Small Meat Processor Survey

OMB Number: 0583-XXXX

Exp. Date:

USDA FSIS Small Plant Study Stakeholder Survey

	OMB No. 0583-NEW Approval Expires: Project Code:

							Xxx
							Niche Meat Processor Assistance Network (NMPAN) College of Agriculture at Oregon State University Rebecca Thistlethwaite, Extension Specialist Contact info: [email protected], Ph. 541-806-1526
Response to this survey is voluntary. According to the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, an agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to, a collection of information unless it displays a valid OMB control number. The valid OMB control number for this information collection is 0583-XXXX. The time required to complete this information collection is estimated to average 75 minutes per response, including the time for reviewing instructions, searching existing data sources, gathering and maintaining the data needed, and completing and reviewing the collection of information.

Background:

As part of the 2018 US Farm Bill, a study on the effectiveness of USDA Food Safety Inspection Service (FSIS)’s outreach, guidance materials, and responsiveness to small meat processors was authorized to be carried out.

The Niche Meat Processor Assistance Network (NMPAN), a project housed within the College of Agricultural Sciences, Department of Crop and Soil Sciences at Oregon State University, is an Extension-based community of practice focused on the long-term viability of small and mid-sized processors who are essential to the local and regional meat and poultry sectors. NMPAN was awarded a cooperative agreement with USDA Food Safety Inspection Service on August 1, 2019, to carry out the study as authorized in the 2018 Farm Bill described above.

Please complete the survey no later than June 30, 2020. Return to Rebecca Thistlethwaite, NMPAN, c/o Department of Crop & Soil Science, Oregon State University, Corvallis, OR 97331.

Please contact Rebecca Thistlethwaite (541-806-1526), Niche Meat Processor Assistance Network (NMPAN), Oregon State University, [email protected] with comments or questions about this survey.

Procedures:

Please take the time to completely read the draft report that NMPAN has put together based on available data- “Report on USDA FSIS Guidance and Outreach to Small Meat Processors, 3.20.2020”. Then fill out this survey to the best of your ability and mail back by June 30, 2020. NMPAN will take your feedback, experience, and rankings to fine tune the draft and develop the final report to USDA FSIS.

Survey will be administered electronically through Qualtrics or in person at future small plant stakeholder meetings or regional meat processor conventions that occur over project period.

All survey results will be anonymized for reporting. Private information will be kept confidential.

1. Please describe your role in the meat industry (Please pick primary #1 and secondary #2 occupation or role, mark 1 & 2 next to descriptor. If you have only one role, just mark a 1):

-Farmer/rancher

-Inspected processor (no slaughter)

-Inspected processor (slaughter)

-Further processing only

-Co-packing only

-Retail exempt butcher

-Custom exempt processor

-Meat brand/aggregator/distributor

-Academic

-Government Agency staff

-NGO staff

-Consultant

-Supplier

-Other (please describe):___________________________________________________

2. If you are an inspected meat processor, what size definition would you fall under (see definitions below, check correct category)? Please skip question if you are not an inspected meat processor.

Very small (fewer than 10 employees or annual sales of less than $2.5 million)

Small (10-499 employees unless annual sales total less than $2.5 million)

Large (500 or more employees)

3. Given what you have read in the draft report about USDA FSIS's outreach strategies, tools, and practices, how effective have you found them in addressing your needs, questions, or concerns?

Outreach	Not effective at all	Somewhat effective	Moderately effective	Effective most of the time	Very effective
Strategies
Tools
Practices

If you marked any of the above as not effective or somewhat effective, could you explain?

Use narrative box below.

4. When you have information needs regarding USDA FSIS regulations or policy who do you most often go to? How has your experience been at those different levels? If you don’t use a source for information, leave blank. For other, please write the name of the other resource you use.

Information Tool or Person	Not effective at all	Somewhat effective	Moderately effective	Effective most of the time	Very effective
In plant inspectors
PHVs
EAIOs
District Office
FSIS website
FSIS national staff
Ask FSIS web portal
Small Plant Help Desk
Extension/University
Trade Association
Other:

If you marked any of the above as not effective or somewhat effective, could you explain?

Use narrative box below.

5. What are your preferred methods for receiving information from USDA FSIS? Pick your top 3 from this list below (mark with a #1, #2, #3):

- Do my own research on the FSIS website

- Participate in webinars (live or recorded)

- Watch video tutorials

- Receive a package with CDs

- Read guidance documents or other written documents

- Read the Constituent Update

- Read the Federal Register

- Read the Code of Federal Regulations

- Talk to my in-plant inspectors or other circuit staff

- Talk to the District Office staff

- Roundtables and monthly industry meetings

- Booths at trade shows or professional meetings

- Email notifications of updates

-Other (please describe):___________________________________________________

6. Have you had any specific issues in the last two years with USDA FSIS policy or practice, and if so, can you mark with of the following categories those issues pertained to? Please rank how responsive USDA FSIS was in general addressing your issue (scale from 1 to 5), mark n/a if it doesn’t apply.

Issue/Concern	Not effective at all	Somewhat effective	Moderately effective	Effective most of the time	Very effective
New regulatory requirements
Obtaining grant of inspection
Humane Handling
Inspector Communication/Relationship
Appealing a FSIS decision
PHIS access
Not getting an answer to a question in a timely way
Labeling
Pathogen testing methods, protocol, or frequency
Lab results
Questions about Appendix A & B
Voluntary inspection for exotics/non-amenables
Food Safety Assessments
Validation Studies
HACCP plans
SSOPs
Pre-Op Sanitation
New pathogen performance standards
Recordkeeping
Billing or inspector hours (including overtime)
Others (please describe):

If you marked any of the above as not effective or somewhat effective, could you explain? Use narrative box below.

7. Based on the draft report and your answer above, do you have any specific recommendations for USDA FSIS to improve the effectiveness of their outreach, guidance materials, and other tools? Use narrative box below.

8. Based on the draft report and your answers above, do you have any specific recommendations for USDA FSIS to be more responsive to inquiries or issues that you have? Use narrative box below.

9. For inspected establishments that slaughter only: In the draft report there was a specific section on humane handling. Do you have any other recommendations to add to that section that aren’t already stated? Use narrative box below.

10. Finally, is there anything missing from this report that you think should be added? Any other key issues that aren’t discussed or potential recommendations or solutions? Use narrative box below and continue below the box if you need more space.

Thank you for your time and feedback!

8