Executive Housekeeping Today - March 2009 - (Page 11)

Integrated Cleaning and Measurement™: A New Approach to Housekeeping and Sanitation a by Robert W. Powitz, PhD, MPH, RS, DLAAS Secondly, almost every procedure detailed in the SSOP, seemed to be overkill but, in rather a strange way: Regardless of the soiling associated with the different operations in the restaurant, the SSOP called for “one size fits all” in both the use of cleaning chemicals and methods of application; followed by the front and the back of the house awash in a sanitizer solution. The written protocols placed more emphasis on the vendor of the cleaning compounds than to the soiling in the kitchen and service areas. Thirdly, the section dealing with “Maintenance of Sanitation” was strictly subjective. There was not one objective measurement listed to evaluate cleaning efficacy. By definition in the SSOP, the “routinely evaluate” provision consisted of two simple parameters: eyeballing “clean” and placing an “x” in multiple boxes on a check sheet. This was punctuated by an occasional nonspecific microbiological assay. Surely, if there had been a failure of any sort in the sanitation efforts at the facility that resulted in a cross contamination event, the corrective action would have taken on the tone of more “overkill,” except at a higher level and with more lethal methods. In short, although this SSOP looked good at first glance, it had been constructed a bit askew, with a bias to the cleaning chemicals rather than the outcome needed. Basically, it was unworkable, cumbersome, costly, and to some degree, unscientific. Granted, I probably made it sound worse than it actually was, but the document did need some serious revamping, together with large doses of objectivity and practicality. I will say that it took an organized and dedicated team effort to get it done. With a lot of good discussion and a huge dose of new ideas, a different approach was taken in its development. The resulting SSOP is now quite comprehensive and it complements actual practice—with almost half the number of pages than that of the original document. Here’s the unique approach we took to get there: Rather than salvage what had been written, we viewed this as a golden opportunity to start afresh from the beginning and with basics. We first decided to scrutinize the entire housekeeping and sanitation program by placing emphasis on those areas and surfaces that had to be cleaned for public health reasons. We wanted to ensure that they got properly cleaned when they needed cleaning and with the best tools and safest products. Secondly, we took a critical view of how housekeeping and general sanitation was done; with special emphasis on the method of cleaning, the use of chemicals, and their related costs. Since general housekeeping and sanitation represents a considerable portion of the cost of doing business, fiscal responsibility is as important as the deed itself. Thirdly, we wanted to monitor the cleaning efforts in such a way that insured adherence (continued on next page) As a sanitarian, I always viewed my professional goals as those of ensuring food safety by constantly applying scientific principles through the application of cost-effective and cost-efficient ongoing preventive measures. So, when I started updating a Sanitation Standard Operating Procedure (SSOP) for a chain restaurant client of mine, the blatantly evident suddenly became the patently obvious. The SSOP, which was originally a fill-in-the-blank document, was neither entirely based on good science, nor was it quite fiscally responsible. Please don’t get me wrong, this document was complete in every way. It met all requirements as outlined in Part 416 of Title 21 CFR. Each section would have resoundingly passed the litmus test of any regulator. But when I started matching the document to the actual operation, it became readily apparent that there were several things seriously amiss. First, the SSOP did not match the practice or vice versa. The housekeeping and sanitation efforts had a morphogenesis of their own, apart from the written protocols. Had the restaurant staff followed the written protocols, there would be no time for customer care and food preparation. All efforts would go into cleaning, and even that was somewhat questionable. To be sure, if there were ever any liability involved, it would be most difficult to reconcile the actual housekeeping practices with the SSOP. March 2009/Executive Housekeeping Today

Table of Contents Feed for the Digital Edition of Executive Housekeeping Today - March 2009

Executive Housekeeping Today - March 2009 Contents Executive Corner Why Integrated Cleaning and Measurement is Good for the Cleaning Industry Hygienic Green Cleaning - The Next Wave Frugal Housekeeper Integrated Cleaning and Measurement: A New Approach to Housekeeping and Sanitation Feature Article What's in YOUR Janitor Closet? The Green Scene 2009 Convention Information Product Highlights New Members Joint IEHA/ISSA Members Advertisers' Index Calendar of Events Inside IEHA What IEHA Has Done For Me

Executive Housekeeping Today - March 2009

For optimal viewing of this digital publication, please enable JavaScript and then refresh the page. If you would like to try to load the digital publication without using Flash Player detection, please click here.