Although the sharing of food safety resources and interactions during health inspections are important, MDH has never surveyed food workers to evaluate and under- stand their preferences for receiving food safety information and how they perceive the current inspection process. We also were interested in understanding food worker behaviors pertain- ing to illness reporting and other MDH-specific requirements. Therefore, we created a survey to better understand the needs and behaviors of food workers related to these processes. Methods Sta from the Partnership and Workforce Development Unit within MDH surveyed workers in food and beverage service facili- ties (e.g., restaurants, delicatessens, coee shops, bars) to 1) assess how they want to receive food safety information; 2) better understand how they perceive inspections and their interactions with health inspectors; and 3) better understand employee illness reporting behaviors. The survey instrument was created in Microsoft Forms and consisted of 29 ques- tions, which were a mix of open-ended, Lik- ert scale, and rating questions (Supplemental Survey File, www.neha.org/jeh-supplemen tals). The survey was presented in English, took an average of 7.5 min to complete, and was piloted internally prior to launch. The survey link was active for 33 days beginning on February 21, 2022, and was distributed to subscribers of the GovDe- livery email system of the Partnership and Workforce Development Unit (sent out to approximately 30,000 email subscribers) that includes food and beverage service facility operators and food workers in Minnesota. The survey was also advertised on MDH Facebook and Twitter accounts. We reviewed link clicks within the first 48 hr of the survey being sent out to deter- mine how the link was being accessed. There were 714 unique clicks via our GovDelivery system, 343 link clicks via Facebook, and 20 engagements (similar to link clicks) via Twit- ter. Sending the survey out via our GovDe- livery system appeared to yield the highest response for participation. The survey announcement included infor- mation on the purpose of the survey, the vol- untary nature of the survey, the anonymity of the survey, and how to request further infor-
mation. Individuals who wanted to partici- pate could access the survey questions via a link within the announcement. We provided a second GovDelivery reminder for survey participation 1 week before the survey closed on March 25, 2022. Descriptive and qualitative data analyses on the survey responses were performed with Microsoft Excel version 2208. Results A total of 1,659 food workers responded to the survey. Of those, 1,535 (93%) said they were individuals who worked in a food or beverage service setting and were able to complete the entire survey. The other 124 respondents reported that they did not work in a food or beverage service setting, and the survey subsequently ended. Survey Respondent Demographics A majority of survey respondents reported that their age was >51 years (46%), their primary work duty was management (66%), their primary language was English (96%), and they had worked in food service for >15 years (58%). Moreover, 88% of respondents said they had been a certified food protec- tion manager (CFPM) at some point in their career, and of those, 92% still had a valid CFPM certificate (Table 1). Food Safety Information Preferences The most common responses for where survey respondents currently get their food safety information were a CFPM course such as ServSafe or Prometric (72%), classes and trainings (60%), conversations with a health inspector (60%), and the MDH web- site (40%). Less common responses included social media, magazines, and blogs (Table 2). When respondents were asked, “What is your preferred method to receive informa- tion,” the most common responses were email such as newsletters and updates (63%), online trainings and presentations (50%), in-person trainings or presentations (40%), and conversations with their health inspector (33%). Less common responses were super- visor or colleagues, web content, mail flyers, and social media. When asked, “What food safety topics do you wish you had more information on,” the answers varied, with many respondents want- ing more information on food code require-
ments (47%), food recalls or consumer warn- ings (41%), and general food safety (41%). Additionally, respondents selected food safety fact sheets (50%) and more communication from the health department about require- ments and food code updates (45%) as the top choices when asked, “What would make you more eective in ensuring safe food handling practices are followed in your restaurant?” We separated out respondents who reported that they have never been a CFPM ( n = 178) from respondents who have been a CFPM ( n = 1,357). Both respondent groups reported food code requirements and general food safety as the top responses when asked, “What food safety topics do you wish you had more infor- mation on?” Respondents who had never been a CFPM were slightly less interested in receiv- ing information on food recalls or consumer warnings than respondents who had been a CFPM (33% versus 42%). Furthermore, respondents who had never been a CFPM reported, “Paid sick leave so I don’t work while ill” (54%) as the top choice for what would make them more eective in ensuring safe food handling practices are followed in their restaurant. Respondents who had been a CFPM chose food safety fact sheets (51%) and more communication from the health department about requirements and food code updates (46%) as the top responses for what would make them more eective, but paid sick leave was selected only 28% of the time. When looking at the dierences in receipt of food safety information between respondents who were or were not CFPMs, the most com- mon way non-CFPMs are receiving food safety information is through their supervisor (59%) and their coworkers (35%); furthermore, their preferred method to receive food safety infor- mation is through their supervisor (47%) and online trainings (45%). Responses from indi- viduals who had been a CFPM were consistent with the findings of the entire group. Perception of Inspections Survey respondents were asked, “In gen- eral, how beneficial are health department inspections?” The majority (89%) of respon- dents said inspections were very beneficial (48%) or somewhat beneficial (41%). Addi- tionally, 70% of respondents would not want to change anything about their inspection process, while 17% said they would like to change something (Table 3). We then asked
9
June 2024 • Journal of Environmental Health
Powered by FlippingBook