Let the Real Housewives of Orange County chime in on restaurant inspection grades

Posted: December 17th, 2008 - 6:05pm by Doug Powell

Having 10-day old baby Sorenne means a lot of sitting around. Seriously, the kid must have breastfed for 12 hours yesterday. And that means a lot of bad TV for Amy and Sorenne. Lately, it’s been a Real Housewives of Orange County marathon. I don’t know who lives like that and I don’t know what’s real about those people, but those ladies need to get their botoxed faces and fake boobies and restylane lips down to the Orange County Board of Supervisors.

Despite a warning from the county grand jury, the Board once again declined Tuesday to impose a letter grading system designed to inform would-be diners about the health safety record of restaurants.

Supervisor Bill Campbell, who once owned a chain of Taco Bell franchises, said he thought it was unfair to punish restaurant owners with grades or color codes if they had corrected problems and met health standards.

Orange County does not require its 13,000 restaurants to post letter grades after health inspections. Instead, restaurants are required to post certificates showing that they have met food preparation and cleanliness standards or are scheduled for a reinspection because of past violations.

In May, the Orange County Grand Jury concluded that the county's current system essentially keeps the public "in the dark" about a restaurant's record and suggested the county's Health Care Agency require restaurants to post letter grades so the public knows how they scored in their last safety inspections.


After watching the mish-mash of federal, state and local approaches to restaurant inspection in a number of western countries for the past decade, I can draw two broad conclusions:

• Anyone who serves, prepares or handles food, in a restaurant, nursing home, day care center, supermarket or local market needs some basic food safety training; and,

• the results of restaurant and other food service inspections must be made public.

Publicly available grading systems rapidly communicate to diners the potential risk in dining at a particular establishment and restaurants given a lower grade may be more likely to comply with health regulations in the future to prevent lost business.

More importantly, such public displays of information help bolster overall awareness of food safety amongst staff and the public -- people routinely talk about this stuff. The interested public can handle more, not less, information about food safety.

And instead of waiting for politicians to take the lead, the best restaurants, those with nothing to hide and everything to be proud of, will go ahead and make their inspection scores available -- today. Demand it ladies.

Your rating: None
Bookmark and Share

Comments

Anonymous says:

I think you left out something really important to your list of broad conclusion. Regulatory inspectors should be properly trained and regulated themselves. I don't know how much time you spend doing field work in restaurants and retailers but I can unfortunately report that heath inspection grades are for the most part, a very poor indication of what is actually going on behind the scenes. As a food safety professional, I have people ask me often what my standard is for whether or not I will eat in a restaurant based on their health inspection score. My response is usually that I pay them no attention... I may glance at them but is usually to get a good laugh or to see how much of the handwriting and misspelled words I can decipher. For instance, spending 3-4 hours in the kitchen where you see things like cooks using a towel to dry his hands that was just used for wiping down a breading table that is covered in raw chicken juice, employees that don't understand why chicken can't be served when it was only cooked to an internal temperature of 120°F and there is no time/temperature control for any potentially hazardous products. You then take a look at the posted health score which the manager has bragged is a 98!! Then you see the parents that take a look at that score and feel safe feeding their small children the food at that location because, WOW they must be "clean" and "safe" if they have a score of 98! It's frightening and disturbing and occurs more often than it doesn't. While I agree purpose regulatory health plays an important role, it is ineffective if not accurate. Posting a health score for consumers to see is false sense of security when that score does not reflect what is actually going on in the back of the house. Public health needs to be more closely monitored and regulated to ensure the public is getting accurate information. A crash course in food handling is not adequate training for regulatory inspectors.

Posted on March 15th, 2010 - 10:42pm

Post new comment

The content of this field is kept private and will not be shown publicly.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.