#### U. S. Food and Drug AdministrationCenter for Food Safety and Applied NutritionNational Food Safety InitiativeFebruary 5, 1999   

Summary of Federal-State Meeting: "Meeting Challenges Together"Phase II - "Planning the Vision"Baltimore, MarylandDecember 8-11, 1998
**EXECUTIVE SUMMARY**

A meeting was held in Baltimore, Maryland the week of December 8-11, 1998 with federal, stateand local officials to continue work to develop plans for an integrated national food safetysystem.  The meeting, hosted by the Food and Drug Administration, continued the themeMEETING CHALLENGES TOGETHER and focused on follow-up activities from the "50 Statemeeting" held in Kansas City in September 1998.  Representatives from the Centers for DiseaseControl and Prevention, the USDA's Food Safety Inspection Service and the Cooperative StateResearch, Education and Extension Service, and the Environmental Protection Agency alsoparticipated in this meeting. At the 50 State meeting, attendees had discussed a vision for foodsafety in the future, identified obstacles and recommended action items, including formation ofWork Groups to develop the ideas presented in Kansas City. This week, the participants wereasked to suggest ways to overcome obstacles and to identify short and long range goals to makethis vision a reality.  Over 70 federal, state and local officials were named to six Work Groupsand issues were discussed in the following areas: Roles and Responsibilities - Capacity andResource Needs; Coordinating Outbreak Responses and Investigations; Information Sharing andData Collection; Communication; Minimum Uniform Standards; and Laboratory Operations andCoordination. The Work Groups elected chairpersons and presented reports on December 11.Each Work Group is working on detailed plans and timelines for proposed projects that willcover a 5-10 year period. The Federal agencies will be considering these plans and funding as wejointly pursue the vision of an integrated food safety system.

A Coordinating Committee, which was recommended at the Kansas City meeting, met onDecember 10. The Committee is composed of 18 individuals: 5 federal and 13 state and local (6of whom are Work Group chairs) and includes a broad geographical mix, with representation ofagriculture, health and epidemiology disciplines from federal, state and local agencies. The roleof the committee will be to set direction, liaison between work groups and agencies, assign tasks,develop a plan based on reports from the Work Groups and to set priorities from Work Grouprecommendations. The Committee selected a chair and three vice-chairs: Janice Oliver, FDA(chair); and Stuart Richardson, California Department of Health Services,  Doug Saunders,Virginia Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services, and Dean Sienko, Ingham County(Michigan) Health Department (vice-chairs). 

The Committee selected the vision statement for the Food Safety Initiative's Strategic Plan as thevision for this project.  The Committee also recommended that a mission statement be developedfor the integrated food safety system. Other topics discussed included planning outreach andpublic meetings and a timeline for next steps. The Committee presented a report to the WorkGroups on December 11.

**I. INTRODUCTION**

The meeting was opened by Mr. Ralph Stafko, Senior Policy Analyst, U.S. Department ofAgriculture (USDA), Food Safety Inspection Service (FSIS). He said that participants at the 50State meeting in Kansas City had discussed a vision for food safety in the future, identifiedobstacles and recommended action items. This week, Work Groups have been asked to find waysto overcome these obstacles to make this vision a reality. Mr. Stafko introduced members of thefollowing Work Groups: 

- Roles and Responsibilities - Capacity and Resource Needs Coordinating Outbreak Responses and InvestigationsInformation Sharing and Data Collection
- Communication Minimum Uniform StandardsLaboratory Operations and Coordination

[Note: The list of Work Group participants are included as an attachment] 

Ms. Janice Oliver, Mr, Gary Dykstra, Ms. Leslie Kux, and Mr. Joe Levitt from the Food andDrug Administration provided opening remarks to help kickoff this meeting. The Work Groupsmet from Tuesday, December 8 through Thursday, December 10. Members of the CoordinatingCommittee also met on Thursday, December 10. On Friday, December 11, the six Work Groupsand the Coordinating Committee presented reports to all the participants. Each Work Group isworking on detailed plans and timelines for proposed projects that will cover a 5-10 year period.The Federal agencies will be considering these plans and funding as we jointly pursue the visionof an integrated food safety system.

**II. WORK GROUP REPORTS**

**Group 1 - Roles and Responsibilities - Capacity and Resource Needs**

Chair:Joseph Corby, Assistant Director, New York Department of AgricultureCo-Chair:Kenneth Kolano, Program Director, New Jersey Department of Health

Mr. Corby discussed some attributes of an integrated food safety system: uniformity, filling gaps,having confidence in imports, centralized research and data, equal standards and policy andsharing information. He said the only way to have these attributes is to integrate the food safetysystem. 

This Work Group developed a table of food safety activities from production to harvest andidentified who has the primary role now. (See Table below)

**Roles Now****Research****Education****Risk  Assessment****Inspection/  Enforcement****Production Harvest**FFSFssf**Transportation** sf ??sf**Processing**FsFSFs-standardsfS-DeliveryFFS**Storage**- -- -- -Sf**Retail**fsFSLFsl-standards fSL-DeliveryffSL**Consumer**fsFSL- -- -
Key: F = Federal; S = State; L = Local. Capital letter indicate primary role;    small letter indicates smaller role

Mr. Corby presented the same table but with roles for a proposed food safety system.

**Proposed Roles****Research****Education****Risk  Assessment****Inspection/ Enforcement****Production HarvestFFSFsSf**Transportation**- -sf FsSf**Processing**FsFs-standards fS-DeliveryFSf**Storage**- -- -- -S**Retail**fsFsl-standardsfSL-DeliveryFfSL**Consumer**fsFSL-fs- -
Key: F = Federal; S = State; L = Local. Capital letter indicate primary role;   small letter indicates smaller role

This Work Group proposed the following activities should be enhanced and improved at federal,state and/ or  local levels:

Federal Government Risk Assessment      
  Food Safety Concerns 
Research   
Adoption of Standards      
        Uniform Regulations        Codex        Lab practices        Additives / Packaging Approvals

State / Local GovernmentInspections       
         Processors / Warehouses (state)         Retail (Local)        "Oklahoma Partnership" model (Suggest this model be reviewed to        see if could be an applicable model
Complaints  
- Issues to be Addressed (Roles to be determined)   Training ? (certification of inspectors)  Program Evaluation?  
- Imported Foods?   Lab Support? (Will liaison with the Lab Work Group)  Funding?  
- Implementation?   Changing roles in the Future? (What happens if a state is not  able to carry out a role?)
Work Group Recommendations- Resource Assessment     Model Partnerships    Subcommittees will be formed
**Budget:** (resources would be needed for the following activities)- January / February 1999 Work Group meetings   Subcommittee conference calls   Information Gathering     
        Resource Assessment (Contract)        Surveys  (Contract)     
Roles and Responsibilities Work Group Liaisons

William Keene - Coordinating Outbreak Responses and Investigations

Lee Bowers - Information Sharing and Data Collection

Dan Sowards - Communication

Don Kraemer - Minimum Uniform Standards

William Cusick - Laboratory Operations and Coordination

**Group #2 - Coordinating Outbreak Responses and Investigations**

Co-Chairs:Jerry Gibson, State Epidemiologist, South Carolina Department ofHealthJeff Farrar, Chief, Food Emergency Unit, California Department ofHealth
This Work Group's initial plan has three major areas:   - Traceback Coordination       Communication      Roles, Processes, Evaluations
**Sub-Work Group:** Traceback Coordination 
Five tasks are proposed in this area: - Develop and test criteria for initiating and prioritizing    tracebacks     Develop/test process for deciding who does tracebacks    Develop/test process for approaching industry and press    during tracebacks    
- Recommend how government can promote record-keeping that    facilitates tracebacks     Consider legal issues
How will this work group do its job?- Need buy-in from stakeholders (federal, state and local    representatives)     the first task will be to do a tabletop multi-state simulatio   n    Assure evaluation of process during multi-state outbreak    
- evaluate effectiveness and write report     Budget: propose 5 in-person meetings
**Sub-Work Group:** Communication 
Effective outbreak response requires that accurate information gets to the people who need it in atimely fashion. Obstacles to effective communication include: - Information bottlenecks (information flow through a single   person who may not always be available)    Information overload: extraneous, unnecessary, irrelevant   information   Uncertainty about who needs to know what and when   
- Inaccurate, incomplete, untimely information  **Goal:** Develop a model communications plan for coordinating responses to outbreaks, recallsand other situations (e.g., water, chemical, bio-terrorism) that states can utilize to createuniformity and consistency in response and to enhance interaction with other entities (federalagencies, other states, other state agencies, local health departments). This model can stimulatestates to develop their own system based on their own administrative structure. 
Short-Term Project -  Needs Assessment   - Utilize a questionnaire to assess mechanisms already in place for communications       Questionnaire to determine:           - Who needs to be notified in each state               Notified by what means              When do we need to be notified              
- Need to know vs nice to know               What information should be sent. Consider a variety              of outbreak scenarios           Recommend pilot project: initial distribution of draft       needs assessment in selected states (use states on Work Group)
Timeline: There are questions that need to be addressed. The answers to these questions will helpdetermine the timeline.- Who will develop the questionnaire for the needs assessment? When should the questionnaire be developed?Is this subgroup the appropriate work group to develop thequestionnaire?
- By when should it be sent out? By what means will it be sent?To whom?
- When should the network be in place?  Follow-up on the Needs Assessment
Implementation of a **basic** notification network will be based on questionnaire responses.- Short-Term : Pilot needs assessment project in selectedstates **Intermediate Term**: Needs assessment in all states. Develop model communicationsystemLong-Term
: Look into a intranet and other more sophisticated and elegant options fortimely and accurate communications
**Budget** (resources would be needed for the following activities)- People to do the needs assessment questionnaire (include supportstaff) Supplies to distribute questionnaireData entry of questionnaire results
- Analysis of questionnaire results Develop a rough budget and funding sources for the long-termproject
**Sub-Work Group:** Roles, Process and Evaluation 
Objectives- Identify leadership roles identify criteria - need measurable parametersEvaluate performance
- Provide feedback  Short-Term Goals (1 Year)- Outline the process and roles in an outbreak Assemble existing documents regarding outbreak responseDevelop a checklist for core criteria for an outbreak response
Long-Term Goals (3 Years)- Pilot program to evaluate the effectiveness and timeliness of out   break activities  **Group # 3 - Information Sharing and Data Collection**
(Note: this Group changed its name from Data Sharing and Collection) 
Co-Chairs:J. Douglas Park, State Epidemiologist, Michigan Departmentof AgricultureJudy Lee, Consumer Safety Officer, FDA/CFSAN
This group felt that it should be a "listening post" with the other work groups and needs to hearfrom the other groups about information sharing and data collection needs. Also requestedcomments from other Work Groups budget representatives to make sure activities are notredundant. 
Assumptions that will affect the goal:- Funding to pay for all hardware, telecommunications The Food Safety Initiative will fund/support these activitiesStates are going to buy-in to this enhanced system with a no state fund provision
- There will be continued funding Contract procedures for surveys/questionnairesCoordinating Committee empowered to "push things through"
- Survey questionnaire is a stand alone  Short-Term Goals- Propose initial development of FORBIN (Food Oriented Relational Basic informationNetwork) Search other National models for information pertaining to federal/state integrationcomputer systems: e.g., LEIN (Law Enforcement Information Network); CLEOObtain data needs from the various work groups that would fit within the following 5categories:
     Surveillance     Complaints     Entity ID (source)     Outbreak Information     Enforcement
Obtain information from the following short and mid-term projectsto determine integration and accessibility levels of performance:

FSIS initiative - access to FSIS data bases (e.g. performance based inspectionsystem) by all states 
CDC mandate from states to develop integrated epidemiologysurveinllance system (i.e., CSTE)
2 pilots in the FDA (Dallas District) - in conjunction with theTexas Department of Health (additional funding):

to provide training and access to the FDA FACTS system
to compare the Texas Department of Health Official EstablishmentInventory with the FDA Dallas District Office Official EstablishmentInventory
Fund MDA pilot Electronic FBD Surveillance System
Contract Needs (On-going list needed for each of the 5 categories of data from state, local andfederal governments involved):  - Telecommunications and equipment Determine current program applicationsData needs
Proposed Timeline for the Food Oriented Relational Basic Information Network (FORBIN)
2/5/99 Contract negotiations / specifications8/1/99 Distribution of survey questionnaire2/5/00 Telecommunications /equipment report from contractor3/15/00 Full contractor report5/1/00 Group recommendations
**Budget**:
Short-term budget needs: Funding for meetings     Proposed FDA/Texas pilots      Proposed Michigan pilots      Contracts needed to develop FORBIN Long-Term (10 years):  Funding for all hardware, software, telecommunication, andcontract needs.

Work Group LiaisonsDennis Baker - Roles and Responsibilities
Kate Glynn - Outbreak Coordination
Don Walker - Communication
Bill Brooks - Minimum Uniform Standards
Judy Lee - Laboratory Operations and Coordination (microbiological)
J. D. Warren - Laboratory Operations and Coordination (chemical)

**Group # 4 - Communications**
Chair:  Sharon Greenman, Food Protection Coordinator, Seattle County Department ofHealth (Washington)
Vice-Chair: Becky Shreeve, Supervisor, Utah Department of Agriculture
**Vision:** Systems and contacts are in place allowing for both routine and emergencycommunications to be utilized by all. 
Prioritized Work Group Charges- Propose methods to improve coordination of the current communication systems acrosslocal, state and federal agencies. Develop a plan for obtaining stakeholder input and outreach efforts for the integratedsystem concept.Identify standardized communications procedures needed for industry and media.
- Propose how to facilitate partnering with industry and consumers, and local, state andfederal agencies to optimize resources.  Short-Term Action Items
By 12/31/98- FDA to give directive to each District Director to survey states regarding relationship,response to requests, inquiries, etc. Obtain stakeholders list derived at 50 State Meeting, Kansas City, Missouri.  Identify existing state/industry working relationships by each FDA district Public AffairsSpecialist.

By 1/15/99- FDA perform an e-mail and fax distribution effectiveness test to see who is on thedistribution list; ask for reply to test; lists will be checked annually.  
By 1/31/99- Develop a plan for providing input at annual Governors conference, the Association ofCities, NACCHO (educating politicians about FSI issues).   
AFDO training director to provide nationwide media relations training to state and localson media relations.

By 2/1/99-  Check with the President's Food Safety Council regarding outcome from their meetingsand inform them of our desire to hold more grassroots meetings.  Develop a plan to identify grassroots groups who might be interested in discussing/hearing about this concept.  Solicit op-ed pieces in editorial pages, particularly in local newspapers. Include Webaddress in piece.  Obtain infomercial air time on public access television; cable commercials; NationalPublic Radio; banner advertising on the Internet; solicit interviews with local radio,particularly on television morning shows.  Complete feasibility study on development of an Internet Home Page.  Work with CSTE to find out what restrictions are in each state regarding the holding ofproprietary information.  Solicit op-ed pieces in editorial pages, particularly in local newspapers.  Complete feasibility study on development of an Internet Home Page for food safety andlink to other food safety pages. A part of the home page, ask for input from readers.  Review current policy regarding media contacts to determine how much they prohibitinteraction with local media.

By 2/28/99-  AFDO requests state and locals to provide heads-up, at minimum, to FDA District Officeand USDA prior to initiating a state recall or issuing a press release.

By 3/1/99-  FDA and USDA to invite local governments to subscribe to an e-mail distribution list(List/Serve) for recalls.

By 9/30/99-  Investigate cost of completing a pilot of joint USDA/FDA 24-hour toll-free meat, poultry,and egg Hotline for states and locals.

By 1/1/2000-  Include state and local e-mail addresses on regional FDA e-mail directories - individualnames and group lists - state and local officials.  Establish a working electronic, current Web directory available to all governmentofficials which is constantly updated and includes function and/or expansion of FDAGold Disk, Eureka System.  Provide pagers to appropriate officials in each agency.  Institute annual meetings of local (cities and counties), state and federal officials in eachstate to discuss the integrated food safety system.  Bring Internet capability to all state and local governments.  FDA / USDA to be included in all existing meetings.  Include academia from Schools of Public Health, food and animal sciences in meetingswith states and  industry.

Long-Term Action Items (Beyond FY 2000)-  Establish an early warning system, similar to Canadian Incident Tracking System, whenpotential outbreak information occurs in different locations.  By 2002, implement systems and contracts for both routine and emergencycommunications.  Establish USDA / FDA / CDC 24 hour toll-free Hotline as a single point of contact forstate and locals for all issues.

**Budget**: 
 Short-Term activities/items that will require resources: Conference calls - 2 per month;Interim calls among group; Meeting - 2/1-5/99 in Dallas; Chair/co-chair meeting(s) withCoordinating Committee; Use of "Meeting Works" type meetings; Fax transmittals; andExpress mail documents. 

 Long-term activities/items that will require resources: Work with CFSAN (cost/year);Pagers (cost/year); Internet capability to all state and local governments; and Annualmeetings of local, state and federal officials. 

Work Group LiaisonsAl Bugenhagen - Roles and Responsibilities
Mary Proctor - Outbreak Coordination
Dave Rodeheaver - Information Sharing and Data Collection
Roger Holbrook - Minimum Uniform Standards
Allen Craig - Laboratory Operations and Coordination

**Group # 5 - Minimum Uniform Standards**
Chair:  Susan Grayson, Head, Food and Lodging Sanitation Branch, North CarolinaDepartment of Health
Co-Chair: Charlene Bruce, Director, Food Protection Branch, Mississippi Department ofHealth

The Work Group selected an acronym: MUST - Minimum Uniform Standards Team. Theprimary priority for this group is to develop and maintain nationally accepted uniform standards.The first activity will be to develop an overall program standard and then have subcommitteesdevelop inspection and compliance standards for 6-7 programs. 
Tentative Sub-Work Groups-    Seafood    Meat / Poultry   Retail  
-  Manufacturing    Produce   Milk and Dairy  
-  ?????  [Note: the first three were selected because some elements may already exist] 

Assumptions- Funding will be available   Personnel will be available  Statutes, rules and regulations will need to be changed  
- All standards will be science and risk-based, practical and prudent   All standards developed will have opponents. Not all stakeholders will be able to meetthe standard

Short-Term Goals- By January 15, 1999, draft of general definitions to be used by sub-work groups   By February 1, 1999, finalize definitions  By June 1999, establish a review process for the work of the subgroups  
- By March 31, 1999, establish and charge the first 3 sub-work groups   By December 31, 1999, establish and charge all sub-groups

Long-Term Goals-  By January 1, 2001, establish a system to maintain standards (review, update, frequency,other issues to keep the standards up-to-date)  By January 1, 2001, establish a quality program to assure that regulatory bodies aremeeting the standards.  By January 1, 2002, all standards drafted for review  By January 1, 2005, all standards accepted

**Budget**: During the next year, funding is needed for 1 meeting of the work group and for 1meeting with each subcommittee. 

**Group # 6 - Laboratory Operations and Coordination**
Chair:  William Krueger, Director of Lab Services, Minnesota Department of Agriculture
Co-Chair: Robert Johnson, Lab Director, FDA/San Francisco District Office

This group reported that it would like to add additional members to the Work Group. Suggestedmembers include representatives from local and veterinary medicine labs and from USDA'sAnimal Plant Health Inspection Service. 

Top Three Work Group Charges:-  Form sub-work groups to develop national standards for labs performing food safetyanalysis (from farm-to-table). Standards will include equivalency of methods, data,samples, etc. 
Make recommendations on the use of laboratory accreditation bodies, including use ofthird-party certification agencies, to improve laboratory operations and coordination. 
Propose how local, state and federal agencies could optimize the currently availablecapacity of government laboratories performing food safety analyses. Propose amechanism to enhance communications and availability among diverse services. Proposemechanisms to minimize unnecessary duplication and focus research and developmentefforts.

**Activity:** Form sub-work groups to develop national standards for labs performing food safetyanalysis (from farm-to-table). Standards will include equivalency of methods, data, samples, etc. 

Short-Term Goal-  Establish a process for national standard development using *E. coli* 0157:H7 as a model.  Look at all facets and resolve issues of our laboratory systems at the federal, state andlocal levels that would enable us to have a fully Integrated Food Safety LaboratorySystem on this single analyte.

Longer-Term Goals (three phases)-  Develop recommendations, pilot implementation (first year)  "Turn it on" / full implementation - distribute recommendations and equipment asnecessary.  Validation / evaluation

**Sub-Work Group:** Sampling, Detection, Isolation and Characterization (SDIC) 

Charges:-  sampling, data collection and reporting  Quality Assurance / Quality Control methods, standardization, equivalency
-  when considered positive and actionable  
Sampling, Detection, Isolation and Characterization (SDIC) Sub-Work Group Members:
Carl Sciacchitano, FDA/ORA/DFS Joy Wells, CDC Ann Weber, Montana Department of Health (5 others to be determined) 

**Sub-Work Group**: PulseNet 

Charges:-  DNA fingerprinting  Quality Assurance / Quality Control methods, standardization, equivalency
**Barriers:**- Turf issues Adequate funding to implement (data systems support equipment, training)Lack of information
- Lack of trust Legal issuesTime delays from transport of samples and data between agencies
- Communication Different priorities between labs

**Sub-Work Group**: Expanded Food Safety Analytes 

Charge: Compile a list of top 10 additional analytes as priorities for application of the *E. coli*0157:H7 model. (These may include: bacteria, viruses, parasites, toxins, pesticides, heavy metals,allergens, or other pathogens of concern). 

Expanded Food Safety Analytes Sub-Work Group Members:Farukh Khambatky, FDA/CFSAN Mark Lee, California Department of Agriculture Patrick McCasky, USDA/FSIS 

**Sub-Work Group:** Accreditation****

**Charges: Make recommendations on the use of laboratory accreditation bodies, including use ofthird-party certification agencies, to improve laboratory operations and coordination.Consolidation of USDA, FDA and EPA accreditation standards  Develop sub-work group to consult with National Environmental LaboratoryAccreditation Conference (NELAC), USDA, FDA and others to tie-in to create a de novosystem.

Accreditation Sub-Work Group Members:
Charlie Parfitt, FDA Stephen Shaub, EPA Roland Jenkins, Ohio Department of Agriculture Paul Kimsey, California Department of Health John Fruin, Florida Department of Agriculture Mark Lee, California Department of Agriculture Peggy Melton, Florida Department of Agriculture 

**Sub-Work Group Activities:**
**(A)** Propose how local, state and federal agencies could optimize the currently available capacityof government laboratories performing food safety analyses. 
**(B)** Propose a mechanism to enhance communications and availability among diverse services.
**(C)** Propose mechanisms to minimize unnecessary duplication and focus research anddevelopment efforts. 

Sub-Work Group A - Need to determine lab capacity and availability 

Charge: 
 Develop a National Food Safety Laboratory Resource Database to determine lab capacity andavailability 

**Budget**: 1 person for survey (contract), 1 person to maintain data, 1 person to maintain website 

Sub-Work Group B - Food Safety Laboratory Conferences 

Charge:- Develop a Conference and Work Group format to disseminate information dedicated tofood safety   Coordinate this activity with the Outbreak Response and Coordination Work Group
**Goal:** By February 22, 1999, develop an outline for conference meeting dates for FY 2000. 

Barriers:- Cost Competition with other conferencesDegree of specialization
- Funding for attendees  
Conferences Sub-Work Group Members:
Mark Lee, California Department of Agriculture Roland Jenkins, Ohio Department of Agriculture Robert Johnson, FDA/San Francisco District Office (1 other To Be Determined) 

Sub-Work Group C -  Propose mechanisms to minimize unnecessary duplication and focusresearch and development efforts. 

Activities:- Recommend Research Coordinating Committee. Further development on issue will beaddressed as action item by the entire work group during the next scheduled conferencecall.       Form work group with the charge to identify current cooperative ventures at the federal,state and local level and identify what might be used to model for further successfulcooperation.
Successful Cooperative Efforts Among Laboratories Sub-Work Group Members:
Robert Johnson, FDA/San Francisco District Office Peggy Melton, Florida Department of Health Phuc Nguygen-Dinh, CDC 

**Budget:**Resources are needed for the following activities of the Laboratory Work Group andSub-Work Group: February 1999 Laboratory Work Group Meeting; Sub-Work Group Meetings -January 1999 - (SDIC) Standards,  January 1999 - Accreditation, and January/February 1999 -Conferences and Successful Lab Cooperation Sub-Work Groups. 

**III. COORDINATING COMMITTEE REPORT**

The members of the Integrated National Food Safety System Coordinating Committee wereintroduced by Karen Deasy, CDC Food Safety Liaison, to the Work Groups. They include: Shirley Bohm, Food Section Manager, Illinois State Department of Public Health 
Steve Bornmann, Program Administrator, Colorado Department of Agriculture 
Jesse Greenblatt, M.D., M.P.H., State Epidemiologist, New Hampshire Department ofHealth & Human Services 
Scott Holmes, Chief, Environmental Health,  Lincoln Lancaster County HealthDepartment 
 Karen Deasy, CDC Food Safety Liaison, (Acting for Dr. Morrie Potter, AssociateDirector for Foodborne Disease, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention)
Stuart Richardson, Chief, Food and Drug Branch, California Department of HealthServices
R. Doug Saunders, Manager, Office of Dairy and Foods, Virginia Department ofAgriculture and Consumer Services
Dean Sienko, M.D., Medical Director, Ingham County Health Department
Ralph Stafko, Senior Policy Advisor, USDA/ Food Safety Inspection Service
Dr. Mary Torrence, National Program Leader, USDA/Cooperative State ResearchEducation and Extension Service 
Janice Oliver, Deputy Director for Systems and Support, FDA/Center for Food Safetyand Applied Nutrition 
Judy Nelson, Special Assistant, Environmental Protection Agency 

**Coordinating Committee Members and Work Group Chairs**
Roles and Responsibilities - Capacity and Resources Work Group
Chair: Joseph Corby, Assistant Director, New York Department of Agriculture
Co-Chair:  Kenneth Kolano, Program Director, New Jersey Department of Health
Outbreak Coordination and Investigations Work Group
Co-Chair: Jerry Gibson, State Epidemiologist, South Carolina Department of Health
 Co-Chair: Jeff Farrar, Chief, Food Emergency Unit, California Department of Health
Data Sharing and Collection Work Group
Chair:J. Douglas Park, State Epidemiologist, Michigan Department ofAgriculture
 Co-Chair: Judy Lee, Consumer Safety Officer, FDA/CFSAN
Communication Work Group 
 Chair:  Sharon Greenman, Food Protection Coordinator, Seattle CountyDepartment of Health (Washington)
Co-Chair: Becky Shreeve, Supervisor, Utah Department of Agriculture (willrepresent WG on the Coordinating Committee)
Minimum Uniform Standards Work Group 
 Chair: Susan Grayson, Head, Food and Lodging Sanitation Branch, NorthCarolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
 Co-Chair: Charlene Bruce, Director, Food Protection Branch, MississippiDepartment of Health

Laboratory Operations and Coordination Work Group 
 Chair:  William Krueger, Director of Lab Services, Minnesota Department ofAgriculture
 Co-Chair: Robert Johnson, Lab Director, FDA/San Francisco District Office

In order to get a broad geographical mix, with representation of agriculture, health andepidemiology disciplines, and to include federal, state and local agencies, the CoordinatingCommittee selected a chair and three vice-chairs:

 Chair:    Janice Oliver**,**Deputy Director for Systems and Support, CFSAN / FDA,Washington, DC 

 Vice-Chair:   Stuart Richardson**, Chief, Food and Drug Branch, California Departmentof Health Services,  Division of Food & Radiation Safety, Sacramento,California 

 Vice-Chair:  R. Doug Saunders**, Manager, Office of Dairy and Foods, VirginiaDepartment of Agriculture and Consumer Services, Division of ConsumerProtection, Richmond, Virginia 

 Vice-Chair:   Dean Sienko, Medical Director, Ingham County Health Department,Lansing, Michigan

Ms. Oliver summarized topics and issues discussed during the meeting of the CoordinatingCommittee on Thursday, December 10. These included: 

Proposed Responsibilities of the Coordinating CommitteeDevelop a plan based on reports from the Work Groups
- Help to set Priorities from Work Group Recommendations Set Direction for the Work Groups- maintain focus on the vision and the plan request status reports from the Work GroupsLiaison between the Work Groups and Agencies
- Establish Procedures and Guiding Principles for the Work Groups Assign tasks to the Work Groups

Vision Statement

The Coordinating Committee reviewed three proposed draft vision statements for the integratedfood safety system. It was agreed that the final version of the vision statement for the FoodSafety Initiative Strategic Plan, should be used as the vision for this project:

 "Consumers can be confident that food is safe, healthy, and affordable. We work within aseamless food safety system that uses farm-to-table preventive strategies and integratedresearch, surveillance, inspection, and enforcement. We are vigilant to new and emergentthreats and consider the needs of vulnerable populations. We use science- and risk-basedapproaches along with public/private partnerships. Food is safe because everyoneunderstands and accepts their responsibilities." *[Draft vision statement from the FoodSafety Initiative's Strategic Plan, September 1998]*

Mission Statement

The Coordinating Committee recommended that a mission statement be developed to describehow the integrated food safety system fits in with the food safety initiative vision. A draftmission statement has been prepared for review:

 "Our mission is to develop and promote an Integrated National Food Safety System tobest serve the public's health. 

 A fully Integrated National Food Safety System consists of common ownership byFederal, State and Local government agencies organized to reduce or eliminate foodborneillness and ensure that foods are safe, wholesome, and honestly represented. 

 We will accomplish this by recommending, developing and implementing strategies withstakeholder involvement that aim to clarify the roles and responsibilities of all levels ofgovernment, enhance data sharing and collection, facilitate system-wide communication,establish minimum uniform standards, improve laboratory operations and coordinationand coordinate outbreak responses and investigations" *[Draft mission statement,December 1998]*

Next Steps for the Coordinating CommitteeThe Coordinating Committee will review the Work Group proposals by the end ofDecember. (Note: FDA can fund the meetings the Work Groups need to develop theirplans. FDA will review the estimated budget requests and set up a coordinated budgetmeeting with CDC, USDA, and EPA.) 
The Coordinating Committee needs to receive status reports on the Work Group plans byJanuary 15, 1999. 
The Coordinating Committee will schedule conference calls during January andFebruary. 
Reports are due to the Coordinating Committee 
before
 February 28, 1999 
Coordinating Committee will meet in St. Louis, Missouri, March 1-3, 1999. Work Groupreports will be reviewed and decisions made on a plan to submit to the Federal agencies.
Ms. Oliver also addressed the following:Work Group members were asked to discuss the concept of an integrated food safetysystem and the results of this meeting with state and local officials when they returnhome in order to achieve a "multiplier effect" to get additional input and support. 
A meeting of State Agriculture and Health Commissioners is scheduled for February 23,1999. Work Group members were asked to provide background information on theintegrated system to Commissioners in their state who will attend this meeting. 
 Work Group members were asked to try to get the support of their governors' for thiseffort. 
The Coordinating Committee will look at the short-term goals and recommend activitiesthat can be started now. Regardless of what happens in the federal budget process, local,state and federal agencies can take steps now to work better together. 
A summary of this meeting will be made available to the participants and on the Internetto those who did not attend. Information on these activities will also be sent toprofessional associations and other interested groups.
Ms. Oliver thanked everyone for their commitment to food safety and public health on a nationallevel. There is no other way to reduce foodborne illness without working together. Therecommendations presented will help go towards a truly national food safety system.
Prepared by  FDA/CFSAN, 2/5/99

50 State Meeting, September 1998
Home   |  Food Safety InitiativeHypertext updated by  ear/dms 1999-APR-27********