Food Safety and Inspection Service Pandemic Response at Establishments — Inspection Report 24801-0001-23
Summary
An inspection report, number 24801-0001-23, from the Office of Inspector General of the United States Department of Agriculture, dated July 2022, on the pandemic response of the Food Safety and Inspection Service (FSIS) at meat and poultry slaughter and processing establishments. It states that the CARES Act provided FSIS with $33 million, available until September 30, 2021, and that as of March 1, 2022, FSIS had spent more than $32 million on items such as employee compensation and personal protective equipment. It states that FSIS issued notices and guidance to promote health and safety and placed inspectors on temporary details to fill personnel shortages. The report recommends that FSIS complete updates to the process for tracking and monitoring the form for alleged safety or health hazards.
Summary drafted by a model from the document's text below and checked by script against that text before publication. It is a navigation aid, not a reading of what the document proves. Where AI is used
- Issuer
- Source documents
- Document type
- Covid19 Fsis Pandemic Response Establishments
- Case
- Covid19 Fsis Pandemic Response Establishments
Cite this document
“Food Safety and Inspection Service Pandemic Response at Establishments — Inspection Report 24801-0001-23.”
Original at usdaoig.oversight.gov. Archived at Pandemic Darlings, https://pandemicdarlings.com/source-documents/covid19-fsis-pandemic-response-establishments/
, SHA-256 5c881f455e10980d38953e1c515a2bbcfdf1f626f20885990a4eed6a3be16705.Full text
OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL
U. S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
COVID-19—Food Safety and
Inspection Service Pandemic
Response at Establishments
Inspection Report 24801-0001-23
July 2022
COVID-19—Food Safety and Inspection Service
Pandemic Response at Establishments
Inspection Report 24801-0001-23
We reviewed the actions FSIS took relating to COVID-19 to ensure the
continuation of inspection operations at meat and poultry slaughter and
processing establishments, including to ensure the health and safety of FSIS
inspectors and how FSIS spent the $33 million in CARES Act funding.
OBJECTIVE WHAT OIG FOUND
Our objective was to determine The Food Safety and Inspection Service (FSIS) is the regulatory
what actions FSIS took relating agency within the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA)
to COVID-19 to ensure the responsible for protecting the public’s health by ensuring the safety
continuation of inspection of the Nation’s commercial supply of meat, poultry, and processed
operations at meat and poultry egg products. The Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security
slaughter and processing (CARES) Act provided FSIS with $33 million, to remain available
establishments. until September 30, 2021, to prevent, prepare for, and respond to
the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, domestically or
internationally.
REVIEWED
In response to a Congressional request, we conducted an inspection to
We interviewed FSIS officials; determine what actions FSIS took relating to COVID-19 to ensure the
reviewed notices related to continuation of inspection operations at meat and poultry slaughter
COVID-19, agency directives, and processing establishments.
and other applicable Federal
laws, guidance, and publicly As of March 1, 2022, FSIS had spent more than $32 million of the
available information; and CARES Act funding in response to COVID-19. Specifically, FSIS used
reviewed financial system reports this funding on items such as employee compensation and personal
and inventory data. We also protective equipment (PPE). While Executive Order 13917 did not
reviewed COVID-19 related FSIS specifically direct FSIS to take action to ensure operations continued
forms 4791-27, “Report of Alleged in agricultural establishments, FSIS did issue notices and guidance
Safety or Health Hazard,” as to promote health and safety during the pandemic. For example,
well as the agency’s process for FSIS promoted health and safety by ensuring PPE was available to
monitoring this documentation, inspection personnel and allowing them to use various types of leave.
and executive orders. Additionally, the agency placed inspectors on temporary details to
fill personnel shortages and ensure inspections continued at the
establishments. If an FSIS inspector tested positive for COVID-19,
RECOMMENDS FSIS had procedures in place to respond to the positive test result.
The agency developed and used the Situation Report and Impact
We recommend FSIS complete Summary for FSIS Leadership to track COVID-19 cases throughout
updates to the process for the pandemic, including the status of employees who tested positive for
tracking and monitoring COVID-19 and the total number of FSIS employees currently
FSIS form 4791-27, “Report self-quarantining.
of Alleged Safety or Health
Hazard,” and associated FSIS FSIS used an existing directive to provide inspectors with the process
Directive 4791.12, Reporting to report alleged safety or health-related hazards in establishments
and Correcting Occupational due to COVID-19. However, we found that FSIS was unable to provide
Hazards. Specifically, update us with an accurate count of the number of forms the agency received
the directive to include the to capture this information. This occurred because the directive did
practice of submitting all FSIS not require FSIS field supervisors to send this form to the agency’s
4791-27 forms to the Safety and Safety and Physical Security Branch.
Physical Security Branch, where
they can be centrally recorded. FSIS agreed with our recommendation, and we accepted management
decision on this recommendation.
OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL
United States Department of Agriculture
DATE: July 26, 2022
INSPECTION
NUMBER: 24801-0001-23
TO: Paul Kiecker
Administrator
Food Safety and Inspection Service
Agency
ATTN: Cara LeConte
Chief Financial Officer
Food Safety and Inspection Service
FROM: Gil H. Harden
Assistant Inspector General for Audit
SUBJECT: COVID-19—Food Safety and Inspection Service Pandemic Response at
Establishments
This report presents the results of the subject review. Your written response to the official draft
is included in its entirety at the end of the report. We have incorporated excerpts from your
response, and the Office of Inspector General’s (OIG) position, into the relevant sections of the
report. Based on your written response, we are accepting management decision for the audit
recommendation in this report, and no further response to this office is necessary. Please follow
your internal agency procedures in forwarding final action correspondence to the Office of the
Chief Financial Officer (OCFO).
In accordance with Departmental Regulation 1720-1, final action needs to be taken within 1 year
of each management decision to prevent being listed in the Department’s annual Agency
Financial Report. For agencies other than OCFO, please follow your internal agency procedures
in forwarding final action correspondence to OCFO.
We appreciate the courtesies and cooperation extended to us by members of your staff during our
audit fieldwork and subsequent discussions. This report contains publicly available information
and will be posted in its entirety to our website (https://usdaoig.oversight.gov) in the near future.
Table of Contents
Background and Objectives ................................................................................... 1
Section 1: CARES Act Funding............................................................................ 5
Section 2: Health and Safety of USDA Inspectors.............................................. 9
Recommendation 1 ......................................................................................11
Section 3: FSIS’ Communication with States ................................................... 16
Section 4: Executive Order 13917 ...................................................................... 18
Scope and Methodology........................................................................................ 19
Abbreviations ........................................................................................................ 20
Exhibit A: FSIS COVID-19 Notices ................................................................... 21
Agency’s Response ................................................................................................ 23
Background and Objectives
Background
The Food Safety and Inspection Service (FSIS) is the regulatory agency within the United States
Department of Agriculture (USDA) responsible for protecting the public’s health by ensuring the
safety of the Nation’s commercial supply of meat, poultry, and processed egg products. 1 FSIS
employs more than 8,700 employees and regulates more than 6,500 establishments in all
50 States and United States territories.2, 3 Even though FSIS inspectors work in regulated
establishments, they are not considered employees of those establishments. 4 The safety and
health of meat and poultry establishment employees falls under the authority of the United States
Department of Labor (DOL) Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA). 5
On March 27, 2020, the Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security (CARES) Act 6 was
signed into law to provide emergency assistance and health care response for individuals,
families, and businesses affected by the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) 7 pandemic. This
law provided $33 million in funds, to remain available until September 30, 2021, to FSIS to
prevent, prepare for, and respond to COVID-19, domestically or internationally.
On April 26, 2020, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and OSHA issued
interim guidance, which has been periodically updated, for meat and poultry processing
facilities. 8 According to an OSHA National News Release, the interim guidance includes
information regarding: (1) cleaning of shared meatpacking and processing tools; (2) screening
employees for COVID-19 before they enter work facilities; (3) managing workers who are
1
FSIS operates under authorities from the Federal Meat Inspection Act (21 U.S.C. §§ 601-695), the Poultry
Products Inspection Act (21 U.S.C. §§ 451-472), the Egg Products Inspection Act (21 U.S.C. §§ 1031-1056) and the
Humane Methods of Slaughter Act (7 U.S.C. §§ 1901-1907).
2
According to FSIS, this includes more than 7,700 FSIS inspectors. For the purposes of this report, “inspector”
refers to food inspectors, consumer safety inspectors, supervisory consumer safety inspectors, public health
veterinarians, and frontline supervisors. This also includes Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS)
and Agricultural Marketing Service (AMS) employees who provide temporary inspection coverage in
establishments when FSIS inspectors were unavailable.
3
The words “establishments” and “plants” are used interchangeably with the word “facilities” in this report.
4
According to the 2021 FSIS budget explanatory notes, FSIS inspectors are required to be present for all domestic
slaughter operations, inspect each livestock and poultry carcass, and inspect operations at each processing
establishment at least once per shift.
5
The Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970, Pub. L. No. 91-596, 84 Stat. 1590 (Dec. 29, 1970) (hereafter
OSHA Act), authorizes the Secretary of Labor to enforce the standards developed under the Act by “assisting and
encouraging the States in their efforts to assure safe and healthful working conditions; and providing for research,
information, education, and training in the field of occupational safety and health.” Due to this authority, our
objectives did not include establishment employees.
6
Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security Act, Pub. L. No. 116-136, 134 Stat. 281 (2020).
7
According to CDC and OSHA interim guidance, COVID-19 is a respiratory illness caused by a virus called severe
acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2. Symptoms often include a fever, cough, and shortness of breath and can
range from very mild to severe. Some people become so sick they must be admitted to the hospital, and some
people may die from the illness.
8
“Processing facilities” in this report includes both meat and poultry slaughter and processing establishments.
INSPECTION REPORT 24801-0001-23 1
showing symptoms of COVID-19; (4) implementing appropriate engineering, administrative,
and work practice controls; (5) using appropriate personal protective equipment (PPE); 9 and
(6) practicing social distancing.
In addition, on April 28, 2020, the President issued Executive Order (EO) 13917, via which he
delegated authority to the Secretary of Agriculture to take appropriate action to ensure meat and
poultry establishments continued operations consistent with CDC and OSHA guidance.10, 11
Subsequently, on January 21, 2021, the President issued EO 13999, Protecting Worker Health
and Safety, which directed the Secretary of Agriculture—along with the heads of other
appropriate agencies—to explore mechanisms to protect workers not protected under the OSHA
Act, so that unprotected workers would remain healthy and safe while performing their duties
during the COVID-19 pandemic.12, 13
FSIS inspectors are considered essential, critical infrastructure workers supporting the food and
agricultural supply chain. 14 Therefore, according to CDC and OSHA guidance, FSIS inspectors
may be permitted to continue work following potential exposure to COVID-19, provided they
remain asymptomatic.15, 16 In addition, the guidance stated that FSIS inspectors at meat and
poultry processing facilities may substantially expose each other to COVID-19 due to the nature
of the work environment, which includes, but is not limited to, distance between workers,
duration of contact, and type of contact.
9
According to OSHA.gov, PPE is equipment worn to minimize exposure to hazards that cause serious workplace
injuries and illnesses. PPE may include items such as gloves; safety glasses; shoes; earplugs or muffs; hard hats;
respirators; and coveralls, vests, and full body suits.
10
E.O. 13917 (Apr. 28, 2020).
11
During our review, the CDC and OSHA released guidance, labeled as interim, on April 26, 2020; May 12, 2020;
June 18, 2020; July 9, 2020; October 29, 2020; November 12, 2020; February 2, 2021; and February 6, 2021.
12
E.O. 13999 (Jan. 21, 2021).
13
The OSHA Act established a separate program for Federal Government employees, making Federal agency heads
responsible for providing a safe and healthy work environment. 29 U.S.C. § 668. As such, FSIS employees are
protected workers.
14
The Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA) within the Department of Homeland Security
(DHS) identified food and agriculture workers—including those at livestock and poultry establishments—as
essential, critical infrastructure workers. DHS CISA, Guidance on the Essential Critical Infrastructure Workforce:
Ensuring Community and National Resilience in COVID-19 Response, Version 3.0 (Apr. 17, 2020).
15
The COVID-19 outbreak in the United States was declared a national emergency as of March 1, 2020. Declaring
a National Emergency Concerning the Novel Coronavirus Disease (COVID-19) Outbreak, 85 Fed. Reg. 15337
(Mar. 13, 2020).
16
Department of Health and Human Services, CDC, Meat and Poultry Processing Workers and Employers, Interim
Guidance from CDC and OSHA (Apr. 26, 2020).
2 INSPECTION REPORT 24801-0001-23
At an establishment on June 10, 2008 (prior to the pandemic), establishment employees dissect, sort, and separate
meat parts. FSIS inspectors were on site to ensure the meat was processed in accordance with USDA FSIS
regulations. Photo by Alice Welch from USDA’s Flickr account. It does not depict any particular audit or
investigation.
On August 11, 2020, Senator Michael Bennet requested that the Inspectors General for USDA
and DOL investigate the Federal Government’s actions in preventing the spread of COVID-19 in
meat and other agricultural processing facilities, as well as the effect of the invocation of the
Defense Production Act of 1950 17 on workers’ wellbeing and health. 18 Therefore, we conducted
an inspection to determine what actions FSIS took to ensure the continuation of inspection
operations at meat and poultry slaughter and processing establishments, including the actions
FSIS took to ensure the health and safety of FSIS inspectors and how FSIS spent the $33 million
in CARES Act funding.
In addition to this inspection, OIG released two other work products that reported on the Federal
Government’s response to COVID-19 in meat and other agricultural processing facilities. In
June 2021, OIG’s Office of Analytics and Innovation (OAI) released the results of a survey on
17
50 U.S.C. §§ 4501-4568.
18
Letter from The Honorable Michael F. Bennet, member of the United States Senate Committee on Agriculture,
Nutrition, and Forestry, to The Honorable Phyllis K. Fong (Aug. 2020). Senator Bennet’s request included six
specific areas of interest, which are highlighted in the Objectives section of this report.
INSPECTION REPORT 24801-0001-23 3
how FSIS inspectors perceived COVID-19 safety in their work environments. 19 In addition, in
September 2020, OIG identified and documented the funding streams available to USDA
agencies, including FSIS, to respond to COVID-19. 20
Objectives
Our objectives were to determine what actions FSIS took relating to COVID-19 to ensure the
continuation of inspection operations at meat and poultry slaughter and processing
establishments. Specifically, we determined:
1. how FSIS spent its $33 million in CARES Act funding;
2. what actions FSIS took to ensure the health and safety of FSIS inspectors working at
official establishments;
3. how FSIS ensured inspections continued at the establishments, including determining
whether inspectors were transferred between establishments;
4. what actions FSIS took to communicate the Federal Government’s authority,
standards, and expectations with the State Departments of Health;
5. whether FSIS had sufficient critical resources to ensure reliable COVID-19 tests,
personal protective equipment, hand sanitizer, soap and warm water, workplace
dividers, and disinfectant were available to the inspectors at the establishments;
6. FSIS’ protocols for when an FSIS or establishment employee tested positive for
COVID-19; and
7. what actions FSIS took following the Executive Order issued on April 28, 2020, that
affected outbreaks at meat and poultry processing and other agricultural facilities.
19
OAI Report 21-001-01, Survey of Food Safety and Inspection Service Inspectors’ Perceptions of COVID-19
Safety in the Work Environment, June 2021.
20
Non-Audit Service Report 50025-0001-23, USDA Coronavirus Disease 2019 Funding, Sept. 2020.
4 INSPECTION REPORT 24801-0001-23
Section 1: CARES Act Funding
How did FSIS spend the $33 million in CARES Act funds?
Under the CARES Act, FSIS received $33 million to prevent, prepare for, and respond to
COVID-19, domestically or internationally. This included funds for temporary and intermittent
workers, inspector relocation, and overtime costs under the Federal Meat Inspection Act, the
Poultry Products Inspection Act, and the Egg Products Inspection Act. 21, 22 In September 2020,
OIG reported that FSIS planned to use the CARES Act funding for salaries and expenses, and for
the provision of specialized services. 23, 24
Use of Funds
FSIS spent more than $32 million of CARES Act funding in response
to the pandemic.
ACHIEVEMENT AWARDS FOR INSPECTORS $14,242,924
PPE AND OTHER CRITICAL RESOURCES $5,608,258
EMPLOYEE COMPENSATION - OTHER $3,625,699
EMPLOYEE BENEFITS $2,579,189
SUPPLIES AND MATERIALS $1,850,311
OVERTIME $1,293,431
INTERMITTENT EMPLOYEES $1,201,936
TRAVEL $1,040,660
OUTSIDE SERVICES $748,404
OTHER $266,247
EMPLOYEE REIMBURSEMENT - PPE $26,815
Figure 1: FSIS Use of CARES Act Funds (Infographic Created by OIG’s Office of Audit)
As of March 1, 2022, FSIS spent more than $32 million in funding in response to
COVID‑19. 25, 26 Specifically, more than $20.3 million of the funds spent went towards FSIS
21
CARES Act, Pub. L. No. 116-136, tit. I, 134 Stat. 281 (2020).
22
FSIS operates under authorities from the Federal Meat Inspection Act (21 U.S.C. §§ 601-695), the Poultry
Products Inspection Act (21 U.S.C. §§ 451-472), the Egg Products Inspection Act (21 U.S.C. §§ 1031-1056) and the
Humane Methods of Slaughter Act (7 U.S.C. §§ 1901-1907).
23
Non-Audit Service Report 50025-0001-23, USDA Coronavirus Disease 2019 Funding, Sept. 2020.
24
“Provision of specialized services” are assistance listings that provide Federal personnel directly to perform
certain tasks for the benefit of communities or individuals. These services may be performed in conjunction with
non-Federal personnel, but involve more than consultation, advice, or counseling.
25
In total, FSIS spent $32,483,879.
26
Appropriations represent legal authority granted by Congress to incur obligations and to make disbursements for
the purpose, during the time periods, and up to the amount limitations specified in the appropriation acts. At the end
of period of obligational availability, an appropriation “dies.” There is, however, an afterlife to the extent of any
unexpended balances. Unexpended balances, both obligated and unobligated, retain a limited availability for
INSPECTION REPORT 24801-0001-23 5
employee compensation, including various employee compensations, such as differential pay. 27
FSIS provided achievement awards to approximately 6,700 FSIS inspectors who performed in-
plant inspections between March 2020 and June 2020, during the pandemic. Awards ranged
from $500 to $4,000 per inspector, depending on the hours spent performing inspections.
According to FSIS, the frontline employees who received achievement awards provided
exceptional and essential inspection services throughout the pandemic, particularly in the spring
of 2020, when the food supply chain was under stress. FSIS spent more than $7.4 million on
supplies and materials, which included PPE 28 and reimbursements to FSIS employees for self-
procured PPE. 29, 30 Employee benefits included FSIS’ share of the Federal Employee
Government Life Insurance, Federal Employees Health Benefits, and Thrift Savings Plan. In
addition, FSIS paid for outside services, which included reimbursing APHIS for providing
temporary inspection coverage in establishments when FSIS inspectors were unavailable. 31
Further, FSIS paid the Material Management Service Center (MMSC) 32 for storage services
related to COVID-19 activities, including the handling and storage of hazardous material and
flammable items. Finally, FSIS paid for other expenses for a variety of costs, including grants,
subsidies, and contributions to States; equipment; messenger services; and freight services.
5 fiscal years following expiration of the period for which the source appropriation was made. At midnight on the
last day of an appropriation’s period of availability, the appropriation account expires and is no longer available for
incurring new obligations. The expired appropriation remains available for 5 years for the purpose of paying
obligations incurred prior to the account’s expiration and adjusting obligations that were previously unrecorded or
under recorded. After 5 years, the expired account is closed and the balances remaining are canceled.
27
FSIS charged all additional salary and travel costs attributable to the COVID-19 pandemic to CARES Act
funding. Additional costs included non-reimbursable overtime, compensation for intermittent staff, and travel. All
expenditures normally charged, such as regular salaries paid to current employees, remained funded by FSIS
through regular appropriations and were not charged to CARES Act funding.
28
FSIS spent more than $5.6 million in PPE and other critical resources, including gloves, masks, hand sanitizer,
face shields, safety glasses, thirst quenchers, and wipes.
29
Supplies and materials also include office supplies, pamphlets, clothing supplies, materials and parts, and
scientific and experimental supplies.
30
As the total for Supplies and Materials ($7,485,385.85) and Employee Reimbursements ($26,815.54) did not
change from July 2021 to March 2022, we conclude that the amount of FSIS Procured PPE and Other Critical
Resources ($5,608,258.46) remained the same, as well resulting in Supplies and Materials for reporting purposes
remaining $1,850,311.85.
31
FSIS officials stated the agency used APHIS and AMS employees who had FSIS experience and were locally
available to perform inspection tasks. FSIS had interagency agreements with both APHIS and AMS. However,
during our review, FSIS did not reimburse AMS for inspection services.
32
The MMSC, a Division within USDA’s Office of Operations, provided supply and property management services
to USDA and other Government agencies and/or organizations. The MMSC supported USDA and other agencies by
providing inventory control by mutual agreement.
6 INSPECTION REPORT 24801-0001-23
Did FSIS have sufficient critical resources to ensure reliable COVID-19 tests,
personal protective equipment, hand sanitizer, soap and warm water, workplace
dividers, and disinfectant were available to the inspectors at the establishments?
FSIS spent more than $5.6 million of CARES Act funding on PPE and other critical resources,
including gloves, masks, hand sanitizer, face shields, safety glasses, thirst quenchers, and wipes
for its employees, of which more than 7,700 were inspectors. 33 According to FSIS, the agency
assessed the feasibility and potential benefits of providing COVID-19 testing for its employees,
but concluded the highly dispersed nature of the workforce did not allow for a comprehensive
agency-wide testing program. Further, FSIS reimbursed $26,815 to employees for
self‑purchased PPE, which is not included in the chart on the following page. According to
FSIS, the agency developed projections and forecasted the quantities needed per employee to
determine how much equipment to purchase. Once FSIS purchased PPE, the supplies were
stored at the MMSC, and FSIS employees were able to place orders through the MMSC website
or by email.
33
According to FSIS, in addition to meeting the needs of the inspectors, the agency acquired personal protective
equipment to cover the needs of employees based in the agency’s three labs; Office of Investigation, Enforcement
and Audit investigators in the field; and employees based in 59 office locations inside and outside of the National
Capital Region.
INSPECTION REPORT 24801-0001-23 7
Figure 2: Health and Safety Supplies and PPE Purchases for FSIS Employees (Infographic Created by
OIG’s OAI)
8 INSPECTION REPORT 24801-0001-23
Section 2: Health and Safety of USDA Inspectors
What actions did FSIS take to ensure the health and safety of FSIS inspectors
working at official establishments?
FSIS implemented a variety of actions to ensure the health and safety of more than
7,700 inspectors working at official establishments during the pandemic. Specifically, FSIS
issued COVID-19 Situation and Impact Summary Reports (“situation report”) and 10 FSIS
Notices related to COVID-19. In addition, FSIS ensured PPE and other critical resources, such
as hand sanitizer and wipes, were available to personnel through the MMSC. Further, FSIS
allowed employees to use various types of emergency and administrative leave, and had an
established process for employees to report health-related hazards due to COVID-19.
FSIS COVID-19 Situation Reports
FSIS developed, and used, the situation report to track COVID-19 cases throughout the
pandemic, including the status of employees who tested positive for COVID-19 and total
number of FSIS employees currently self-quarantining. However, we did not assess the
accuracy or timeliness of the data included with the COVID-19 situation reports.
FSIS Notices
FSIS Notices are time-sensitive materials issued to provide instruction in support of
workplace policies, procedures, and food safety regulations. According to FSIS, between
March 2020 and July 2021, the agency issued 10 notices, related to COVID-19, to
address the health and safety of inspectors working at official establishments. (See
Exhibit A). These notices, disseminated through email, provided FSIS employees with
new or updated guidance from CDC and OSHA. FSIS also used these notices to inform
employees of the availability of PPE. Additionally, FSIS communicated with all
employees through a monthly employee newsletter and regular town hall meetings.
PPE
FSIS spent more than $5.6 million of CARES Act funding on PPE and other critical
resources, including gloves, masks, hand sanitizer, face shields, safety glasses, thirst
quenchers, and wipes. (See Section 1). FSIS ensured employees had access to PPE and
other critical resources through the MMSC. Specifically, the agency purchased supplies
and shipped them to the MMSC for storage and distribution. Once supplies were
available, employees or their supervisors placed orders either via the MMSC’s ordering
site or by email. 34 FSIS stated that, by using multiple ordering methods, FSIS personnel
experienced minimal delays in ordering and/or obtaining PPE. According to FSIS,
MMSC orders shipped daily. FSIS provided instructions for ordering from the MMSC in
several of the notices related to COVID-19.
34
Program resource managers and pandemic coordinators could also place bulk orders for their respective program
areas, labs, and/or offices.
INSPECTION REPORT 24801-0001-23 9
When PPE was limited due to demand, as was the case in the early months of the
pandemic, FSIS provided personnel with alternatives to acquire PPE. For instance, FSIS
authorized personnel holding purchase cards to obtain PPE, such as spray bottles and
funnels, locally to enable inspectors to begin using the authorized items as soon as
possible. Alternatively, FSIS reimbursed $26,815 to personnel for employee-purchased
PPE. 35 For example, FSIS authorized a one-time reimbursement of up to $50 for the
purchase of face coverings or materials to make face coverings to all mission-essential 36
employees that performed essential duties outside of their residence. FSIS notices
detailed the materials eligible for reimbursement and the process for submitting a claim.
Leave
FSIS granted employees the use of various types of leave, including emergency and
administrative leave, in response to COVID-19. 37 For example, FSIS provided
administrative leave to employees who self-certified to meeting the CDC criteria for
being at higher-risk of severe illness with COVID-19. 38 In addition, FSIS encouraged
employees to request leave if they were sick or became sick during work hours. If an
FSIS employee received a positive test result for COVID-19 and was required to
quarantine, supervisors granted administrative leave during the quarantine period. If an
employee was telework-eligible, in each of the above instances, then the employee could
telework with supervisory approval. FSIS issued guidance on the types of leave and
telework options available for employees. 39
Reporting of COVID-19 Related Alleged Safety or Health Hazards
FSIS used an existing directive to provide inspectors with the process to report
health‑related hazards in establishments due to COVID-19 to their front line supervisor or
district office. FSIS Directive 4791.12 encouraged employees to report the existence of,
or potential for, unsafe or unhealthy working conditions by using FSIS form 4791-27:
“Report of Alleged Safety or Health Hazard” (hereafter referred to as “FSIS
form 4791‑27). 40 According to the directive, FSIS is responsible for ensuring that
35
Employees would first receive authorization for purchases from their frontline supervisor or district office. FSIS
personnel were to file claims by July 31, 2020, to qualify for the reimbursement.
36
Mission-essential employees from every program area who performed essential duties outside of their residence
qualified for reimbursement, including, but not limited to, Office of Field Operations; Office of Investigation,
Enforcement and Audit; and Office of Public Health Science.
37
We did not determine the dollar impact because the agency did not use COVID-19 funding to pay for this leave.
38
Administrative leave was available for 30 days, during which time employees could pursue a Reasonable
Accommodation request. A Reasonable Accommodation includes changes to the work environment, or to how the
job is customarily performed, that allow a qualified, disabled individual to perform the essential functions of that
job. A Reasonable Accommodation also includes changes that help a disabled employee enjoy equal benefits and
privileges of employment as those enjoyed by other similarly situated employees without disabilities. (29 C.F.R. §
1630.2(o)(1)). Examples of reasonable accommodations include approving leave, as appropriate; acquiring or
modifying equipment or providing auxiliary aids and devices; or permitting telework or telecommuting.
39
USDA FSIS, FSIS COVID-19 Information Sheet (Mar. 2020).
40
USDA FSIS, Reporting and Correcting Occupational Hazards, Directive 4791.12 (June 19, 1996).
10 INSPECTION REPORT 24801-0001-23
inspectors’ work environments are free from recognized safety and health hazards that
may cause death or serious physical harm.
FSIS officials stated that they performed a data call to obtain all COVID-19 related FSIS
form 4791-27s from the field; 41 however, FSIS was unable to provide us with an accurate
count of these forms. Under the FSIS directive 4791.12, the lead safety professional, at
the agency’s headquarters, did not learn of all COVID-19 related FSIS form 4791-27s
until later in the tracking and monitoring process. This occurred because the directive did
not require FSIS field supervisors to send these forms to the agency’s Safety and Physical
Security Branch.
According to FSIS officials, the agency is updating the process for tracking and
monitoring FSIS form 4791-27 and placing the Safety and Physical Security Branch
review at the beginning of the process. The Safety and Physical Security Branch will
perform monthly reviews of FSIS form 4791-27s filed by FSIS inspectors and track the
forms until closure. According to FSIS, this control will identify issues not addressed in
the original process. The agency is developing an FSIS notice while a more
comprehensive update to the agency’s directive is forthcoming.
FSIS began to proactively address the concerns we identified during this inspection.
However, we recommend that FSIS complete the updates to the process for tracking and
monitoring the FSIS form 4791-27 and associated FSIS Directive 4791.12. By updating
this process and the corresponding directive, FSIS can better ensure the agency receives
and takes action on all COVID-19 related safety and health-related hazards.
Recommendation 1
Complete the updates to the process for tracking and monitoring the FSIS form 4791-27, “Report
of Alleged Safety or Health Hazard” and associated FSIS Directive 4791.12. Specifically,
update the directive to include the practice of submitting all FSIS form 4791-27s to the Safety
and Physical Security Branch, where they can be centrally recorded.
Agency Response
In its June 1, 2022, response, FSIS stated:
FSIS will complete the updates to the process for tracking and monitoring FSIS
Form 4791-27, Report of Alleged Safety or Health. The Agency will revise FSIS
Directive 4791.12, Reporting and Correcting Occupational Hazards, to instruct FSIS
employees to submit FSIS Form 4791-27 to the FSIS Safety and Physical Security
Branch where the forms will be centrally recorded.
The estimated completion date is June 30, 2023.
41
FSIS performed this prior to our data request.
INSPECTION REPORT 24801-0001-23 11
OIG Position
We accept management decision on this recommendation.
12 INSPECTION REPORT 24801-0001-23
How did FSIS ensure inspections continued at the establishments, including
determining whether inspectors transferred between establishments?
According to FSIS officials, the agency placed inspectors on temporary details to fill personnel
shortages and ensure inspections continued at meat and poultry slaughter and processing
establishments. FSIS officials stated that, prior to the pandemic, the agency used temporary
details essentially on a daily basis, for instance, to cover inspectors on sick leave; however, the
use of temporary details increased due to COVID-19. In response, the agency created the FSIS
COVID-19 situation report to track and consolidate COVID-19 data. 42 The situation report
assisted FSIS officials in assigning employees to temporary details to perform inspection tasks
and cover inspectors out on leave.
While establishments closed or reduced operations throughout the pandemic for a variety of
reasons, 43 according to FSIS officials, no establishment closed due to a lack of USDA
inspectors. 44, 45 If an establishment temporarily closed, FSIS frontline supervisory personnel—
with district management input, as needed—would assess the assignment workload of the FSIS
inspectors covering the establishment to determine if an inspector needed to be temporarily
detailed to another establishment. FSIS assessed adjacent and nearby assignments to determine
whether there was a need for additional inspection coverage. If so, the applicable frontline
supervisor would temporarily detail affected inspectors to the new assignment while their
headquarters establishment was closed. If there was no need for additional inspection coverage,
FSIS placed the inspector on administrative leave.
In addition, FSIS allowed all employees who met the CDC criteria for being at higher risk of
severe illness with COVID-19 to self-certify their status with their supervisor. Supervisors
approved telework for telework-eligible employees and granted paid administrative leave
accordingly. 46 When additional FSIS employees, including inspectors, requested to self-certify,
FSIS reached out to other agencies, including AMS and APHIS, for assistance. Through
interagency agreements, these agencies provided inspection support for FSIS and helped fill
critical personnel shortages at establishments. In these instances, FSIS officials stated the
agency used APHIS and AMS employees who had FSIS experience and were locally available to
perform inspection tasks. 47
42
FSIS officials stated these situation reports started in March 2020 but, at some point, the agency would no longer
continue to prepare this documentation.
43
An establishment might close or reduce operations due to a lack of plant employees, State or local public health
restrictions, and lack of products or sales.
44
CDC and OSHA have the authority and expertise relating to public health and worker safety issues for plant
employees. Establishments need to follow protocols set by State and local health departments, which may vary.
45
We did not confirm or corroborate this statement. However, FSIS provided situation reports, which stated there
were zero establishments closed due to FSIS staffing shortages.
46
After initial self-certification, employees were required to have a conversation with their supervisor at least once
every 2-week pay period to discuss whether the employee needed to continue to self-certify based on their medical
condition and the COVID-19 situation at their place of work.
47
FSIS had interagency agreements with both APHIS and AMS. However, during our review, FSIS did not
reimburse AMS for inspection services.
INSPECTION REPORT 24801-0001-23 13
In addition, FSIS worked with local offices and establishment supervisors to share information
about confirmed COVID-19 cases for trace back purposes and to follow appropriate CDC
quarantine guidelines. FSIS officials stated that they also worked with the regulated industry to
apply CDC‑recommended mitigation steps in establishments to reduce the risk of inspectors
contracting COVID-19. Specifically, this included ensuring FSIS inspectors submitted to body
temperature monitoring, wore masks in the facilities, and had access to barriers (Plexiglass) at
locations where keeping a 6-foot distance between personnel was not possible. The above
actions allowed FSIS to ensure inspections continued at the establishments.
14 INSPECTION REPORT 24801-0001-23
What protocols did FSIS have in place for when an FSIS or establishment
employee tested positive for COVID-19?
If an FSIS inspector tested positive for COVID-19, FSIS officials expected the inspector or the
local health department to notify the inspector’s supervisor. FSIS officials would then notify the
regulated establishment(s) where the inspector worked. FSIS permitted supervisors to grant
administrative leave, during the period of quarantine, to FSIS inspectors not eligible to
telework. 48, 49 Outside of the period of quarantine, FSIS inspectors could use:
• accrued or advanced sick or annual leave;
• earned compensatory time off or travel compensatory time off;
• earned credit hours for employees who work a maxi-flex schedule; or
• leave without pay. 50
FSIS supervisors evaluated the inspector’s individual circumstances to determine the appropriate
type of leave.
When a regulated establishment employee tested positive for COVID-19, FSIS officials
requested that establishment managers share the information with the agency because FSIS does
not have the authority to require establishments to report this information. For instance, FSIS
officials encouraged all regulated establishments to follow CDC and OSHA guidance and
recommendations for reducing transmission of COVID-19, including implementing screening
programs, when appropriate. For establishments that had such programs, FSIS instructed its
employees, during town hall meetings, to comply with the screening and testing requirements.
48
A telework-eligible employee may telework if able to do so and if they have supervisory approval.
49
According to FSIS, administrative leave was not guaranteed.
50
USDA FSIS, FSIS COVID-19 Information Sheet (Mar. 2020).
INSPECTION REPORT 24801-0001-23 15
Section 3: FSIS’ Communication with States
What actions did FSIS take to communicate the Federal Government’s
authority, standards, and expectations with the State Departments of Health?
In order to communicate the Federal Government’s authority, standards, and expectations to
State departments of health, FSIS:
• published the FSIS Human Pandemic Operations Plan;
• posted information in the publicly available FSIS Constituent Update; and
• provided information for the USDA COVID-19 Food Supply Chain website.
The FSIS Human Pandemic Operations Plan, published March 2020, contained several
overarching principles, which included coordinating closely with local partners; stakeholders;
State, local, and tribal governments; and health officials. Further, this plan outlined
communication strategies and measures FSIS and its employees could implement during a
human pandemic, including actions specific to communicating with State and industry officials.
According to FSIS officials, the Human Pandemic Operations Plan helped eliminate chaos by
providing a guide of what to do in given situations. FSIS officials stated that the plan was just a
guide or framework, and that the agency documented its specific actions within FSIS notices.
(See Exhibit A).
In addition, FSIS released information about COVID-19 through its publicly available FSIS
Constituent Update newsletter. 51 For example, these updates:
• addressed how FSIS was monitoring the evolving COVID-19 pandemic;
• provided employees and stakeholders with links to online resources; and
• discussed the implementation of EO 13917.
FSIS continues to release these constituent updates throughout the pandemic.
Further, FSIS created the COVID-19 Food Supply Chain website, which included questions and
answers related to COVID-19 and USDA’s food supply chain. 52 This publicly available website
included information on food access, critical infrastructure, food safety, and EO 13917. The
COVID-19 Food Supply Chain website also included information regarding the Government’s
authority, standards, and expectations for operating during the COVID-19 pandemic, and
included language on the responsibilities of State and local health departments. In addition, the
COVID-19 Food Supply Chain website regularly directed readers to the CDC and OSHA
guidance for meat and poultry processing establishments. FSIS used public channels, which
51
USDA-FSIS, News and Events: News & Press Releases (Mar. 24, 2021),
https://www.fsis.usda.gov/wps/portal/fsis/newsroom/meetings/newsletters/constituent-updates.
52
USDA-FSIS, Coronavirus: Food Supply Chain (Feb. 1, 2021), https://www.usda.gov/coronavirus/food-supply-
chain.
16 INSPECTION REPORT 24801-0001-23
ensured State departments of health had access to up-to-date information regarding FSIS’
standards and expectations for operating during the COVID-19 pandemic.
INSPECTION REPORT 24801-0001-23 17
Section 4: Executive Order 13917
What actions did FSIS take following the Executive Order issued on April 28,
2020 (relating to the Defense Production Act with respect to Food Supply Chain
Resources caused by COVID-19) that affected outbreaks at meat and poultry
processing and other agricultural facilities?
EO 13917 did not specifically direct FSIS officials to take action to ensure operations continued
in agricultural establishments. 53 However, FSIS did issue notices and guidance to employees to
promote health and safety while performing inspection tasks during the COVID-19 pandemic.
EO 13917 delegated authority to the Secretary of Agriculture to take appropriate actions to
ensure regulated establishments continued operations during the COVID-19 pandemic. 54 In
response, on May 5, 2020, the Secretary of Agriculture issued two letters to the Nation’s
governors and the leadership of major meat and poultry processing companies establishing
USDA’s expectations for the implementation of the CDC and OSHA guidance for meat and
poultry processing establishments. 55 Additionally, the Secretary of Agriculture used the letters
to direct meat and poultry processing establishments contemplating reductions of operations or
recently closed to submit written documentation of their operation and health and safety
protocols. 56 The letters also stated that USDA would partner with the CDC and OSHA—
Federally recognized public health and worker safety authorities—to work with State and local
officials to ensure meat and poultry processing establishments implement best practices to
mitigate the spread of COVID-19 while maintaining operations.
53
According to EO 13917, the Secretary of Agriculture shall take all appropriate actions to ensure that meat and
poultry processors continued to operate with the guidance issued by the CDC and OSHA.
54
E.O. 13917 (Apr. 28, 2020).
55
USDA, Executive Order Delegating Authority Under the Defense Production Act with Respect to the Food Supply
Chain Resources During the National Emergency Caused by the Outbreak of COVID-19, Secretary Memorandum
(May 5, 2020), https://www.usda.gov/media/press-releases/2020/05/06/secretary-perdue-issues-letters-meat-
packing-expectations.
56
Outbreaks of COVID-19 among workers at some processing facilities led to the reduction in some of those
facilities’ production capacity. In addition, actions in some States led to the complete closure of some large
processing facilities.
18 INSPECTION REPORT 24801-0001-23
Scope and Methodology
We conducted this inspection to determine what actions FSIS took related to COVID-19 to
ensure the continuation of inspection operations at meat and poultry slaughter and processing
establishments. Our inspection also included how FSIS spent $33 million in CARES Act
funding. Our inspection followed the Council of the Inspectors General on Integrity and
Efficiency (CIGIE) Quality Standards for Inspection and Evaluation. 57 We performed our
inspection remotely due to the COVID-19 pandemic. We conducted our fieldwork from
December 2020 through March 2022.
Our inspection scope covered the actions taken by FSIS in response to the COVID-19 pandemic
from March 2020 through July 2021.
To accomplish our inspection objectives, we:
• interviewed FSIS Office of Management and Office of Field Operations officials;
• reviewed the 10 FSIS notices related to COVID-19, agency directives, as well as other
applicable Federal laws, guidance, and publicly available information;
• reviewed financial system reports and inventory data to identify how FSIS spent the
$33 million in CARES Act funding;
• reviewed reports of alleged safety or health hazards related to COVID-19, as well as the
agency’s process for tracking and monitoring this documentation;
• reviewed EOs related to worker health and safety 58 and the implementation of the
Defense Production Act; 59 and
• coordinated with the Government Accountability Office and OIG’s OAI about our
respective work with FSIS. 60
We conducted this inspection in accordance with CIGIE’s Quality Standards for Inspection and
Evaluation. These standards require that we plan and perform the inspection to obtain sufficient,
appropriate evidence to provide a reasonable basis for our conclusions and recommendations
based on our review objectives. We believe that the evidence obtained provides a reasonable
basis for our conclusions and recommendations based on our review.
57
CIGIE, Quality Standards for Inspection and Evaluation (Jan. 2012). CIGIE updated these standards in
December 2020. However, these standards were effective for inspections beginning on or after January 1, 2022, and
as a result, did not apply to this inspection.
58
E.O. 13999 (Jan. 21, 2021).
59
E.O. 13917 (Apr. 28, 2020).
60
OAI conducted a pulse survey of FSIS inspectors from February through March 2021 to obtain information about
how FSIS frontline inspectors perceive COVID-19 safety in their work environments.
https://www.usda.gov/oig/reports/survey-food-safety-and-inspection-service-inspectors-perceptions-covid-19-
safety-work.
INSPECTION REPORT 24801-0001-23 19
Abbreviations
AMS.......................................Agricultural Marketing Service
APHIS ....................................Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service
CARES Act............................Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security Act
CDC .......................................Centers for Disease Control and Prevention
C.F.R. .....................................Code of Federal Regulations
CISA ......................................Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency
CIGIE.....................................Council of the Inspectors General on Integrity and Efficiency
COVID-19..............................coronavirus disease 2019
DHS........................................Department of Homeland Security
DOL .......................................United States Department of Labor
EO ..........................................executive order
FSIS........................................Food Safety and Inspection Service
MMSC....................................Material Management Service Center
OAI ........................................Office of Analytics and Innovation
OIG ........................................Office of Inspector General
OSHA.....................................Occupational Safety and Health Administration
PPE.........................................personal protective equipment
U.S.C......................................United States Code
USDA.....................................United States Department of Agriculture
20 INSPECTION REPORT 24801-0001-23
Exhibit A: FSIS COVID-19 Notices
This table lists and describes the 10 notices related to COVID-19 FSIS issued between
March 2020 and July 2021. The FSIS notices were provided by FSIS, and are listed according to
the date they were issued.
FSIS Title Issue Purpose
Notice Date
Number
18-20 COVID-19 4/3/2020 To outline the use of the COVID-19 funds for
Funding Use for recording payroll time and attendance and travel
Payroll and Travel expenditures.
19-20 Use of Protective 4/9/2020 To provide new guidance to FSIS employees from
Face Covering to the CDC on the voluntary use of face coverings to
Reduce the Spread reduce the spread of COVID-19.
of COVID-19
24-20 The Families First 5/7/2020 To provide FSIS employees with information on
Coronavirus the Families First Coronavirus Response Act
Response Act Emergency Paid Sick Leave Act provisions.
Emergency Paid
Sick Leave Act
Provisions
26-20 Availability of 5/11/2020 To reiterate the availability of hand sanitizer at the
Hand Sanitizer MMSC, as announced via all-user notice on
May 5, 2020. Inspection program personnel are to
begin placing orders immediately.
27-20 FSIS Availability 5/11/2020 To reiterate the availability, as of May 1, 2020, of
of Cloth Face cloth face coverings, disposable masks, and face
Coverings, shields at the MMSC.
Disposable
Masks, and Face
Shields
30-20 Update—Use of 5/22/2020 To provide new instructions to FSIS employees
Protective Face from the CDC and USDA on the use of face
Coverings by coverings to reduce the spread of the COVID-19
FSIS Personnel to virus. The notice updates and cancels FSIS
Reduce the Spread Notice 19-20, Use of Protective Face Coverings to
of COVID-19 Reduce the Spread of COVID-19.
31-20 Instructions for 5/22/2020 To notify employees of the availability of face
Face Shields that shields that attach to the helmets and that comply
Attach to the with OSHA and CDC Meat and Poultry Packing
Helmet Industry Interim Guidance.
INSPECTION REPORT 24801-0001-23 21
32-20 Face Coverings, 6/5/2020 To announce that all employees engaged in
Disinfectant in‑person human interactions—including
Wipes, and Hand interactions with the public or with other USDA
Sanitizer for the and FSIS employees will be required to wear
Reopening of disposable facemasks or cloth face coverings until
USDA and FSIS further notice.
Facilities
33-20 Corrected Item 6/17/2020 To correct the item numbers listed in FSIS
Numbers for Face Notice 31‑20, Instructions for Face Shields that
Shields Attach to Helmets.
35-20 Preventing Heat 6/26/2020 To announce that inspection program personnel
Stress Illness can order items from the MMSC to help prevent
heat-stress illness.
22 INSPECTION REPORT 24801-0001-23
Agency’s Response
Food Safety and Inspection Service’s
Response to Inspection Report
INSPECTION REPORT 24801-0001-23 23
Food Safety and
Inspection Service
1400 Independence TO: Gil H. Harden
Avenue, SW. Assistant Inspector General
Washington, D.C.
Office of Inspector General
20250
FROM: Terri Nintemann / s / 6 / 1 / 2022
Deputy Administrator
Food Safety and Inspection Service
SUBJECT: OIG Official Draft Report, COVID-19–Food Safety and
Inspection Service Pandemic Response at Establishments,
Inspection Number 24801-0001-23
Thank you for providing an opportunity for USDA’s Food Safety and Inspection
Service (FSIS) to respond to the USDA Office of Inspector General (OIG) draft report
entitled, “COVID-19–Food Safety and Inspection Service Pandemic Response at
Establishments.”
This report describes the essential actions FSIS took throughout the coronavirus disease
(COVID-19) pandemic to ensure the:
• Continuation of inspection operations at meat and poultry slaughter and
processing establishments,
• Protection of the health and safety of FSIS inspectors, and
• Utilization of $33 million in Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security
Act (also known as the CARES Act) funding.
Approximately eighty-five percent of FSIS employees work in the field and are
involved in inspecting food products at over 6,500 regulated facilities. From the
outset of the pandemic to the present, FSIS took actions to ensure the continuation of
inspection operations at meat and poultry slaughter and processing establishments
and undertook a proactive, multi-layered approach to protect its employees against
the risks of contracting COVID-19.
Throughout the pandemic, FSIS rapidly adapted as Federal COVID-19 guidance
from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Occupational Safety and
Health Administration, Office of Personnel Management, and the Safer Federal
Workforce Task Force changed. The Agency effectively communicated up-to-date
guidance to employees in a timely manner through multiple channels. In the 2021
Federal Employee Viewpoint Survey, the majority (76.8 percent) of FSIS employees
who responded indicated that the Agency encouraged the use of personal protective
An Equal Opportunity Provider and Employer
Page 2
equipment or other safety equipment in the worksite.1 FSIS regulated industry has since
instituted engineering and administrative controls in response to COVID-19. In addition, the
majority of FSIS employees are now fully vaccinated. Taken together, these factors have helped
to significantly reduce the risk of FSIS employees being exposed to COVID-19 in the workplace.
FSIS has general comments followed by a response to the described recommendation. The
general comments concern how FSIS tracked COVID-19 employee illness case counts, and the
form used to report and abate hazards in the workplace.
FSIS General Comments
At the outset of the COVID-19 pandemic, FSIS monitored COVID-19 case counts at a local
level to ensure that inspection could proceed at an establishment-by-establishment level. The
Agency’s Significant Incident Preparedness and Response Staff (SIPRS) tracked and reported
the COVID-19 impact on FSIS employees and on the operations of more than 6,500 FSIS-
regulated establishments. The Agency developed pandemic reporting protocols and COVID-19
illness tracking reports for employees who contracted COVID-19. To protect personally
identifiable information, unique identifiers were assigned to each case and the Agency rolled up
this data to track COVID-19 case counts and trends at a national level. SIPRS closely kept track
of COVID-19 cases throughout the pandemic, populated accurate case counts in the USDA
COVID-19 case tracker on a timely basis, and provided the USDA and FSIS senior leadership
with visibility into the status of employees who tested positive for COVID-19 and/or were likely
exposed to someone who tested positive.
The Agency uses FSIS Form 4791-27, Report of Alleged Safety or Health Hazard, to report and
abate hazards in the workplace.2 This form is intended for Agency employees to report and track
their complaints of alleged hazards and be assured that the proper officials within the Agency have
reviewed their statements. An FSIS employee reports an alleged hazard at an establishment by
completing FSIS Form 4791-27 and submitting it to the supervisor or other Agency officials. The
supervisor then either abates the hazard at their level or forwards the form to the FSIS Safety and
Physical Security Branch. An assigned Safety Specialist ensures that the reported hazard is properly
abated within the establishment. During the pandemic, some FSIS employees also used FSIS Form
4791-27 to report as hazards, incidents that could result in possible exposure to COVID-19.
1
Of the FSIS employees who responded to the 2021 Federal Employee Viewpoint Survey, an additional 18.5 percent indicated that, although the
Agency encouraged the use of personal protective equipment or other safety equipment in the worksite, it was not needed to perform their jobs
while 4.7 percent indicated it was needed but not available to them.
2
This is just one part of FSIS’ safety program and there are other ways for employees to report alleged hazards.
An Equal Opportunity Provider and Employer
Page 3
FSIS’ Response to OIG’s Recommendation
Objective 2: What actions did FSIS take to ensure the health and safety of FSIS inspectors
working at official establishments?
Recommendation 1
Complete the updates to the process for tracking and monitoring the FSIS Form 4791-27, Report
of Alleged Safety or Health Hazard, and associated FSIS Directive 4791.12. Specifically, update
the directive to include the practice of submitting all FSIS 4791-27 forms to the Safety and
Physical Security Branch where they can be centrally recorded.
FSIS Response
FSIS will complete the updates to the process for tracking and monitoring FSIS Form 4791-27,
Report of Alleged Safety or Health Hazard. The Agency will revise FSIS Directive 4791.12,
Reporting and Correcting Occupational Hazards, to instruct FSIS employees to submit FSIS
Form 4791-27 to the FSIS Safety and Physical Security Branch where the forms will be centrally
recorded.
Estimated Completion Date: June 30, 2023
An Equal Opportunity Provider and Employer
Learn more about USDA OIG
Visit our website: usdaoig.oversight.gov
Follow us on Twitter: @OIGUSDA
How to Report Suspected Wrongdoing in USDA
Programs
Fraud, Waste, and Abuse
File complaint online: usdaoig.oversight.gov/hotline
Monday–Friday, 9:00 a.m.– 3:00 p.m. ET
In Washington, DC 202-690-1622
Outside DC 800-424-9121
TDD (Call Collect) 202-690-1202
Bribes or Gratuities
202-720-7257 (24 hours)
In accordance with Federal civil rights law and U.S. Department of Agriculture Relay Service at (800) 877-8339. Additionally, program information may be made
(USDA) civil rights regulations and policies, the USDA, its Agencies, offces, and available in languages other than English.
employees, and institutions participating in or administering USDA programs
are prohibited from discriminating based on race, color, national origin, religion, To fle a program discrimination complaint, complete the USDA Program Discrimina-
sex, gender identity (including gender expression), sexual orientation, disability, tion Complaint Form, AD-3027, found online at How to File a Program Discrimination
age, marital status, family/parental status, income derived from a public Complaint and at any USDA offce or write a letter addressed to USDA and provide
assistance program, political beliefs, or reprisal or retaliation for prior civil in the letter all of the information requested in the form. To request a copy of the
rights activity, in any program or activity conducted or funded by USDA (not all complaint form, call (866) 632-9992. Submit your completed form or letter to USDA
bases apply to all programs). Remedies and complaint fling deadlines vary by by: (1) mail: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Offce of the Assistant Secretary for
program or incident. Civil Rights, 1400 Independence Avenue, SW, Washington, D.C. 20250-9410; (2) fax:
(202) 690-7442; or (3) email: program.intake@usda.gov.
Persons with disabilities who require alternative means of communication for
program information (e.g., Braille, large print, audiotape, American Sign USDA is an equal opportunity provider, employer, and lender.
Language, etc.) should contact the responsible Agency or USDA’s TARGET
Center at (202) 720-2600 (voice and TTY) or contact USDA through the Federal All photographs on the front and back covers are from USDA’s Flickr site and are in
the public domain. They do not depict any particular audit or investigation.
File and source
- File
- covid19-fsis-pandemic-response-establishments.pdf
- Size
- 9,094,730 bytes
- SHA-256
- 5c881f455e10980d38953e1c515a2bbcfdf1f626f20885990a4eed6a3be16705
- Original
- usdaoig.oversight.gov