Questions? Call 800-624-6242 About | Ordering | New Menu | Items in cart [0] SEARCH

Rights & Permissions Free PDF Access Sign in to download PDF book and chapters Free Resources Display this book on your site! Related Titles Ensuring Safe Food:From Production to Consumption Poultry Inspection:The Basis for a Risk-Assessment Approach Other Related Titles Review of the Methodology Proposed by the Food Safety and Inspection Service for Risk-Based Surveillance of In-Commerce Activities: A Letter Report (2009) Board on Agriculture and Natural Resources (BANR) Citation Manager Export the bibliographic data for this book in your chosen format Web Search Builder Use this book's key terms to search within this book, across our collection, or across the Web. Skim This Chapter Skim this chapter and use this chapter's key terms to search within this book. Reference Finder Paste in your own text to find books that relate to your topic. Citation Manager . "APPENDIX D Comparison of Rankings Proposed by the Committee with the FSIS15 Ranking of Risk Considerations." Review of the Methodology Proposed by the Food Safety and Inspection Service for Risk-Based Surveillance of In-Commerce Activities: A Letter Report. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press, 2009. Please select a format: Page 28   E-mail Share on facebook Facebook Share on delicious Delicious Share on stumbleupon Stumble Share on twitter Twitter More Sharing ServicesMore The following HTML text is provided to enhance online readability. Many aspects of typography translate only awkwardly to HTML. Please use the page image as the authoritative form to ensure accuracy. APPENDIX D Comparison of Rankings Proposed by the Committee with the FSIS15 Ranking of Risk Considerations16 15 Based on Donald Anderson (FSIS) Public Health “Risk Based” In-Commerce Surveillance, presented to the Committee, November 6, 2008. 16 Differences are identified by shading. 17 “Gather info” recognizes that surveillance by other authorities varies by state and region. Partnering with federal, state, and local jurisdictions to understand the level of surveillance activity, including existence or establishment of Memoranda of Understanding (MOU) within each region should be done to determine ranking specific to the region under surveillance by the CID inspector. 18 Pet food facilities, which are under FDA jurisdiction, are Low. Meat products destine for other animal use (e.g. mink farms, zoos, animal parks) may not have other surveillance. 19 Consumer Susceptibility for child care, primary schools, nursing homes, and hospital institutions is High; other institutions are ranked a medium Page 28 Front Matter (R1-R8) Letter Report (1-23) APPENDIX A Meeting Agendas (24-24) APPENDIX B Percentage of Reported Foodborne-Disease Outbreaks Associated With Identified Contributing Factors (25-25) APPENDIX C Foodborne Illnesses in Institutions (26-27) APPENDIX D Comparison of Rankings Proposed by the Committee with the FSIS15 Ranking of Risk Considerations (28-28) APPENDIX E An Example of a Stepwise Decision Process (29-29)

Below are the first 10 and last 10 pages of uncorrected machine-read text (when available) of this chapter, followed by the top 30 algorithmically extracted key phrases from the chapter as a whole.
Intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text on the opening pages of each chapter. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.

Do not use for reproduction, copying, pasting, or reading; exclusively for search engines.

OCR for page 28
Review of the Methodology Proposed by the Food Safety and Inspection Service for Risk-Based Surveillance of In-Commerce Activities: A Letter Report APPENDIX D Comparison of Rankings Proposed by the Committee with the FSIS15 Ranking of Risk Considerations16 15 Based on Donald Anderson (FSIS) Public Health “Risk Based” In-Commerce Surveillance, presented to the Committee, November 6, 2008. 16 Differences are identified by shading. 17 “Gather info” recognizes that surveillance by other authorities varies by state and region. Partnering with federal, state, and local jurisdictions to understand the level of surveillance activity, including existence or establishment of Memoranda of Understanding (MOU) within each region should be done to determine ranking specific to the region under surveillance by the CID inspector. 18 Pet food facilities, which are under FDA jurisdiction, are Low. Meat products destine for other animal use (e.g. mink farms, zoos, animal parks) may not have other surveillance. 19 Consumer Susceptibility for child care, primary schools, nursing homes, and hospital institutions is High; other institutions are ranked a medium