View Report Details
Evaluation of the Food Hygiene Rating Scheme (FHRS) & Food Hygiene Information Scheme (FHIS)
Project Code: FS244011
Policy Studies Institute
Husain, F ; Vegeris, S
The Policy Studies Institute (PSI) has been commissioned by the FSA to undertake an evaluation of the Food Hygiene Rating Scheme (FHRS) and Food Hygiene Information Scheme (FHIS). Work began in autumn 2011 and the evaluation research programme is due to be completed in mid-2014.
The overall aim of the research is to systematically and robustly assess the operation (process evaluation) and identify the impacts (impact evaluation) of the national FHRS and FHIS, taking into account the existence of ‘local’ food hygiene rating schemes.
Full findings from the first stage of the evaluation, which looks at early implementation of the schemes, were published in March 2013. Early findings on the specific issue of the display of ratings/inspection results at food premises have been drawn out of data collected for the wider evaluation exercise and summarised in an interim report (first document below).
Fieldwork was conducted between October 2011 and February 2012 and included in-depth interviews with 38 staff from 22 local authorities and six case studies of local authority areas. Each case study included further in-depth interviews with local authority staff, in-depth interviews with food businesses and consumer discussion groups. Research participant views on the current voluntary approach to FHRS rating/FHIS inspection result display and the theoretical possibility of a mandatory approach were explored during the interviews and discussion groups.
Consumer and local authority participants in FHRS/FHIS areas were generally supportive of the principle of mandatory display. Views expressed by the small number of non-adopter local authority staff interviewed were generally more supportive of voluntary display. Businesses tended to be divided on the issue, with support for mandatory display expressed by some higher rated businesses.
Process study - Stage 1 report (March 2013)
This stage considered early implementation of FHRS and FHIS, when the schemes were still relatively new, when many local authorities were still operating their own ‘local’ hygiene rating schemes and before the Agency implemented its national communications strategy.
The main findings are as follows:
- Generally local authorities recognised the benefits of a single national scheme and any barriers to adopting the scheme were practical and/or financial in nature.
- FHRS/FHIS were viewed by local authorities as a tool to enhance their enforcement role. This would be further strengthened if display of ratings by food businesses became mandatory.
- Consumer awareness of the scheme was generally low at this stage, but there was evidence of the FHRS influencing those who had some awareness of the scheme.
- Few food business operators fully understood the details of the scheme, but there was evidence that some had made changes and improved their rating.
Stage 2 of the process evaluation has assessed whether the Food Hygiene Rating Scheme (FHRS) in England, Wales and Northern Ireland, and the Food Hygiene Information Scheme (FHIS) in Scotland, are operating as intended.
• Local authority officers were generally positive about the FHRS/FHIS with operations now part of the regular programme of inspections. Workloads were also seen as manageable.
• However, resourcing of the scheme is required to ensure that teams are able to continue to carry out inspections, maintain scheme administration and engage with food businesses, particularly those who are new or with relatively poor hygiene standards. Food safety teams have put effort into ensuring consistency of FHRS ratings/ FHIS inspection results. Consequently, local authority officers were confident that they were achieving consistency within local authorities, though in Wales and England there was the perception that there remained inconsistencies in scoring between local authorities. Local authority officers reported that compliance rates had increased over time. Display rates were lower than expected for food businesses with an FHRS rating of 3, 4 or 5 or FHIS ‘pass’. Local authority officers felt there was little else that they could do to encourage these businesses to display their ratings, beyond mandatory display and wide-spread publicity.
• There was broad support for the scheme amongst food businesses, which were generally aware of their rights to appeal and to request a re-inspection.
• Reported display of stickers/certificates in a place that was visible to the public tended to be associated with a ‘pass’ or higher levels of compliance. The prime reason reported for display was to communicate their food hygiene standard to customers.
• Widespread implementation of improvements were reportedly driven by the motivation to achieve a higher FHRS rating or FHIS “pass” result and a concern about losing trade. In Wales, improvements were also driven by the prospect of mandatory display of ratings from November 2013.
• Negative views towards the scheme tended to be associated with ratings that were perceived to be lower than expected or unjustified. Amongst the relatively poor performing businesses, frustration was expressed, particularly in the Confidence in Management scoring category.
- More information was also required on what changes were necessary to achieve full compliance. Reported barriers to change included costs and building regulations.
• Consumers supported the idea of the scheme in principle and welcomed its provision of objective and useful information on hygiene standards. However when probed more deeply, it was clear that consumers were uncertain how to interpret FHRS scores and in Scotland, unclear about the implications of an ‘improvement required’ inspection result.
• Consumers also reported that they would be inclined to use the scheme more frequently if there were more stickers/certificates on display. However, it was acknowledged that hygiene standards are just one of a number of criteria, such as price, taste and convenience, which are each taken into account to a varying degree depending on the occasion, when making a decision about where to eat.
- Consumers supported the mandatory display of ratings/results and thought that wider advertising was needed to increase awareness of the schemes.
- Interim Report on Mandatory Display
- Process Evaluation: Early Implementation Study Method Plan
- Stage 1 - Process study
- Case study - England 1
- Case study - England 2
- Case study - England 3
- Case study - Scotland
- Case study - Wales
- Case study - Northern Ireland
- Stage 2 final report
- FHRS case study England 1
- FHRS case study England 2
- FHRS case study NI 1
- FHRS case study NI 2
- FHRS case study Wales 1
- FHRS case study Wales 2
- FHIS case study Scotland 1
- FHIS case study Scotland 2
- FBS findings IFF Final
Some of the files on this site may be in a format that your computer can't read. However, you can download Readers and Viewers for the following document types below: