FHRS and FHIS evaluation findings published
Posted: 25 March 2015 | Victoria White | No comments yet
The final two research reports, in a series commissioned by the FSA to evaluate the FHRS and FHIS are being published today…
The final two research reports, in a series commissioned by the Food Standards Agency (FSA) to evaluate the Food Hygiene Rating Scheme (FHRS) in England, Wales and Northern Ireland, and Food Hygiene Information Scheme (FHIS) in Scotland, are being published today.
The evaluation was commissioned with the Policy Studies Institute in 2011 and ran until mid-2014. It explored the impact of the FHRS and the FHIS on local authorities, consumers, businesses, food hygiene compliance and the incidence of foodborne disease. The evaluation and other research findings have been discussed by the FSA Board today.
In England, Wales and Northern Ireland businesses are rated from 0 – 5, with 0 being the lowest rating and 5 being the highest. Businesses rated with a 3 or above are considered to be generally satisfactory or better. The FSA recommends consumers choose to eat in these ‘compliant’ establishments.
FHRS has a positive impact on business compliance
These final reports provide evidence that the FHRS had a positive impact on business compliance levels. These showed that there was a significant increase in ‘broad compliance’ (equivalent to ratings of 3 to 5) in the first year, and a significant increase in ‘full compliance’ (rating of 5) in the second year in local authority areas after the FHRS was introduced, compared with areas where the scheme was not yet operating. There was also a significant decrease in the proportion of businesses with very poor levels of compliance in the first two years after launch.
For Scotland, although the general pattern was the same for FHIS, the changes in compliance levels were not statistically significant.
FHRS and FHIS reports find consumers are more likely to refer to hygiene information when eating out for special occasions
The reports also include findings on consumer views about the scheme and provide some interesting insights. For example, those using the schemes said they were more likely to refer to hygiene information when in an unfamiliar location, or eating with vulnerable people or for special occasions when planning meals out at Christmas or Valentine’s Day.