Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Tool - FoodSafety
Tool - FoodSafety
Supervised on Supervisor
1. General Information
1.1. RDHS area
1.2. MOH area
1.3. Name of the local authority
(Pradeshiya Sabha/Municipality area/Urban Council)
1.4. PHI area
1.5. Name of the PHI
1.6. Date appointed to this station DD / MM / YYYY
1.7. Date of first appointment DD / MM / YYYY
2. Transport facilities
2.1. Available
No Date obtained
4. Food safety charts (each in A‐4 size papers) Maintained Well Any Remarks
Yes No
34
6. Files (on Food Safety) Satisfactory
Available Remarks If any
(Up to date)
Yes No Yes No
7. Food establishments inspected for the previous six months (at least one routine inspection)
Total Expected %
Grade of Establishment Minimum Frequency no. of inspections Remarks if any
No inspections done
i. Grade‐A Once in 6 months
ii. Grade‐B Once in 3 months
iii. Grade‐C Once a month
iv. Grade‐D Once in two weeks
8. Change of grade of the food establishments at the last inspection (according to previous two
inspection results)
Poor quality
Adulterated
d. No of prosecutions
e. No convicted
10. Action taken by the PHI to improve sanitary conditions of food establishments?
Conducted
12. Health Education programmes No. Planned
No %
(during last six months)
Number of
13. Water Number of Samples bacteriologically Action taken for unsatisfactory
Sampling tested unsatisfactory samples samples
(during last reported
year)
i. Weekly Fair
No %
i. Estimated no. of food handlers in the area
ii. No. of food handlers screened during the previous year
iii. No. of food handlers vaccinated for Typhoid during the
previous year
FIELD SUPERVISION
Institution Canteens
Hotel/Restaurants
Tea/Coffee Kiosks
School Canteens
Food Factories
Supermarkets
Mld‐day Meal
Snack Bars
Groceries
Bakeries
Kitchens
16. Food Handling establishments
19. Suggestions made by the PHI for more effective service delivery?
e. Action taken by the Medical Officer of Health (MOH) for non implementation
i. i.
ii. ii.
iii. iii.
iv. iv.
v. v.