A Scores on the Doors poster as backed by the Food Standards Agency
How to get the Score on the Door
As anyone who has seen the movie ‘Ratatouille’ will be aware, no-one is keen on seeing rats in the kitchen. But is there the clear correlation between food hygiene and culinary excellence that you might expect? You may imagine they are inextricably linked, but this is not always the case.
80,000 secret council files on food hygiene ratings of places to eat and drink in London have recently been made accessible online to the general public, and some outlets have also posted their results in their windows – a ‘Score on the Door’, as recognised by the Food Standards Agency. The top-rated (ie cleanest) places get five stars, and as the star rating drops, so do standards.
Though Scores on the Doors is currently only a trial scheme, it is backed by the Food Standards Agency, the Chartered Institute of Environmental Health (CIEH) and the consumer organisation Which?, so pressure exists to make it permanent. These supporters, and the 25+ London councils currently participating in the scheme, say it’s great news for the customer, transforming poor hygiene in restaurants almost overnight. But if your favourite neighbourhood restaurant scored badly, would you still eat there? If you saw the sous chef wiping his nose on his sleeve or the new recruit in the kitchen was revealed never to wash his hands after visiting the loo, would you reconsider your dinner reservation? Feature continues
The government’s Food Law Codes of Practice recommend that Environmental Health Officers grade food premises on a star scale of one to five, based on criteria including food hygiene, confidence in management and structural standards (including pest-proofing). A ‘no stars’ rating indicates a failure to comply with legal requirements, including little or no appreciation of food safety, while five stars shows that the restaurant adheres to the very best standards of food hygiene.
High-risk premises will be inspected every six months and the low-risk every two years. The numerical scores you see listed are like points on a driving licence – the more a premises has, the worse the record.
At the moment, premises are not legally required by the council to publish their results ‘on the door’, but this hardly matters as ratings can be checked on www.yourlondon.gov.uk/foodscores.
Is this too much information? Or should Scores on the Doors be praised for highlighting serious flaws in food hygiene, while allowing those with the best standards to walk tall? One man’s ‘harmless little cockroach’ could be another’s salmonella, that the little blighter might be carrying when it wanders across the food prep surface on which your dessert is being lovingly constructed.
So, what happens to the venues that are the dunces in food hygiene class? Venues awarded less than two stars for Scores on the Doors can expect ‘enforcement action’ if things don’t improve – assuming they’re still in business by the time the Environmental Health Officer visits again. However, given the national shortage of suitably qualified EHOs – there are currently 700 vacant posts in councils nationwide – the wait for reassessment could be lengthy.
How to get the Score on the Door
Go to: www.yourlondon.gov.uk/foodscores
Click on 'start search'
Read then click on the disclaimer
Type in the name of the restaurant you want
The author, Helen Buckingham, is an Environmental Health Officer.
|
|
|
|
1 comment
This is a great scheme. However, if someone gets a lower score (say 2 or 3) it does not neccessarily mean that their hygene is bad.
I am a prime example. I run a food business, my kitchen is spotlessly clean, even the Council Officer comented on this. However, I was not up to date with paperwork (keeping a diary of what we do on a daily basis to keep the hygiene), so we got awarded 3 stars. Even though we did all those things on a daily basis, which was clearly evident from the spotlessness of our premises, we were not awarded the highest stars as we had no up to date paperwork.
Even though I can certainly see the point of keeping up to date diary, I found the hygiene inspector very inflexible, as he was not prepared to make a judgment "obvious state vs. paperwork trail", and this is what upset me. So, the scoring is not necessarily ONLY about the hygiene, but of properly keeping the paperwork (beaurocracy), as this can massively influence the score. Obviously, lots of places get low scoring because they are filthy, all I am saying here that this is not ALWAYS the case.