |
William Krueger, Director of Lab Services, Minnesota Department
of Agriculture |
Co-Chair: |
Robert Johnson, Lab Director, FDA/San Francisco District Office |
This group reported that it would like to add additional members to
the Work Group. Suggested members include representatives from local
and veterinary medicine labs and from USDA's Animal Plant Health Inspection
Service.
Top Three Work Group Charges:
-
Form sub-work groups to develop national standards for labs performing
food safety analysis (from farm-to-table). Standards will include
equivalency of methods, data, samples, etc.
-
Make recommendations on the use of laboratory accreditation bodies,
including use of third-party certification agencies, to improve laboratory
operations and coordination.
-
Propose how local, state and federal agencies could optimize the
currently available capacity of government laboratories performing
food safety analyses. Propose a mechanism to enhance communications
and availability among diverse services. Propose mechanisms to minimize
unnecessary duplication and focus research and development efforts.
Activity: Form sub-work groups to develop national
standards for labs performing food safety analysis (from farm-to-table).
Standards will include equivalency of methods, data, samples, etc.
Short-Term Goal
-
Establish a process for national standard development using E.
coli 0157:H7 as a model.
-
Look at all facets and resolve issues of our laboratory systems
at the federal, state and local levels that would enable us to have
a fully Integrated Food Safety Laboratory System on this single
analyte.
Longer-Term Goals (three phases)
-
Develop recommendations, pilot implementation (first year)
-
"Turn it on" / full implementation - distribute recommendations
and equipment as necessary.
-
Validation / evaluation
Sub-Work Group: Sampling, Detection, Isolation and
Characterization (SDIC)
Charges:
- sampling, data collection and reporting
- Quality Assurance / Quality Control
- methods, standardization, equivalency
- when considered positive and actionable
Sampling, Detection, Isolation and Characterization (SDIC) Sub-Work
Group Members:
Carl Sciacchitano, FDA/ORA/DFS
Joy Wells, CDC
Ann Weber, Montana Department of Health
(5 others to be determined)
Sub-Work Group: PulseNet
Charges:
- DNA fingerprinting
- Quality Assurance / Quality Control
- methods, standardization, equivalency
Barriers:
- Turf issues
- Adequate funding to implement (data systems support equipment, training)
- Lack of information
- Lack of trust
- Legal issues
- Time delays from transport of samples and data between agencies
- Communication
- Different priorities between labs
Sub-Work Group: Expanded Food Safety Analytes
Charge: Compile a list of top 10 additional analytes as priorities
for application of the E. coli 0157:H7 model. (These may include:
bacteria, viruses, parasites, toxins, pesticides, heavy metals, allergens,
or other pathogens of concern).
Expanded Food Safety Analytes Sub-Work Group Members:
Farukh Khambatky, FDA/CFSAN
Mark Lee, California Department of Agriculture
Patrick McCasky, USDA/FSIS
Sub-Work Group: Accreditation
Charges: Make recommendations on the use of laboratory
accreditation bodies, including use of third-party certification agencies,
to improve laboratory operations and coordination.
-
Consolidation of USDA, FDA and EPA accreditation standards
-
Develop sub-work group to consult with National Environmental Laboratory
Accreditation Conference (NELAC), USDA, FDA and others to tie-in
to create a de novo system.
Accreditation Sub-Work Group Members:
Charlie Parfitt, FDA
Stephen Shaub, EPA
Roland Jenkins, Ohio Department of Agriculture
Paul Kimsey, California Department of Health
John Fruin, Florida Department of Agriculture
Mark Lee, California Department of Agriculture
Peggy Melton, Florida Department of Agriculture
Sub-Work Group Activities:
(A) Propose how local, state and federal agencies could
optimize the currently available capacity of government laboratories
performing food safety analyses.
(B) Propose a mechanism to enhance communications and
availability among diverse services.
(C) Propose mechanisms to minimize unnecessary duplication
and focus research and development efforts.
Sub-Work Group A - Need to determine lab capacity and availability
Charge:
Develop a National Food Safety Laboratory Resource Database to determine
lab capacity and availability
Budget: 1 person for survey (contract), 1 person to
maintain data, 1 person to maintain website
Sub-Work Group B - Food Safety Laboratory Conferences
Charge:
- Develop a Conference and Work Group format to disseminate information
dedicated to food safety
- Coordinate this activity with the Outbreak Response and Coordination
Work Group
Goal: By February 22, 1999, develop an outline for
conference meeting dates for FY 2000.
Barriers:
- Cost
- Competition with other conferences
- Degree of specialization
- Funding for attendees
Conferences Sub-Work Group Members:
Mark Lee, California Department of Agriculture
Roland Jenkins, Ohio Department of Agriculture
Robert Johnson, FDA/San Francisco District Office
(1 other To Be Determined)
Sub-Work Group C - Propose mechanisms to minimize unnecessary
duplication and focus research and development efforts.
Activities:
- Recommend Research Coordinating Committee. Further development on
issue will be addressed as action item by the entire work group during
the next scheduled conference call.
- Form work group with the charge to identify current cooperative ventures
at the federal, state and local level and identify what might be used
to model for further successful cooperation.
Successful Cooperative Efforts Among Laboratories Sub-Work Group
Members:
Robert Johnson, FDA/San Francisco District Office
Peggy Melton, Florida Department of Health
Phuc Nguygen-Dinh, CDC
Budget: Resources are needed for the following activities
of the Laboratory Work Group and Sub-Work Group: February 1999 Laboratory
Work Group Meeting; Sub-Work Group Meetings - January 1999 - (SDIC) Standards,
January 1999 - Accreditation, and January/February 1999 - Conferences
and Successful Lab Cooperation Sub-Work Groups.
III. COORDINATING COMMITTEE REPORT
The members of the Integrated National Food Safety System Coordinating
Committee were introduced by Karen Deasy, CDC Food Safety Liaison, to
the Work Groups. They include:
- Shirley Bohm, Food Section Manager, Illinois State Department of
Public Health
- Steve Bornmann, Program Administrator, Colorado Department of Agriculture
- Jesse Greenblatt, M.D., M.P.H., State Epidemiologist, New Hampshire
Department of Health & Human Services
- Scott Holmes, Chief, Environmental Health, Lincoln Lancaster County
Health Department
- Karen Deasy, CDC Food Safety Liaison, (Acting for Dr. Morrie Potter,
Associate Director for Foodborne Disease, Centers for Disease Control
and Prevention)
- Stuart Richardson, Chief, Food and Drug Branch, California Department
of Health Services
- R. Doug Saunders, Manager, Office of Dairy and Foods, Virginia Department
of Agriculture and Consumer Services
- Dean Sienko, M.D., Medical Director, Ingham County Health Department
- Ralph Stafko, Senior Policy Advisor, USDA/ Food Safety Inspection
Service
- Dr. Mary Torrence, National Program Leader, USDA/Cooperative State
Research Education and Extension Service
- Janice Oliver, Deputy Director for Systems and Support, FDA/Center
for Food Safety and Applied Nutrition
- Judy Nelson, Special Assistant, Environmental Protection Agency
Coordinating Committee Members and Work Group Chairs
- Roles and Responsibilities - Capacity and Resources Work Group
Chair: |
Joseph Corby, Assistant Director, New York Department of
Agriculture |
Co-Chair: |
Kenneth Kolano, Program Director, New Jersey Department of
Health |
- Outbreak Coordination and Investigations Work Group
Co-Chair: |
Jerry Gibson, State Epidemiologist, South Carolina Department
of Health |
Co-Chair: |
Jeff Farrar, Chief, Food Emergency Unit, California Department
of Health |
- Data Sharing and Collection Work Group
Chair: |
J. Douglas Park, State Epidemiologist, Michigan Department
of Agriculture |
Co-Chair: |
Judy Lee, Consumer Safety Officer, FDA/CFSAN |
- Communication Work Group
Chair: |
Sharon Greenman, Food Protection Coordinator, Seattle County
Department of Health (Washington) |
Co-Chair: |
Becky Shreeve, Supervisor, Utah Department of Agriculture
(will represent WG on the Coordinating Committee) |
- Minimum Uniform Standards Work Group
Chair: |
Susan Grayson, Head, Food and Lodging Sanitation Branch,
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources |
Co-Chair: |
Charlene Bruce, Director, Food Protection Branch, Mississippi
Department of Health |
- Laboratory Operations and Coordination Work Group
Chair: |
William Krueger, Director of Lab Services, Minnesota
Department of Agriculture |
Co-Chair: |
Robert Johnson, Lab Director, FDA/San Francisco District
Office |
In order to get a broad geographical mix, with representation of agriculture,
health and epidemiology disciplines, and to include federal, state and
local agencies, the Coordinating Committee selected a chair and three
vice-chairs:
Chair: |
Janice Oliver, Deputy Director for Systems and
Support, CFSAN / FDA, Washington, DC |
Vice-Chair: |
Stuart Richardson, Chief, Food and Drug Branch,
California Department of Health Services, Division of Food & Radiation
Safety, Sacramento, California |
Vice-Chair: |
R. Doug Saunders, Manager, Office of Dairy and
Foods, Virginia Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services,
Division of Consumer Protection, Richmond, Virginia |
Vice-Chair: |
Dean Sienko, Medical Director, Ingham County Health Department,
Lansing, Michigan |
Ms. Oliver summarized topics and issues discussed during the meeting
of the Coordinating Committee on Thursday, December 10. These included:
Proposed Responsibilities of the Coordinating Committee
- Develop a plan based on reports from the Work Groups
- Help to set Priorities from Work Group Recommendations
- Set Direction for the Work Groups
- maintain focus on the vision and the plan
- request status reports from the Work Groups
- Liaison between the Work Groups and Agencies
- Establish Procedures and Guiding Principles for the Work Groups
- Assign tasks to the Work Groups
Vision Statement
The Coordinating Committee reviewed three proposed draft vision statements
for the integrated food safety system. It was agreed that the final version
of the vision statement for the Food Safety Initiative Strategic Plan,
should be used as the vision for this project:
"Consumers can be confident that food is safe, healthy, and affordable.
We work within a seamless food safety system that uses farm-to-table
preventive strategies and integrated research, surveillance, inspection,
and enforcement. We are vigilant to new and emergent threats and consider
the needs of vulnerable populations. We use science- and risk-based
approaches along with public/private partnerships. Food is safe because
everyone understands and accepts their responsibilities." [Draft
vision statement from the Food Safety Initiative's Strategic Plan,
September 1998]
Mission Statement
The Coordinating Committee recommended that a mission statement be developed
to describe how the integrated food safety system fits in with the food
safety initiative vision. A draft mission statement has been prepared
for review:
"Our mission is to develop and promote an Integrated National Food
Safety System to best serve the public's health.
A fully Integrated National Food Safety System consists of common
ownership by Federal, State and Local government agencies organized
to reduce or eliminate foodborne illness and ensure that foods are
safe, wholesome, and honestly represented.
We will accomplish this by recommending, developing and implementing
strategies with stakeholder involvement that aim to clarify the roles
and responsibilities of all levels of government, enhance data sharing
and collection, facilitate system-wide communication, establish minimum
uniform standards, improve laboratory operations and coordination and
coordinate outbreak responses and investigations" [Draft mission
statement, December 1998]
Next Steps for the Coordinating Committee
- The Coordinating Committee will review the Work Group proposals by
the end of December. (Note: FDA can fund the meetings the Work Groups
need to develop their plans. FDA will review the estimated budget requests
and set up a coordinated budget meeting with CDC, USDA, and EPA.)
- The Coordinating Committee needs to receive status reports on the
Work Group plans by January 15, 1999.
- The Coordinating Committee will schedule conference calls during
January and February.
- Reports are due to the Coordinating Committee before February
28, 1999
- Coordinating Committee will meet in St. Louis, Missouri, March 1-3,
1999. Work Group reports will be reviewed and decisions made on a plan
to submit to the Federal agencies.
Ms. Oliver also addressed the following:
- Work Group members were asked to discuss the concept of an integrated
food safety system and the results of this meeting with state and local
officials when they return home in order to achieve a "multiplier effect" to
get additional input and support.
- A meeting of State Agriculture and Health Commissioners is scheduled
for February 23, 1999. Work Group members were asked to provide background
information on the integrated system to Commissioners in their state
who will attend this meeting.
- Work Group members were asked to try to get the support of their
governors' for this effort.
- The Coordinating Committee will look at the short-term goals and
recommend activities that can be started now. Regardless of what happens
in the federal budget process, local, state and federal agencies can
take steps now to work better together.
- A summary of this meeting will be made available to the participants
and on the Internet to those who did not attend. Information on these
activities will also be sent to professional associations and other
interested groups.
Ms. Oliver thanked everyone for their commitment to food safety and
public health on a national level. There is no other way to reduce foodborne
illness without working together. The recommendations presented will
help go towards a truly national food safety system.
Prepared by FDA/CFSAN, 2/5/99
50 State Meeting, September 1998
|