Editor’s Note: This is a guest blog post written by Michael Graugnard, a second-year law student at the University of Arkansas School of Law and a Research and Writing Assistant for the Food and Agriculture Impact Project.

One positive thing to come out of the public health and economic challenges of the last two years is the increased attention that all levels of government are paying to strengthening local and regional food systems.  As supply chain bottlenecks and shortages prove, any solution to food system concerns must involve our small-scale processors.  To lend their support to these efforts, and in response to a Congressional mandate from the 2018 Farm Bill, the Niche Meat Processors Assistance Network (NMPAN), in cooperation with the National Sustainable Agriculture Coalition (NSAC), released a report to the Food Safety and Inspection Service (FSIS) in December of 2020.  The report found that Small and Very Small (SVS) meat processors are underrepresented in the regulatory and policy making process and experience a disproportionately higher number of regulatory sanctions than large processors.  In response, the report outlined several recommendations aimed at improving the food safety and inspection system for SVS processors. 

Since the release of this report, FSIS has made considerable changes to service resources and programming.  However, several areas highlighted by NSAC and NMPAN remain either unaddressed or partially addressed.  FSIS has made significant improvements, for example, in producing and revising model HACCPs and enhancing website resources.  At the same time, other areas of FSIS policy, such as SVS guidance on compliance with Salmonella and Campylobacter performance protocols, have not been addressed as clearly. 

Report Summary

The 2020 report’s recommendations centered around three general areas in which FSIS could improve practices across the entire spectrum of service functions:

1. Outreach – How to improve communication across FSIS to ensure the most important and accurate information reaches SVS processors as effectively as possible.
2. Information – How effective guidance documents and other tools are at assisting SVS processors with their needs.
3. Responsiveness – How quickly and effectively FSIS responds to questions, comments, and assistance requests from SVS processors.

The study also focused on increasing the inclusion of SVS processor voices in the policy making process.  Some of the recommendations include:

• Outreach:
  • Increase SVS processor representation in roundtable meetings, conference calls, and on advisory committees.
  • Shift outreach activities from Enforcement, Investigation, and Analysis Officers (EIAO) to the Office of Policy and Program Development (OPPD).
  • Standardize education for inspection and outreach personnel across districts and analyze enforcement data for patterns of inconsistencies among districts.
• Information:
  • Coordinate Small Plant Help Desk (SPHD) and AskFSIS more closely or merge the two into one entity.
  • Enhance the FSIS website to streamline information resources and eliminate out of date and redundant information.
  • Provide up-to-date model HACCP plans for SVS processors and increase access to peer-reviewed research for developing processing procedures.
• Responsiveness:
  • Partner with United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) Agricultural Marketing Service (AMS) to verify label claims, remove claims which cause consumer confusion, and ensure claims are enforced fairly.
  • Enhance research, including using funds for new research, on how SVS plants can meet Salmonella and Campylobacter performance standards.
  • Commission a report on options for the handling and slaughter of non-amenable species, including bison, yak, alpaca, llama, and rabbit.

The report also included a humane handling study which found that the overwhelming majority of suspensions relating to humane handling violations occur at SVS plants, and that the duration of suspensions for SVS plants are significantly longer than their larger counterparts. Recommendations for correcting suspension inconsistencies centered on increasing the clarity of regulations outlining these handling violations.  At the time of the report, the effects of the 2020 revisions to humane handling evaluations were unclear.  The FSIS FY2021 Humane Handling Report indicated that while the overall proportion of SVS plant suspensions remained high (94% of total suspensions) the total number of suspensions decreased significantly (56).

Response

Overall, FSIS has demonstrated its willingness to take these recommendations into consideration since the report’s release.  Although not every key recommendation has been addressed, the constituent updates show a consistent stream of improvements since publication of the 2020 report. The bulk of FSIS communications to its processors come through the weekly constituent updates which are meant to inform the public on recent service activities.  These updates are an important tool for determining how and when FSIS’ has responded to NMPAN 2020 report.

FSIS’s response has included several next steps, as well as inactions, including the following:

• Outreach:
  • FSIS has taken some steps to increase SVS processor representation, such as seeking representation of small and very small processors on the National Advisory Committee for Meat and Poultry Inspection.  The service has also hosted occasional webinars discussing policy and program developments for SVS processors, but these are infrequent.
  • The constituent updates do not mention any shifting of EIAO outreach activities away from inspection and enforcement personnel.
  • Although data is available for enforcement comparisons between districts, there is no information on how FSIS is addressing discrepancies.
• Information:
  • FSIS has integrated askFSIS into the larger AskUSDA platform and has made significant improvements to the SPHD resources to enhance user experience for SVS processors.
  • FSIS has also made significant improvements to its overall website organization and its presentation of service and USDA resources, including both functional and financial resources.
  • The service has consistently updated model HACCPs to current standards and incorporated new models to aid SVS processors.  They have also included links to peer reviewed studies to help processors develop their own HACCP plans.
• Responsiveness:
  • FSIS, and the USDA more broadly, have shown increased interest in correcting labeling issues, including “Product of USA” labels and other labeling claims which may confuse consumers and promote unfair practices.
  • The constituent updates do not reflect enhancements in FSIS’ approach to Salmonella and Campylobacter standards for SVS processors.
  • FSIS has paid some attention to the handling of non-amenable species, but there is more work to be done in clarifying non-amenable species regulations and fee structures.

Ultimately, FSIS has been following a positive trajectory for enhancing the experience of SVS producers, as evidenced by the consistent stream of improvements, even throughout the COVID-19 pandemic.  The 2020 NMPAN report was a significant driver of this recent progress.  Although much has been done to improve the quality and quantity of resources available to SVS producers, more progress can be made, particularly in regards to increasing SVS stakeholder representation and improving how field outreach is conducted by FSIS personnel.  As the USDA and other organizations continue to recognize the importance of small and local processors, more progress is necessary to ensure a competitive marketplace and strengthen the resiliency of processors of all sizes.