Hot Holding at 140°F (Data Item 8A)
vs.
Hot Holding at 135°F (Data Item 18A)
| Facility Type |
Total IN 140°F |
Total OUT 140°F |
% IN 140°F |
Total IN 135°F |
Total OUT 135°F |
% IN 135°F |
Difference (%IN) |
| Hospitals |
59 |
36 |
62.1% |
65 |
30 |
68.4% |
6.3% |
| Nursing Homes |
53 |
17 |
75.7% |
54 |
16 |
77.1% |
1.4% |
| Elementary Schools |
61 |
21 |
74.4% |
62 |
20 |
75.6 |
1.2% |
| Fast Food Rest. |
66 |
28 |
70.2% |
71 |
23 |
75.5% |
5.3% |
| Full Service Rest. |
45 |
42 |
51.7% |
48 |
39 |
55.2% |
3.5% |
| Delis |
38 |
59 |
39.2% |
41 |
56 |
42.3% |
3.1% |
| Meat & Poultry* |
0 |
2 |
0%* |
1 |
1 |
50.0%* |
50.0%* |
| Seafood* |
3 |
3 |
50.0%* |
3 |
3 |
50.0%* |
0%* |
| Produce* |
6 |
0 |
100%* |
6 |
0 |
100%* |
0%* |
* The number of observations for these 3 facility types is too low to make comparisons
Speaker's Notes
To illustrate, let's look at the change in the hot holding temperature for potentially hazardous foods. For the 1998 Baseline data collection, the critical limit for hot holding potentially hazardous food was 140º F. The critical limit for hot holding was lowered to 135º F in the 2003 FDA Food Code Supplement. To measure the potential impact this change might have on the hot holding IN Compliance percentages, a supplemental data item was added to assess hot holding at 135º F.
The lowering of the critical limit to 135º F had a minimal impact on the IN Compliance percentage related to industry's control of this data item. None of the differences for the IN compliance percentages displayed in the far right hand column of the table meet the criteria for statistical significance. More simply put, it can not be determined whether the differences noted are due to the lowering of the temperature or sample variation between the establishments selected for the study.
There were not enough observations to draw any conclusions for the meat and poultry, seafood and produce facility types.
