Strategic Plan 

FY 2011-2016

FOOD SAFETY AND INSPECTION 

SERVICE
2

One Team, 

One Purpose

We are one team, with only one 

purpose. And that is to protect 

public health. FSIS employees 

take pride in the fact that their 

jobs help prevent foodborne

illness.
1 FSIS Strategic Plan FY 2011-2016

Message from the

Administrator

I AM PROUD to present the Food Safety and Inspection Service (FSIS) 2011–2016 

Strategic Plan. FSIS is the public health regulatory agency responsible for the 

safety of the U.S. meat, poultry, and processed egg products supply. For over a 

century, the Agency and its employees have helped to ensure that America’s 

food is safe from contamination. The vital services of FSIS have and continue to 

touch the lives of almost every citizen, every day in America. FSIS is 

accountable for protecting food for over 300 million American people and 

millions more around the world.

All FSIS employees are actively engaged in preventing foodborne illness and 

protecting public health. We are one team, with one purpose, working toward 

a common and extremely important goal. The Agency is involved in many 

areas of food processing and distribution; the inspection of domestic product, 

imports, and exports; conducting risk assessments; and educating the public, 

among a range of other activities. FSIS invests heavily in maintaining a highly 

trained workforce and equipping them with the resources and tools they need 

to understand and combat threats to food safety.

A main driver of this 5-year Strategic Plan is the desire for the Agency to 

continue to be an ever more trusted and successful public health agency—an 

Agency that adapts to the changing nature of food safety risks. FSIS will strive 

to continuously improve its ability to protect consumers from harm. It will 

work with other Federal, State, and local agencies; consumer and industry 

groups; and other stakeholders to present a comprehensive and interdependent 

approach to food safety.

This Strategic Plan encompasses our strategic intentions over the next 5 years, 

and will serve as a foundation document for both the long-range and day-today operations of the Agency. The strategic planning process is one of many 

tools that will better ensure that we are prepared for food safety challenges this 

decade and beyond.

Alfred Almanza

Administrator, FSIS

Alfred V. Almanza was appointed as the 

Administrator of the U.S. Department of 

Agriculture's Food Safety and Inspection 

Service on May 6, 2010. In this position, he 

leads FSIS and its employees in their 

mission of protecting public health through 

food safety and food defense.
2

Contents

FSIS Strategic Plan Road Map 4

Part I: Introduction 6

Part II: FSIS Strategic Framework for FY 2011-2016 10

Vision, Mission, and Values 11

USDA Food Safety Priority Goal 14

Strategic Theme: Prevent Foodborne Illness 21

Goal 1: Ensure that food safety inspection aligns with existing and emerging risks 22

Goal 2: Maximize domestic and international compliance with food safety policies 28

Goal 3: Enhance public education and outreach to improve food-handling practices 34

Goal 4: Strengthen collaboration among internal and external stakeholders to 

prevent foodborne illness 40

Strategic Theme: Understand and Influence the Farm-to-Table Continuum 43

Goal 5: Effectively use science to understand foodborne illness and emerging trends 44

Goal 6: Implement effective policies to respond to existing and emerging risks 50

Strategic Theme: Empower People and Strengthen Infrastructure 53

Goal 7: Empower employees with the training, resources, and tools to enable success 

in protecting public health 54

Goal 8: Based on the defined Agency business needs, develop, maintain, and use 

innovative methodologies, processes, and tools, including PHIS, to protect public 

health efficiently and effectively and to support defined public health needs and 

goals

60

Part III: Putting the Plan into Action 66

Part IV: Appendices 68

Appendix A: Trends and Factors Impacting FSIS 69

Appendix B: Management Initiatives 72

Appendix C: Program Evaluations 73

Appendix D: Strategic Consultations 76

Appendix E: Key Terms and Acronyms 77
3 FSIS Strategic Plan FY 2011-2016

This page intentionally left blank
4

FOOD SAFETY AND INSPECTION SERVICE

STRATEGIC PLAN: 

FY 2011-2016 

Prevent Foodborne Illness

STRATEGIC THEME

Goal 2: Maximize Domestic and International 

Compliance with Food Safety Policies

Goal 1: Ensure that Food Safety Inspection 

Aligns with Existing and Emerging Risks

Outcome 1.1

Minimize existing and 

emerging food safety 

hazards through the 

most effective means

Corporate Measure: Total number of 

Salmonella, Listeria monocytogenes, and 

E. coli O157:H7 illnesses from products 

regulated by FSIS

363,547

Outcome 1.2

Resources are targeted 

to existing and 

emerging risks

Supporting Measure: % of domestic 

establishments that meet the “for cause” 

Food Safety Assessments and monthly 

Hazard Analysis Verification decision 

criteria more than once per year

<20% Supporting Measure: % of importing 

countries requiring more immediate 

inspection or reinspection attention 

more than twice within the previous 

year

Outcome 1.3

Surveillance, 

investigation, and 

enforcement are 

effectively implemented 

across the Farm-to-Table 

Continuum

Supporting Measure: % of priority incommerce facilities (e.g., warehouses, 

distributors and transporters) covered 

by surveillance activities

Supporting Measure: % of follow-up 

surveillances resulting in compliance

Understand and Influence the Farm-to-Table Continuum

STRATEGIC THEME

Outcome 2.1

Domestic- and foreignproduced products 

meet food safety 

performance standards

Corporate Measure: % of broiler plants 

passing the carcass Salmonella 

verification testing

Outcome 2.2

Humane handling and 

slaughter practices are a 

central focus of 

establishment employees as 

evidenced by the awareness 

of proper procedures and 

the implementation of a 

systematic approach to 

humane handling

Corporate Measure: % of slaughter plants 

identified during District Veterinary 

Medical Specialist (DVMS) humane 

handling verification visits as having an 

effective systematic approach to humane 

handling (all four elements of a 

systematic approach implemented)

Outcome 2.3

Food protection and 

handling systems 

ensure protection 

against intentional 

contamination

Corporate Measure: % of all official 

establishments with a functional Food 

Defense Plan

Supporting Measure: % of food defense 

practices implemented at in-commerce 

facilities

Supporting Measure: Outreach to eligible 

countries to encourage implementation of 

a system that protects product from 

intentional contamination

Goal 5: Effectively Use Science to Understand 

Foodborne Illness and Emerging Trends

Goal 6: Implement Effective Policies to Respond 

to Existing and Emerging Risks

Outcome 5.1

FSIS continually 

improves its capacity 

for and use of cuttingedge science in policy 

development to better 

defend against public 

health risks

Supporting Measure: % of annual 

science agenda completed and number 

of agenda items initiated

Supporting Measure: % of completed 

science agenda items that meet quality 

standards for information rigor, clarity, 

and defensibility of methods used

Outcome 5.2

FSIS increases the 

application of cuttingedge science across the 

Farm-to-Table supply 

chain to improve public 

health

Supporting Measure: % of identified 

public health and food safety gaps 

addressed across the Farm-to-Table 

Continuum

Outcome 6.1

Public health risks are 

mitigated through 

effective strategies 

based on the best 

available information

Supporting Measure: % of food safety 

appeals granted (categories of appeals in 

which FSIS actions were misapplied or 

poorly supported and overturned by a 

higher-level supervisor)

Supporting Measure: % of regulated 

industry adhering to key public health 

related policies (establishments receiving 

zero public health related noncompliance in a year)

Supporting Measure: Frequency of 

reviews examining the effectiveness of 

FSIS policies regarding significant public 

health risks

FY 2016 Target FY 2016 Target

FY 2016 Target

1.5%

85%

82%

90%

91%

90%

50%

95%

39%

78%

60%

95%

95%

Monthly

FSIS VISION

A trusted public health 

regulatory agency 

committed to preventing 

foodborne illness

FY 2016 Target
5 FSIS Strategic Plan FY 2011-2016

Goal 4: Strengthen Collaboration Among Internal and 

External Stakeholders to Prevent Foodborne Illness

Goal 3: Enhance Public Education and Outreach 

to Improve Food-Handling Practices

Outcome 3.1

Consumers, including 

vulnerable and 

underserved 

populations, adopt food 

safety best practices

Corporate Measure: Average % of 

consumers who follow the four key food 

safety “best practices” (i.e., clean, 

separate, cook, and chill) and 

thermometer use

Outcome 3.2

Consumers have 

effective tools and 

information to keep “inhome” food safe

Supporting Measure: Population that 

views FSIS’ most important “in-home” 

food safety message (i.e., clean, separate, 

cook and chill; thermometer use)

FSIS Electronic Media Outreach:

Empower People and Strengthen Infrastructure 

STRATEGIC THEME

Outcome 4.1

FSIS maximizes 

relationships with 

public health and food 

safety partners (i.e., 

large, small, and very 

small regulated 

establishments; other 

Federal, State, and 

local agencies; 

consumer groups; 

academia; and other 

food safety 

stakeholders) to 

enhance the food 

safety system

Supporting Measure: Research: % of 

time products from three research 

agencies (i.e., Agricultural Research 

Service, Economic Research Service, and 

National Institute of Food and 

Agriculture) used by FSIS and shared 

with stakeholders

Goal 7: Empower Employees with the Training, 

Resources, and Tools to Enable Success in Protecting 

Public Health

Goal 8: Based on the Defined Agency Business Needs, 

Develop, Maintain, and Use Innovative Methodologies, 

Processes, and Tools, including PHIS, to Protect Public 

Health Efficiently and Effectively and to Support 

Outcome Defined Public Health Needs and Goals 7.1

Each employee 

understands how he/she 

impacts public health

Supporting Measure: Average score on 

the Annual Employee Viewpoint Survey 

for questions related to workers' 

understanding of their impact on public 

health

Outcome 7.2

All employees have the 

knowledge, tools, and 

resources to accomplish 

the FSIS mission

Supporting Measure: % of competency 

gaps closed for targeted groups

Outcome 8.1

Continuously evaluate 

and seek to understand 

and employ new or 

innovative missionsupporting processes, 

methodologies, and 

technologies

Supporting Measure: Key Federal 

partners, FDA, and CDC: % of results 

from interagency collaboration on 

analytics used in FSIS policy

Supporting Measure: Small and Very Small 

Plants: % of identified opportunities 

realized to improve information sharing

Supporting Measure: % of all eligible 

FSIS employees with an Individual 

Development Plan (IDP) in place

Outcome 7.3

FSIS has a diverse, 

engaged, highperforming, and 

satisfied workforce

Supporting Measure: % of workplace 

injury/illness cases

Supporting Measure: Annual rate of 

staff vacancies

Supporting Measure: Ranking in the 

Partnership for Public Service Report, Best 

Places to Work in the Federal Government

Supporting Measure: % of innovative 

processes, methodologies, or technologies 

for which the Agency has established a 

baseline

Outcome 8.2

Implement value-added 

business processes, 

methodologies, or 

technologies that 

contribute to serving the 

FSIS mission and are 

applied in the appropriate 

areas within FSIS

Supporting Measure: % of documented 

implemented processes, methodologies, or 

technologies, including those adopted in 

accordance with formally accepted 

requirements or criteria, that are evaluated 

to assess whether they meet the intended 

outcomes or otherwise contribute to the 

Agency’s efforts to perform its mission

FY 2016 Target FY 2016 Target

FY 2016 Target

FY 2016 Target

23million

93%

20%

decreased

100%

5.8%

6%

95%

75%

25%

above 

baseline

80%

79%

46,100

145,000

500,000

- Visits to FSIS Web site

- YouTube Views

- Twitter Followers

Visitors to USDA Food Safety Discovery 

Zone

STRATEGIC THEME

Prevent 

Foodborne Illness

STRATEGIC THEME

Understand and 

Influence the Farmto-Table Continuum

STRATEGIC THEME

Empower People 

and Strengthen 

Infrastructure 

Cultural 

Transformation 

Cultural 

Transformation 

FOCUS ON 

MEASUREMENT 

& RESULTS

FSIS STRATEGIC THEMES 

FSIS MISSION

Protect consumers by ensuring 

that meat, poultry, and 

processed egg products are 

safe, wholesome, and correctly 

labeled and packaged

Supporting Measure: % of innovative 

processes, methodologies, or technologies 

that, once employed, are evaluated by the 

Agency

80%

75/224

Top one-third

25%

above 

baseline
6

Part I:

Introduction

About FSIS

THE FOOD SAFETY AND INSPECTION SERVICE (FSIS) is a public 

health regulatory agency operating within the United States 

Department of Agriculture (USDA). The Agency ensures that 

the commercial supply of meat, poultry, and processed egg 

products is safe, wholesome, and correctly labeled and 

packaged. FSIS is comprised of a wide range of talented 

employees dedicated to protecting public health by ensuring 

that these food products are safe to eat. FSIS also works 

diligently with our partners—including other Federal, State, 

and local governments; industry; food handlers; and 

consumers — to prevent foodborne illness and promote food 

safety.

Nearly 8,000 FSIS full-time and other inspection personnel 

are stationed across the United States in approximately 6,200 

federally inspected meat, poultry, and processed egg 

products plants. FSIS employees verify that the processing of 

tens of billions of pounds of red meat and poultry and 

billions of pounds of liquid egg products comply with 

statutory requirements. FSIS conducts assessments (e.g., Food 

Safety Assessments or FSAs) and promotes the 

implementation of plans to defend against intentional 

contamination (i.e., Food Defense Plans) at food 

establishments across the country.

FSIS Employees

Food Inspectors, Consumer Safety 

Inspectors, and Import Inspectors are the 

first line of defense against diseased and 

adulterated meat and poultry. They ensure 

that commercial slaughtering plants operate 

within standards for sanitation and 

processing, conduct activities relating to 

consumer protection (e.g., misbranding), and 

ensure that products imported from other 

countries are safe.

Public Health Veterinarians are trained in 

public health and regulatory medicine. FSIS is 

the largest employer of veterinarians in the 

U.S. They are employed as epidemiologists, 

pathologists, auditors, risk analysts, and 

biosecurity experts. FSIS veterinarians 

investigate outbreaks of foodborne illness and 

assess State inspection programs.

Scientists protect the public by providing 

microbiological, pathological, chemical, and 

other scientific analyses of meat, poultry, and 

processed egg products.

Compliance and Investigation Division 

Investigators are trained in surveillance and 

enforcement methodologies. They perform 

surveillance activities at in-commerce 

businesses, enforcement activities, foodborne 

illness investigations, and other vital functions 

to protect public health.

Other Professionals provide critical support, 

including data analysis, public and legislative 

affairs, risk management, financial 

management, information technology 

services, equal employment opportunities, 

and technical and clerical support.
7 FSIS Strategic Plan FY 2011-2016

As meat, poultry, and processed egg products move through 

commerce to consumers, they are handled and sometimes 

further processed by many thousands of “in-commerce” 

businesses, warehouses, distributors, transporters, retailers, 

institutions, and restaurants. FSIS has a responsibility to ensure 

that while in commerce, these products are not adulterated, 

processed, or mishandled in a way that could render them 

injurious to health. To this end, about 120 field investigators 

perform surveillance visits each year in in-commerce facilities.

During the past 2 years, these investigators performed 

surveillance in about 13,000 different businesses and removed 

thousands of pounds of products from commerce because they 

were adulterated, illegal, or otherwise posed a significant threat 

to consumers. In the case of a foodborne illness outbreak, FSIS 

investigators work with epidemiologists from other health 

partners to trace the path of foodborne illness back through the 

supply chain and perform emergency preparedness and 

response activities.

Our Authority

There are four primary laws that provide FSIS the authority to 

issue regulations regarding the inspection of meat, poultry, and 

processed egg products. These include the Federal Meat 

Inspection Act (FMIA), Poultry Products Inspection Act 

(PPIA), Egg Products Inspection Act (EPIA), and Humane 

Methods of Slaughter Act (HMSA). Together, these statutes

authorize FSIS to inspect all meat, poultry, and processed egg 

products, as well as certain exotic species, and provide FSIS the 

authority to ensure equivalence of foreign country systems for 

imports and reinspect imported products. The HMSA

specifically requires that the handling and slaughtering of 

livestock be carried out by humane methods.
8

Part I: Introduction (continued)

The Food Safety Landscape

As illustrated in the figure below, numerous Federal, State, and

local government agencies and other entities work across the 

Farm-to-Table Continuum—protecting food from “farm to 

fork”—with the goal of preventing foodborne illness and 

protecting public health. CONTINUED >>

Farm Slaughter Processing Distribution Retail Table

PLANT IN-COMMERCE 

Federal Agencies Other Entities FSIS Mandates

Poultry Products Inspection Act (PPIA)

Federal Agencies Other Entities FSIS Mandates

Fig. 1 THE FOOD SAFETY LANDSCAPE 

Federal Meat Inspection Act (FMIA)

Egg Products Inspection Act (EPIA)

Human Methods of Slaughter Act (HMSA)

Homeland Security Presidential Directive 9:

Defense of United States Agriculture and Food

USDA Food Safety and Inspection Service (FSIS): 

FSIS’ mission is to protect consumers by ensuring that meat,

poultry, and processed egg products are safe, wholesome, and

correctly labeled and packaged.

Food and Drug Administration (FDA):

FDA has a goal of ensuring “the safety of the food supply from farm to table,” including establishing

preventive controls; bolstering egg safety; and regulating food ingredients; labeling; and packaging.

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC): 

CDC helps in the prevention of illness, disability, and death due to foodborne diseases.

CDC supports projects that build epidemiology and laboratory capacity and oversees the

Foodborne Diseases Active Surveillance Network (FoodNet). Environmental Protection Agency (EPA): 

EPA establishes maximum pesticide residue levels for 

food or feed at harvest or slaughter, and releases 

information and advisories related to fish food. Department of Homeland Security (DHS): 

DHS has a responsibility to protect citizens from dangerous goods and harmful materials and organisms.

USDA Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service 

(APHIS): 

APHIS’ responsibilities include protecting and promoting 

U.S. agricultural health, regulating genetically engineered 

organisms, administering the Animal Welfare Act, 

coordinating emergency response, and protecting public 

health. Food Emergency Response Network (FERN)

Association of Food and Drug Officials (AFDO)

Codex Alimentarius Commission

State and Local Health Departments

President’s Food Safety Working Group

The Council to Improve Foodborne Outbreak Response (CIFOR)

Trade Associations

Consumer Groups
9 FSIS Strategic Plan FY 2011-2016

In addition to FSIS, two other key Federal organizations that 

contribute to food safety are the Food and Drug Administration 

(FDA) and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention 

(CDC). The FDA is committed to the goal of ensuring, “the 

safety of the food supply from farm to table,” and works with FSIS 

on egg safety, labeling, and packaging issues. Similarly, the 

CDC performs epidemiologic studies (the study of patterns of 

health and illness in the general population) and other activities 

to reduce foodborne illness.

The Department of Homeland Security’s Presidential Directive 

(HSPD) 9 establishes a national policy to defend the U.S. 

agriculture and food system against terrorist attacks and major 

disasters. A portion of the Environmental Protection Agency’s

(EPA) mission includes protecting public health and the 

environment from risks posed by pesticides and promoting 

safer means of pest management.

A number of other national entities advocate for specific food 

safety related issues. An example is the President’s Food Safety 

Working Group (FSWG)—a committee created in 2009 that 

advises the President on how to upgrade America’s food safety 

system. Co-chaired by the Secretary of Agriculture and the 

Secretary of Health and Human Services, the FSWG has 

recommended and is committed to establishing a new, public 

health-focused approach to food safety based on three core 

principles: (1) prioritizing prevention; (2) strengthening 

surveillance and enforcement; and (3) improving response and 

recovery. Another notable example of collaboration among 

food safety partners includes the joint USDA-FDA Food 

Emergency Response Network (FERN) – an initiative to 

integrate the Nation’s food testing laboratories and bolster 

emergency preparedness.

“USDA, FDA and other agencies 

have an opportunity right now to 

make this food safety system the 

kind of 21st century system we want 

it to be. To do that, public health 

has to be at the heart of our 

legislative authorities, our 

regulations, and every 

administrative action that we take.”

(Dr. Elisabeth Hagen, 2010)
10

Part II:

FSIS Strategic Framework 

for FY 2011-2016

FSIS MISSION

Protect consumers by ensuring that 

meat, poultry, and processed egg 

products are safe, wholesome, and 

correctly labeled and packaged

FSIS VISION

A trusted public health 

regulatory agency committed 

to preventing foodborne illness

STRATEGIC THEME

Prevent Foodborne Illness

STRATEGIC THEME

Understand and Influence the Farmto-Table Continuum

STRATEGIC THEME

Empower People and Strengthen 

Infrastructure

Cultural 

Transformation 

Cultural 

Transformation 

FOCUS ON 

MEASUREMENT 

& RESULTS 

Fig. 2 FSIS STRATEGIC FRAMEWORK 

Goal 1

Ensure that food 

safety inspection 

aligns with existing 

and emerging risks

Goal 2

Maximize domestic 

and international 

compliance with food 

safety policies

Goal 3

Enhance public 

education and outreach 

to improve foodhandling practices

Goal 4

Strengthen 

collaboration among 

internal and external 

stakeholders to prevent 

foodborne illness

Goal 5

Effectively use science to 

understand foodborne 

illness and emerging 

trends

Goal 6

Implement effective 

policies to respond to 

existing and emerging 

risks

Goal 7

Empower employees 

with the training, 

resources, and tools 

to enable success in 

protecting public 

health

Goal 8

Based on the defined Agency 

business needs, develop, maintain, 

and use innovative methodologies, 

processes, and tools, including 

PHIS, to protect public health 

efficiently and effectively and to 

support defined public health 

needs and goals
11 FSIS Strategic Plan FY 2011-2016

Vision

A trusted public health 

regulatory agency committed to 

preventing foodborne illness

The prevention and continual reduction of foodborne illness is 

FSIS’s highest goal. FSIS will continually earn the public’s trust 

through proper policies and actions focused on decreasing the 

risk of and preventing foodborne illnesses.

Mission

Protect consumers by ensuring 

that meat, poultry, and 

processed egg products are safe, 

wholesome, and correctly 

labeled and packaged

FSIS is responsible for protecting the meat, poultry, and 

processed egg products consumed by the American public from 

intentional and unintentional contamination and ensuring these 

products are safe for consumption. In addition, FSIS reviews 

the products’ labels and packaging to protect consumers from 

misbranded products. The Agency also provides safeguards 

against possible contamination.

Values

FSIS believes in and lives by the 

values instilled by USDA in 

accomplishing our day-to-day work. 

Our success depends on living up to 

these values:

Empowerment: Giving FSIS field 

employees the information, methods, 

and training they need to make 

informed decisions in the 

establishment and in commerce. 

Transparency: Making FSIS 

management processes more open 

so that the public can learn how the 

Agency supports Americans every 

day.

Participation: Providing opportunities 

for FSIS constituents to shape and 

improve services provided by the 

Agency.

Collaboration: Working cooperatively 

at all governmental levels – 

domestically and internationally – on 

policy matters affecting a broad 

audience.

Accountability: Ensuring that the 

performance of all employees is 

measured against the success of the 

Agency’s strategic goals.

Customer Focus: Serving FSIS 

constituents by delivering programs 

that address their diverse needs.

Professionalism: Building and 

maintaining a highly skilled, diverse 

and compassionate workforce.

Results Orientation: Measuring 

performance and making 

management decisions to direct 

resources where they are used most 

effectively.
12

Part II: FSIS Strategic Framework (continued)

Our Strategic Themes

Strategic Theme: Prevent Foodborne Illness

Preventing foodborne illness and protecting public health is 

FSIS’ primary purpose. FSIS continually strives to become more 

adaptable to changing food safety risks, educates consumers on 

food handling best practices, and works closely with other 

public health partners to present a comprehensive approach to 

preventing illness.

Strategic Theme: Understand and Influence the Farm-to-Table 

Continuum

FSIS cannot improve its ability to prevent foodborne illness, 

develop new policy or regulation, or effectively collaborate 

with other food safety organizations without first 

understanding the epidemiology of foodborne illness outbreaks 

and factors influencing food safety issues. To gain this insight, 

FSIS optimizes its use of science and data to fully understand 

the environment in which FSIS operates.

Strategic Theme: Empower People and Strengthen Infrastructure

All FSIS employees deserve to take pride in the fact that what 

they do helps prevent foodborne illness. FSIS hires the 

appropriate people, trains them correctly, and ensures that they 

have the right tools and technology to perform their jobs. Each 

FSIS employee contributes to the success of the entire Agency.

CONTINUED >>

Strategic themes are logical groupings of 

FSIS long-term goals. They serve to describe 

how our outcomes, performance measures, 

and strategies interrelate. The two themes 

“Understand and Influence the Farm-to-Table 

Continuum” and “Empower People and 

Strengthen Infrastructure,” provide a 

foundation and acts as enablers for FSIS to 

“prevent foodborne illness.” FSIS can best 

prevent foodborne illness by continuing to 

properly invest in its staff, equipment, and 

technology; and seek to understand food 

safety issues through science and data. In 

addition, an Agency-wide Cultural 

Transformation initiative and a culture of 

measurement and results permeate each of 

the themes and every activity performed by 

the Agency.

STRATEGIC THEME

Prevent 

Foodborne 

Illness

STRATEGIC THEME

Understand and 

Influence the 

Farm-to-Table 

Continuum 

STRATEGIC THEME

Empower People 

and Strengthen 

Infrastructure 

Cultural 

Transformation 

Cultural 

Transformation 

FOCUS ON 

MEASUREMENT 

& RESULTS 

Fig. 3 FSIS STRATEGIC THEMES 
13 FSIS Strategic Plan FY 2011-2016

A Focus on “Measurement and Results"—An FSIS activity 

that touches all themes and goals: FSIS is committed to 

developing and nurturing a culture of performance 

measurement and a focus on results. This ranges from 

inspectors on the slaughter floor to scientists working in 

laboratories. FSIS is and will increasingly be data-driven at 

every level. A continued focus on “Measurement and Results”

expresses our deep-seated commitment to base policy decisions 

on science and the best available data and information.

Cultural Transformation—An FSIS activity that touches all 

themes and goals: The practice of continually working to 

positively transform the Agency permeates every FSIS activity. 

Cultural Transformation (CT) plays an important role in 

helping FSIS protect public health by making the workplace

better for employees and stakeholders. CT efforts in FSIS will 

contribute to a long-term organizational culture that promotes:

 Inclusion through “One Team, One Purpose;”

 Employee safety and health; and

 Continuous improvement through employee 

development, organizational development, and 

program/process improvement.

In order to ensure long-term and sustainable success, FSIS:

 Integrated the CT initiative and measures into the FSIS 

Strategic Plan and Agency priorities;

 Established an implementation framework and the CT

taskforce under the Agency’s governance process;

 Completed a number of employee feedback strategies, 

such as listening sessions and brown bag lunches, the 

Administrator’s blog, and Agency studies;

 Established the Business Management Leaders Program 

in the Office of Management;

 Developed a communications and training plan for FSIS 

employees; and

 Developed a template for FSIS offices to submit 

proposals for continuous improvement projects that

advance CT.

Cultural Transformation at USDA is the 

process of creating a workplace where 

all employees and customers are 

treated with dignity and respect and 

provides the opportunity for success.

USDA’s Cultural Transformation action 

items include:

 Leadership;

 Employee Development;

 Recruitment and Retention; and

 Customer Focus and Community 

Outreach.

FSIS Cultural Transformation training involves 

staff at all levels of the Agency.
14

Part II: FSIS Strategic Framework (continued)

USDA Food Safety Priority Goal

The USDA Food Safety Priority 

Goal focuses on reducing the 

incidences of Salmonella.1

The Administration worked with FSIS senior leadership to 

develop this high-priority performance goal. The goal is 

consistent with the Administration’s call to focus on the highest 

value areas most important to the public.

Salmonella is the leading known cause of bacterial foodborne 

illness and death in the United States. Each year, food 

contaminated with Salmonella causes an estimated 1.3 million 

illnesses, including fever and diarrhea, and between 400 and 

500 deaths. Salmonella Enteritidis (SE), a subtype of Salmonella, 

is the second most common type of Salmonella in the United 

States and accounts for approximately 17 percent of all

Salmonella cases in humans.

Preventing Salmonella infections depends on actions taken to 

reduce food contamination by regulatory agencies, the food 

industry, and consumers, as well as actions taken for detecting 

and responding to outbreaks when they occur. As part of their 

shared vision to reduce foodborne illness, FSIS and FDA have 

both developed priority goals to focus efforts around reducing 

Salmonella illnesses in the United States.

The FY 2011 USDA Food Safety Priority Goal seeks a 4.5 

percent reduction in the rate of Salmonella illnesses from 

FSIS-regulated products between the 2007-2009 average 

baseline and the end of FY 2011.2 Based on CDC FoodNet 

foodborne illness data, this is equivalent to a reduction of 

approximately 22,600 illnesses.

Reducing Salmonella-caused illnesses can be achieved by 

implementing Salmonella performance standards for broilers

1 FSIS’ Priority Goal utilizes foodborne 

illness attribution. This allows the 

Agency to estimate the number of 

foodborne illnesses resulting from 

FSIS-regulated products. The goal is 

anchored to the Department of Health 

and Human Services’ (HHS) proposed 

Healthy People 2020 Initiative.
15 FSIS Strategic Plan FY 2011-2016

and turkeys; focusing on reducing public exposure to Salmonella

from both Ready-to-Eat (RTE) and Non-RTE products; 

conducting additional baseline studies (e.g., poultry parts and 

hog carcasses); and developing a proposed rule on egg 

products for more effective standards. FSIS will also increase

the number of establishments sampled and support for the 

verification-testing program for ground poultry products.

Corporate Performance Measures

The FSIS corporate performance measures tell the broadest and 

richest story of FSIS’ success in protecting public health. These 

performance measures are limited to the critical few measures 

deemed most essential to assess FSIS’ progress toward 

achieving outcomes. FSIS corporate performance measures 

focus on activities that are outcome focused and affect the 

entire organization, while supporting measures are output 

oriented and internally focused. The following five corporate 

performance measures provide both internal and external 

stakeholders with information necessary to both set and chart 

the Agency’s progress over time.

■Corporate Performance Measure

Total number of Salmonella, Lm, 

and E. coli O157:H7 illnesses from 

products regulated by FSIS.

Baseline FY 2007-2009

436,401

Target FY 2016

363,547

FSIS calculates a measure that estimates a total number of 

foodborne illnesses for three key pathogens-Salmonella, Listeria 

monocytogenes (Lm), and E. coli O157:H7-from FSIS-regulated 

products (i.e., meat, poultry, and processed egg products). 

Foodborne illness numbers are calculated for this corporate 

measure using a combination of data from published case rates 

from CDC’s FoodNet and National Outbreak Reporting System 

(NORS) outbreak data. FSIS has also incorporated the most 

currently available data from Scallan et al. (2010). FSIS is 

working to reduce this number. Objectives for 2016 are linked 

to the Healthy People 2020 proposed objectives for E. coli

O157:H7, Lm and Salmonella. Some of the new information 

changes how historical data are calculated, so it cannot be 

Alignment to USDA 

Strategy

The FSIS FY 2011–2016 Strategic Plan 

aligns to the broader USDA Strategic 

Plan for FY 2010–2015, particularly 

through USDA Objective 4.3—“Protect 

Public Health by Ensuring Food is 

Safe.” FSIS is committed to ensuring 

the American people have access to 

safe, nutritious, and balanced meals.

USDA agencies and FSIS are working 

together across the Farm-to-Table 

Continuum to take a practical and 

effective approach to preventing 

foodborne illness and proactively 

protect public health.

FSIS 

STRATEGIC PLAN 

FY 2011-2016 

OBJECTIVE 4.3

PROTECT PUBLIC 

HEALTH BY ENSURING 

FOOD IS SAFE

USDA 

STRATEGIC PLAN 

FY 2010-2015

Fig. 4 FSIS ALIGNMENT TO 

USDA STRATEGIC PLAN 
16

directly compared to previously reported FSIS All-Illness 

measure estimates. 

■Corporate Performance Measure

Percentage of broiler plants passing 

the carcass Salmonella verification 

testing.

Baseline CY 2010

87%

Target FY 2016

95%

Broiler carcasses represent the raw class of food product with 

the greatest potential to cause exposure of the public to 

Salmonella. In 2010, FSIS proposed a new performance standard 

for Salmonella in broiler carcasses based on a recent baseline 

study. Failure to meet this new standard serves as a proxy for 

heightened exposure potential to the public. FSIS identifies 

performance standards for Salmonella in up to eight classes of 

raw products. These standards are designed to cause industry 

to control for Salmonella and reduce the potential for human 

exposure. The best available projection is that 88 percent of 

establishments will have passed the new performance standard.

By 2016, FSIS expects to take steps to increase the number of 

establishments passing the new standard to 95 percent, thereby 

further decreasing exposure of the public to Salmonella and 

contributing to fewer foodborne illnesses. 

■Corporate Performance Measure

Percentage of slaughter plants 

identified during District 

Veterinary Medical Specialist 

(DVMS) humane handling 

verification visits as having an 

effective systematic approach to 

humane handling (all four 

elements of a systematic approach 

implemented).

Baseline CY 2008-2009

28%

Target FY 2016

50%

All official livestock slaughter establishments are required to 

handle and slaughter livestock using humane methods.

Establishments need to implement and maintain a systematic 

approach to humane handling and slaughter to best assure 

compliance with the HMSA. A well-designed and implemented 

systematic approach to humane handling includes at least four 

features. These include: (1) conducting an initial assessment of 

locations where livestock are handled in connection with 

slaughter; (2) designing facilities and on-going standard 
17 FSIS Strategic Plan FY 2011-2016

handling procedures that minimize excitement, discomfort, or 

accidental injury to livestock; (3) conducting periodic 

evaluations of the humane handling methods; and (4) 

identifying and implementing corrective measures when 

necessary. This performance measure will capture the extent to 

which industry is implementing a systematic approach to 

humane handling. The performance measure will also include 

an Agency assessment as to the effectiveness of these programs 

in ensuring that all livestock are handled and slaughtered in a 

humane manner for the entire time that they are at the 

slaughter establishment.

■Corporate Performance Measure

Percentage of all official 

establishments with a functional 

Food Defense Plan.

Baseline FY 2010

74%

Target FY 2016

90%

An FSIS goal is to increase the number of establishments with a 

functional food defense plan. To be considered “functional,”

these plans need to be developed, written, implemented, 

assessed, and properly maintained by establishments. FSIS 

considers these plans to be a very important measure of how 

well an establishment does in preventing intentional product 

adulteration. FSIS has developed guidance materials to help 

establishments develop and better understand what constitutes 

an effective food defense plan.

■Corporate Performance Measure

Average percentage of consumers 

who follow the four key food safety 

“best practices” (i.e., clean, separate, 

cook, and chill) and thermometer 

use.

Baseline CY 2006

75%

Target FY 2016

79%

FSIS will work to ensure that information to keep food safe is 

easily accessible to the public, especially the most vulnerable 

populations. By using different mediums and creative 

approaches, more and different segments of the population will

be able to better protect themselves and their families from 

foodborne illness. Research shows that we cannot reach all 

population segments with a single approach. Realizing this 

target will involve new media and increased collaboration with 

food safety partners. While dependent upon resources, FSIS 
18

hopes to, over the next several years, be able to work with and 

utilize FDA survey data on consumer behavior to better assess 

the effectiveness of its outreach and public education efforts.

Current and Intended Risk Mitigation Strategies

An important part of the FSIS mission is its ability to reduce the 

potential risk of foodborne illness. As with other aspects of the 

Agency’s performance, FSIS recognizes that the impact of the 

implementation of any new risk management strategy must be 

measured. Consideration of competing strategies or policies 

should be informed by the expected impact of those strategies 

in reducing hazards in meat, poultry, and processed egg 

products, thereby preventing illnesses attributed to these 

products. FSIS has developed various models that can be used 

to estimate the potential reduction in hazards in the food and 

how that will reduce illnesses in the citizens we serve. FSIS is 

embarking on an effort to consider the various policy options 

and their expected effects as one means of prioritizing policy 

development and the best use of Agency resources. We expect 

that this will become a standard tool in decisions about risk 

mitigation strategies.
19 FSIS Strategic Plan FY 2011-2016

The Public Health Model

FSIS addresses potential and actual foodborne illness by 

preparing for the threat, developing policies to regulate 

establishment activities, and verifying a wide range of food 

production and distribution systems. This three-pronged 

approach presented below is referred to as the National 

Academy of Sciences (NAS) model for a public health

regulatory agency. Three major areas of emphasis are widely 

recognized and accepted by both the Federal and State sectors 

as defining a public health regulatory institution. These areas 

are Assessment, Policy Development, and Assurance. The three 

areas of activity are interdependent and form a feedback loop. 

COMMUNICATIONS & 

CONTINUOUS IMPROVEMENT 

ASSESSMENT POLICY 

DEVELOPMENT ASSURANCE 

Fig. 5 NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCES - PUBLIC HEALTH MODEL 

Data-Driven Decision-Making and the Public Health 

Information System (PHIS)

FSIS is working to further ensure that its policy and 

management decisions are based upon data supported by 

innovative technology. This ”data driven decision-making” will 

enable the Agency to more quickly and effectively respond to 

indications of risk to human health. FSIS will increasingly rely 

on a robust data management and proactive decision-making 

tool—the Public Health Information System (PHIS). PHIS

automates and integrates FSIS’ systems into one comprehensive 

easy-to-use data analytics tool and facilitates the sharing of 

data among inspection personnel, their managers, and 

headquarters on a daily basis. PHIS operates through four 

components—domestic inspection, import activities, export 

activities, and predictive analytics. PHIS is a powerful decisionmaking tool to further help the Agency protect public health. 

PHIS will be a way for 

[FSIS] to gather and make 

better use of the 

enormous amount of data 

obtained in the more than 

6,000 plants [the Agency] 

regulates—that data, in 

turn, helps [FSIS] make 

 

The Public Health Model

1 The first area, “Assessment,” is the 

activity by which known or potential 

public health problems are identified 

and assessed with respect to the 

magnitude of the problem and the 

potential impact on public health. 

Assessment is carried out using the 

latest surveillance and testing 

methods to gather data for conducting 

the analyses, including quantitative 

risk assessments, forecasting 

models, data-mining, and trend 

analysis.

2 The second area is “Policy 

Development.” The word “policy” 

includes legal regulations, guidance 

and other rules, documents and 

strategies issued by FSIS. Policy 

development is defined as the 

process by which society makes 

decisions about problems, chooses 

goals and the proper means to reach 

them, handles conflicting views about 

what should be done, and allocates 

resources to deploy those policies. 

The Agency’s policies serve to 

translate issues affecting public 

health into a course of action that 

minimizes the risk of foodborne 

illnesses.

3 The third area is “Assurance.” 

Assurance is the activity that verifies 

FSIS performance measures and 

targets and validates that the Agency 

is effective in achieving the desired 

results. This is the function of 

providing services and implementing 

Agency policies and procedures to 

meet public health needs. One aspect 

of this is done through policy 

evaluation and the enforcement of 

established statutory and regulatory 

responsibilities which hold industry 

accountable for ensuring that meat, 

poultry, and processed egg products 

are safe, secure, wholesome, and 

accurately labeled. FSIS assurance 

also occurs through domestic and 

import inspection activities and 

verification testing.
20

The following parts of 

this Strategic Plan 

establish the foundation 

from which FSIS will 

move forward and 

provide a road map for 

the Agency over the next 

5 years.
21 FSIS Strategic Plan FY 2011-2016

Strategic Theme

Prevent 

Foodborne 

Illness

Preventing foodborne illness and protecting public 

health is the primary purpose of FSIS. FSIS will 

continually strive to become more adaptable to 

changing food safety risks, will educate 

consumers on food handling best practices, and 

work closely with other organizations to present a 

comprehensive approach to preventing illness.
22

Goal 1:

Ensure that food safety 

inspection aligns with 

existing and emerging risks

FSIS will strategically employ resources across the Farm-toTable Continuum in order to target existing and emerging 

risk.

FSIS will continue to target existing and emerging risks through 

the following series of actions. First, the Agency will collect and 

analyze data on food safety hazards across the Farm-to-Table 

Continuum. Second, scientific, analytical, and policy resources 

from inside and outside the Agency will create a hazard 

profiling system based upon the data analysis and risk 

assessment disciplines. Finally, FSIS will allocate its inspection, 

investigation, sampling, and information architecture resources 

in accordance with the hazard profiling system.
23 FSIS Strategic Plan FY 2011-2016

Outcome 1.1

Minimize existing and emerging food safety hazards 

through the most effective means

FSIS will develop policies and implement methodologies that 

effectively and efficiently utilize resources to mitigate or 

counter new and existing food safety hazards.

■Corporate Performance Measure

Total number2 of Salmonella, Lm, 

and E. coli O157:H7 illnesses from 

products regulated by FSIS.

Baseline FY 2007-2009

436,401

Target FY 2016

363,547

“The nature of the risks causing foodborne 

illness is dynamic, and, thus, FSIS must be 

a similarly dynamic organization that 

effectively changes its response along with 

every shift in the food safety landscape.”

(FSWG Report, 2010)

2 These numbers differ from baseline 

and target numbers included in the 

USDA FY2010-2015 Strategic Plan as 

they reflect an updated methodology 

and new data.
24

Outcome 1.2

Resources are targeted to existing and emerging risks

We will prioritize work efforts to reduce contamination and 

prevent foodborne illness. Relatively greater risks to food safety 

will receive proportionately greater levels of FSIS resources.

■Supporting Performance Measure

Domestic: Percentage of domestic 

establishments that meet the “for cause” 

Food Safety Assessments and monthly 

Hazard Analysis Verification decision 

criteria more than once per year.

Baseline CY 2010

1.8%

Target FY 2016

1.5%

■Supporting Performance Measure

Imports: Percentage of importing 

countries requiring more immediate 

inspection or reinspection attention 

more than twice within the previous 

year (target reflects fluctuating numbers 

of countries eligible to ship to the U.S.).

Baseline FY 2010

<20%

Target FY 2016

<20%

Goal 1
25 FSIS Strategic Plan FY 2011-2016

Outcome 1.3

Surveillance, investigation, and enforcement are effectively 

implemented across the Farm-to-Table Continuum

FSIS will ensure that food safety risks are prevented or 

otherwise mitigated not only during slaughter and processing, 

but also across the whole of the Farm-to-Table Continuum.

■Supporting Performance Measure

Percentage of priority in-commerce 

facilities (e.g., warehouses, 

distributors and transporters) 

covered by surveillance activities.

Baseline to be 

established by end of 

FY 2012

Target FY 2016

85%

■Supporting Performance Measure

Percentage of follow-up 

surveillances resulting in 

compliance.

Baseline CY 2009-2010

77%

Target FY 2016

82%

Coast to Coast

FSIS has a strong inspection workforce. The Agency has 

nearly 8,000 full-time and other inspection personnel in 

approximately 6,200 federally inspected establishments.
26

Goal 1: Ensure that food safety inspection aligns with 

existing and emerging risks

Strategy 1

Collect data on FSIS activities across the Farm-to-Table 

Continuum and develop annual sampling plan

FSIS will collect, analyze, and report surveillance, investigation, 

enforcement, and other data on activities and food safety risks 

from across the Farm-to-Table Continuum. The Agency will 

identify and fill gaps in data collection along the Continuum.

Using the results of the data collection activities, FSIS will 

develop and maintain an annual sampling plan, informed by 

public health partners, that measures existing and emerging 

food safety hazards. The annual sampling plan will measure 

food safety hazard levels, such as levels of E. coli O157:H7 in 

ground beef, at critical points along the Continuum.
27 FSIS Strategic Plan FY 2011-2016

Strategy 2

Create a hazard profiling system

Using the results of the annual sampling plan, FSIS will create a 

hazard profiling system to indicate the relative risks associated 

with different food safety hazards (e.g., Salmonella). In addition, 

it will evaluate the relative financial costs involved in 

mitigating the various existing and emerging hazards within 

the Agency’s purview. FSIS will use a profiling system to rank 

food safety hazards relative to one another. In this way, the 

Agency can make informed decisions on how best to allocate 

resources according to differing levels of hazard.

Strategy 3

Allocate resources in accordance with the hazard profiling 

system

FSIS will align internal resources and implement changes based 

on a hazard ranking system. For example, if previously 

unknown risks are discovered within the processing phase of 

food production, this could justify the use of altered inspection 

methods at that point. Similarly, FSIS could also scale back 

activities that solely pertain to the inspection of products based 

on taste and/or product quality (e.g., product defects, factors 

deemed unfit for consumption, etc.). While these factors are 

relevant to issues of product desirability at the business level, 

they do not necessarily have an impact on food safety.
28

Goal 2:

Maximize domestic and 

international compliance 

with food safety policies

FSIS will enhance compliance of domestic- and foreign-produced 

products with safety regulations and guidance. It will do this by 

providing clearly written guidance to the domestic industry and 

to foreign countries. FSIS will also ensure adherence to humane 

handling, as well as "other consumer protection" requirements 

and food labeling regulations and policies.

Criteria for measuring equivalence of a foreign food safety system 

will be more closely aligned with existing and emerging domestic 

food safety regulations and policies. FSIS will improve the methods 

used by industry to prevent the contamination of the food supply 

and seek to continuously increase the number of facilities that have 

adopted Food Defense Plans (FDPs). It will engage countries 

through outreach activities to encourage implementation of a 

process to protect product from intentional contamination.

One of its main responsibilities is to regulate the domestic meat, 

poultry, and processed egg products industry by developing 

policies to minimize consumer exposure foodborne illnesses. As a 

result of domestic policy, criteria are developed and applied to 

foreign country food safety systems so that the consumer feels 

confident about the safety of the food derived from imported 

products.
29 FSIS Strategic Plan FY 2011-2016

Outcome 2.1

Domestic- and foreign-produced products meet food safety 

performance standards

FSIS will continuously evaluate and develop new methods of 

gaining compliance with relevant food safety standards.

■Corporate Performance Measure

Percentage of broiler plants passing 

the carcass Salmonella verification 

testing.

Baseline CY 2010

87%

Target FY 2016

95%

Of plants regulated by FSIS, 97 percent of 

large plants have a functional Food 

Defense Plan in place, compared with 82

percent of small and 64 percent of very 

small establishments.

(FSIS, 2010)
30

Outcome 2.2

Humane handling and slaughter practices are a central 

focus of establishment employees as evidenced by the 

awareness of proper procedures and the implementation of 

a systematic approach to humane handling

This performance measure will capture the extent to which 

industry is implementing a systematic approach to humane 

handling.

■Corporate Performance Measure

Percentage of slaughter plants 

identified during District 

Veterinary Medical Specialist 

(DVMS) humane handling 

verification visits as having an 

effective systematic approach to 

humane handling (all four 

elements of a systematic approach 

implemented).

Baseline CY 2008-2009

28%

Target FY 2016

50%

Goal 2 
31 FSIS Strategic Plan FY 2011-2016

Outcome 2.3

Food protection and handling systems ensure protection 

against intentional contamination

FSIS will ensure that facilities implement safeguards and 

systems to protect food from contamination by people who 

might try to intentionally and maliciously harm consumers.

■Corporate Performance Measure

Percentage of all official 

establishments with a functional 

Food Defense Plan.

Baseline FY 2010

74%

Target FY 2016

90% ■Supporting Performance Measure

Percentage of food defense practices 

implemented at in-commerce facilities.

Baseline CY 2010

91%

Target FY 2016

91% ■Supporting Performance Measure

Outreach to eligible countries to 

encourage implementation of a system 

that protects product from intentional 

contamination.

Baseline to be 

established by end 

of FY 2012

Target FY 2016

90%
32

Goal 2: Maximize domestic and international 

compliance with food safety policies

Strategy 1

Establish performance baselines

FSIS will identify and establish relevant performance baselines 

for regulated products throughout the Farm-to-Table 

Continuum. The Agency will ensure that the best available 

science and information are used to inform the determination 

of each baseline. FSIS will consult with relevant stakeholders 

when developing performance baselines and provide venues 

for public comment and feedback. It will ensure that domesticand foreign-produced products meet food safety standards.

Strategy 2

Oversee compliance with food safety, humane handling

and other consumer protection standards

FSIS will expand successful initiatives and develop new 

initiatives that direct food establishments to comply with safety 

regulations. FSIS will continuously evaluate existing initiatives,

promote the Salmonella Initiative Program and small plant 

outreach initiatives. New initiatives will generally commence as 

pilot programs, and successful pilots will be rolled out on a 

broader scale. The Agency will also encourage businesses to 

develop other consumer protection process control plans, 

including humane handling and accurate labeling, and perform 

their own quality control activities backed by FSIS verification.
33 FSIS Strategic Plan FY 2011-2016

Strategy 3

Protect the food supply against intentional harm

FSIS will encourage the adoption of Food Defense Plans (FDPs) 

across all parts of the Farm-to-Table Continuum. The Agency 

will reach out to small and very small establishments that may 

require assistance in implementing FDPs. In addition, FSIS will 

better target food defense efforts toward those facilities that 

have not yet adopted a FDP and increase the effectiveness of 

State efforts to encourage the adoption of FDPs. It will 

investigate new methods, safeguards, and systems for 

protecting product against intentional harm and encourage 

their implementation at relevant facilities as appropriate.

The Humane Methods of Slaughter Act 

states that the handling and slaughtering of 

livestock are to be carried out only through 

humane means.
34

Goal 3:

Enhance public education 

and outreach to improve 

food-handling practices

FSIS will strive to continuously increase consumer awareness 

of food safety best practices with the intent to improve “inhome“ food-handling behavior. Public education and 

outreach initiatives will place an emphasis on connecting 

with vulnerable and underserved populations.

FSIS will work to ensure that all populations along the Farm-toTable Continuum receive valuable food safety information. Our 

work will involve educating consumers about the importance 

of safe food handling and how to reduce the risk of foodborne 

illnesses. This means information to keep food safe is easily 

accessible to the public, especially the most vulnerable 

populations. By using different mediums and creative 

approaches, more and different segments of the population will 

be better able to protect themselves and their families from 

foodborne illness.
35 FSIS Strategic Plan FY 2011-2016

Outcome 3.1

Consumers, including vulnerable and underserved 

populations, adopt food safety best practices

The Agency will investigate prevalent consumer behaviors that 

have an adverse impact on food safety and identify ways in 

which consumers can improve “in-home” food preparation and 

handling practices. The performance measure target is 

influenced by information in the Healthy People 2020 Initiative, 

the ability of FDA and FSIS to undertake survey research, and 

funding.

■Corporate Performance Measure

Average percentage of consumers 

who follow the four key food safety 

“best practices” (i.e., clean, separate, 

cook and chill) and thermometer use.

Baseline CY 2006

75%

Target FY 2016

79%
36

Outcome 3.2

Consumers have effective tools and information to keep 

“in-home” food safe

FSIS will provide consumers with effective tools and important 

information on food safety in formats that are easily 

understood and readily accessible.

■Supporting Performance Measure

Population that views FSIS’ most 

important “in-home” food safety 

message (i.e., clean, separate, cook and 

chill; thermometer use):

FSIS Electronic Media Outreach:

• Visits to FSIS Web site

Baseline CY 2010 

17,671,000

Target FY 2016 

23,000,000

• YouTube Views

Baseline CY 2010

35,487

Target FY 2016

46,100

• Twitter Followers

Baseline CY 2011

112,000

Target FY 2016

145,000

Visitors to USDA Food Safety Discovery 

Zone

Baseline CY 2010

434,480

Target FY 2016

500,000

USDA Food Safety 

Discovery Zone

Also known as the Food Safety Mobile, it travels to 

State fairs, public events, supermarkets, and schools 

around the country. Its goal is to provide visitors of all 

ages with interactive and fun experiences that teach 

them how to Fight BAC!

® bacteria that cause 

foodborne illnesses.

Goal 3 
37 FSIS Strategic Plan FY 2011-2016

Goal 3: Enhance public education and outreach to 

improve food-handling practices

Strategy 1

Perform consumer research and evaluate best practices

Being “food safe” means preventing illness through four easy 

steps: clean, separate, cook, and chill. FSIS will provide food 

safety education around “clean, separate, cook, and chill” in 

order to influence and improve consumer food safety behavior.

While resource dependent, it will perform consumer research 

and evaluate food handling and preparation best practices 

based upon the best available information. Following Federal

information collection procedures, FSIS will collect annual data 

on consumer food-handling and preparation techniques, and 

expand FDA and the International Food Information Council 

(IFIC) surveys to incorporate more questions associated with 

“in-home” food safety practices. Working with the media, 

including celebrity chefs, FSIS will model optimal consumer 

handling and preparation practices. Agency analysts will 

describe how various populations – including vulnerable and 

underserved groups – understand food safety best practices. In 

this manner, it can better target populations most in need of 

food safety guidance with relevant and custom-tailored 

communications.

1in 6

Every year, roughly one in six American 

consumers become sick from eating 

contaminated food.

(CDC, 2010)
38

Strategy 2

Deliver food safety messages that are easily understood 

and readily accessible

FSIS will produce and deliver simple, easy-to-understand 

communications to targeted populations using relevant forms 

of communication (e.g., social media). FSIS will locate 

information on food handling and preparation best practices, 

foodborne illnesses, and food safety risks in physical (e.g., 

school libraries) and virtual (e.g., the FSIS Web site) locations 

that are easily accessible. The Agency will maximize 

partnerships to reach target populations, improve information 

transparency, and increase exposure to food safety messages 

and best practices. In addition, FSIS subject matter experts will 

regularly communicate important food safety message via 

lectures and other opportunities for public education.

CLEAN SEPARATE COOK CHILL
39 FSIS Strategic Plan FY 2011-2016

This page intentionally left blank
40

Goal 4:

Strengthen collaboration 

among internal and external 

stakeholders to prevent 

foodborne illness

FSIS will work with stakeholders to prevent and respond to 

intentional and unintentional food safety hazards.

Preventing foodborne illness is a goal FSIS shares with many 

other agencies and organizations. FSIS stakeholders can 

contribute needed expertise and resources to this common 

effort. In working together with FSIS through a variety of 

means, they become valuable partners in achieving this 

important national goal.
41 FSIS Strategic Plan FY 2011-2016

Outcome 4.1

FSIS maximizes relationships with public health and food 

safety partners (i.e., large, small, and very small regulated 

establishments; other Federal, State, and local agencies; 

consumer groups; academia; and other food safety 

stakeholders) to enhance the food safety system

FSIS will improve collaboration with key Federal partners such 

as the FDA and CDC, in its ongoing efforts to prevent 

foodborne illness. One important way will be by working with 

FDA, where feasible, in its implementation of the Food Safety 

Modernization Act in identifying opportunities to strengthen 

process control throughout the Farm-to-Table Continuum.

The Agency will also seek to influence research and leverage 

food safety research completed by other public health and food 

safety partners to improve its ability to protect public health.

FSIS will continue its outreach program to small and very small 

establishments, resulting in greater compliance by these 

establishments with FSIS regulations and improved food safety.

■Supporting Performance Measure

Research: Percentage of time products 

from three research agencies (i.e., 

Agricultural Research Service, 

Economic Research Service, and 

National Institute of Food and 

Agriculture) used by FSIS and shared 

with stakeholders.

Baseline to be 

established by end 

of FY 2012

Target FY 2016

25%

over baseline

■Supporting Performance Measure

Key Federal partners FDA and CDC:

Percentage of results from 

interagency collaboration on analytics 

used in FSIS policy.

Baseline to be 

established by end 

of FY 2012

Target FY 2016

95%

■Supporting Performance Measure

Small and Very Small Plants:

Percentage of identified opportunities 

realized to improve information 

sharing.

Baseline to be 

established by end 

of FY 2012

Target FY 2016

75%
42

Goal 4: Strengthen collaboration among internal and 

external stakeholders to prevent foodborne illness

Strategy 1

Foster information sharing

FSIS will encourage all stakeholders to share relevant and 

timely information with other food safety partners across the 

Farm-to-Table Continuum. This information, including 

scientific advancements and improved food safety practices, 

will be used to better understand pathogens, impediments to 

food safety practices, and improve inspection and enforcement 

activities. The Agency will also identify Federal, State, and local 

agencies, as well as industry practices, that it may adopt or 

adapt to improve Agency performance or conserve resources.

Strategy 2

Develop new approaches for seeking stakeholder input and 

feedback

FSIS will work to identify best practices and proven techniques 

from other government agencies and the private sector that 

could be used by FSIS to improve its ability to gather 

stakeholder feedback. The Agency will also work to use that 

feedback to improve its efforts to prevent foodborne illness. 

FSIS will liaise with industry and consumer groups to further 

encourage stakeholder input. The Agency will use this feedback 

to continuously improve its performance.

Strategy 3

Seek new means for effectively interacting with small and 

very small establishments

FSIS will look to other Federal agencies that regulate small 

businesses, or private companies that interact with small 

businesses, to identify additional opportunities and methods 

for sharing guidance and informational materials with small

and very small establishments.

Goal 4
43 FSIS Strategic Plan FY 2011-2016

ATEGIC THEME: UNDERSTAND & INFLUENCE THE FARM TO TABLE

CONTINUUM

Strategic Theme

Understand and 

Influence the Farmto-Table Continuum

FSIS will seek to fully understand the 

epidemiology of illness and those factors 

influencing food safety issues. To gain this 

insight, FSIS will optimize its use of science and 

data to fully understand the environment in 

which FSIS operates.
44

Goal 5:

Effectively use science to 

understand foodborne illness 

and emerging trends

FSIS will continuously improve its analytic, forecasting, and 

traceback capabilities and methods based on supportable science 

and current data. It will identify ways in which emerging trends 

(e.g., consumption patterns, methods of distribution, the 

increasing virulence of certain pathogens, and the evolving 

global supply chain) influence food safety and defense.

FSIS has scientists who track known and emerging hazards in the 

foods it regulates. In turn, its scientists are connected to the broader 

community of scientists (in universities and industry) whose work 

is devoted to developing ways to reduce hazards in meat, poultry,

and processed egg products.

There are many potential hazards in food. Science must form the 

basis for policies that the FSIS creates and the steps that the foodproducing industry takes as a result of FSIS policies. FSIS is a leader 

in using traditional risk-assessment techniques to predict both the 

public health risk associated with foodborne hazards and the effect 

that intervention strategies can have in improving food safety.

Finally, the Agency is preparing for new or previously 

unrecognized hazards by developing new techniques, tools, and 

risk profiles to determine the potential impacts of these hazards on 

public health and ways to ensure that these impacts do not 

materialize.
45 FSIS Strategic Plan FY 2011-2016

Outcome 5.1

FSIS continually improves its capacity for and use of 

cutting-edge science in policy development to better 

defend against public health risks

FSIS will continuously analyze and synthesize data and 

external sources of information on food safety and defense 

hazards and risks. Through this pursuit, FSIS will develop a 

comprehensive understanding of the hazards. Its scientific 

agenda will be closely aligned with guiding policies to reduce 

food safety risks from known and emerging hazards. Its targets 

reflect a very high alignment between the development and use

of scientific information to guide policies.

■Supporting Performance Measure

Percentage of annual science agenda 

completed and number of agenda items 

initiated.

Baseline to be 

established by end 

of FY 2012

Target FY 2016

95% ■Supporting Performance Measure

Percentage of completed science agenda 

items that meet quality standards for 

information rigor, clarity, and 

defensibility of methods used.

Baseline to be 

established by end 

of FY 2012

Target FY 2016

95%

FSIS strives

to ensure that food safety policies and 

regulations are informed by Agency 

scientific analyses.
46

Outcome 5.2

FSIS increases the application of cutting-edge science 

across the Farm-to-Table supply chain to improve public 

health

FSIS will draw on all available data sources and information to 

continually improve how food supply chain systems, 

demographic trends, people’s behaviors, and other emerging 

macro trends influence food safety and defense. The Agency 

will work to address scientific data gaps through research and 

coordination with a wide range of food safety partners.

FSIS will continue to ensure that food safety policies and 

practices are based on a scientific understanding of foodborne 

hazards and public health risks. This will involve both training 

its workforce and more widely communicating scientific 

information pertaining to food safety.

■Supporting Performance Measure

Percentage of identified public health 

and food safety gaps addressed across 

the Farm-to-Table Continuum.

Baseline to be 

established by end 

of FY 2013

Target FY 2016

60%

1in 5

“By 2015, it is estimated that one in five 

Americans will be over the age of 60 and therefore 

more susceptible to certain types of infections.”

(FSWG Report, 2010)

Goal 5
47 FSIS Strategic Plan FY 2011-2016

Goal 5: Effectively use science to understand foodborne 

illness and emerging trends

Strategy 1

Identify data collection techniques

FSIS will conduct a gap analysis to identify key data collection 

techniques and system improvements needed to better 

understand and analyze data. It will look to integrate data from 

new internal and external sources into its PHIS system to 

develop a more complete understanding of the Farm-to-Table 

Continuum and, therefore, improve its role in ensuring the 

production of safe food. Once primary data collection 

techniques are identified, the Agency will develop and 

maintain a plan for conducting food safety and vulnerability 

assessments of biological, chemical, and physical hazards 

across Federal, State, and international systems. As part of this 

assessment, FSIS will determine where and how food safety 

hazards enter the food supply chain.

“Over the last decade, a perfect storm 

has gathered to challenge our food 

safety system. The storm includes new 

disease agents; an increasingly 

globalized food supply chain; changes 

in the U.S. population; and new dietary 

patterns.”

(FSWG, 2010)
48

Strategy 2

Improve the understanding behind drug-resistant 

pathogens

FSIS will improve its understanding of the effect antimicrobials have on the virulence and drug resistance of 

different pathogens. In addition, FSIS scientists and analysts 

will help to advance the science behind drug-resistant 

pathogens and the understanding of the means to prevent and 

reduce contamination of the food supply. FSIS will also work 

with its food safety partners, including FDA, CDC, and the 

USDA Agricultural Research Service, on this topic.

Strategy 3

Understand existing and emerging trends

FSIS will assess the health-related risks of changing 

consumption patterns, methods of distribution, pathogen 

adaptation, and the evolving global supply chain. In particular, 

FSIS analysts will investigate the various ways in which 

America’s aging population and tendency to eat outside the 

home could affect food safety policy and public health concerns 

in the future.
49 FSIS Strategic Plan FY 2011-2016

This page intentionally left blank
50

Goal 6:

Implement effective policies 

to respond to existing and 

emerging risks

FSIS will ensure food safety hazards are effectively and 

comprehensively mitigated using supportable science. The 

Agency will develop and use effective policies and strategies 

through a variety of approaches.

A critically important part of what FSIS does is developing and 

implementing policies and solutions to address food safety 

issues. FSIS will continue to utilize a risk-based approach to 

develop and implement effective policies to address existing 

and emerging issues in collaboration with stakeholders. The 

Agency will keep abreast of current research and other 

developmental activities and continuously assess whether 

regulatory standards and guidance materials need revision. It 

will do this using a risk analysis framework that includes 

developing, implementing, and measuring the effectiveness of 

policies.
51 FSIS Strategic Plan FY 2011-2016

Outcome 6.1

Public health risks are mitigated through effective 

strategies based on the best available information

FSIS will develop policies, regulations, and strategies to 

mitigate, prevent, and respond to existing and emerging risks 

based on a comprehensive understanding of relevant food 

safety and public health issues and risks. Supported by analysis 

of PHIS data, FSIS will be able to shorten the time to ascertain 

whether a policy is effectively implemented to a monthly rather 

than quarterly basis, for those issuances that are predesignated 

to have a significant impact on public health.

■Supporting Performance Measure

Percentage of food safety appeals 

granted (categories of appeals in 

which FSIS actions were misapplied or 

poorly supported and overturned by a 

higher-level supervisor).

Baseline CY 2010

41%

Target FY 2016

39%

■Supporting Performance Measure

Percentage of regulated industry 

adhering to key public health related 

policies (establishments receiving zero 

public health related non-compliance 

in a year).

Baseline CY 2010

74%

Target FY 2016

78%

■Supporting Performance Measure

Frequency of reviews examining the 

effectiveness of FSIS policies regarding 

significant public health risks.

Baseline FY 2011

Quarterly

Target FY 2016

Monthly

Protecting 

Public Health

“And so our mission, our goal in USDA's 

Office of Food Safety, is protecting the 

health of more than 300 million Americans. 

We are committed to that single purpose.”

(Dr. Elisabeth Hagen, 2010)
52

Goal 6: Implement effective policies to respond to 

existing and emerging risks

Strategy 1

Develop clear processes and procedures for policy 

development

FSIS will fully utilize the data available in PHIS and other 

internal data sources to guide policy and strategy development. 

It will integrate data gleaned from all relevant sources (e.g., the 

Agency, industry, State and local governments, international

entities, consumer groups, etc.) within the policy and strategy 

development process. Lastly, the Agency will define and 

stringently follow clear plans and timelines on how to develop, 

review, and solicit feedback on proposed policies and 

strategies.

Strategy 2

Create a clear framework for the evaluation of policies and 

strategies

FSIS will develop a framework detailing the criteria for the 

ongoing evaluation of policies and strategies. In part, the 

Agency will implement policies and strategies based upon the 

potential impact on public health and feasibility. It will also 

define other relevant criteria for the ongoing analysis and 

evaluation of the merits of policies and strategies. After 

implementation, FSIS will continuously evaluate each policy 

and strategy's effect on mitigating relevant food safety hazards.

Strategy 3

Develop a multi-scenario emergency response plan

FSIS will develop a comprehensive and effective emergency 

response plan and seek to continuously improve it. The plan 

will detail a series of process steps and procedures governing 

the Agency’s response to various types of foodborne illness 

outbreaks and instances involving food supply contamination 

due to a disaster. As part of the plan, FSIS will define how it

can best and most appropriately communicate with other 

stakeholders.

Goal 6
53 FSIS Strategic Plan FY 2011-2016

STRATEGIC THEME: EMPOWER PEOPLE & STRENGTHEN INFRASTRUCTURE

Strategic Theme

Empower People 

and Strengthen 

Infrastructure

All FSIS employees deserve to take pride in the fact 

that their jobs help to prevent foodborne illness.

FSIS will hire the appropriate people, train

them correctly, and ensure that they have the 

right tools and technology to perform their jobs. 

Each FSIS employee contributes to the success of 

the entire Agency.
54

Goal 7:

Empower employees with the 

training, resources, and tools 

to enable success in 

protecting public health

FSIS will create an engaged workforce focused on protecting 

public health and foster a safe and healthy environment for 

its employees. The Agency represents a single, unified team 

and will use feedback from all employees across the 

organization to inform management decisions. FSIS will 

continuously improve training opportunities and recruitment 

processes, as well as promote diversity across the 

organization.

It is not just financial and technological capital that provide and

enable success. People, or human capital, are equally if not 

more important. Without attracting and retaining the right 

people, in the right jobs, with the right skills and training, an 

organization cannot succeed. Having highly skilled employees 

is recognized as an organization’s most important asset. As the 

Federal government and FSIS face limited resources in the 

future to meet their mission, the workforce will be asked to do 

more with less. It will need to be trained to do multiple jobs in 

order to meet human resource requirements for completing the 

mission. The importance of the FSIS human resource capability 

cannot be underestimated in meeting the goals of its Strategic 

Plan.
55 FSIS Strategic Plan FY 2011-2016

FSIS will take proactive steps to ensure the agency maintains a 

Model Equal Employment Opportunity Program for all 

employees and applicants for employment. The Agency will 

build an infrastructure to promote and sustain diversity and 

inclusion initiatives that integrate EEO into the Agency’s 

strategic mission and leverage the diversity of the FSIS 

workforce. The Agency will place the Civil Rights Director 

under the direct supervision of the Administrator and include 

the Director in Agency strategic planning efforts. The Agency 

will regularly evaluate its employment practices to identify 

barriers to equality of opportunity for all individuals. By the 

end of FY 2013, FSIS will complete a thorough Agency-wide 

barrier analysis and implement an action plan to eliminate 

those barriers to equal access and opportunity.

One of the largest food safety inspection 

forces in the Federal government, FSIS 

employs professional, scientific, technical 

and other personnel.
56

Outcome 7.1

Each employee understands how he/she impacts public 

health

All FSIS employees see themselves as contributing to the 

prevention of foodborne illness through his or her respective 

role. FSIS is increasingly seen and known as having “one team, 

one purpose” pursuing the protection of public health.

■Supporting Performance Measure

Average score on the Annual 

Employee Viewpoint Survey for 

questions related to workers' 

understanding of their impact on 

public health.

Baseline FY 2010

89%

Target FY 2016

93%

Outcome 7.2

All employees have the knowledge, tools, and resources to 

accomplish the FSIS mission

FSIS will provide its employees with the appropriate training, 

information, technology, and other tools needed to excel in 

their positions and, thereby, serve the FSIS mission.

■Supporting Performance Measure

Percentage of competency gaps 

closed for targeted groups. Baseline to be 

established by end of 

FY 2012

Target FY 2016

20% Decrease in competency 

gap between 2010 and 

2016

■Supporting Performance Measure

Percentage of all eligible FSIS 

employees with an Individual 

Development Plan (IDP) in place.

By the end of FY 2011

80%

Target FY 2016

100% ■Supporting Performance Measure

Percentage of all 

managers/supervisors that complete 

three (3) hours of EEO training--

annually. 

By the end of FY 2013

60%

Target FY 2016

95% ■Supporting Performance Measure

Percentage of all nonmanagers/non-supervisors that 

complete two (2) hours of EEO 

training—annually. 

By the end of FY 2013

40%

Target FY 2016

90%
57 FSIS Strategic Plan FY 2011-2016

Outcome 7.3

FSIS has a diverse, engaged, high-performing, and 

satisfied workforce

FSIS will hire and retain a diverse and talented workforce, 

dedicated to preventing foodborne illness and protecting public 

health. Leadership and management will foster a safe and 

inviting work environment and continually seek to improve 

worker satisfaction. FSIS will demonstrate a commitment to 

equal employment opportunity (EEO) and eliminate potential 

EEO barriers, in accordance with EEO Commission 

Management (MD) Directive-715, that it identifies in its 

operation.

■Supporting Performance Measure

Percentage of workplace injury/illness 

cases.

Baseline CY 2010

6.4%

Target FY 2016

5.8% ■Supporting Performance Measure

Annual rate of staff vacancies.

Baseline FY 2011

7%

Target FY 2016

6% ■Supporting Performance Measure

Ranking in the Partnership for Public 

Service's Annual Report, Best Places to 

Work in the Federal Government.

Baseline FY 2010

91st of 224

Target FY 2016

75th of 224

(Top one-third)

■Supporting Performance Measure 

Increase the hiring rate of Persons with 

Targeted Disabilities. 

By the end of FY 2013

2%

Target FY 2016

TBD 

(By the 

Department)

“Every one of us is looking out for 

someone's child, someone's parent, 

someone's pastor, loved one, or friend. 

We're all responsible for the safety of food 

on American tables.”

(Dr. Elisabeth Hagen, 2010)
58

Goal 7: Empower employees with the training, resources, and 

tools to enable success in protecting public health

Strategy 1

Seek employee feedback and build a talented, engaged, 

and diverse workforce

FSIS management and leadership will obtain employee 

feedback – from all levels of FSIS – on how they view their 

respective roles in protecting public health. It will also define 

training, outreach, and other human resource policies to bridge 

any gaps identified from the feedback. 

The Agency will provide training to improve workers' problemsolving skills. Training will link particular problems and 

situations to available internal and external resources and 

promote increased worker self-sufficiency. FSIS leadership and 

management will communicate findings concerning food safety 

hazards to relevant FSIS workers and deliver the "one team, one 

purpose" message across all FSIS. To further facilitate the 

prevention of foodborne illness and the protection of public 

health, FSIS will develop and maintain an optimal recruitment 

system that drives higher employee satisfaction. This system 

will better ensure that workers are operating within a safe and 

healthy environment.

FSIS will work to create effective recruitment and 

outreach strategies to attract a diverse pool of high performing

candidates and employees, including executives, with the skill 

sets essential for performance of the agency’s mission.

Strategy 2

Continually improve employee satisfaction and 

effectiveness

FSIS will update its defined worker core competencies and 

align employees throughout the Agency with this new set of 

competencies. These core competencies will create an 

environment in which job satisfaction is the norm, and all 

employees work in a place where they feel confident of being 

treated with dignity and respect. 

Cultural 

Transformation

is the process of creating an 

employee-friendly workplace where 

employees experience equity of 

opportunity for success.
59 FSIS Strategic Plan FY 2011-2016

FSIS will strengthen employee knowledge through training and 

skills development in EEO, Civil Rights and diversity, 

emphasizing the prevention of harassment and employee EEO 

rights. Additionally, the Agency will provide employees with 

information regarding the use of the Alternative Dispute 

Resolution (ADR) process to resolve EEO and non-EEO 

disputes, which will create a win-win situation for all parties 

involved. 

FSIS will assess the level of achievement of defined core 

competencies across the organization to better determine 

strategic training needs. The Agency will also close gaps in core 

competencies through training, recruitment, and recognition of 

quality work. FSIS will seek to understand and adapt best 

practices from high-performing organizations that have proven 

successful in motivating employees and improving job 

satisfaction. 
60

Goal 8:

Based on the defined Agency 

business needs, develop, maintain,

and use innovative methodologies, 

processes, and tools, including 

PHIS, to protect public health 

efficiently and effectively and to 

support defined public health 

needs and goals

FSIS will evaluate, adopt, and apply innovative methods, 

processes, or technologies, including the Public Health 

Information System (PHIS), to minimize food safety hazards 

and serve the Agency's mission.

FSIS uses a variety of methods and technologies to support its 

mission. PHIS is the latest system that FSIS is bringing to bear to 

improve its data management capabilities. Accomplishing the 

mission requires FSIS to use its resources as effectively and 

prudently as possible. In doing so, FSIS must make continuous 

improvement a basic principle of how it operates. By continuously 

evaluating and improving the technologies and methodologies 

FSIS employs, the Agency will better leverage its resources. The 

Agency will become more effective and efficient in verifying that 

establishment operations are well controlled, that only safe 

product enters commerce, and that, should adulterated product 

enter commerce, it is removed before it can have adverse effects.
61 FSIS Strategic Plan FY 2011-2016

Outcome 8.1

Continuously evaluate and seek to understand and employ 

new or innovative mission-supporting processes, 

methodologies, and technologies

FSIS will implement valuable and cost-effective business 

technologies and methodologies that help to carry out daily 

operations or otherwise improve food safety.

■Supporting Performance Measure

Percentage of innovative processes, 

methodologies, or technologies for 

which the Agency has established a 

baseline.

Baseline to be 

established by end 

of FY 2013

Target FY 2016

25%

above baseline

■Supporting Performance Measure

Percentage of innovative processes, 

methodologies, or technologies that, 

once employed, are evaluated by the 

Agency.

Baseline to be 

established by end 

of FY 2013

Target FY 2016

80%
62

Outcome 8.2

Implement value-added business processes, 

methodologies, or technologies that contribute to serving 

the FSIS mission and are applied in the appropriate areas 

within FSIS.

The Agency will research, evaluate, and remain up to date on 

the latest technologies, methodologies, and innovations that 

could be of use in mitigating or preventing food safety hazards. 

FSIS will evaluate the potential for new technologies, 

innovations, and methodologies to meet internal needs.

■Supporting Performance Measure

Percentage of documented 

implemented processes, 

methodologies, or technologies, 

including those adopted in accordance 

with formally accepted requirements 

or criteria, that are evaluated to assess 

whether they meet the intended 

outcomes or otherwise contribute to 

the Agency’s efforts to perform its 

mission.

Baseline to be 

established by end 

of FY 2013

Target FY 2016

80%

Goal 8
63 FSIS Strategic Plan FY 2011-2016

Goal 8: Based on the defined Agency business needs, 

develop, maintain, and use innovative methodologies, 

processes, and tools, including PHIS, to protect public 

health efficiently and effectively and to support defined 

public health needs and goals

FSIS will work to ensure the application of a “life-cycle” 

concept (i.e., business processes and technologies support 

continuous innovation) between outcomes so that they are in 

alignment and their interdependencies are clear. Once new or 

innovative mission-supporting processes, methodologies, and 

technologies are put in place, they will be regularly evaluated. 

The Agency will develop new and leverage existing data 

streams and baselines to support analysis. This analysis will be 

used to transparently demonstrate how innovative technologies 

are enabling FSIS to better protect public health in an efficient 

and effective way.

Strategy 1

Promote the adoption of technological skills and 

understanding across the Agency

FSIS will research and evaluate new technologies and 

methodologies designed to reduce or prevent food safety hazards. 

It will conduct on-going, internal gap analyses and perform 

external scans to determine areas where new technologies and 

methodologies could potentially improve FSIS' effectiveness in 

protecting public health. FSIS will create policies and strategies 

(e.g., outreach and training) that explain why and how new 

technologies and methodologies improve public health. In this 

manner, employees will be able to better understand their role in 

preventing foodborne illness and gain a more thorough 

understanding of the uses of available tools and resources. In a 

similar regard, management will regularly verify that workers 

understand the methods, uses, and applications of relevant 

technologies.

FSIS will also work to develop stakeholder profiles (also called 

personas and customer or audience profiles) to help systems 

To ensure investments have appropriate 

business cases for senior leadership approval, 

as well as appropriate metrics to ensure 

mandatory federal-level monitoring by the 

Office of Management and Budget, the 

Agency will review existing processes and:

1 Develop and establish a process for 

evaluating business cases;

2 Ensure all new proposed investments 

have business cases that have been 

evaluated;

3 Develop a baseline forecast (opportunity 

matrix) of technology mapped against 

high-level business needs;

4 Ensure all approved business cases 

have data streams that can be used to 

evaluate return on investment;

5 Develop return on investment performance 

metrics for monitoring and analysis; and

6 Develop criteria for approving business 

cases.
64

designers better create technology based on mission needs and 

expectations. As hypothetical "stand-ins" for actual visitors, 

stakeholder profiles help envision real customers, their goals, and 

their expectations. FSIS can then synthesize and segment key 

information into clear portraits of typical users to create or select 

new technology.

Strategy 2

Fully implement PHIS and continually perform cost-benefit 

analyses on existing and new technologies and 

innovations

FSIS will fully implement PHIS and develop a process that details 

how to seek out relevant new technologies/innovations and 

compare the costs and benefits associated with new 

technology/innovation implementation to the maintenance of 

existing technologies/innovations. Technology and information 

specialists and financial (i.e., capital budgeting) professionals will 

work together to determine the added value entailed in pursuing 

various technological/innovation options that could improve food 

safety and public health.

To improve effectiveness and limit the adverse financial impact 

associated with large-scale technology implementations, FSIS will 

run pilot studies on a select number of new technologies and 

methodologies each year to decide upon larger technological and 

innovation program rollouts.

To ensure consistency, performance and 

continuous improvement, FSIS will:

1 Develop and establish a process for 

evaluating technical projects in production 

with approved business cases including: 

criteria for continued resourcing or funding 

projects with approved business cases;

baseline return on investment metrics for 

PHIS; and ROI criteria and metrics for 

approving resources and funding for future 

PHIS enhancements. The Agency will 

leverage the new, OMB-mandated 

“TechStat” process;

2 Ensure all technical projects with approved 

business cases have a chartered user group; 

and

3 Compile and review customer satisfaction 

scores quarterly.
65 FSIS Strategic Plan FY 2011-2016

This page intentionally left blank
66

Part III:

Putting the Plan into 

Action

EACH AND EVERY ACTION FSIS takes is directed toward 

preventing foodborne illness and remains firmly committed to 

this ultimate goal. The Agency will accomplish its mission by 

ensuring that meat, poultry, and processed egg products are 

safe, wholesome, and correctly labeled. FSIS seeks to reduce the 

contamination of these food products and, thereby, prevent 

foodborne illness and earn the public’s trust. The Agency’s 

Cultural Transformation initiative and focus on performance, 

measurement, and results will also serve to create a more 

satisfied, engaged, and empowered workforce uniquely 

dedicated to protecting public health. Moreover, FSIS’ 

unwavering commitment to performance improvement and 

measurement will demonstrate to the public that it is making 

continuous improvement toward achieving its vision, mission, 

and strategic goals.

The primary purpose of this Strategic Plan is to define the 

Agency’s strategy for ensuring that meat, poultry, and 

processed egg products are safe for consumption and establish 

a means by which to measure progress over time. To ensure the 

relevance and successful deployment of this plan, effective 

strategies for communication, implementation, and assessment 

are required.

Communication

Accomplishing the strategic goals and executing the strategies 

set forth in this plan requires a coordinated effort by all FSIS 

employees. To educate employees regarding appropriate roles 
67 FSIS Strategic Plan FY 2011-2016

in the implementation process, FSIS will develop a range of 

communication products and feedback loops to ensure that key 

goals, targets, and messages included in this plan are conveyed 

and understood by its employees. FSIS will also post a copy of 

the Strategic Plan on the Intranet for all employees and on its 

Web site for key stakeholders and the public to review. Both 

employees and stakeholders are highly encouraged to read and 

discuss their thoughts on the FSIS Strategic Plan. The Agency 

will also engage in public conversations with its food safety

partners concerning the plan.

Implementation

Implementation of the FSIS Strategic Plan will be accomplished 

primarily through the strategies outlined under each of the eight 

strategic goals.

The development of clear goals, outcomes, performance 

measures, and strategies to achieve targets over time provides 

FSIS with a clear road map to accomplish its core mission for 

the American public. The Agency will work to ensure that steps 

are taken to achieve set targets in accordance with existing FSIS 

requirements, internal performance measures, and reporting 

activities.

Assessment

FSIS will be proactive in ensuring the continued applicability of 

its 5-year Strategic Plan. Specifically, the Agency recognizes

that updating its Strategic Plan is in accordance with changes in 

Federal mandates and departmental compliance requirements.

Concluding Thoughts

FSIS remains committed to preventing foodborne illness and 

achieving its mission, to “Protect consumers by ensuring that 

meat, poultry, and processed egg products are safe, wholesome, 

and correctly labeled.” FSIS holds a long-term commitment to 

continuously reevaluate and seek to change any policies, 

legislation, resource constraints, or ineffective strategies that 

prevent it from achieving its vision and mission to the 

maximum extent possible. The process, consumer, management 

and human capital-related strategies outlined in this plan will 

create enduring pathways for success.
68

Part IV:

Appendices
69 FSIS Strategic Plan FY 2011-2016

Appendix A:

Trends and Factors 

Impacting FSIS

FSIS OPERATES IN A CONTINUOUSLY CHANGING LANDSCAPE of 

food safety and in a world increasingly dominated by the 

global marketplace. In the words of the President’s Food Safety 

Working Group (FSWG), “Over the last decade, a perfect storm 

has gathered to challenge our food safety system.” Among 

other trends, new pathogens are contaminating food products; 

trade and consumption patterns and hazards are constantly 

changing; and the American population is in the midst of a 

demographic shift.

Based on research and internal and external stakeholder 

interviews, FSIS has identified the following trends and factors 

that can directly influence the Agency’s priorities and goals. 

The Agency will work to continuously assess its policies and 

practices to improve operational performance.

Trends and Historical Facts

#1 Certain systems for food safety collaboration are already in 

place, serving as the beginning of a unified and comprehensive 

approach to food safety.

A joint effort between USDA, FDA, and CDC, the Foodborne 

Diseases Active Surveillance Network (FoodNet) provides 

active surveillance of foodborne diseases and related 

epidemiologic studies. Information sharing between 

stakeholders and the coordination of a unified response to 

foodborne outbreaks are pivotal toward the successful 

prevention of foodborne illness.
70

#2 The increasingly globalized food supply chain exhibits new 

and changing risks.

Food safety efforts are complicated by the diverse agricultural 

and production methods used in other countries.

#3 The continuous adaptation and evolution of pathogens.

Pathogens continue to evolve and adapt to changing 

conditions, sometimes increasing their virulence in the process.

Certain microorganisms have been unexpectedly found in 

particular foods, and new pathogens are being discovered that 

pose a risk for human consumption. In particular, some 

pathogens are developing resistances to antibiotics. FSIS and 

other food safety advocates have recognized these trends, and 

new means of pathogen detection and policy guidance are in 

development.

#4 Changing consumption patterns create dynamic risks.

More and more people are choosing to eat outside of the home.

Workers in food retail tend to have high rates of turnover, and 

differing systems for training and certifying workers pose 

further food safety challenges. Changing consumption patterns 

influence the size and composition of populations vulnerable to 

foodborne illness.

#5 As baby boomers age, the proportion of American people

vulnerable to foodborne illness continues to increase.

The percentage of the American population over the age of 50 

continues to increase, in turn increasing the number of 

Americans vulnerable to foodborne illness.

Internal Factors for Consideration

#1 Barriers exist to the reallocation of resources from areas of 

low food safety risk to areas of high risk.

FSIS’ legal mandate to perform an inspection on each animal 

carcass creates challenges to the Agency’s ability to respond to 

ever-changing food safety risks through a reallocation of 

resources.
71 FSIS Strategic Plan FY 2011-2016

#2 FSIS’ influence to effect change runs across the entire Farmto-Table Continuum.

FSIS holds the regulatory authority to issue regulations and 

policies that compel and/or encourage changes in food safety 

practices. In particular, this right does not end with the 

slaughter and processing phases of food production, but 

extends through distribution and retail. This provides FSIS with 

the opportunity to deploy resources and prevent contamination 

and mitigate harm across the Farm-to-Table Continuum.

#3 Challenges associated with determining an optimal 

methodology for attributing FSIS’ actions to reductions in 

foodborne illness.

FSIS statisticians and researchers are continuously seeking to 

improve the statistical methodology with which the 

organization measures its affect on foodborne illness reduction.

This presents a means for the Agency to measure the impact of 

its activities on the food products subject to FSIS inspection. In 

developing this understanding, FSIS can begin to evaluate 

mechanisms to improve collaboration and the relative strengths 

and weaknesses of its own activities.

#4 Challenges involved in conveying messages to a broad based 

group of employees.

In some cases, it takes time for messages pertaining to FSIS 

policies or activities to cascade out to all field employees. FSIS 

is working to spread a culture of openness and transparency 

(through a variety of processes) to better ensure that the 

Agency effectively communicates up and down.
72

Appendix B:

Management Initiatives

USDA is dedicated to transforming itself into a model 

organization by strengthening management operations and 

engaging employees through the implementation of eight 

management initiatives. As the Department’s lead agency for 

ensuring that the nation's commercial supply of meat, poultry, 

and processed egg products is safe, wholesome, and correctly 

labeled and packaged, FSIS is committed to this transformation. 

The table below illustrates how FSIS’ eight strategic goals align 

with the Department’s eight management initiatives.

FSIS GOALS

USDA Management Initiatives 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

Engage USDA Employees to Transform USDA into a 

Model Agency

● ●

Provide Civil Rights Services to Agriculture Employees 

and Customers

●

Coordinate Outreach and Improve Consultation and 

Collaboration Efforts to Increase Access to USDA 

Programs and Services

● ●

Leverage USDA Departmental Management to Increase 

Performance, Efficiency, and Alignment

● ● ●

Optimize Information Technology (IT) Policy and 

Applications

● ● ● ● ● ● ● ●

Enhance USDA Homeland Security and Emergency 

Preparedness to Protect USDA Employees and the Public

● ● ● ●

Enhance Collaboration and Coordination on Critical 

Issues Through Cross-cutting Department-wide Initiatives

● ●

Optimize USDA “Green” or Sustainable Operations

FSIS will adhere to USDA’s strategy for optimizing “Green” and 

more sustainable ways to perform its daily operations.
73 FSIS Strategic Plan FY 2011-2016

Appendix C:

Program Evaluations

Improving FSIS programs and policies is critical in the effort to 

increase the safety and security of meat, poultry, and processed 

egg products.

Evaluation is a formal, structured process of gathering and 

analyzing objective information needed to assess a program or 

policy. Evaluations provide practical information to assist 

decision-makers who implement programs and policies, 

document program success or show how to improve efforts, 

and supply information to enhance the credibility of programs.

FSIS has a dedicated evaluation staff whose work is an 

important component of the FSIS management assurance 

program. FSIS annually performs numerous evaluations, 

analytical reports, and other types of data analyses at the 

request of the FSIS Management Council or specific Agency 

offices. These evaluations focus on three areas:

 Ensuring that programs are effective at improving public 

health by ensuring a safe and secure food supply;

 Ensuring that Agency resources are used consistently with 

and efficiently towards accomplishing the Agency’s public 

health mission; and

 Improving accountability through the collection, 

maintenance, and use of timely information.
74

FSIS reviewed numerous evaluations in developing 

this Strategic Plan. The following table highlights a 

number of these evaluation and studies as they relate to 

FSIS programs and activities.

Evaluation Title Description Result Date

FSIS Evaluation of 

Circuit 

Maintenance 

Guidelines

FSIS evaluated 

whether new Circuit 

Maintenance 

Guidelines lessened 

the administrative 

burden on Frontline 

Supervisors.

With the evaluation, FSIS was 

able to determine where 

administrative burden had 

been lessened, where it had 

stayed the same, and work on 

further improvements.

November 2010

The Office of 

Inspector General 

(OIG) Audit of FSIS 

National Residue 

Program for Cattle

OIG evaluated the 

efficacy of the FSIS 

program for 

monitoring residues 

in cattle.

FSIS is making improvements 

to its verification programs for 

residues, particularly in 

regard to its cooperative 

efforts with FDA and EPA.

April 4, 2010

The General 

Accountability 

Office (GAO) Audit 

of HMSA 

Enforcement

GAO examined FSIS 

enforcement of the 

HMSA.

FSIS clarified and improved 

its policies for verification and 

enforcement of humane 

handling requirements.

March 4, 2010

FSIS Evaluation of 

Processing Team 

Inspection

FSIS evaluated the 

impact of processing 

team inspection on 

the quantity and 

quality of inspection.

FSIS determined that 

processing team inspection 

improved inspection and was 

correlated with establishment 

performance improvements.

October 2009

OIG Audit of FSIS 

Oversight of the 

Recall by 

Hallmark/Westland 

Meat Packaging 

Company

OIG evaluated FSIS 

checks on the recall of 

beef products from 

Hallmark/Westland.

FSIS made changes to how it 

samples firms for recall 

effectiveness checks.

October 20, 2009

GAO Audit of 

Federal School 

Meal Programs

GAO assessed recalls 

of food produced for 

the school lunch 

program.

FSIS further clarified its policy 

for recall effectiveness checks 

in regard to recalled meat and 

poultry products produced for 

the school lunch program.

August 20, 2009

OIG Audit of 

USDA's Controls to 

Ensure Compliance 

with Beef Export 

Requirements

OIG audited FSIS 

export certification 

programs and USDAAMS activities 

concerning exports.

FSIS is improving its 

management of the export 

certification process.

August 4, 2009

GAO Audit of the

Federal Veterinary 

Workforce

GAO examined the 

shortage of Federal 

veterinarians.

FSIS clarified and improved 

its policies for veterinarian 

recruitment and retention.

February 26, 2009
75 FSIS Strategic Plan FY 2011-2016

FSIS will undertake many new evaluations over the 

next 5 years. The following table highlights some of the 

longer-term studies as they relate to FSIS.

Proposed Title/Area 

of Inquiry Description Methodology Proposed 

Date

Ongoing and Planned 

OIG and GAO Audits

OIG and GAO have 12 ongoing 

and two planned audits of FSIS 

programs (including the 

humane handling audit 

mentioned below).

OIG and GAO 

audit methods

Ongoing and 

CY 11

OIG audit of industry 

appeals of humane 

handling 

noncompliance 

records and related 

enforcement actions

This audit was requested by the 

Undersecretary for Food Safety 

to “help determine whether 

FSIS has adequately handled 

humane handling violations 

identified by inspection 

personnel and challenged by an 

establishment.”

OIG audit 

methods

CY 11

PHIS Training FSIS is conducting a

comprehensive evaluation to 

determine the efficacy of PHIS 

training.

Surveys, 

interviews, data 

analysis, and 

direct observation

Ongoing; to be 

completed by 

the end of CY

11 with 

interim 

reporting

Outbreak 

Investigations

FSIS is conducting an 

evaluation of outbreak 

investigations for the 

President’s Food Safety 

Working Group.

Surveys, 

interviews and 

data analysis

Ongoing with 

an interim 

report; to be 

completed in 

May 2011
76

Appendix D:

Strategic Consultations

It is important to note the various internal and external 

stakeholders that have provided significant input and feedback 

for this Strategic Plan. This Strategic Plan was developed in 

accordance with guidance from the Government Performance 

and Results Act (GPRA), Office of Management and Budget 

(OMB), and USDA.

The FSIS strategic planning staff has spoken with 

representatives from the USDA Office of the Secretary, various 

FSIS programs and USDA agencies, members of the Food and 

Drug Administration (FDA), and representatives for the 

National Joint Council of Food Inspection Local Unions, and 

national consumer and industry groups. Of note, FSIS has 

consulted with staff from the Center for Science in the Public 

Interest (CSPI), the Consumer Federation of America (CFA), the 

National Meat Association (NMA), and the American 

Federation of Labor and Congress of Industrial Organizations 

(AFL-CIO). In developing the plan, FSIS strategic planning staff 

also interviewed a range of internal employees, as well as 

external stakeholders. In addition, the team conducted 

numerous workshops to develop and finalize the strategic 

goals, outcome statements, and strategies. Also several other 

consultative sessions were conducted to develop performance 

measures and targets.

FSIS would like to thank all of the stakeholders for their efforts 

and support throughout the development of the FSIS FY 2011–

2016 Strategic Plan. Without their input and guidance, the plan 

would not be nearly as well-developed, logical, or strategically 

important as it is in its current form.
77 FSIS Strategic Plan FY 2011-2016

Appendix E:

Key Terms and Acronyms

Agricultural Research Service (ARS)

The USDA agency employing Federal scientists to conduct 

basic, applied, and developmental research in the following 

fields: livestock; plants; soil, water, and air quality; energy; 

food safety and quality; nutrition; food processing, storage, 

and distribution efficiency; non-food agricultural products; 

and international development.

Antimicrobial Resistance

Bacteria and other disease-causing organisms have a 

remarkable ability to mutate and acquire resistance genes 

from other organisms and, thereby, develop resistance to 

antimicrobial drugs. When an antimicrobial drug is used, the 

selective pressure exerted by the drug favors the growth of 

organisms that are resistant to the drug’s action.

Biosecurity

Biosecurity refers to policies and measures taken to protect 

this Nation’s food supply and agricultural resources from 

both accidental contamination and deliberate attacks of 

bioterrorism. Now viewed as an emerging threat, 

bioterrorism might include such acts as introducing pests 

intended to kill U.S. food crops; spreading a virulent disease 

among animal production facilities; and poisoning air, water, 

food, and blood supplies. The Federal government is now 

increasing its efforts to improve biosecurity to lessen the 

vulnerabilities to bioterrorism threats.

Carcass

All parts of any slaughtered livestock.

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention

(CDC)

An Agency within the U.S. Department of Health and 

Human Services that monitors and investigates foodborne 

disease outbreaks and compiles baseline data against which 

to measure the success of changes in food safety programs.

Codex Alimentarius Commission

A joint commission of the Food and Agriculture 

Organization (FAO) and the World Health Organization, 

comprised of some 146 member countries, created in 1962 to 

ensure consumer food safety, establish fair practices in food 

trade, and promote the development of international food 

standards. The Commission drafts nonbinding standards for 

food additives, veterinary drugs, pesticide residues, and 

other substances that affect consumer food safety. It 

publishes these standards in a listing called the “Codex 

Alimentarius.”

Country-of-Origin Labeling

Under Section 304 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended, 

most products entering the United States must be clearly 

marked so that the “ultimate purchaser” can identify the 

country of origin. Imported meat products are subject to this 

requirement: imported carcasses and parts of carcasses must 

be labeled, and individual retail (consumer-ready) packages 

also must be labeled. Imported carcasses or parts generally 

go to U.S. plants for further processing. The labeling policy 

considers these plants as the “ultimate purchasers.” 

Therefore, any products these plants make from the 

imported meat (for example, ground beef patties made in the 

United States from beef that originated in Canada or 

elsewhere) do not have to bear country-of-origin labels. A 

number of other agricultural articles are exempt from the 

basic country-of-origin labeling requirements: eggs; livestock 

and other animals, live or dead; and other “natural 

products” such as fruits, vegetables, nuts, and berries. 

(However, the outermost containers used to bring these 

articles into the United States must indicate the country of 

origin.) On May 13, 2002, President George W. Bush signed 

into law the Farm Security and Rural Investment Act of 2002, 

which requires beef, lamb, pork, farm-raised fish, wild fish, 

perishable agricultural commodities, and peanuts to bear 

Country-of-Origin labeling at the point of retail sale.

Critical Control Point

An operation (practice, procedure, process, or location) at or 

by which preventive or control measures can be exercised 

that will eliminate, prevent, or minimize one or more 

hazards. Critical control points are fundamental to Hazard 

Analysis and Critical Control Point (HACCP) systems.
78

E. coli O157:H7 (Escherichia coli O157:H7)

A bacterium that lives harmlessly in the intestines of animals 

such as cattle, reptiles, and birds. However, in humans the 

bacterium, which can be transmitted by foods, animal 

contact, and drinking water, can cause bloody diarrhea and 

also lead to hemolytic uremic syndrome (HUS), a lifethreatening disease. Although other generic strains of E. coli

are thought to be harmless to humans, the O157:H7 strain is 

particularly virulent and dangerous. USDA began an E. coli

O157:H7 testing plan in 1994. As part of the Hazard Analysis 

and Critical Control Point (HACCP) rule, all meat and 

poultry slaughter plants are required to test carcasses 

regularly for generic E. coli in order to verify that their 

sanitary systems are effectively controlling fecal 

contamination.

Egg Products

Eggs that are removed from their shells for processing. The 

processing of egg products includes breaking eggs, filtering, 

mixing, stabilizing, blending, pasteurizing, cooling, freezing 

or drying, and packaging. Egg products include whole eggs, 

whites, yolks, and various blends with or without non-egg 

ingredients that are processed and pasteurized, and may be 

available in liquid, frozen, and dried forms. FSIS is 

responsible for inspecting egg products and enforcing the 

Egg Products Inspection Act (EPIA).

Egg Products Inspection Act (EPIA)

The Egg Products Inspection Act, passed by Congress in 

1970, provides for the mandatory continuous inspection of 

the processing of liquid, frozen, and dried egg products.

Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)

The Federal Agency whose mission is to protect human 

health and to safeguard the natural environment; air, water, 

and land; upon which life depends. EPA provides leadership 

in the Nation's environmental science, research, education 

and assessment efforts. EPA works closely with other Federal 

agencies, State and local governments, and Indian tribes to 

develop and enforce regulations under existing 

environmental laws. EPA is responsible for researching and 

setting national standards for a variety of environmental 

programs and delegates to States and Tribes responsible for 

issuing permits and monitoring and enforcing compliance.

Epidemiology

Study of the distribution of disease, or other health-related 

conditions and events in human or animal populations, in 

order to identify health problems and possible causes.

Equivalence

A term applied by the Uruguay Round Agreement on the 

Application of Sanitary and Phytosanitary (SPS) Measures. 

WTO member countries shall accord acceptance to the SPS 

measures of other countries (even if those measures differ 

from their own or from those used by other member 

countries trading in the same product) if the exporting 

country demonstrates to the importing country that its 

measures achieve the importer’s appropriate level of sanitary 

and phytosanitary protection.

Establishment or Official Establishment

Any slaughtering, cutting, boning, meat canning, curing, 

smoking, salting, packing, rendering, or similar facility at 

which inspection is maintained under regulations of the 

Federal Meat Inspection Act, Poultry Products Inspection 

Act, Egg Products Inspection Act, and the Humane Methods 

of Slaughter Act.

Farm-to-Table Continuum

A multi-step journey that food travels before it is consumed.

Federal Meat Inspection Act of 1906 (FMIA)

Enacted June 30, 1906, as chapter 3913, 34 Stat. 674, and 

substantially amended by the Wholesome Meat Act 1967 

(P.L. 90-201), the FMIA requires USDA to inspect all cattle, 

sheep, swine, goats, and horses when slaughtered and 

processed into products for human consumption. The 

primary goals of the law are to prevent adulterated or 

misbranded livestock and products from being sold as food, 

and to ensure that meat and meat products are slaughtered 

and processed under sanitary conditions. These requirements 

apply to animals and their products produced and sold 

within States, as well as to imports, which must be inspected 

under equivalent foreign standards. The Food and Drug 

Administration is responsible for all meats considered 

“exotic” at this time, including venison and buffalo.

Food Emergency Response Network (FERN)

The Food Emergency Response Network integrates the 

Nation's food-testing laboratories at the local, State, and 

Federal levels into a network that is able to respond to 

emergencies involving biological, chemical, or radiological 

contamination of food. The FERN structure is organized to 

ensure Federal and State inter-agency participation and 

cooperation in the formation, development, and operation of 

the network.

Fight BAC!® Campaign

A national public education project by the Partnership for 

Food Safety Education, which brings together industry, 

government, and consumer groups to educate Americans 

about the importance of using safe food-handling practices. 

The campaign focuses on the “4 Cs” of food safety-the four 

simple steps people can take to fight foodborne bacteria and 

reduce the risk of foodborne illness. The four simple steps 

are: Clean, Cook, Separate, and Chill.

Food Safety and Inspection Service (FSIS)

The Food Safety and Inspection Service is the public health 

agency in the U.S. Department of Agriculture responsible for 

ensuring that the Nation’s commercial supply of meat, 

poultry, and processed egg products is safe, wholesome, and 
79 FSIS Strategic Plan FY 2011-2016

correctly labeled and packaged, as required by the Federal 

Meat Inspection Act, the Poultry Products Inspection Act, 

and the Egg Products Inspection Act.

Food Biosecurity Action Team (F-BAT)

The USDA Under Secretary for Food Safety formed the Food 

Biosecurity Action Team to coordinate and facilitate all 

activities pertaining to biosecurity, countering terrorism, and 

emergency preparedness with FSIS. F-BAT also serves as 

FSIS’ voice with other governmental agencies and internal 

and external constituents on biosecurity issues.

Food and Drug Administration (FDA)

An Agency within the Public Health Service of the 

Department of Health and Human Services. FDA is a public 

health agency charged with protecting consumers by 

enforcing the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act and 

several related public health laws. Importantly for 

agriculture, a major FDA mission is to protect the safety and 

wholesomeness of food. In this regard, its scientists test 

samples to see if any substances, such as pesticide residues, 

are present in unacceptable amounts; it sets food labeling 

standards; and it sees that medicated feeds and other drugs 

given to animals raised for food are not threatening to the 

consumer health.

Food Thermometer

A special device that measures the internal temperature of 

cooked foods, such as meat, poultry, and any combination 

dishes, to ensure that a safe internal food temperature is 

reached.

Foodborne Illnesses

Illnesses caused by pathogens that enter the human body 

through foods.

Foodborne Outbreak

The occurrence of two or more people experiencing the same 

illness after eating the same food.

Foodborne Pathogens

Disease-causing microorganisms found in food, usually 

bacteria, fungi, parasites, protozoans, and viruses. The top 10

pathogens are: Salmonella, Staphylococcus Aureus,

Campylobacter jejuni, Yersinia enterocolitica, Listeria 

monocytogenes, Vibro cholerae non-01, Vibrio Parahemolyticus,

Bacillus cereus, Escherichia coli – enteropathogenic, and Shigella. 

Many of these pathogens may be found in contaminated 

meat, poultry, shell eggs, dairy products, and seafood.

FoodNet

The Foodborne Diseases Active Surveillance Network 

(FoodNet) is the principal foodborne disease component of 

CDC's Emerging Infections Program (EIP). FoodNet is a 

collaborative project of the CDC, nine EIP sites (California, 

Colorado, Connecticut, Georgia, Maryland, Minnesota, New 

York, Oregon, and Tennessee), the USDA, and the FDA. The 

project consists of active surveillance for foodborne diseases 

and related epidemiologic studies designed to help public 

health officials better understand the epidemiology of 

foodborne diseases in the United States. FoodNet provides a 

network for responding to new and emerging foodborne 

diseases of national importance, monitoring the burden of 

foodborne diseases, and identifying the sources of specific 

foodborne diseases.

Food Safety Assessments (FSAs)

FSAs provide assurance, in the light of the best available 

scientific knowledge, that the food does not cause harm 

when prepared, used, and/or eaten according to its intended 

use. The outcome of the safety assessment process is to 

define the product under consideration in such a way as to 

enable risk managers to determine whether any measures are 

needed and, if so, to make well-informed and appropriate 

decisions.

Food Safety Working Group (FSWG)

On March 14, 2009, President Barack Obama announced the 

creation of a new Food Safety Working Group to advise him 

on how to upgrade the U.S. food safety system. The Working 

Group is recommending a new, public health-focused 

approach to food safety based on three core principles: (1) 

prioritizing prevention; (2) strengthening surveillance and 

enforcement; and (3) improving response and recovery.

Hazard Analysis And Critical Control Point 

(HACCP)

A production quality control system now being adopted 

throughout much of the food industry as a method for 

minimizing the entry of foodborne pathogens into the food 

supply in order to protect human health. Under a HACCP 

(pronounced Ha-sip) system, potential hazards are identified 

and risks are analyzed in each phase of production; critical 

control points for preventing such hazards are identified and 

constantly monitored; and corrective actions are taken when 

necessary. Record keeping and verification procedures are

used to ensure that the system is working. HACCP is one of 

the major elements of regulations, issued by USDA in July 

1996, to control pathogens in meat and poultry products. 

Under the rules, all meat and poultry slaughter and 

processing plants with 500 or more employees had to 

develop and implement, by January 1998, a USDA-approved 

HACCP plan for each of their processes and products. Plants 

with 10 to 500 employees implemented HACCP by January 

1999, and plants with less than 10 employees implemented 

the system by January 2000. Under separate rules issued by 

the Food and Drug Administration on December 5, 1995, 

seafood processors and importers also were required to 

implement HACCP plans and be in full compliance by 

December 1997.
80

HACCP-Based Inspection Models Project

(HIMP)

HIMP is an effort to determine how FSIS can improve the use 

of its online slaughter inspectors and continue to ensure the 

reduction and/or elimination of defects that pass through 

traditional inspection. Under this project, FSIS has 

established performance standards for food-safety and nonfood-safety defects (also known as “other consumer 

protections” or OCP) found in young chickens, hogs, and 

turkeys. The food safety performance standards are set at 

zero to protect consumers from conditions that may be 

harmful. The OCP performance standards are more stringent 

than current standards and, thus, require improved plant 

performance. Participating plants must revise their HACCP 

systems to meet these food safety performance standards and 

establish process control systems to address the OCP 

concerns. Under this project, FSIS conducts continuous 

inspection with verification to ensure that performance 

standards are met.

Humane Methods of Slaughter Act (HMSA)

This Act amended the FMIA by requiring that all meat 

inspected at Federal establishments by FSIS, for use as 

human food, be produced from livestock slaughtered by 

humane methods in accordance with the Humane Slaughter 

Act of 1958. The 1958 Act required all livestock in the United 

States be slaughtered humanely, except for Kosher, Halal, 

and other religious slaughter.

“Inspected and Passed” or “U.S. Inspected 

and Passed” or “U.S. Inspected and Passed 

by Department of Agriculture” (or any 

authorized abbreviation thereof)

This term means that the product so identified has been 

inspected and passed under the regulations in Code of 

Federal Regulations (CFR) , and at the time it was inspected, 

passed, and identified, it was found to be not adulterated.

Listeria monocytogenes (Lm)

Listeria monocytogenes, a pathogenic bacterium that can be 

carried in a variety of foods such as dairy products, red 

meat, poultry, seafood, and vegetables.

Meat

The flesh of animals used as food, including the dressed flesh 

of cattle, swine, sheep, goats and other edible animals, except 

fish, poultry, and wild game animals.

Memorandum of Understanding (MOU)

An agreement between Federal Agencies, or divisions/units 

within an Agency or department, or between Federal and 

State agencies, which delineate tasks, jurisdiction, standard 

operating procedures, or other matters which the agencies or 

units are duly authorized and directed to conduct.

National Academy of Sciences (NAS)

An institution created by Congress in 1863 to provide 

science-based advice to the government. The sister 

organizations associated with the Academy are the National 

Academy of Engineers, Institute of Medicine, and the 

National Research Council. The Academies and the Institute 

are honorary societies that elect new members to their ranks 

each year. The bulk of the institutions’ science-policy and 

technical work is conducted by the National Research 

Council (NRC), created expressly for that purpose. The 

NRC’s Board on Agriculture addresses issues confronting 

agriculture, food, and related environmental topics.

National Outbreak Reporting System

(NORS)

The National Outbreak Reporting System is a Web-based 

platform designed to support reporting of waterborne, 

foodborne, enteric person-to-person, and animal contactassociated disease outbreaks to CDC by State and territorial 

public health agencies.

Pathogen

A microorganism (bacteria, parasites, viruses, or fungi) that 

is infectious and causes disease.

Postmortem Inspection

As used in the meat and poultry inspection program, the 

phrase refers to the inspection that Food Safety and 

Inspection Service inspectors are required to conduct of all 

animal carcasses immediately after they are killed.

Poultry Products Inspection Act of 1957 

(PPIA)

P.L. 85-172 (August 28, 1957), as amended by the Wholesome 

Poultry Products Act of 1968 (P.L. 90-492, August 18, 1968), 

requires USDA to inspect all “domesticated birds” when 

slaughtered and processed into products for human 

consumption. The USDA has defined, by regulation, 

domesticated birds as chickens, turkeys, ducks, geese, and 

guineas. The primary goals of the law are to prevent 

adulterated or misbranded poultry and products from being 

sold as food, and to ensure that poultry, poultry products, 

ratites, and squabs are slaughtered and processed under 

sanitary conditions. These requirements also apply to 

products produced and sold within States as well as to 

imports, which must be inspected under equivalent foreign 

standards.

Poultry Product Classes

Standards for kinds and classes and for cuts of raw poultry 

are discussed in 9 CFR 381.170.

Product

Any carcass, meat, meat by-product, or meat food product 

capable for use as human food
81 FSIS Strategic Plan FY 2011-2016

Public Health

The science and the art of 1) preventing disease; 2) 

prolonging life; and organized community efforts for a) the 

sanitation of the environment; b) the control of 

communicable infections; c) the education of the individual 

in personal hygiene; d) the organization of medical and 

nursing devices for the early diagnosis and preventive 

treatment of disease; and e) the development of the social 

machinery to ensure everyone a standard of living adequate 

for the maintenance of health, so organizing these benefits as 

to enable every citizen to realize his/her birthright of health 

and longevity.

Public Health Information System (PHIS)

PHIS is a robust data management and proactive decisionmaking tool. PHIS automates and integrates FSIS’ systems 

into one comprehensive easy-to-use data analytics tool and 

facilitates the sharing of data among inspection personnel, 

their managers, and headquarters on a daily basis. PHIS 

operate through four components—domestic inspection, 

import activities, export activities, and predictive analytics.

Qualitative Analysis

The process of testing for a substance to determine what it is 

and what its components are. The results are reported in 

terms of the presence or absence of particular components 

based on the size of the sample used in the analysis; the 

number of samples analyzed; and the testing method. An 

example of qualitative analysis would be testing for the 

presence of the bacterial pathogen Listeria monocytogenes in a 

specific food.

Qualitative Risk Assessment

A risk assessment that is based on qualitative data or giving 

a qualitative result. The results are often stated in an 

estimated range, such as “there is a moderate to high risk of 

a certain outcome occurring.”

Quantitative Analysis

The process of testing for a substance to determine how 

much of it there is and the numerical value of each of its 

components. An example would be testing for the amount or 

concentration of a certain chemical or microorganism, such 

as E. coli, in a food.

Quantitative Risk Assessment

A risk assessment that uses modeling to determine the 

probability(s) of what can go wrong, how likely it is to 

happen, and how severe the health impact will be. The 

results are stated in numerical terms, such as “there is a 42

percent probability that one illness may occur from eating a 

serving of X food with a certain health outcome.”

Ready-to-Eat

Food that is in a form that is edible without washing, 

cooking, or additional preparation by the food establishment 

or consumer and that is reasonably expected to be consumed 

in that form.

Recall

Recalls are voluntary actions carried out by a food 

manufacturer or distributor in cooperation with Federal and 

State agencies. Products are recalled when found to be 

contaminated, adulterated, or misbranded. Even when the 

food has been previously inspected and passed by FSIS, a 

recall is necessary when new information becomes available 

indicating a possible public health issue. A recall does not 

include a market withdrawal or stock recovery.

Recall Classifications

FSIS assesses the public health concern or hazard presented 

by a product being recalled, or considered for recall, whether 

firm-initiated or requested by FSIS, and classifies the concern 

as one of the following:

Class I. This is a health hazard situation where there is a 

reasonable probability that the use of the product will cause 

serious, adverse health consequences or death. For example, 

the presence of pathogens in ready-to-eat product or the 

presence of E. coli O157:H7 in ground beef.

Class II. This is a health hazard situation where there is a 

remote probability of adverse health consequences from the 

use of the product. For example, the presence of undeclared 

allergens such as milk or soy products.

Class III. This is a situation where the use of the product will 

not cause adverse health consequences. For example, the 

presence of undeclared generally recognized as safe nonallergen substances, such as excess water.

Risk Analysis

The assessment and management of hazards that cause harm 

(risk) to human health and the communication of how those 

hazards can be controlled, reduced, or eliminated.

Risk Assessment

The process of estimating the severity and likelihood of harm 

to human health or the environment occurring from 

exposure to a substance or activity that, under plausible 

circumstances, can cause harm to human health or the 

environment.

Risk Management

The process of evaluating policy alternatives in view of the 

results of risk assessment and selecting and implementing 

appropriate options to protect public health. Risk 

management determines what action to take to reduce, 

eliminate, or control risks. This includes establishing risk 

assessment policies, regulations, procedures, and a 

framework for decision-making based on risk.

Salmonella

A pathogenic, diarrhea-producing bacterium that is the 
82

leading cause of human foodborne illness among intestinal 

pathogens. It is commonly found in raw meats, poultry, milk, 

and eggs, however, other foods can carry it. Under 1996 rules 

published by USDA to control pathogens in meat and 

poultry, all plants that slaughter food animals and produce 

raw ground meat products must meet established pathogen 

reduction performance standards for Salmonella

contamination. The standards, which took effect in January 

1998, vary by product. Plants where USDA testing indicates 

contamination rates are above the national standard will be 

required to take remedial actions.

Sample 

A specimen that is taken from food and tested for the 

purpose of identifying a foodborne pathogen or various 

kinds of chemical contaminants in food.

State Inspection Program

Often refers to the State-run meat and poultry inspection 

programs to which USDA contributes 50 percent of the cost. 

State programs (about half the States use them) must be 

certified by USDA to be at least equal to Federal inspection 

requirements. However, products from State-inspected 

plants (most are relatively smaller operations) cannot be sold 

outside of the State. Small plants and many State officials 

have endorsed bills in Congress that would permit Stateinspected products to be sold into interstate and foreign 

commerce, but large meat and poultry companies (most 

already under Federal inspection) generally oppose such a 

change.

Surveillance

A system of monitoring the health of the population, which 

is used to prevent foodborne illness outbreaks from 

increasing.

Survey

A tool used by epidemiologists to understand the state of 

health of the population or to identify the source of a 

foodborne outbreak.

Verification

The use of methods, procedures, or tests by supervisors, 

designated personnel, or regulators to determine if the food 

safety system based on the HACCP principles is working to 

control identified hazards or if modifications need to be 

made.

Voluntary Inspection

Under the authority of the Agricultural Marketing Act of 

1946, as amended (7 U.S.C. 1621 et seq.), FSIS provides 

voluntary inspection of exotic animal products. Voluntary 

inspection is conducted by USDA inspectors who must have 

knowledge about each particular species they inspect. Under 

the FSIS voluntary inspection program, establishments are 

required to pay a fee for inspection services.
83 FSIS Strategic Plan FY 2011-2016

This page intentionally left blank
84

One 

Team, 

One 

Purpose
85 FSIS Strategic Plan FY 2011-2016

We are one team, with only one 

purpose. And that is to protect 

public health. FSIS employees 

take pride in the fact that their 

jobs help prevent foodborne 

illness.
86

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE (USDA)

FOOD SAFETY AND INSPECTION 

SERVICE

STRATEGIC PLAN FY 2011-2016

Additional copies of this Strategic Plan can be downloaded from FSIS’s Web site at www.fsis.usda.gov

The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) prohibits discrimination in all its programs and activities on the basis of race, color, national 

origin, age, disability, and where applicable, sex, marital status, familial status, parental status, religion, sexual orientation, genetic 

information, political beliefs, reprisal, or because all or a part of an individual's income is derived from any public assistance program. (Not 

all prohibited bases apply to all programs.) Persons with disabilities who require alternative means for communication of program 

information (Braille, large print, audiotape, etc.) should contact USDA's TARGET Center at (202) 720-2600 (voice and TDD). To file a 

complaint of discrimination write to USDA, Director, Office of Civil Rights, 1400 Independence Avenue, S.W., Washington, D.C. 20250-9410, 

or call (800) 795-3272 (voice) or (202) 720-6382 (TDD).

USDA is an equal opportunity provider and employer.