How the Food Hygiene Risk Rating is Calculated
Following the Food Standard Agency’s Code of Practice, Kennet District Council undertakes risk ratings of all food businesses following a primary inspection and the main categories used to determine the overall score are as follows:
-
Type of food and method of handling
-
Method of processing
-
Consumers at risk
-
Level of current compliance with food hygiene and safety procedures *
-
Level of current compliance with structure of premises *
-
Confidence in management and control systems *
-
Risk of contamination of food
The overall score is then used to determine the frequency of inspection for the business in line with the FSA’s Code of Practice.
* For the purposes of the Star Rating Scheme only the categories marked with an asterisk are taken into account since they are the areas directly controllable by the business.
The following page outlines the ratings and scores which are used in order to determine the Star Rating that will be awarded - Follow for more information
Food hygiene and safety
Based on food handling practices and procedures and temperature control
Structure of the establishment
Based on cleanliness, layout, condition of the structure, lighting, ventilations, facilities etc)
| Score | Guidance on Scoring System |
| 25 | Almost total non-compliance with statutory obligations |
| 20 | General failure to satisfy statutory obligations – standards generally low |
| 15 | Some major non-compliance with statutory obligations – more effort required to prevent fall in standards. |
| 10 | Some non-compliance with statutory obligations and industry codes of recommended practice. Standards are being maintained or improved |
| 5 | High standard of compliance with statutory obligations and industry codes of recommended practice, minor contraventions of food hygiene regulations. Minor non-compliance with statutory obligations and recommended practice. |
| 0 | High standard of compliance with statutory obligations and industry codes of recommended practice; conforms to accepted good practices in the trade. |
Confidence in Management/Control Systems
Factors which will influence the officer’s judgement include;
-
The track record of the business and it’s willingness to act on previous advice and enforcement.
-
The attitude of the management towards hygiene and food safety.
-
Hygiene and food safety knowledge.
-
Satisfactory documented procedures/HACCP based food safety management systems commensurate with business activities (consider SANCO)
| Score | Guidance
on Scoring System |
| 30 | Poor track record of compliance. Little or no technical knowledge. Little or no appreciation of hazards or quality control. No food safety management system. |
| 20 | Varying record of compliance. Poor appreciation of hazards and control measures. No food safety management system. |
| 10 | Satisfactory record of compliance. Understanding of significant hazards and control measures in place. Making satisfactory progress towards a documented food safety management system/procedures commensurate with type of business. |
| 5 | Reasonable record of compliance. Satisfactory documented procedures and systems. Able to demonstrate effective control of hazards. Satisfactory documented food safety management system. Access to technical advice. |
| 0 | Good record of compliance. Will have satisfactory documented HACCP based on food safety management system (SANCO). Audit confirms compliance with documented management system and only a few/minor non-conformities not identified as critical control points. |
Conversion
Total
Food hygiene + Structure + Confidence
| Award | Score | Level |
| 0-9 | Excellent |
|
| 10-19 | Very Good |
|
| 20-29 | Good |
|
| 30-39 | Satisfactory |
|
| 40-49 | Poor |
|
| Zero Stars | 50+ | Very Poor |
Guidance on Scoring
-
5 Star Total compliance with statutory obligations. Excellent structural standards and very high confidence in management.
-
4 Star High standard of compliance with statutory obligations. Good structural standards and high confidence in management.
-
3 Star Minor non-compliance with statutory obligations. Structural standards and confidence in management are good.
-
2 Star Generally complies with statutory obligations. Structural standards and confidence in management are acceptable.
-
1 Star General failure to satisfy statutory obligations. Structural standards and confidence in management is low. More effort required to prevent fall in standards.
-
Zero Stars Unacceptable. Almost total non-compliance with statutory obligations. Structure very poor and little or no confidence in management. Follow up action likely.