The FDA needs to better communicate with state and local officials to improve food safety efforts, according to testimony heard by a House of Representatives subcommittee.
Steven Mandernach, executive director of the Association of Food and Drug Officials (AFDO), on Wednesday delivered the testimony before the U.S. House of Representatives Committee on Energy and Commerce Subcommittee on Health hearing “Healthier America: Legislative Proposals on the Regulation and Oversight of Food.”
Before joining AFDO in 2018, Mandermach spent more than15 years in state government, most recently as Bureau Chief for Food and Consumer Safety at the Iowa Department of Inspections and Appeals, where he oversaw the regulation of tens of thousands of food manufacturers and retail establishments. He has a law degree from Drake University Law School and has completed graduate coursework in food safety at Michigan State University.
AFDO is a nonprofit association of food safety professionals across state, local, federal, tribal, territorial, academic, and industry sectors. Its members are the state and local regulatory agencies responsible for most day-to-day food safety oversight in the United States, including inspections, laboratory testing, outbreak response, and recall verification. The association was founded in 1896 — predating the country’s major food laws — when it advocated for a strong federal food safety system, including the founding of what became the Food and Drug Administration.
Mandernach told the subcommittee that the U.S. food safety system works because it is a shared effort between the U.S. Food and Drug Administration and state and local agencies. However, red tape keeps the federal body from sharing key information with state and local entities, hampering safety efforts.
“States and FDA do not operate in parallel silos; they function as a connected system, relying on mutual trust, clear roles, and timely coordination,” Mandernach said. “When that partnership works well, the food safety system can respond quickly and effectively to emerging risks. When it does not, the consequences are felt by consumers, regulators and industry alike.”
The system also places unnecessary burdens on businesses, which are forced to respond to multiple, duplicative requests from different agencies.
Mandernach provided the subcommittee with bullet points to illustrate the breakdown of responsibilities between the federal government and state and local agencies:
100 percent of retail inspections at restaurants, grocery stores and convenience stores are conducted by state and local inspectors;100 percent of Grade A milk and shellfish inspections are conducted by states;More than 93 percent of produce safety inspections are conducted by states;Nearly 90 percent of the food processing inspections in the United States are conducted by state agencies;State laboratories conduct more than 600,000 analytical tests of food and food-related samples each year; More than half of all foodborne illness outbreaks in this country are associated with retail food establishments, schools, and other institutions, and 100 percent of these food service providers and events are inspected by state and local governments; andStates also conduct nearly all inspections of food manufacturers nationwide. That’s typically 400 percent more domestic manufactured food inspections a year than the FDA conducts.
“We do believe that the United States’ food safety system succeeds because it is a shared enterprise,” Mandernach told the subcommittee. “State and local agencies exercise substantial independent authority to conduct inspections, enforce food safety laws, respond to outbreaks, and oversee recalls within their jurisdictions, while working in coordination with FDA to support national standards, consistency, and shared public health goals.
“But when timely, actionable information — especially product distribution information — is not shared during an outbreak, that partnership is strained. Delays in information sharing slow the removal of unsafe food from commerce, make it harder for state and local agencies and consumers to take action to prevent illnesses and deaths, and ultimately undermine confidence in the response.”
Mandernach said a positive action on the part of the FDA is the agency’s BRIDGE Project (Better Regulatory Inspections for Dynamic Government Efficiency), which is slated for national implementation by the end of 2030. The project is designed to respond to gaps in domestic inspection coverage and followup.
The project will integrate state programs into FDA’s domestic inspection strategy, increasing reliance on state capacity to carry out federal priorities. That reliance must be matched with sustained federal investment in training, staffing, and program support; without resources following responsibility, BRIDGE will be difficult to implement effectively or equitably across states, Mandernach told the subcommittee members.
Roadblocks to communication
Mandernach cited two examples where the FDA refused to share crucial information with states while asking them for help.
In one example, a state was asked by the FDA to follow up on a grocery store complaint that the federal agency had received. The complaint documentation was completely redacted except for the grocery store name and location. When the state asked for more information, the FDA responded simply with a lengthy explanation of why it couldn’t share anything further.
In another example, a state was asked by the FDA to take enforcement action on a facility. The FDA frequently makes such mutual-reliance requests because states can often act more quickly under their own authority. However, in the documentation shared with the state, the FDA redacted the very things that were out of compliance, leaving the state with no evidence to act on.
“One consequence of this restrictive posture is that state partners may be forced to use the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) processes to obtain routine inspection reports that were previously shared more directly, undermining real-time coordination and efficiency,” Mandernach said. “This restricted information-sharing also contributes to duplicative work, where federal and state inspectors unknowingly cover the same ground, and it increases the burden on industry by forcing repeated contacts and repeated requests for the same underlying information — challenges that will only intensify as federal-state inspection integration increases.
“Simply put, federal and state regulators have to be able to tell each other exactly what’s wrong in a food facility.”
Mandernach used two more examples to drive home his point about the importance of open sharing of information between the FDA and its state and local partners.
Lead-contaminated cinnamon applesauce
The 2023-2024 investigation into lead chromate contamination of cinnamon applesauce pouches for children showed how limitations on federal-state information sharing can complicate response during a rapidly evolving public health emergency.
The investigation began when the North Carolina Department of Health and Human Services identified elevated blood lead levels in young children and linked illnesses to a commonly consumed snack product. State investigators quickly shared laboratory findings showing extraordinarily high lead levels with FDA, triggering a public health advisory and recall of a widely distributed, shelf‑stable product intended for young children.
As the investigation expanded across jurisdictions, state and local agencies were responsible for identifying affected products at retail, verifying removal from commerce, and protecting consumers.
However, timely access to complete product distribution information was limited, making it difficult for states to determine where recalled products had been shipped or sold within their jurisdictions, particularly given the product’s long shelf life and distribution through secondary markets.
“States stepped in to close critical information gaps, conducting their own investigations and engaging in direct peer‑to‑peer communication,” Mandernach said. “While this cooperation reflects the strength of the integrated food safety system, it also highlights how legal and operational barriers to information sharing can slow response, fragment efforts, and reduce efficiency during emergencies affecting vulnerable populations.”
Infant botulism outbreak traced to ByHeart infant formula
In late 2025 an uptick on infant botulism cases was detected by California public health officials. It was found that ByHeart brand infant formula was to blame and a recall was initiated.
Ultimately, the outbreak included 48 confirmed and probable cases of infant botulism across 17 states.
State and local agencies played a critical role in verifying product removal and protecting consumers at the point of sale. According to a real-time AFDO survey, states reported 1,986 recall effectiveness checks completed during the first week of the response, and 4,459 by the end of the third week, finding recalled infant formula still for sale in 7 percent of the retail locations they visited. During that same first week, FDA reported completing 21 recall checks.
“Despite this level of state activity, the overall response was constrained by limited access to key information,” Mandernach said. “FDA indicated that access to full retail distribution lists was limited to states operating under a 20.88 information-sharing agreement, which many states currently have, but few of the nearly 2,200 local agencies have. In practice, these agreements take time to negotiate and approve, are not intended to be initiated in the midst of an emergency, and do not scale efficiently for a nationwide response that requires rapid access by many jurisdictions at once.”
The FDA suggested that states without the agreements conduct recall audit checks by visiting major retailers and reporting findings back, despite offering no information about where affected products were actually distributed. FDA also described developing a 20.91 memo to authorize sharing the retail distribution list to effectuate the recall, underscoring the need for workarounds due to current statutory constraints.
“Notably, the very information FDA is constrained from sharing often originates with state agencies that gathered and first provided it to FDA,” Mandernach said.
“Taken together, these experiences underscore a central reality of today’s food safety system: state and local agencies are already carrying out the frontline work that protects consumers, and FDA is taking important steps through initiatives like BRIDGE to strengthen efficiency and coordination, but when information cannot move quickly and seamlessly across that partnership, it is ultimately consumers who remain at risk when the system cannot act as swiftly or effectively as public health demands.”