225BatonRouge.com - Blogs

I’m back from my ketchup-induced hiatus and I’m feeling better than ever. It was like a cleansing ritual without the excessive amounts of lemon and maple syrup. Anyway, while I was out, I managed to lift my weary head long enough to read fellow 225 blogger Maggie Heyn Richardson’s entry wondering “Is Louie’s too gross to enjoy?” You can read it for yourself here and then come back to join me. Anyway, the whole thing made me wonder about the Department of Health and Hospitals’ restaurant inspection rating system. See, on its Web site you can view a restaurant’s rating, but little else. If you want any more than that, you have to go visit the kind people at the environmental health department to view the records. Honestly, I’m not being sarcastic. They were quite hospitable. So that’s what I did, and now you can reap the benefits of my labor. As always, if you have questions about Baton Rouge related nonsense, send them here.

Question: How does the restaurant inspection rating system work?

Answer: With pelicans!

Any retail food outlet in Louisiana is inspected at least one to four times a year, based on the type of operation. Violations are coded as critical (if left uncorrected are more likely to contribute to food contamination or illness) or non-critical (are not directly related to the cause of food borne illness, but if left uncorrected, could become critical). Critical violations must be corrected immediately or by a time limit set by the health officer. Non-critical violations must be corrected as soon as possible or by a time limit set by the health officer. Restaurant regulations come from part 23 (some 30+ pages) of the public health sanitary code, which if you’re curious, you can download here.

This is where the pelicans start to dance. Non-critical and critical violations take pelican form for use on the DHH Web site. Stay with me here. The pelicans might snap. For starters, those non-critical violations I mentioned earlier, well now those are sometimes counted as critical violations (five non-critical violations become one critical violation for pelican-coding purposes). One pelican means regulatory action (compliance action is currently being pursued or an imminent health hazard exists). Two pelicans mean poor (six or more critical violations were noted; re-inspection must be performed to ensure compliance). Three pelicans mean good (five or less critical violations were noted; re-inspection must be performed to ensure compliance). Four pelicans mean excellent (critical violations were noted during inspection; however all were corrected during the time of the inspection, and five non-critical violations were cited, but less than five remained following inspection). Five pelicans mean superior (no critical violations and less than five non-critical violations were cited during the time of inspection). Finally, any establishment that has to be re-inspected can only reach four-pelican/excellent status upon re-inspection. It’s like turning an essay in late. You’re automatically capping your grade. Complicated enough? Hell no. Let’s keep going. If I’ve lost you, it’s okay, but please keep reading. It gets really interesting. Trust me.

Question: So Louie’s? Three pelicans? Really? They got a good rating?

Answer: You bet your shiniest lucky penny they did.

When Louie’s was inspected Jan. 19, 2007, the inspector noted nine non-critical violations, all of which must be corrected by April 19. (That makes three pelicans: five or less critical violations were noted and re-inspection must be performed to ensure compliance.) Seven of these non-critical violations were corrected during the inspection. If you’re following with the fuzzy math here, that pretty much leaves two non-critical violations to fix. One violation: non-food contact surfaces of equipment have an accumulation of dust, dirt, food residue and other debris (inspector’s general comment: “hood of oven, cooler”). The other violation: walls/ceilings or attached equipment are not clean (inspector’s general comment: “vent”). So there. Those are the remaining non-critical violations Louie’s has to fix.

Question: Is nine non-critical violations a lot?

Answer: Not from what I saw.

(Warning: if you’re queasy, proceed with caution.) You see: I also looked at the inspection history records for those establishments with the two-pelican/poor rating. Do I regret this endeavor? I still haven’t decided. I counted nine restaurants with poor ratings per the DHH Web site. Apologies if I missed any, but that was a long list. These nine establishments are: Semolina’s Restaurant on Coursey Boulevard; Portobello’s Italian Grill on W. Lee Drive; Mandarin Express on Bluebonnet Boulevard; Las Palmas on Coursey Boulevard; King Buffet on Bluebonnet Boulevard; Hunan Restaurant on S. Sherwood Forest Boulevard; Grand Wall on Plank Road; China Chef on Thad Cain Lane; and Casa la Vida on Coursey Boulevard.

Upon inspection Dec. 12, 2006, Semolina’s Restaurant had 10 critical violations and 24 non-critical violations and had to have approval from the health department before they could open for the day’s business. One critical violation? “Employee was eating in the food preparation or other area where food equipment, utensils or other items requiring protection were stored.” Less than two hours later, they were inspected again, with all critical violations corrected and only 11 non-critical violations reported.

Portobello’s Italian Grill was inspected Feb. 7, and cited with nine critical violations and 26 non-critical violations. One critical violation? “Employee did not wash hands and exposed portions of arms at appropriate time.”

Mandarin Express was inspected Nov. 13, 2006 and cited with eight critical violations and 14 non-critical violations. One critical violation? “Rodents are present in the establishment.” A fax sheet is attached to the inspection report showing a pest control invoice, but it should be noted anything recorded in the report is witnessed by the health officer.

Las Palmas was inspected Dec. 6, 2006 and cited with 11 critical violations and 26 non-critical violations. One critical violation? “Employee was using tobacco products in a food preparation, storage or service area.”

King Buffet was inspected Nov. 16, 2006 and cited with 11 critical violations and 22 non-critical violations. One non-critical violation? “Dead insects and insect fragments are not prevented from being impeded onto or falling onto exposed food, clean equipment, utensils and linens or unwrapped single-service and single use articles.”

Hunan Restaurant was inspected Dec. 6, 2006 and was cited with 11 critical violations and 22 non-critical violations. One critical violation? “Food meets the definition of adulterated.” Adulterated? Yeah, that could be any number of things and the report doesn’t specify which (from “if any substance has been substituted wholly or in part thereof” to “if it consists in whole or in part of any filthy, putrid, or decomposed substance, or if it is otherwise unfit for food”), so I won’t speculate.

Grand Wall was inspected Feb. 12, but that inspection wasn’t in the folder, so please excuse that lack of information.

China Chef was inspected Jan. 1, and was cited with nine critical violations and 19 non-critical violations. One critical violation? “Poultry or meat products are not obtained from sources according to law.” I really don’t know what to do with that. I really don’t. And the last one, I promise, is Casa la Vida. They were inspected Oct. 13, 2006 and were cited with five critical violations and seven non-critical violations. One critical violation? “There is no hand washing lavatory installed in the food establishment.”

There you go. More than you EVER wanted to know about restaurant inspection. It’s all in public documents, folks. Now, I’m going to take a nap. Thanks to the kind folks over at the environmental health department for giving me some space to take notes.