December 2007
Volume 45 Number 6

Tools of the Trade

Reporting Program Impacts: Slaying the Dragon of Resistance

Nancy K. Franz
Professor/Extension Specialist Program Development
nfranz@vt.edu

Mark McCann
Associate Dean and Director
mmccnn@vt.edu

Virginia Cooperative Extension
Blacksburg, Virginia

Introduction

Many Extension faculty and administrators struggle with reporting substantive program impacts and organizational excellence (Archer et al., 2007). Increased program accountability has magnified this "struggle to report" (Hoffman & Grabowski, 2004). Virginia Cooperative Extension (VCE) responded to this situation with a holistic approach focused specifically on program development, implementation, and evaluation of outcomes-based programming.

Intended outcomes for this improving reporting and accountability included the:

• Increased ability of faculty to measure and report program impacts;


• Increased quality and quantity of program impact statements;


• Increased usefulness of impact statements for faculty, clients, and administration; and


• Improved program design and evaluation.

New Faculty Hires

Over the years, VCE's program leadership positions were eroded by budget cuts. In 2005, VCE administrators committed funds to fully staff program leadership. By mid 2006, five state and six district program leaders were in place, and a Program Development Specialist position was filled. These positions focus on outcomes-based programming through faculty training, technical assistance, and other support.

Administration and Faculty Training

An organizational assessment revealed training and technical assistance for program impact reporting was the highest priority. Twenty-six training sessions for faculty were conducted around the state in districts, on campus, and at Agricultural Research and Extension Centers. Extension administrators also participated in impact reporting training at the invitation of the dean of the college. District Directors participated in their district's training.

Each of the 26 trainings taught by program leadership and the Director of VCE included:

• The purpose and audiences for impact reporting,


• An impact reporting formula,


• Tips and tools for impact reporting,


• Review of sample reports,


• Writing or rewriting personal impact reports, and


• Critique of impact reports.

The training ranged from 1 to 4 hours in length, with eight to 35 faculty attending.

Individual and Small Group Technical Assistance

Interviews with faculty indicated individuals rarely applied concepts and tools from training sessions. Therefore, individual and small group technical assistance was implemented following impact reporting training. Program leadership worked with faculty to develop logic models for program development, design program evaluations, and develop program impact reports.

Development of Reporting Tools

The VCE Program Development Specialist and the College of Ag and Life Sciences Director of Communications and Marketing created a college-wide document on impact reporting guidelines <http://www.cals.vt.edu/communications/writingimpactstatements.html>. This document covers the purposes of impact reporting, target reporting audiences, types of impact, an impact reporting formula, and report examples for faculty to emulate. Ewert's matrix of approaches to Extension work was adapted to help faculty mesh program evaluation and impact report methods with program approaches (McDowell, 2001).

Tying Impact Reporting to Performance and Recognition

Administrators deliberately began tying employee performance and recognition to program impact and reporting. This enhanced faculty readiness to engage in improved program development, evaluation, and reporting. The change was supported by a new online electronic faculty annual reporting system that produces faculty reports used by administrators for faculty performance review.

The VCE director initiated two new recognition systems to enhance program impact reporting. The first included district and state program awards for agents in program evaluation, program impact, Extension leadership council development, program marketing, interdisciplinary programming, and new program initiatives. Program excellence grants were also introduced for faculty focused on outcomes-based programs that highlight agent/specialist relationships.

So What?

Positive effects of VCE's approach impact reporting approach quickly became evident. A process evaluation of these efforts was conducted using quick whips, listening posts, and focus group interviews. The data shows 339 faculty attending trainings found them to be valuable for gaining clear expectations about impact writing, useful tools, and reflection on programming.

These stories also emerged:

• Faculty voluntarily rewrote promotion materials to focus on program impact;


• Faculty rewrote award applications/nominations to highlight program impact;


• Faculty used the impact writing formula for other reporting;


• Faculty asked for additional training on related topics; and


• Technical assistance on program development, evaluation, and report increased.

One participant wrote, "My camping partners and I are planning ahead of time this year to offer pre/post tests to our campers on various areas of learning that will take place at camp. The importance of these types of tests became evident to me at the training."

A survey was sent to faculty and administrators who received impact reporting training and technical assistance. Of the 339 participants, 131 responded and indicated that as a result of the training and/or technical assistance:

• 96% made impact statements more useful for themselves, their clients, and administration;


• 95% improved their ability to measure and report impacts;


• 93% increased the quality and quantity of program impact reports; and


• 71% improved their program design and evaluation

Faculty also highly valued the simple reporting formula, small group work, example impact statements, practical/hands on approach, writing and feedback, and better understanding of impact reporting and expectations.

Lessons Learned

Lessons learned by VCE's program leadership about impact reporting support for faculty included the following.

• Effective faculty impact reporting requires training not just on basic tips and techniques but actual writing and critiquing of impact reports and related follow up technical assistance to personally apply training concepts/tools.


• Some faculty find it difficult to move from technical writing to reporting impacts in lay language for public consumption.


• Key administrative champions for impact reporting results in faculty buy in and attitude and behavior change.


• Impact reporting culture change should take place across the functions of the land-grant university. At Virginia Tech, the dean for the College of Agriculture and Life Sciences held a training for department heads on impact reporting for research, teaching, and Extension.


• Faculty want a wide variety of program impact statement examples to work from.


• Program leadership and campus specialist positions providing technical assistance are key to quality impact data collection and reporting.


• Tying impact reporting to performance and recognition motivates faculty to enhance the number, quality, and use of impact reports.


• Increased attention to impact reporting enhances critical reflection on better aligning programs with Extension's mission, faculty and organizational capacity, and local needs.


• Improving impact reporting can focus on the product and/or the process. Virginia Cooperative Extension focused on the product of outcomes-based programming to force faculty to more closely scrutinize and evaluate their current programming models, mechanics, and outcomes. This resulted in heightened awareness of the importance of good program development and evaluation.


• Focusing on good organizational citizens rather than resistors enhances reporting quality.

These efforts to slay the dragon of resistance around impact writing are not easy but necessary to enhance Extension's ability to cope with and excel in today's environment of enhanced accountability.

References

Archer, T., Warner, P., Miller, W., Clark, C., James, S., Cummings, S., & Adamu, U. (2007). Can we define and measure excellence in Extension? Journal of Extension [On-line], 45(1) Article 1COM1. Available at: http://www.joe.org/joe/2007february/comm1.shtml

Hoffman, B., & Grabowski, B. (2004). Smith Lever 3(d) Extension evaluation and outcome reporting--A scorecard to assist federal program leaders. Journal of Extension [On-line], 42(6). Available at: http://www.joe.org/joe/2004december/a1.shtml

McDowell, G. R. (2001). Land-grant universities and Extension into the 21st century. Ames, IA: Iowa State University Press.

A Practical Tool for the Evaluation of Extension Programs Presented to Older Adults

K. S. U. Jayaratne
State Leader for Program Evaluation and Assistant Professor
Department of Agricultural and Extension Education
North Carolina State University
Raleigh, North Carolina
jay_jayaratne@ncsu.edu

Introduction

The increased older adult population is a significant client group for Extension in the U.S. There were 35.9 million people aged 65 years or older in the U.S. in 2003 (Wan, Sengupta, Velkoff, & Debarros, 2005). Extension reaches out to this older adult population with educational programs such as nutrition education, food safety, diabetic management, and fraud prevention.

Evaluation of Extension programs presented to older adults is often challenging because some of them are physically weak and have limited eye sight. Sometimes, Extension agents use big fonts to print evaluation surveys in deference to older adults' limited eye sight. Due to the physical limitations of some older adults, responding to a written survey can be a challenging task. Because of these limitations and difficulties of collecting data using a printed survey, sometimes Extension programs presented to older adults are left without being evaluated.

It is difficult to secure continuous funding support for Extension programming without being accountable for the resources utilized. For this reason, Extension is continually demanding for program evaluation (Radhakrishna, 1999). This situation led to the development of a practical tool to collect evaluation data from the older adults in Extension programs. This evaluation data collection tool was tested by Georgia Cooperative Extension. The Family and Consumer Sciences Extension agents in Georgia use this tool to evaluate educational programs presented to older adults. This article shares the information about this evaluation tool.

Description of the Evaluation Tool

When this evaluation tool was developed, older adults' limited physical abilities in responding to a survey were taken into account. The evaluation tool is a specially designed wooden box. The dimensions of the evaluation box are in the figure 1. The evaluation box has been partitioned into three sections. On the side of the box there are three holes. Each of these holes opens into a separate section of the partitioned box. Just above these holes on the side of the box there is a sliding transparent plastic cover. A printed paper can be slipped into this transparent cover. The top lid of the box is a sliding cover.

Figure 1.
Evaluation Box

How Does the Evaluation Box Work?

The evaluation box is used with some plastic tokens. The size of a plastic token is about the size of a nickel coin. This method is very appropriate to measure participants' levels of aspirations--readiness to apply learned practices--at the time of concluding Extension workshops. However, this can be used to measure participants' perceived knowledge gained, skill development, and attitude change.

When participants' level of aspirations is assessed, each of the holes should be labeled from left to right as "More Likely," "Undecided," and "Less Likely," respectively. If the target audience is a low literate group, it is important to use a simple set of response choices. A possible alternative for this type of situation is "Yes," "Maybe," "No." The targeting behavior change should be typewritten with large fonts and inserted into the transparent sliding frame of the box.

For an example, if the workshop is emphasizing low-fat dairy products, this behavior change would be type written as follows: "As a result of today's workshop, how likely are you to consume low-fat dairy products?" At the end of the training session, the evaluation box and tokens would be passed to the participants, and they would be asked to drop a token into the hole that represents the direction of their potential behavior change. If someone has been aspired to take charge of eating low-fat dairy products, he or she would drop a token into the "Yes" hole.

At the end of the training, the Extension Agent who presented the workshop will be able to evaluate the outcomes just by counting the number of tokens in each section of the evaluation box. For example, if there were 25 older adults in the program and 15 said that they are more likely to consume low-fat dairy products, the outcome would be that 60% of the participants intended to follow the desired dietary habit. This method is very user-friendly. Because this tool keeps the respondents anonymous, it is compatible with the human subjects governing rules and regulations.

Applications and Recommendations

When written surveys are not practical, this method can be used to collect evaluation data. Collecting evaluation data from older adults is just one application of this method. There are two other possible applications of this method in Extension.

First, this method can be used to evaluate programs presented to low literate audiences. The written survey method is not appropriate for collecting data from low-literate audiences.

The second important application is to evaluate the outcome of educational exhibits. Extension educators present many exhibits and rarely evaluate the outcome of exhibits. The evaluation box can be used to document the outcome of exhibits by placing the box and tokens beside the exhibits and asking viewers to drop a token to indicate the direction of their learning outcome.

References

Radhakrishna, R. (1999). Program evaluation and accountability: Training needs of Extension agents. Journal of Extension [On-line], 37(3). Available at: http://www.joe.org/joe/1999june/rb1.html

Wan, H., Sengupta, M. Velkoff, V. A., & Debarros, K. A. (2005). U. S. Census Bureau, current publication reports, 65+ in the United States: 2005. U. S. Government Printing Office, Washington DC. Retrieved on April 13, 2007 from: http://www.census.gov/prod/2006pubs/p23-209.pdf

Plants and Textiles: A Legacy of Technology--Introducing a New On-Line Project for Youth

Marcia Eames-Sheavly
Senior Extension Associate, Horticulture
ME14@cornell.edu

Charlotte W. Coffman
Senior Extension Associate, Fiber Science & Apparel Design
CWC4@cornell.edu

Cornell University
Ithaca, New York

Background

The number of older youth in 4-H, including textile and horticulture projects, continues to decline. In contrast, Cornell University students are enthusiastic about horticulture and textile courses, particularly when combined with technology, art, and history, and such courses are often over-enrolled. A teenaged youth member of the Cornell Cooperative Extension (CCE) Youth Development Program Council stated in a 2002 program review that teens would welcome a 4-H technology program that "isn't just computers"--a program that explains "how things are made." Although New York schools offer technology courses, many students graduate with only a few semesters of middle-school technology. In addition, recent studies show that out-of-school activities rival formal classrooms in the amount of time devoted to technology education.

In response to this situation, two senior extension associates in the departments of Fiber Science & Apparel Design, and Horticulture, found their interest piqued. Perhaps greater numbers of middle- and high-school youth could be engaged in experiential learning through plants and textiles. Extension educators in New York confirmed that teenaged youth were, in fact, eager for new opportunities for hands-on learning and that often many plant-related activities are routine to them by this age.

To meet this need, the authors developed the Plants and Textiles: A Legacy of Technology project activities with university students as assistants and received guidance and feedback throughout the process from middle- and high-school-aged youth and their teachers and leaders. The project is entirely on-line at <http://www.hort.cornell.edu/plantsandtextiles/>.

Non-formal educators, as well as teachers, can use this project in its entirety, or try individual activities for a shorter term effort. Currently, four detailed activities are on-line, with plans to add more in the future. It is a unique opportunity to engage youth in an exploration of how plants yield fibers, dyes, and chemicals that are used to make textile products and how changes in traditional technologies affect product production today--all with a creative twist.

Project Components

The Plants and Textiles project focuses on past and present technologies that convert plant materials into fibrous products. Project components include a tool, the associated technology, research, and community connections. Current activities are indigo dyeing, mat weaving, paper making, and rope making, with plans to complete net knotting in the future. Each activity begins with making a tool and then using the tool in a traditional activity. Students then use the Internet to learn about comparable technologies and products in today's market and to further explore plant fibers and textiles. Last, they involve others from their community.

An example of one activity is paper-making; youth begin by making a mold and deckle and then make paper from a diversity of plant materials. They research the history, science, and technology of paper and can expand the activity in various ways. Youth are encouraged to put their own distinctive spin on the activity, experimenting with different plant materials to make the paper and then, using it for a unique purpose.

A key part of the project is connecting to the local community. Young people might investigate plants that were critical at one point in the area's industrial history. Participants can work with local artists, historical associations, and museums or talk with older residents. Youth are encouraged to share what they have learned by developing a display, exhibit, or educational program. They may collaborate with a local weaver's guild to offer workshops, organize a fieldtrip to an appropriate factory, or invite a professional in an appropriate field to speak to a class or club. The Web site suggests numerous ideas for showcasing young people's work in diverse ways throughout the community.

Outcomes and Impacts

Program evaluation was based on responses from four groups: 1) undergraduate students who helped develop and test the activities, 2) middle- and high-school students who tested activities and participated in the program, 3) adults who served as 4-H leaders and teachers, and 4) collaborators at partnering agencies.

Three Cornell undergraduates and 29 trained teens reported an increased knowledge about plant and textile technology and an increased interest in youth development and informal education. According to the leaders/teachers, young people who participated in the program not only gained experience with plants and textiles, but were able to place this knowledge in a historical or environmental context. Students demonstrated problem solving, leadership skills, experimentation, and creativity.

The authors learned that program depth encouraged a range of partnerships. One New York county Extension program strengthened existing partnerships with a farmer's museum and with the Master Gardener program. Another formed a new alliance with the local historical society and with local high schools. A third county Extension program connected with Agriculture in the Classroom and with elementary and middle school teachers who used the program to teach writing, history, technology, science, and math.

On campus, the link between undergraduate study and outreach was nurtured through student employment, as well as through an Art of Horticulture course for undergraduates. Horticulture 203 is a survey course that explores plants used in or as art, from living sculpture methods (such as bonsai, topiary, and tree sculpture), to floral design and plant fibers and dyes used in or as art. A number of student final projects were initiated that focused on fibers and dyes, demonstrating an enthusiasm for this topic.

Email communications from educators nationwide have indicated that the plants and textiles Web site is very effective in providing quality activities for teenaged youth. At an on-campus lab session with Cornell undergraduates, the site was rated as the best, easiest to navigate, and useful garden-based learning Web site.

Conclusion

This project emphasizes the Youth Development Program Council priority of "enhancing science and technology literacy." It engages and enriches teenaged youth by combining a fun approach with technological experience and academic depth. Program delivery links 4-H to museums and historical associations, using local resources and involving youth in their communities.

To explore the Plants and Textiles: A Legacy of Technology project, please, visit the Web site <http://www.hort.cornell.edu/plantsandtextiles/>. The authors welcome feedback, as well as opportunities to partner and to introduce new plants and activities to the site.

Estimating Pre-Purchase Housing Counseling and Education Costs per Client

Leslie E. Green
Ph.D. Student
University of Georgia
Athens, Georgia
lesgreen@uga.edu

Lucy Delgadillo
Assistant Professor
Utah State University
Logan, Utah
lucyd@cc.usu.edu

Introduction

The services provided by housing counseling agencies and Extension educators are important to the sustainability of home ownership (Joint Center, 2003). However, funding for housing counseling and education (HCE) programs is limited. In 2004, only 20% of the 1,682 housing counseling agencies approved by the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) received funding (Baker & Collins, 2005; Weicher, 2004).

Housing counseling agencies are often short staffed (Joint Center, 2004b) and may experience a high volume of requests for pre-purchase HCE; therefore, the costs of providing counseling can be high. Baker and Collins (2005) estimate that depending on a number of factors, including the readiness of the client and the complexity of the program, costs could range between $500 and $1,500 per client. Self training courses may reduce the cost of providing direct HCE; however, self training courses are not always considered as effective as group or one-on-one counseling (Hirad & Zorn, 2001; Strauss & Phillips, 1997).

Purpose and Objectives

This article describes a method of calculating the per client cost of pre-purchase housing counseling using a formula developed by Baker and Collings (2005) and adopted by the HUD approved Family Life Center, Housing and Financial Counseling (FLC HFC) program located at Utah State University. The FLC HFC serves three rural Utah counties (Cache, Rich, and Box Elder). Many of the households served are low to moderate income. A method of determining the cost of HCE can help these agencies 1) pursue programmatic funding armed with solid data and 2) monitor intake of pre-purchase clientele in both counseling and classroom education. Extension professionals can also use per client cost information to evaluate the effectiveness of current housing education programs or to evaluate the practicality of initiating such a program.

Methodology and Procedures

Determining the cost of HCE involves more than simply dividing the dollar amount necessary to run a program by the number of clients (Joint Center, 2004a). To illustrate a more accurate method of figuring the cost per client this study applied a formula created by Baker and Collins (2005).

The formula in Figure 1 is for calculating the total cost of pre-purchase counseling. To find the total cost per client, TC should be divided by Q, the number of clients per year served by one full time equivalent.

The necessary costs involved in counseling can be separated into two categories, direct and indirect, and can include variable and non-variable (fixed) costs.

• Direct costs include:
  • supplies
  • employee training and salaries
  • marketing

• Indirect costs (items necessary to sustain the agency) include:
  • overhead (the cost of maintaining the building)
  • salary for the director and other management staff
  • other administrative costs

Application

For purposes of illustration, the authors applied the Baker and Collins (2005) formula using data collected from FLC HFC personnel records and housing counseling workshops (Figure 2). To preserve confidentiality, the authors used approximate costs rather than actual costs to illustrate how the formula works. The FLC HFC holds 12-18 pre-purchase education classes a year and over the past 3 years averaged 219 participating households per year. The pre-purchase housing counseling program at the FLC HFC is run by 1.25 full-time equivalents. The formula shows that the total cost of providing pre-purchase HCE is approximately $410 per client.

Conclusions

Many housing counseling agencies and Extension services request funding for HCE, and this funding is limited. HCE providers that can support per client costs with data have an advantage in preparing realistic budgets from which to base their funding requests. Housing counseling agencies and Extension agents can use the Baker and Collins (2005) formula, with data from their own programs, to calculate the cost of providing HCE in their respective areas.

References

Baker, C., & Collins, J. M. (2005, May). Measuring the delivery costs of prepurchase homeownership education and counseling [Electronic version]. Washington DC: Neighborworks America.

Hirad, A., & Zorn, P. M. (2001, May). A little knowledge is a good thing: Empirical evidence of the effectiveness of pre-purchase homeownership counseling. Retrieved March 2007 from http://www.freddiemac.com/corporate/reports/pdf/homebuyers_study.pdf

Joint Center for Housing Studies (2003, October). Sustaining home ownership through education and counseling (Working Paper Series W03-7). Harvard University: Wiranowski, M.

Joint Center for Housing Studies (2004a, February). The cost-effectiveness of community-based foreclosure prevention (Working Paper Series BABC 04-18). Harvard University: Quercia, R. G., Cowan, S. M., & Moreno, A.

Joint Center for Housing Studies (2004b, December). Strengthening the case for homeownership counseling: Moving beyond "a little bit of knowledge" (Working Paper Series W04-12). Harvard University: Hornburg, S. P.

Strauss, L., & Phillips S. (1997, January) Housing counseling in rural America. Housing Assistance Council, 1-24.

Weicher, J. C. (2004) Statement before the United States House of Representatives housing and community opportunity subcommittee March 18, 2004. Retrieved October 11, 2005 from www.hud.gov/offices/cir/test31804.cfm

Interagency Cooperation in Addressing Worker Protection Standard Compliance Issues

Fred Fishel
Associate Professor
University of Florida
Gainesville, Florida
weeddr@ifas.ufl.edu

Worker Protection Standard

The Worker Protection Standard (WPS) is a regulation issued by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA). It covers pesticides that are used in the production of agricultural plants on farms, forests, nurseries, and greenhouses. The WPS requires agricultural establishment owners to take precautionary measures to reduce the risk of pesticide-related illness and injury of workers and pesticide handlers they employ. The various WPS protective requirements are categorized under five major areas: information at a central location, pesticide safety training, decontamination supplies, employer information exchange, and emergency assistance. Each state is responsible for enforcing all requirements of the WPS.

In Florida, the WPS is under the Florida Pesticide Law, and the Florida Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services (FDACS) is the responsible agency (FDACS, 2007). In most states, including Florida, Extension serves as the primary educational agency in assisting the agricultural industry in understanding this legislation.

Summary of WPS Compliance in Florida

Beginning in 1995, FDACS initiated enforcement of WPS compliance within the state. A 10-year summary of the firms inspected, including rate and totals of violations were compiled (Table 1). Although there were additional types of agricultural firms inspected for WPS compliance, the majority targeted were farms and nurseries employing workers and pesticide handlers.

Of these two types of establishments, 26% and 40% of farms and nurseries were reported to have at least one WPS violation, respectively. Of all WPS inspections, farms and nurseries accounted for 2,194 total violations. Of the five major areas of WPS requirements, three areas were most problematic for these types of establishments: information at a central location, pesticide safety training, and decontamination supplies (Table 2).

All areas of violation and all types of establishments are not presented, but only the three main areas of concern for farms and nurseries. Although all areas of compliance are of concern, these three areas accounted for 81% and 84% of all WPS violations on farms and nurseries, respectively. Of the three areas, display of information at a central location on the establishment was most often cited for violations on both of these types of establishments. The information required for display at a central location includes a pesticide safety poster, information regarding pesticide applications on the establishment, and emergency information for seeking medical assistance.

An Effort of Interagency Cooperation to Improve Compliance

Based upon the 10 years of compliance data for Florida, it was recognized that WPS is difficult for agricultural establishments to be in full compliance with. The nature of this state's agricultural industry and its environment are major factors for such difficulties. Agriculture is extremely diverse in Florida in that there are a tremendous variety of agricultural plants that fall under the WPS realm. With this diversity comes the great amount of hand labor required for most production facilities to produce their commodities, some facilities employing several hundred workers each.

There are approximately 44,000 agricultural establishments marketing more than $6.8 billion, making Florida 8th in the nation in total cash receipts (FDACS, 2004). Only tourism is responsible for a greater amount of total cash receipts within the state. The state's warm and humid environment fosters a great variety of pest complexes that require control, many on a regular basis for much of the year. Pesticides are often employed in the integrated pest management on Florida's agricultural establishments. The most recent revisions to the WPS, with its entire requirements, are published in a document that totals 127 pages (USEPA, 2005). Considering these factors, full compliance is difficult, especially since it has been in effect for only a brief period of time.

Based upon all those factors, an educational opportunity was readily recognized. Agricultural commodity associations are strongly supported by Florida's producers. Because of the commitment to its constituents by the commodity associations, FDACS and the University of Florida Extension Pesticide Information Office (UFEPIO) were called upon to lead an educational outreach campaign for assisting growers in improving WPS compliance. Those participating included the Florida Fertilizer and Agrichemical, Fruit and Vegetable, Nursery Growers and Landscape Associations, and the Florida Farm Bureau. With additional monetary support from private industry, meeting facilities were secured and educational materials were developed and reproduced by the UFEPIO to target growers at 17 locations in Florida. Each meeting's focus was on the three main areas of WPS compliance that had been in most frequent violation.

Based on participant surveys, 98% of nearly 1,000 producers in attendance rated the value of the program as "good to excellent." The surveys also revealed that attending a meeting made them have a "decent to complete understanding" of the compliance areas presented. Each participant was supplied with the full 127-page WPS document and a DVD of the presentations made at the meetings.

Implications

Because WPS is federal legislation, other states could potentially take an interagency approach to addressing compliance issues, with Extension serving as a leader, especially in states that involve great amounts of hand labor. In Florida, a similar compilation of compliance data will be monitored in the future. Based on those data, the effectiveness of our efforts may partially be determined. It may be determined that additional effort will be necessary.

Several other tangible outcomes resulted from the first 10 years of data and this initial effort. A full-time WPS coordinator was hired and is housed in the UFEPIO. A major responsibility of the WPS coordinator is to work directly with our Extension professionals in conducting outreach programs. Development of interactive web-based educational materials addressing WPS was also initiated during 2006 within the UFEPIO.

References

Florida Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services (2004). Florida agricultural statistical directory [On-line]. Available at http://www.nass.usda.gov/fl/

Florida Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services (2007). Florida Pesticide Law [On-line]. Available at http://www.flaes.org/statutesandrules.html

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency [On-line]. Available at http://www.epa.gov/

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (2005). Federal Worker Protection Standard (WPS) for agricultural pesticides, 40 CFR part 170 [On-line]. Available at http://www.epa.gov/agriculture/htc.html

Food Allergies: Safe Food Handling to Prevent Triggering an Allergic Reaction

Carol Byrd-Bredbenner
bredbenner@aesop.rutgers.edu

Jaclyn Maurer
maurer@aesop.rutgers.edu

Department of Nutritional Sciences
Rutgers University
New Brunswick, New Jersey

Introduction

Food allergies are a common, serious--and sometimes fatal--problem. Almost 11 million Americans have food allergies; many are children. The prevalence of food allergies, particularly among children, is on the rise (Sicherer, Munoz-Furlong, & Sampson, 2003, 2004). Although any food can cause an allergic reaction, eight foods, namely peanuts, tree nuts (like walnuts and cashews), milk, eggs, fish, shellfish, soy, and wheat account for 90% of all food allergies.

An allergic reaction is triggered when the immune system mistakenly overreacts to a food that it thinks is a harmful invader. This overreaction causes symptoms that may appear within seconds to hours after eating a trigger food. Fortunately, most allergic reactions are mild. They may cause a runny nose, sneezing, itching skin, hives, and digestive upset. For those who are severely allergic, exposure to a trigger food may cause life-threatening reactions. The tongue, lips, or throat may swell so severely that the person cannot breathe (Basset, 2005). Death will occur without immediate medical help. Unfortunately, sudden severe allergic reactions (known as "anaphylaxis") to food cause 200 deaths annually.

The only proven way to prevent triggering a reaction in those with a food allergy is to avoid the offending food. Avoidance measures include reading food labels for allergenic ingredients, asking questions about meal ingredients when eating outside of the home, and adopting food handling behaviors that prevent cross contact with allergens.

What Extension Professionals Can Do

Food is frequently present at Extension events as meals or snacks or as teaching aids in food and nutrition education programs. In addition, key Extension stakeholders include youth, many of whom likely have food allergies. Thus, it is imperative that Extension professionals arm themselves with the knowledge needed to safely handle foods to prevent triggering an allergic reaction. In addition, Extension professionals have numerous opportunities to teach others, especially children's caregivers (e.g., coaches, baby sitters, teachers), how to do the same.

Key Safe Food Handling Practices to Prevent Triggering a Food Allergy Reaction

1. Listen carefully when someone in your group indicates he or she has a food allergy.
   1. Try to find out ahead of time if someone in your group has a food allergy, and adjust the menu or lesson whenever possible.
   2. Explain to the person what you know to be true about the food being served or used in the lesson---don't be afraid to say you don't know.

2. Keep foods simple and safe.
   1. Be aware that allergens often hide in soups, dips, and homemade goodies.
   2. Check ingredient labels on food packages for allergens every time--food products may change.
      1. The new food labeling law requires food manufacturers to disclose in plain language whether products contain any of the top eight food allergens.
   3. Do not serve a food if you can't guarantee it will be allergen free, or ask the person with an allergy to bring his or her own snack.

3. Disclose ingredients used to prepare meals.
   1. Avoid using "secret" ingredients. Always indicate whether key allergens are included in the recipe or may have come in contact with the food you are preparing or serving.

4. Prevent cross contact between allergen-containing and allergen-free foods.
   1. Keep even a trace amount, part, or product of an allergenic food (e.g., peanut, peanut butter, peanut oil) from coming in contact with an allergen-free food or allergen-free food or surface (e.g., counter, bowl, spoon).
      1. Cross contact measures are not the same as cross contamination measures used to prevent foodborne illness. That is, while many foodborne diseases can be prevented by cooking foods thoroughly, cooking a food containing an allergen will not make the food safe to eat by someone allergic to it.
   2. Wash your hands, workspace, utensils, and pans, and make sure dishes are allergen-free before preparing foods.
   3. Thoroughly clean up workspace after use.

5. Be in control of the eating situation.
   1. Keep kids from trading meals and snacks.
   2. Confine food to eating areas.
   3. Have participants wash hands and eating areas after meals and snacks. (For example, a smudge of peanut residue on the table could trigger a reaction.)
   4. Limit crafts that use food items.

What to Do in an Emergency

The steps above will help prevent a food allergy from being triggered. Unfortunately, accidents do happen. And sometimes a reaction occurs in someone who had not previously experienced a reaction; therefore, to play it safe, know what to do in an emergency. Symptoms may appear within seconds to hours.

1. Learn the symptoms: tingling sensation, itching, or metallic taste in the mouth; hives; a sensation of warmth; asthma symptoms; swelling of the mouth and throat area; difficulty breathing; vomiting; diarrhea; intestinal cramping; drop in blood pressure; and/or loss of consciousness.


2. If someone reports feeling sick after eating, take him or her seriously, and act quickly.


3. Call 911 or your local emergency service.

Educational Materials for Teaching Others About Food Allergies

New Jersey passed Public Law 2005, c.206 (A303 ACS 2R), which mandated the development and dissemination of educational materials to help food service personnel and the public, particularly children's caregivers, prevent triggering food allergic reactions. To guide the development of these materials, researchers reviewed existing food allergen educational materials and conducted key-informant interviews with health professionals (e.g., Registered Dietitians, physicians [allergist, pediatrician], local health officers, Registered Environmental Health Specialists, school nurse), food service experts (e.g., school food service administrators, restaurateurs, chefs), children's caregivers (e.g., parents, teachers, coaches, babysitters), allergy education experts, and food policy experts.

The materials that were developed included five informational factsheets, targeted to specific groups that contained guidelines for preventing triggering food allergic reactions. Figure 1 displays the factsheet developed for food service employees and children's caregivers, others are available at <http://www.foodallergy.rutgers.edu>. These factsheets were developed with the assistance of a professional graphic designer and are available in both English and Spanish. The materials serve as educational tools for Extension professionals to use in both their professional development as well as in outreach efforts such as in-service programs for restaurateurs, school lunch personnel, childcare providers, parents, and even youth who may find themselves hired to baby-sit a child with a food allergy. (For more information on factsheet development, refer to Maurer, Byrd-Bredbenner, & Grasso, in press).

Figure 1.
Food Allergy Factsheets (also available in Spanish)

Conclusion

Safe food handling extends beyond preventing food illness caused by foodborne pathogens; it also involves knowing how to prevent triggering a food allergic reaction. Extension professionals likely will face increasing numbers of clientele in their outreach efforts who are affected, personally as well as professionally (e.g., teachers, day care) by food allergies. The educational factsheets and food handling guidelines presented in this article can help Extension professional meet the challenge of preventing triggering a food allergic reaction themselves as well as educating others to accomplish the same.

Acknowledgements

This project was funded by the State of New Jersey Department of Health and Senior Services as part of legislation, Public Law 2005, c.026 (A303 ACS 2R). Thank you to the following groups for their invaluable assistance: Rutgers University's Food Allergies Advisory Board; Lerner Design Group; Rutgers University Food Policy Institute, New Jersey Agricultural Experiment Station, Rutgers Cooperative Extension.

References:

Basset, C. W. (2005). What you should know about common food allergies. Cortland Forum, November, 38-40,45.

Maurer, J., Byrd-Bredbenner, C., & Grasso, D. (in press). Know before you serve--A fact sheet to help food service personnel prevent triggering allergic reactions in customers with food allergies. Cornell Hotel and Restaurant Administration Quarterly.

Sicherer, S. H., Munoz-Furlong, A., & Sampson, H. A. (2003). Prevalence of peanut and tree nut allergy in the United States determined by means of a random digit dial telephone survey: a 5-year follow-up study. J Allergy Clin Immunol, 112(6), 1203-1207.

Sicherer, S. H., Munoz-Furlong, A., & Sampson, H. A. (2004). Prevalence of seafood allergy in the United States determined by a random telephone survey. J Allergy Clin Immunol, 114(1), 159-165.

Tools to Help Horse Owners Deal with Muddy High-Traffic Areas

Elizabeth A. Greene
Associate Professor and Extension Equine Specialist
University of Vermont
Burlington, Vermont
Betsy.Greene@uvm.edu

Introduction

Nearly every horse owner has had to deal with mud and ice in high traffic areas in paddocks or pastures. These muddy spots are usually found at the gate, feed, and watering areas. With high horse traffic, the soil quickly becomes compacted and will no longer support healthy pasture growth. Weeds easily compete with the grasses/legumes, or in many cases, the trampling and compaction stifle all plant growth. Water runs across mud and manure before entering the closest stream or river without the benefit of filtering by healthy vegetation. Besides the potential environmental contamination, horses and owners must deal with dangerous mud and ice issues. Extension personnel are often called upon to assist with clientele's equine pasture issues.

Equine Facility Challenges

Equine businesses depend upon a constant flow of clientele, many of whom are minors, to keep business thriving. To ensure rider safety, riding stables tend to place higher priority on a calm, safe school horse than on the health of the paddocks. If a school horse stays in the barn on rainy or snowy days (to enhance pasture health), the horse may be fractious and excitable during its next lesson. If the horse acts up and the client falls off, at best, the client may not return. At worst, the client may be injured and try to sue the facility for negligence. Given the choice, equine operations usually sacrifice the pasture rather than risk injury or worse.

Because multiple, calm horses are necessary for a successful lesson program, the pastures and paddocks are frequently overpopulated. Paddocks are often arranged for convenience for turnout and access to the barn, rather than the best drainage or layout of the land. In addition, horse owners often do not factor in forage received from pasture as a part of their horses' daily nutrient requirements. Smaller farms also may not have adequate equipment or knowledge to maintain pasture health.

Renovating Heavily Compacted Areas

To address these challenges, improvements were made to paddocks at the University of Vermont. The university's Ellen A. Hardacre Equine Facility has several typical equine paddock issues (Figure 1). The gate is at the lower end, which leads to water running across compacted ground in the gate area. Paddocks are large enough for exercise, but not enough to meet to nutrient needs. Although there is a grass buffer strip between the paddocks and a French drain (culvert with large rocks) to move water, the grass is not adequate to cleanse the yearly runoff. Furthermore, since horses are turned out in all weather conditions, mud and ice accumulates throughout the year, posing a higher potential for horse and human injury.

Figure 1.
Muddy and Icy Paddock Prior to Renovation

In an attempt to address some of these issues, the Greener Pastures project was undertaken. We renovated a 15 x 76 foot strip of land along the front of each paddock. Renovation involved replacing 8 inches of compacted topsoil with a layer of geotextile filter fabric, 4 inches of large stone (1 ½ - 1 ¾ inch), covered by another layer of fabric, then 4 inches of dirty pea stone on the topmost layer (Figure 2). The "large stone sandwich" allowed water to flow underneath the compacted top surface to a slightly angled PVC pipe buried under the travel lane to the grass buffer and into the existing French drain.

Figure 2.
Layers in Renovated Area

Practical Aspects of the Renovation Process

The width (into the paddocks) of the renovated area was determined by both the amount of area needed to lead a horse in and turn it around prior to releasing it, and the available width of the filter fabric roll. The entire length of the front of each paddock was renovated. The depth of each type of stone was approximately 4 inches, and, although the upper layer was hard pack, it was no harder than the previously compacted ground, and the mud and ice issues were significantly reduced.

The two layers of geotextile filter fabric were necessary to prevent both the soil (bottom) and the pea stone (top) from filling in the air pockets that allowed water to pass through to the drainage pipe. The university hired a contractor to do most of the work, because the farm labor and equipment was not available due to other farm commitments. As a result, each paddock (labor and product) cost approximately $1,400 dollars to renovate. The worst three paddocks were done as a trial in the fall of 2004, and the difference was very distinct between those renovated and those not (Figure 3). Thus, the other four paddocks were renovated the following spring (2005).

Figure 3.
Paddock in Foreground Is Renovated (Spring 2005)

Benefits of Renovated Areas

There have been several significant outcomes of the Greener Pastures project.

• Both people and horses are no longer subjected to mud up to a foot deep or ice in the gate areas and travel lane of the paddocks.


• Water runs under, rather than through, manure in newly renovated high traffic areas in the paddocks.


• The university stable is providing a better example to the community and students by being a better steward of the land.


• The resulting Greener Pastures: Sacrifice a Little Pasture to Save a Lot publication provides horse owners a step-by-step, pictorial guide to the process, which includes materials and cost involved.


• Individuals can easily adapt the process to their unique situation, and can decrease costs significantly by doing the work themselves.

Impact

The fall and winter seasons of 2006/2007 were unseasonably warm and wet; however, the renovated areas of the paddocks have held up reasonably well. Although renovation of portions of the paddocks at UVM has not addressed overuse issues, it has increased the safety for horses and humans, helped decrease the negative impact of UVM horses on the environment, and set a good example for the community. The Greener Pastures project and publication have been the focus of several presentations (Vermont, Maine, Ohio, New Hampshire, New Jersey) and are being used by NH Natural Resource Conservation District personnel, the New England Small Farm Institute, and others.

Acknowledgement

The author would like to thank Josie Trott, Julie Smith, Frances Greene, and Grace N. Matiru for their editorial assistance and Rachel Gilker for her collaboration on the Greener Pastures project.

References

Greene, B., & Gilker, R. (2006). Greener pastures: Sacrifice a little pasture to save a lot. University of Vermont.

Copyright © by Extension Journal, Inc. ISSN 1077-5315. Articles appearing in the Journal become the property of the Journal. Single copies of articles may be reproduced in electronic or print form for use in educational or training activities. Inclusion of articles in other publications, electronic sources, or systematic large-scale distribution may be done only with prior electronic or written permission of the Journal Editorial Office, joe-ed@joe.org.

If you have difficulties viewing or printing this page, please contact JOE Technical Support.