Food Protection Trends - May/June 2014 - 162

In addition, a significant difference was found between
the post-test behavioral scores (M = 3.22, SD = 0.747) at
home and the post-test behavioral scores (M = 3.43 SD =
0.8173) at the Ronald McDonald House (P = 0.00001). This
indicates that the participants reported that they practiced
safer food safety behaviors at the Ronald McDonald House
than they do in their own homes.
The following three statements were used to determine the
importance of understanding food safety to respondents:
(1) Foodborne illness can be life threatening; (2) I think
unsafe food can make people really sick; and (3) Foodborne
illness can result in serious consequences. Comparison of
the results from pre-training (M = 4.63, SD = 0.017) and
post-training (M = 4.79, SD = 0.00) indicates a significant
improvement (P = 0.05). This is a possible explanation
for why the volunteers' behaviors both at home and at the
Ronald McDonald House changed following the food safety
training course.
There was no significant change in the respondents' level of
confidence in ability to practice safe food safety behaviors
before (M = 4.12, SD = 0.32) and after (M = 4.37, SD =
0.1456) the training session. This indicates that regardless of
the food safety training class, participants felt confident that
their current food handling behaviors were safe, which in
reality may or may not be so.
In 1996, the Pathogen Reduction/Hazard Analysis Critical
Control Point (PR/HACCP) Systems Final Rule initiated
consumer awareness and educational campaigns, such
as FightBAC!™ (12). After these consumer educational
programs were implemented, the Research Triangle
Institute conducted a study, in 2001, to analyze consumers'
knowledge about food safety (e.g., are chicken and meats
high risk foods?; importance of hand washing; use of a food
thermometer; etc.). These studies were conducted using the
following tools: (a) 3 telephone surveys; (b) 2 series of focus
groups; and (c) 2 sets of observational studies. The results
showed that 79% of participants reported or were observed
cleaning cutting boards after using them in handling raw
meats and 68% washed their hands before cooking. However,
only 20% safely heated leftover food, and only 46% owned
a food thermometer. The reasons given for not following
proper food safety practices were as follows: (a) "knowing
correct practice but not thinking about it at the time" 40%;
(b) "had no knowledge" 40%; or (c) "chose to ignore safe
practices" 20% (12).
Similar results were obtained by Patil et al. (11), who performed a meta-analysis of 20 studies since 1992 that contained
information on consumption of raw/undercooked meats, good
hygiene practices, prevention of cross contamination, proper
cooking practices, actual practices in these areas, and basic demographic information. Their results showed an increased gap
since 1992 between consumer knowledge and practice.

162

Food Protection Trends

May/June

Our results are consistent with the research just cited.
Overall, they indicate that an increase in knowledge does
not always translate to an improvement of proper behavior.
It should be noted that only self-reported behaviors were
evaluated. This study is unique in that is the first food
safety-related study performed at an international charity
that relies on local volunteers in each community it serves.
Yiannas (2009) notes that the food safety culture for most
organizations is a choice (16). An organization such as the
Ronald McDonald House may encourage their volunteers
to use best food safety practices because they so highly
value the safety of their residents.
CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
limitation of this study was the inability to conduct
effective behavioral observations. Unlike a restaurant,
where employees are required to work many days of the
week, the Ronald McDonald House has a schedule of
participants that is very inconsistent. Some individuals
volunteer monthly, while others volunteer as little as one
time per year. Because of the time frame of the research and
the inconsistency of volunteers' schedules, this study was
unable to track behavior both before and after training.
This study's findings may have positive implications for
non-profit organizations such as the Ronald McDonald
House. The results may make volunteers and staff aware
of the different areas of importance regarding food safety.
The main areas of knowledge and behavior in this study
were cross contamination, personal hygiene, and time and
temperature abuse. It is important that current and future
staff members continue to be educated in these areas, as well
as in all other areas of food safety. Providing all food handlers
with proper training, educational materials and adequate
information such as reminder signs or "info-sheets" could
be beneficial in helping the organization, as a whole, make
food safety a priority. Implementing food safety "info-sheets"
as a training guide could also serve as a way to promote a
food safety culture by providing a personalized method,
emphasizing control, and demonstrating the importance of
risk reduction practices (3). Info-sheets that communicate
information regarding simple food safety guidelines, proper
times and temperatures needed in cooking different items,
and the proper way to wash hands could be posted around
the Ronald McDonald House to remind volunteers and staff
of how to put the guidelines they have learned into practice.
Many of the families travel far from home to stay at the
Ronald McDonald House while they seek medical care
for their children. Many of these children are immunocompromised and therefore even more susceptible than usual
to fatal effects of foodborne illness. Creating a food safety
culture at the Ronald McDonald House will not only make
food safety a top priority among volunteers and staff, but also
provide peace of mind to the families staying there.

Food Protection Trends - May/June 2014

Table of Contents for the Digital Edition of Food Protection Trends - May/June 2014