Adoption Of The FDA Food Code By State And Territorial Agencies .
Adoption of the FDA Food Codeby State and Territorial AgenciesResponsible for the Oversight ofRestaurants and Retail Food Stores2020
The Food and Drug Administration’s (FDA) National Retail Food Team (NRFT) monitors adoption of the FDAFood Code by State and Territorial regulatory agencies in the United States responsible for the regulationof restaurants and retail food stores. Adoption of the Food Code represents a successful federal/state/local partnership in improving food safety and signals commitment to the goal of preventing and reducingthe incidence of foodborne illness in retail and foodservice establishments in the United States. FDA RetailFood Specialists (Specialists) assess the Food Code adoption activities within each State and territory for the2020 calendar year. The Center for Food Safety and Applied Nutrition (CFSAN) analyzes and compiles theinformation gathered by these Specialists into a report that includes the version of the FDA Food Code adoptedby each State and Territorial regulatory agency.Between 1993 and 2001, the FDA Food Code was issued every two years. The 2005 Food Code was the firstfull edition published on the new four-year interval. During the interim period between full editions, FDA maypublish one Food Code Supplement that updates, modifies, or clarifies certain provisions. As of December31, 2020, the 2017 Food Code (https://www.fda.gov/media/110822/download) is the most recent full editionpublished by FDA, and it was followed by the Supplement to the 2017 Food Code (https://www.fda.gov/media/133749/download), which was published in 2019. As such, adoption of the Food Code modified withSupplement is hereinafter indicated with “(w/Suppl.)”. For example, adoption of the 2017 Food Code modifiedwith its Supplement in 2019 will be marked as “2017(w/Suppl.)”. This Report may use two terms to describethe FDA Food Code – ‘version’ and ‘edition’. The term ‘version’ is associated with the year of publication/release and the term ‘edition’ is associated with the number of times the Code has been published in itscurrent format. So, the 1993 version is the 1st edition, the 1995 version is the 2nd edition, the 1997 version isthe 3rd edition, the 1999 version is the 4th edition, the 2001 version is the 5th edition, the 2005 version is the6th edition, the 2009 version is the 7th edition, the 2013 version is the 8th edition and the 2017 version is the9th edition.States and Territories Monitored for Food Code Adoption Status in 2020Geographic Scope:All 50 States, the District of Columbia (DC), Guam, Northern Marianas Islands, Puerto Rico, American Samoa,and U.S. Virgin Islands.Terms Defined:For the purposes of summary by State and population calculation, this report considers DC as a State, and“District of Columbia Department of Health/Health, Regulation and Licensing” is considered as a State agency.Summary of State Agencies with Oversight of Restaurants and Retail Food StoresThere are 64 State agencies responsible for providing regulatory oversight of either restaurants, or retail foodstores, or both. A State may give regulatory oversight to multiple agencies within that State, each assigned toregulate different segments of the retail food industry. For example, a state may have: 2A single regulatory agency with responsibility for both restaurants and retail food stores.Two regulatory agencies with responsibility for both restaurants and retail food stores.A regulatory agency with responsibility for restaurants but not retail food stores, and another regulatoryagency with responsibility for retail food stores but not restaurants.A regulatory agency with responsibility for both restaurants and retail food stores, and another regulatoryagency with responsibility for retail food stores but not restaurants.Two regulatory agencies with responsibility for both restaurants and retail food stores, and anotherregulatory agency with responsibility for restaurants but not retail food stores.
Of the 64 State regulatory agencies:a) There are 46 agencies responsible for both restaurants and retail food stores; 45 out of these 46 haveadopted the FDA Food Code, with California Dept. of Public Health, Food & Drug Program the onlyexception.b) There are 8 agencies responsible for restaurants but not retail food stores; 7 out of these 8 have adoptedthe FDA Food Code, with New York State Department of Health the only exception.c) There are 10 agencies responsible for retail food stores but not restaurants; all 10 agencies have adoptedthe FDA Food Code.Figure 1 depicts the number of agencies per State with regulatory oversight for restaurants and retail foodstores. Specific details include: There are 39 States with a single State regulatory agency responsible for regulating restaurants and retailfood stores.There are 12 States that have multiple regulatory agencies, with details provided below: One (1) State (FL) has 3 agencies, where: One agency is responsible for both restaurants and retail food stores. Two agencies are responsible for restaurants. Three (3) States (CT, MS, OH) have 2 agencies, where: One agency is responsible for both restaurants and retail food stores. One agency is responsible for retail food stores. Seven (7) States (GA, ME, NY, OR, TN, UT, VA) have 2 agencies, where: One agency is responsible for restaurants. One agency is responsible for retail food stores. One (1) State (MN) have 2 agencies, where: Two agencies are responsible for both restaurants and retail food stores.State Agencies Responsible for RegulatingRestaurants and Retail Food Stores(as of ZKSOKNMMOWVKYNJMDDEDCVANCTNARSCMSTXOHINNHMACT RINYMIALGAAgency Responsibility1 Agencyboth restaurant & storeLAFLAK2 Agenciesboth restaurant & store2 Agencies1 for restaurant; 1 for storeHI39 States (including DC) with a single state agency responsible for regulatingrestaurants and food stores.12 states have multiple agencies: FL has 3 agencies; 11 states(CT/GA/ME/MN/MS/NY/OH/OR/TN/UT/VA) have agencies.2 Agencies1 for both; 1 for store3 Agencies1 for both; 2 for restaurantFigure 1: State regulatory agencies have responsibility for oversight of restaurants, and retail food stores.3
Summary of Status on State Adoption of the FDA Food CodeFigure 2 reflects the most recent Food Code version that was adopted by each State. Each State has at leastone agency that has adopted the FDA Food Code, with California the only exception. Specific details regardingthe Food Code versions adopted by different States are provided below: The 2017 Food Code is the most recent version adopted by 15 States: Arizona, Delaware, Florida (two ofthree agencies), Georgia (one of two agencies), Illinois, Iowa, Mississippi (one of two agencies), Nebraska,New Hampshire, New Mexico, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, South Carolina, Virginia (two agencies), andWashington.The 2013 Food Code is the most recent version adopted by 18 States: Alabama, Arkansas, Colorado,Connecticut (one of two agencies), Hawaii, Idaho, Kentucky, Massachusetts, Minnesota (two agencies),Montana, North Dakota, Ohio (two agencies), Oklahoma, Texas, Utah (two agencies), West Virginia,Wisconsin, and Wyoming.The 2009 Food Code is the most recent version adopted by 10 States: District of Columbia, Kansas, Maine,Maryland, Michigan, Missouri, Nevada, North Carolina, Oregon (two agencies), and Tennessee (twoagencies),The 2005 Food Code is the most recent version adopted by 2 States: Alaska, and New Jersey.The 2001 Food Code is the most recent version adopted by 4 States: Indiana, Louisiana, New York (one oftwo agencies), and Vermont.The 1995 Food Code is the most recent version adopted by 1 State: South Dakota.Food Code Adoption by State(as of ZKSOKNMMOWVKYARSCALHIVAFood Code AFLAKNJMDDEDCNCTNMSTXOHINNHMACT RINYMI“NA” means:not adotpted Food Code.Figure 2: FDA Food Code versions were adopted by States in 2020. If a State has multiple agencies, this map displays the agency that hasadopted the most recent version of FDA Food Code. (1) CT has two agencies: one agency adopted 2013 version, the other agency adopted2001 version; (2) FL has three agencies: two adopted 2017 version, and one adopted 2013 version; (3) GA has two agencies: one agencyadopted 2017 version, the other agency adopted 2013 version; (4) MS has two agencies: one agency adopted 2017 (w/Suppl.), while the otheragency adopted 2013 version; (5) NY also has two agencies: one agency adopted 2001 version, the other agency not adopted FDA FoodCode.4
Summary of Adoption Method of the FDA Food CodeTypically, there are two code adoption methods: one is the “short-form” or “adoption by reference” approachwhere a simple statement is published stating that certified copies of the proposed code are on file for publicreview; The alternative method is the “long-form” or “section-by-section” approach where the proposedcode is published in its entirety. See the FDA Food Code 2017 Preface, “7. Code Adoption/Certified Copies” foradditional information: 017. Figure 3 displays how theFDA Food Code was adopted among the states’ rulemaking process.The Adoption Method by State(as of HINNHMACT RINYAdoption Method27&DCLong-Form20Short-Form1Mixed 1*1Mixed 2**1No ApplicableMixed 1*: In NY State, one agency used long form, the other did not adopt FDA Food Code.Mixed 2**: In FL State, two agency used short form, while one agency used long form.Figure 3: The adoption method by State.Specific details regarding the adoption methods of States are provided below. Twenty (20) States used short-form format (FDA Food Code was adopted by reference): Alabama, Arizona,Colorado, Connecticut, Idaho, Illinois, Kentucky, Massachusetts, Michigan, Mississippi, Montana, NewHampshire, North Carolina, North Dakota, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Tennessee, Utah, Virginia, andWest Virginia.Twenty eight (28) States used long-form format (FDA Food Code was adopted section-by-section): Alaska,Arkansas, Delaware, District of Columbia, Georgia, Hawaii, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Louisiana, Maine,Maryland, Minnesota, Missouri, Nebraska, Nevada, New Jersey, New Mexico, Ohio, Oklahoma, Oregon,South Carolina, South Dakota, Texas, Vermont, Washington, Wisconsin and Wyoming.One (1) State has three agencies. Two agencies used short-form, but one agency used long-form format toadopt FDA Food Code: Florida.One (1) State has two agencies where only one agency used long-form format to adopt FDA 2001 FoodCode whereas the other agency did not adopt any edition of FDA Food Code: New York.One (1) State did not adopt FDA Food Code: California.5
Summary of the Food Code Adoption by PopulationFor the purposes of summary by State and population calculation, if a State has multiple agencies, we countthe agency that has adopted the most recent version of FDA Food Code. For example, two New York agenciesare responsible for providing regulatory oversight of restaurants and/or retail food stores. While one agencyadopted the 2001 FDA Food Code and the other agency has not adopted the FDA Food Code. Therefore, weconsider New York as a State which has adopted the 2001 FDA Food Code.Table 1 shows the total and the percentage of population broken down by the versions of the Food Code thatwere adopted in each State.Table 1: FDA Food Code adoption by population (source of population: 2020 US Census)Food CodeversionState(s)Population in2020% of U.S.201715: AZ, DE, FL, GA, IA, IL, MS, NE, NH, NM, PA, RI, SC, VA, WA100,367,43430.28201318: AL, AR, CO, CT, HI, ID, KY, MA, MN, MT, ND, OH, OK, TX, UT, WI, WV, WY96,255,61129.04200910: DC, KS, MD, ME, MI, MO, NC, NV, OR, TN52,091,35015.7220052: AK, NJ10,022,3853.0220014: IN, LA, NY, VT32,287,6119.741999000199700019951: SD886,6670.27None1: CA39,538,22311.93List of State Regulatory Agencies and Food Code Adoption StatusOf the 64 State regulatory agencies, 62 State agencies have adopted codes patterned after the 2017, 2013,2009, 2005, 2001, or 1995 versions of the FDA Food Code, whereas 2 State agencies have not adopted the FDAFood Code (Table 2).Table 2: The list of State regulatory agencies and Food Code adoption status6StateAgency NameFood CodeVersion AdoptedAdoption MethodOversightEffective YearResponsibilityAKAlaska Department of Environmental Conservation, Food Safety and Sanitation Program2005Long-FormBoth#2005ALAlabama Department of Public Health2013Short-FormBoth#2016ARArkansas Department of Health2013Long-FormBoth#2019AZArizona Department of Health Services2017*Short-FormBoth#2020CACalifornia Department of Public Health, Food &Drug ProgramNone**Not applicableBoth#Not applicableCOColorado Department of Health and Environment 2013Short-FormBoth#2019CTConnecticut Department of Consumer Protection 2013 (w/Suppl.)Short-FormRetail FoodStores2016CTConnecticut Department of Public Health2001***Short-FormBoth#2007DCDistrict of Columbia Department of Health/Health, Regulation and Licensing2009Long-FormBoth#2012
StateAgency NameFood CodeVersion AdoptedAdoption MethodOversightEffective YearResponsibilityDEDelaware Division of Public Health and SocialServices2017*Long-FormBoth#2020FLFlorida Department of Business andProfessional Regulations2017Short-FormRestaurants2019FLFlorida Department of Agriculture andConsumer Services2017*Short-FormBoth#2020FLFlorida Department of Health2013Long-FormRestaurants2018GAGeorgia Department of Public Health2013Long-FormRestaurants2015GAGeorgia Department of Agriculture2017Long-FormRetail FoodStores2019HIHawaii State Department of Health, SanitationBranch2013Long-FormBoth#2017IAIowa Department of Inspections and Appeals2017 (w/Suppl.) *Long-FormBoth#2021IDIdaho Department of Health & Welfare2013Long-FormBoth#2016ILIllinois Department of Public Health2017Short-FormBoth#2019INIndiana State Department of Health2001Long-FormBoth#2004KSKansas Department of Agriculture2009Long-FormBoth#2013KYKentucky Cabinet for Health and Family Services2013Short-FormBoth#2019LALouisiana Department of Public Health2001Long-FormBoth#2002MAMassachusetts Department of Public Health,Bureau of Environmental Health, FoodProtection Program2013Short-FormBoth#2018MDMaryland Department of Health and MentalHygiene/Prevention and Health ne Department of Health and HumanServices, Health Inspection Program2009 (w/Suppl.)Long-FormRestaurants2013MEMaine Department of Agriculture2009 (w/Suppl.)Long-FormRetail FoodStores2013MIMichigan Department of Agriculture and RuralDevelopment2009Short-FormBoth#2013MNMinnesota Department of Health2013Long-FormBoth#2019MNMinnesota Department of Agriculture2013Long-FormBoth#2019MOMissouri Department of Health and SeniorServices2009Long-FormBoth#2013MSMississippi Department of Health2017 (w/Suppl.)Short-FormBoth#2019MSMississippi Department of Agriculture2013Short-FormRetail FoodStores2015MTMontana Department of Health & HumanServices2013Short-FormBoth#2015NCNorth Carolina Division of Public Health/NCDHHS2009Short-FormBoth#2012NDNorth Dakota Department of Health, Division ofFood and Lodging2013Short-FormBoth#2018NENebraska Department of Agriculture2017*Long-FormBoth#2020NHNew Hampshire DHHS, Food Protection Section2017Short-FormBoth#20197
StateAgency NameFood CodeVersion AdoptedAdoption MethodOversightEffective YearResponsibilityNJNew Jersey dept of health & Senior Serv2005Long-FormBoth#2005NMNew Mexico Environment Department2017Long-FormBoth#2019NVNevada Department of Health and HumanServices, Division of Public & Behavioral Health2009Long-FormBoth#2013NYNew York State Department of Health Bureauof Community Environmental Health and FoodProtectionNone**Not applicableRestaurantsNot applicableNYNew York State Department of Agriculture andMarkets Division of Food Safety and Inspection2001Long-FormRetail FoodStores2004OHOhio Department of Health2013 (w/Suppl.)Long-FormBoth#2019OHOhio Department of Agriculture2013 (w/Suppl.)Long-FormRetail FoodStores2019OKOklahoma State Department of Health2013Long-FormBoth#2016OROregon Health Authority2009Long-FormRestaurants2011OROregon Department of Agriculture2009Long-FormRetail FoodStores2011PAPennsylvania Department of Agriculture2017Short-FormBoth#2018RIRhode Island Department of Health Office ofFood Protection2017 (w/Suppl.) *Short-FormBoth#2021SCSouth Carolina Department of Health andEnvironmental Control (SCDHEC)2017Long-FormBoth#2019SDSouth Dakota Department of Health, OPHPR &OHP1995Long-FormBoth#1997TNTennessee Department of HealthEnvironmental Health Division2009Short-FormRestaurants2013TNTennessee Department of Agriculture2009Short-FormRetail FoodStores2013TXTexas Department of Health Services - PublicSanitation and Retail Food Safety2013Long-FormBoth#2015UTUtah Department of Agriculture and Food2013Short-FormRetail FoodStores2016UTUtah Department of Health2013Short-FormRestaurants2016VAVirginia Department of Agriculture andConsumer Services/Food and Dairy SafetyProgram2017*Short-FormRetail FoodStores2021VAVirginia Department of Health2017*Short-FormRestaurants2021VTVermont Department of Health2001Long-FormBoth#2003WAWashington State Department of Health,Environmental Health2017 (w/Suppl.) *Long-FormBoth#2021WIWisconsin Department of Agriculture Trade andConsumer Protection2013 (w/Suppl.) *Long-FormBoth#2020WVWest Virginia Department of Health and HumanResources2013Short-FormBoth#2019WYWyoming Department of Agriculture2013 (w/Suppl.) *Long-FormBoth#2020Note:Both#: the agency has responsibility for restaurants and retail food stores.*: the agency completed rulemaking in 2020.**: the agency did not adopt any version of FDA Food Code, no adoption.***: FDA specialist has confirmed with Program Manager of CT DPH, adoption of newer FDA Food Code has been delayed.8
Food Code Adoption Status Changes Between 2019 and 2020In 2020, 10 States (11 State agencies) have completed Food Code adoption related rulemaking (see details inTable 3). Eight (8) States changed Food Code adoption status from previous version to the 2017 version: AZ is from1999 version; DE, IA, RI and VA are from 2013 version; FL (one agency), NE and WA are from 2009 version.Two (2) States changed Food Code adoption status from previous version to 2013: WI and WY are from2009 version.Additionally, Kansas, Michigan, and Missouri are still in progress with intent to adopt Food Code 2017.Table 3: Changes in Food Code adoption between 2019 and 2020StateFood Code version in 2019Food Code version in 2020AZ19992017DE20132017FL (one agency)20092017IA20132017NE20092017RI20132017VA (two rview Food Code Adoption Changes in 4 YearsThe 2017 Food Code is the most recent full edition published by FDA in February of 2018. 2017 is the yearbefore 2017 Food Code was published. Table 4 showed the changes before and after 2017 FDA Food Codepublished. Figure 4 displayed the changes in a chart.Table 4: Changes in Food Code adoption between 2017 and 2020Food Code version#States in 2017#States in 2018#States in 2019#States in 444199921101997100019951111Not adopted11119
Both Table 4 and Figure 4 provided two trends: (1) adoption of 2017 Food Code increased every year since itpublished; (2) in the past 4 years, adoption of 2009 Food Code decreased each year.Food Code Adoption Status from 2017 to 202025Number of Food Code Versions#Statesin 2017#Statesin 2018#Statesin 2019#Statesin 2020Figure 4: Number of States by Food Code version adopted in 2017, 2018, 2019, and 2020Additionally, eight States (AK, CA, IN, LA, NJ, NY, SD, and VT) have not changed adoption status for more than12 years.Territorial Agencies’ FDA Food Code AdoptionTwo territorial agencies (Puerto Rico and U.S. Virgin Islands) have adopted 2017 FDA Food Code and itsSupplement, and they used short-form format. One territorial agency (Guam) has adopted the 2005 FDA FoodCode, and Guam used long-form format. We do not know the status in American Samoa and Northern MarianaIslands.10
If a State has multiple agencies, this map displays the agency that has adopted the most recent version of FDA Food Code. (1) CT has two agencies: one agency adopted 2013 version, the other agency adopted 2001 version; (2) FL has three agencies: two adopted 2017 version, and one adopted 2013 version; (3) GA has two agencies: one agency
May 02, 2018 · D. Program Evaluation ͟The organization has provided a description of the framework for how each program will be evaluated. The framework should include all the elements below: ͟The evaluation methods are cost-effective for the organization ͟Quantitative and qualitative data is being collected (at Basics tier, data collection must have begun)
Silat is a combative art of self-defense and survival rooted from Matay archipelago. It was traced at thé early of Langkasuka Kingdom (2nd century CE) till thé reign of Melaka (Malaysia) Sultanate era (13th century). Silat has now evolved to become part of social culture and tradition with thé appearance of a fine physical and spiritual .
On an exceptional basis, Member States may request UNESCO to provide thé candidates with access to thé platform so they can complète thé form by themselves. Thèse requests must be addressed to esd rize unesco. or by 15 A ril 2021 UNESCO will provide thé nomineewith accessto thé platform via their émail address.
̶The leading indicator of employee engagement is based on the quality of the relationship between employee and supervisor Empower your managers! ̶Help them understand the impact on the organization ̶Share important changes, plan options, tasks, and deadlines ̶Provide key messages and talking points ̶Prepare them to answer employee questions
Dr. Sunita Bharatwal** Dr. Pawan Garga*** Abstract Customer satisfaction is derived from thè functionalities and values, a product or Service can provide. The current study aims to segregate thè dimensions of ordine Service quality and gather insights on its impact on web shopping. The trends of purchases have
Chính Văn.- Còn đức Thế tôn thì tuệ giác cực kỳ trong sạch 8: hiện hành bất nhị 9, đạt đến vô tướng 10, đứng vào chỗ đứng của các đức Thế tôn 11, thể hiện tính bình đẳng của các Ngài, đến chỗ không còn chướng ngại 12, giáo pháp không thể khuynh đảo, tâm thức không bị cản trở, cái được
Food outlets which focused on food quality, Service quality, environment and price factors, are thè valuable factors for food outlets to increase thè satisfaction level of customers and it will create a positive impact through word ofmouth. Keyword : Customer satisfaction, food quality, Service quality, physical environment off ood outlets .
Le genou de Lucy. Odile Jacob. 1999. Coppens Y. Pré-textes. L’homme préhistorique en morceaux. Eds Odile Jacob. 2011. Costentin J., Delaveau P. Café, thé, chocolat, les bons effets sur le cerveau et pour le corps. Editions Odile Jacob. 2010. Crawford M., Marsh D. The driving force : food in human evolution and the future.
