Progress 09/01/23 to 08/31/24

Outputs
Target Audience:Individuals, groups, market segments, or communities As part of Activity 1, a 2-day in-person planning meeting was convened that included the core project team. (Full team) As part of Activity 2, 2 listening sessions were conducted with stakeholders of the fresh produce industry, fertilizer industry, and regulatory agencies to discuss project goals, methods and our pilot dashboard. (UC Davis) As part of Activity 3, 8 listening sessions and 22 interviews have been conducted with farm advisors and extension professionals, state department of agriculture personnel, organic farm and input certifiers, grower advocates, produce growers and handlers, retailers and organic input suppliers. As part of listening sessions and interviews, participants were introduced to the project and the proposed deliverables were described. Participants were asked to offer feedback as potential end users for the proposed soil amendment risk assessment tool and participants in the training and outreach program. Some of the listening sessions were conducted at Organic Week in Washington, DC where we also networked with wider members of the organic community. (URI and TOC) For the beginning stages of Activity 4, the target audiences were the produce industry and consumers. Our main messaging goal was to engage industry with the project launch and to update the public on experimental progress through the activities cited as part of Activity 3 and a project website. (TOC) Racial and ethnic minorities and those who are socially, economically, or educationally disadvantaged. As part of Activity 3, three of the team members attended the Texas Hispanic Farmers and Ranchers conference and Food Summit to seek feedback from Hispanic growers and better understand their unique needs in relation to project goals. Feedback was solicited via a booth with information about the project and proposed deliverables and conversations with team members. (URI and TOC) Formal classroom instruction, laboratory instruction, or practicum experiences; development of curriculum or innovative teaching methodologies; internships; workshops; experiential learning opportunities; extension and outreach. In addition to research conducted to meet project goals, target audiences were reached through formal classroom instruction, laboratory instruction, and research instruction for students at the University of Georgia. Changes/Problems:URI For Activity 3, we added a task on listening sessions to the data collection as a way to gain early feedback, particularly for input to Activity 2 to address questions raised during the 2-year team planning meeting conducted in January 2024. UC Davis There was a delay in the hiring process at UC Davis, which led to a delay in starting the project. Quantitative data on pathogen prevalence on vegetable crops has been challenging to obtain, therefore, the Bayesian Belief Network analysis has been delayed. Different approaches on collecting qualitative data via expert opinion (Delphi method), focus groups and other approaches are being considered to further complement the information regarding the causal pathway of crop contamination. UGA The primary challenge we faced was finding and training the appropriate graduate students in machine learning skills and building computationally intensive models. Developing a robust system model requires a specialized skill set in data science, particularly machine learning techniques, which are essential for analyzing complex datasets and predicting pathogen behavior in produce fields. We addressed this challenge by seeking graduate students with a background in data science or related fields and providing targeted training to bridge any knowledge gaps. Additionally, we will collaborate with experts in machine learning to guide model development and ensure its accuracy and effectiveness. What opportunities for training and professional development has the project provided? Professional development of URI postdoctoral research fellow and URI PhD student through mentorship, project management activities, and conference participation. The postdoctoral fellow also successfully completed a Produce Safety Alliance food safety training hosted by URI extension. Professional development of UC Davis project scientists and PhD students (2) through mentorship, project management activities, conference participation. A UC Davis PhD student was awarded a 2024 'Compost Research University Scholarship', funded by the Compost Research & Education Foundation https://compostfoundation.org/Research/University-Scholarships All events mentioned above offered opportunities for professional development for the Organic Center team members involved in this project. How have the results been disseminated to communities of interest?NA - the project has not yet produced results, as data are still being collected and analyzed. What do you plan to do during the next reporting period to accomplish the goals?External Evaluator's Assessment (Dr. Sheely, External Evaluator) Overall, this project is moving forward in a satisfactory manner to achieve the stated goal/objectives as described in the original project proposal and as articulated above in the "Issue or Problem" section of this report. The accomplishments described in this progress report are an accurate description of the activities conducted and the progress made by the project team. Activity-specific comments are below: Activity 1: Project management The project is well managed by the Project Director, Dr. Patrick Baur, and his Co-Project Directors. URI Post-Doctoral fellow, Dr. Jaime Barrett, is effective in carrying out her responsibilities, including facilitating/leading project team meetings as necessary. A second Advisory Board meeting will occur shortly and should yield useful feedback from that group. The January, 2024 launch meeting for the project team was well organized, critical for team building, and effective in developing a shared understanding of the various elements of the project and each team member's role in carrying them out. Activity 2: Risk assessment and decision dashboard for organic soil amendments The considerable work related to Activity 2 is well underway and is expected to continue throughout the next reporting period. Supplemental qualitative data and alternative approaches will be used to address difficulties encountered in acquiring quantitative data. *Please note the interesting, timely outcome reported under Activity 2, Task 2.5. Activity 3: Needs assessment among farm advisors, extension, auditors/certifiers, and buyers Significant effort has been made to prepare for an upcoming survey of farm advisors and extension professionals. Numerous interviews and listening sessions were conducted to better understand challenges related to food safety and organic production practices. These activities will provide a strong foundation for Activities 4 and 5, which will occur in subsequent years. Planned Next Steps by Activity Activity 2 2.1 Synthesize current available evidence on food safety risks associated with organic soil amendments from scientific literature, unpublished data, and private sector data. Continuing literature review and summarizing of current available data 2.2 Survey labs serving each region to assess methodological consistency and compatibility of testing data. Conduct a survey of the current available diagnostic tests for soils amendments on detection of foodborne pathogens provided by commercial laboratories 2.3 Survey and assessment of types of organic soil amendments currently available on the market and used by organic growers in our study regions. Conduct a survey targeting the soil amendment manufacturers Analysis of information obtained from tasks 2.1-2.3 using the BBN methodology. 2.4 Quantitative risk assessment using Bayesian belief networks (BBN) & scenario trees (ST). Continue the development of pathway specific models for integration in the risk assessment dashboard 2.5. Use a systems approach to predict the pathway of foodborne pathogens in the pre-harvest produce environments. We will focus on developing a comprehensive system model that integrates our completed studies on the survival of pathogens in produce fields. This model will incorporate the findings from our research, as well as data from existing literature and contributions from our collaborators at UC Davis and other partners involved in the OREI project. By combining these diverse data sources, we aim to enhance our systems-based approach to accurately model the pathways of pathogens within produce fields. Our efforts will include refining model parameters to account for various environmental factors such as weather conditions, soil composition, and agricultural practices that influence pathogen behavior. This approach will allow us to simulate different scenarios and identify key risk factors, offering a predictive tool for growers and regulators to implement science-based interventions. Additionally, we will work on validating the model through collaboration with field experts and testing against real-world data to ensure its reliability and applicability. By the end of this period, we aim to have a robust model that can support decision-making processes to improve produce safety and reduce contamination risks, ultimately contributing to the long-term goals of the OREI project. 2.6 Develop a user-friendly dashboard to integrate methods and results of the risk assessment and prediction models. Finalize the compilation of parameters for the risk assessment model Activity 3 3.1 Survey of farm advisor and extension professionals The survey has been configured and distributed to team members and board members for comment. It is currently in the process of beta testing with a subset of the compiled recruitment list. The final survey will be released to the full recruitment list (N > 2000) in Fall 2024 after sufficient beta responses have been collected and final adjustments are made as needed. 3.2 Key informant interviews with auditors, certifiers and buyers The interview groups have expanded to include grower representatives or advocates, farm advisors and extension professionals, state department of agriculture personnel and organic soil amendment suppliers. 22 interviews have been conducted. Once the existing interviews have been analyzed, we will determine if additional interviews are needed. If needed, we will perform a second round of recruitment and interviews. In the second round we will focus on clarification and confirmation of existing data and capturing stakeholder groups with low representation. 3.3 Analysis of survey data, interview data and policy and extension analysis Analysis of listening sessions and interviews has been initiated and is expected to continue for the next several months. Survey is expected to be released in Fall 2024 and survey data are expected to be analyzed after the open period or when response rates indicate that no one else is likely to take it. We will be conducting an extensive policy and extension materials search and creating a repository of resources in anticipation of document analysis to identify any relevant policy differences across states and key extension content for later outreach efforts. Activity 4 and 5 TOC's new manager of science programs will take over administrative and everyday tasks associated with project Activities 4 and 5. 4.0 Design outreach programs and training modules Working with subawardees, the Produce Safety Alliance (PSA) at Cornell University and the Organic Agronomy Training Services (OATS), we will begin the development of region-specific training programs for growers and auditors/certifiers, and train-the-trainer modules (TTT) for advisors and extension professionals to execute the training programs. We will also begin to build an online training module tailored to auditors and certifiers. Relevant TOC staff will continue to build relationships with potential partners for the in-person workshops and outreach plan. We will engage with the Transition to Organic Partnership Program (TOPP) regional leads to explore collaboration and potential workshop execution. 5.0 Extension & Outreach We will continue communication efforts including maintaining the website, updating the website with progress reports provided by the project team, and publicizing research phase announcements, and requests for stakeholder input. The Organic Center will continue to engage industry members as needed and will attend regular planning meetings to stay informed on the progress of the research and contribute as needed.

Impacts
What was accomplished under these goals? Issue or problem To help organic specialty crop growers overcome operational and administrative barriers to complying with both food safety and organic certification requirements by offering science based tools and training. To improve communication across the different stakeholder groups involved in organic specialty crop production on both the regulatory side and throughout the supply chain. Activity 1: Project management Task 1.1. Initiate Project and Convene Research Team and Advisory Committee. Convened a 3 day meeting with the research team to clarify goals and activities for the first 2 years of the project. Planning meeting took place on the University of Georgia campus in Griffin, GA on January 8-10, 2024. Convened the initial advisory board meeting with team and board members Advisory board meeting took place online via Zoom on March 27, 2024. Activity 2: Risk assessment and decision dashboard for organic soil amendments Tasks 2.1: Synthesize current available evidence on food safety risks associated with organic soil amendments from scientific literature, unpublished data, and private sector data. UC Davis conducted a literature review on wildlife, adjacent land use and soil amendments. Two hundred and twenty (n=220) publications (including scientific papers, whitepapers, reports, and guidelines from fresh produce associations) were gathered and reviewed. Papers were organized using tags pertaining to the following categories: wildlife, adjacent land use, soil amendments, climate/weather, livestock proximity, water, soil, airborne contamination, vectors, risk perception, mitigation, handling, BSAAO, manure, compost, and organic. Key information that was considered important for later parameterization was collected in an Excel spreadsheet. This information in each tab varied depending on factors that may influence the risk of fresh produce contamination. Task 2.2. Survey labs serving each region to assess methodological consistency and compatibility of testing data. Expected to start in year 2 Task 2.3. Survey and assessment of types of organic soil amendments currently available on the market and used by organic growers in our study regions. UC Davis is compiling a summary of the current commercially available soil amendments of animal origin for organic farmers. Included in the summary is characterization of the soil amendments (feedstocks, food safety testing, ingredients and intended use (on-going). Task 2.4. Quantitative risk assessment using Bayesian belief networks (BBN) & scenario trees (ST). UC Davis conducted a review of the literature on soil amendments use and survival of pathogenic E. coli in organic produce. They also developed pathways, and 'what if scenarios' for evaluating the use of biological soil amendments of animal origin: soil amendments included raw manure, compost, and heat-treated poultry pellets. UC Davis is compiling and summarizing the current published data (literature review) and unpublished data available on the soil amendments of animal origin available to organic farmers. Task 2.5. Using a systems approach to predict the pathway of foodborne pathogens in the pre-harvest produce environments. UGA is conducting experiments to estimate the pathways of pathogens in produce fields to enhance food safety. They have published two manuscripts detailing the survival of E. coli in produce fields, emphasizing the significant influence of weather parameters on pathogen persistence. Their research findings have provided insights into the relationships between environmental factors and microbial risks, guiding improved management practices. The initial findings of this project were timely as several foodborne outbreaks associated with root crops such as onions raised questions about the survival of foodborne pathogens in soil and their contributing factors. The initial findings from our models were shared with growers and regulatory agencies at the annual IAFP conferences. The findings have the potential to impact produce safety protocols and have provided growers and regulators with information on weather conditions that exacerbate contamination risk. Our findings have and will continue to fortify risk based recommendations for safer agricultural practices and public health protection. Task 2.6. Develop a user-friendly dashboard to integrate methods and results of the risk assessment and prediction models). UC Davis developed a framework for the demo dashboard based on the input from stakeholders, the research team and other collaborators. UC Davis is integrating environmental and landscape characteristics data for the risk assessment dashboard. UC Davis will use the compilation of input parameters from task 2.1 in the modeling framework. Activity 3: Needs assessment among farm advisors, extension, auditors/certifiers, and buyers Task 3.1 Survey of farm advisor and extension professionals URI compiled a recruitment list of farm advisors and extension personnel across the 50 states with over 2000 names and email addresses. The survey was written and formatted and distributed to team and board members for comment. It is currently in the beta testing stage with a subset (N=100) of the recruitment list. Task 3.2 Key informant interviews with auditors, certifiers and buyers URI has conducted a total of 22 interviews with a combination of farm advisor and extension professionals, state department of agriculture personnel, organic produce and input certifiers, grower advocates, produce growers and handlers, retailers and organic input suppliers. In addition 8 listening sessions were conducted with the same stakeholder groups. Between interviews and listening sessions URI team members have talked to over 50 stakeholders about the project and proposed deliverables and the challenges and priorities at the intersection of food safety and organic certification. Task 3.3 Analysis of survey data, interview data and policy and extension analysis URI is analyzing the data collected. Listening sessions have been transcribed and coded (i.e. text was categorized by topic or theme); analysis is on-going. All other forms of data are still being collected. Activity 4: Design outreach programs and training modules Expected to start in year 2 Activity 5: Extension & Outreach Expected to start in year 3 Who or what will be most immediately helped by your work, and how? All stakeholder groups involved in organic specialty crop production will benefit from improved communication through development of the soil amendment risk assessment tool and training and outreach program. Those groups in close contact with growers and/or soil amendments will also benefit from the development of a data-based risk assessment tool that can serve in both a decision support and educational capacity.

Publications