Quality Systems in Institutional Foodservice: Review and Improvement Pathways (HACCP, ISO 22000, GHP/GMP)

Abstract The article reviews technological practicesGood Hygienic Practices and Good Manufacturing Practices (GHP/GMP), Hazard Analysis and Critical Control Points (HACCP), and ISO 22000 and managerial solutions in institutional foodservice, with particular emphasis on leadership, allocation of responsibilities, food safety culture (FSC), supplier relationships, selected elements of digitalization, and the cost of quality (COQ). The aim of this study was to assess whether a low-cost, ISO 22000-aligned improvement package can measurably strengthen HACCP execution and related performance outcomes (PRP/OPRP discipline, incident responsiveness, supplier reliability, and COQ) in resource-constrained public foodservice units. A 6-month pre-post pilot was conducted in a school cafeteria (S1) and a hospital kitchen (H1). The intervention comprised micro-trainings, point-of-use visual standards, mobile checklists and temperature logs with alerts, KPI boards, and clarification of roles using a Responsibility Assignment Matrix (RACI) for critical control points (CCPs) and operational prerequisite programs (OPRPs). The analysis covered Food Safety Management System (FSMS) records, digital logs, delivery documentation (service level agreement/on-time-in-full; SLA/OTIF), and brief staff surveys. Results included a reduction in nonconformities per 1,000 meals by 43% (S1) and 40% (H1), a shortening of mean Corrective and Preventive Action (CAPA) closure time by ~47% and ~46%, a 55–57% reduction in temperature incidents, a 10-12 percentage-point increase in on-time monitoring and record completeness, a 23-24% decrease in COQ, and improved OTIF performance. The application of selected ISO 22000 elements (objective communication, management reviews, incident management), combined with unambiguous assignment of responsibilities, strengthened the PDCA cycle and enabled sustained performance improvement without increasing the documentation burden. The findings provide practical guidance for institutional foodservice managers (e.g., school and hospital kitchen supervisors), auditors and inspectors, and trainers/procedure designers when prioritizing low-cost interventions and defining a minimal, high-sensitivity KPI set.