Progress 09/01/16 to 08/31/19
Outputs
Target Audience:Fruit and vegetable growers in the Southeastern United States are the focus of the training and associated resources thathave been developed for this project. Additionally, educators who commonly work with these audiences have been targeted in order to extend training materials beyond the project collaborators. Changes/Problems:The project team was not granted a one-year no-cost extension for the project, which was initially communicated as a feasible option in 2017.Based upon these developments, the team worked in consultation with the National Program Leader, Dr. Jodi Williams, to accomplish the project goals.Ultimately, the team was able to execute on all objectives with the exception of the last objective:Evaluate the short-term and medium-term outcomes through knowledge gained and adoption of this technology.While the evaluation tools developed by Dr. Harder have been utilized for the pilot training, extensive data collection of these outcomes was not feasible within the project's duration. What opportunities for training and professional development has the project provided?Day-long training courses are planned by each of the co-PIs located in Florida, North Carolina, Tennessee, and Virginia amongst stakeholders they regularly engage. The team has collaborated with the organizers of the Southeast Regional Fruit and Vegetable Conference and has filled a 30-participant grower course, which will take place January 9, 2020 in conjunction with the conference.Additionally, a train-the-trainer will be held on January 8, 2020 for extension professionals and produce safety educators who wish to teach the curriculum in the future. The team will continue to collaborate past the project's end date to facilitate transfer of this curriculum to other produce safety educators.This approach has both facilitated grower training, while increasing the number of individuals who will be able to offer the training. How have the results been disseminated to communities of interest?The team is comprised of extension professionals who regularaly engage the produce growing community with respect to food sfaety issues. Members will utilize their pre-existing mechanisms for training with stakeholders located in their state and region to deliver the training content. Additionally, as previously mentioned above, a train-the-trainer will be offered for educators in the Southeastern U.S. in early January2020 to expand the number of educators capable of delivering course content. What do you plan to do during the next reporting period to accomplish the goals?
Nothing Reported
Impacts
What was accomplished under these goals?
Pre-harvest water treatment is allowed by the Produce Safety Rule and has recently been required by some buyers or marketing agreements. A collaboration between University of Tennessee (lead), University of Florida, Virginia Tech, North Carolina State University, New Mexico State University, and Washington State University led to the creation of a one-day curriculum consisting of four modules: (1)Agricultural WaterTreatment and FSMA,(2)Agricultural WaterTreatment Tools,(3)Developing On-farmAgricultural WaterTreatment Programs, and(4) ImplementingAgricultural WaterTreatments On-farm. This curriculum will provide opportunities for hands-on learning through interactive activities that reinforce key concepts of each module and allow participants to interface with a Mobile Unit for Demonstration (MUD), which demonstrates several water treatment options: perastaltic and diaphragm pumps, a UV system, and a tablet chlorinationsystem. This project was developed to teach growers what options are available to them to effectively treat water, the process for validating a system on-farm, how to verify that the treatment is working as designed, and the associated records which must be kept. The developed curriculum aims to introduce participants to chemistries and devices that can treat preharvest agricultural water through a Hazard Analysis and Critical Control Points-approach for controlling hazards tied to preharvest water. The Mobile Units for Demonstration (MUD) are a highlight of the training and allows participants to interact with featured water treatment devices. Additional hands-on activities included in the trainingwere monitoring using test strips and titrations. A 24-participantpilot of thecurriculum was held in August 2019 in Lake Alfred, FL. The pilot went extremely well, with 100% of participants satisfied with the content developed for all four modules and their associated activities. Overall,66% of participants rating the training as excellent. Participant feedback from the pilot was integrated into a final version of the curriculum, which was printed as an accompanying 85-page notebook for course participants. Beyond development of the core curriculum and MUDs, the team also worked with co-PIs from New Mexico State University to create a series of four videos, one test strip app (available on the Apple app storehttps://apps.apple.com/us/app/test-strip-lab/id1475520823), and a website (irrigation.nmsu.edu) to link these materials. These resources are meant to provide the greatest flexibility for trainers to deliver course contentif MUDs and wet labs are not available.
Publications
- Type:
Websites
Status:
Published
Year Published:
2019
Citation:
Critzer, F., A. Wszelaki, J. Buchanan, B. Chamberlin, T. Chapin, M. Danyluk, J. Gleason, C. Gunter, A. Harder, P. Martinez, L. Strawn. 2019. irrigation.nmsu.edu. Accessed Nov. 26, 2019.
|
Progress 09/01/17 to 08/31/18
Outputs
Target Audience:Fresh fruit and vegetable produce growers, who are interested in options for treating preharvest agricultural water in Florida, North Carolina, Tennessee, and Virginia, were the audiences that were engaged during the project reporting period. Changes/Problems:As previously discussed, the timeline for both trainining delivery and evaluation assessment will extend beyond the project end date. In order to fulfill all activities associated with objectives 2 and 3 for the project, the team will be requesting a one year no-cost extension. What opportunities for training and professional development has the project provided?One graduate student associated with evaluation tool development has been working with co-PI Harder and gaining experience in how to develop, test, and implement assessment tools for extension projects. How have the results been disseminated to communities of interest?
Nothing Reported
What do you plan to do during the next reporting period to accomplish the goals?Objective 2.Share the curriculum with growers and train-the-trainers. In the coming year,grower trainingwill be implemented in Florida, North Carolina, Tennessee and Virginia to fulfill objective 2. Additionally, train-the-trainer activities will be coordinated to occur just prior to the FSMA Southern Center Meeting which will take place in Savannah Georgia in January. Training activities are expected to extend beyond the August end date for the project, and as a result the team will be requesting a one year no-cost extension. Objective 3.Evaluate the short-term and medium-term outcomes through knowledge gained and adoption of this technology. Evaluation tools are currently in development and will be finalized prior to the launch of training delivery. Evaluation assessment is expected to extend beyond the project duration and as a result, we will be requesting a one year no-cost extension.
Impacts
What was accomplished under these goals?
Objecitve 1. Four modules with associated breakout activities have been developed and finalized by the project team as summarized below. Module One- Agricultural Water Treatment and FSMA Topics Discuss FSMA requirements for agriculture water quality PSA review of water testing (testing methods, Corrective measures- with an emphasis on water treatment) Discuss circumstances in which a grower may consider a water treatment technology. Discuss the regulatory context of water treatment technology and the Produce Safety Rule. EPA pesticide label approval- target organisms within irrigation water (surface water) EPA Devices Regulatory vs. auditing standards Discuss interplay of regulatory requirements vs. auditing standards Learning Objectives Growers will be able to describe the purpose of water treatment within the context of on-farm irrigation and agricultural water as defined by the produce safety rule. Growers will be able to describe scenarios for which a treatment system would help mitigate on farm food safety risks posed by agriculture water. Explain the connectivity between implementing a water treatment system and mitigating risk on the farm. Describe the regulatory context of water treatment technologies Module Two- Technologies for Ag Water Treatment Topics Introduce the growers to commercially available technologies that can be used to treat agricultural water with a focus on UV light, chlorine, and peroxyacetic acid. Critical criteria for evaluating irrigation/ag water treatment technologies (volume, contact time, interactions with other pesticides and fertilizers, worker protection/safety) Discuss the modes of action, factors impacting efficacy and methods for real-time water treatment for each system. Chlorine- pH, temp, organic matter, hypochlorous acid generation - free chlorine, economics PAA- contrast to chlorine, shift in pH soil health, economics UV light- mode of action, lack of residual, economics Learning Objectives Growers will be able to contrast the differences between discussed water treatment systems Growers will be able to justify what treatment system(s) would work best on their farm Module Three- Designing Ag Water Treatments Topics Discuss what should be included in an Standard Operating Procedure (SOP). Discuss HACCPconcepts of critical limits, operating limits, monitoring, verification activities, and validation activities. Discuss the role of corrective actions and how they can be utilized when treating ag water. Learning Objectives Develop a SOP outlining key factors for implementation (recordkeeping requirements) Understand the difference between critical limits and operating limits Explain activities tied to monitoring, verification and validation Module Four- Implementing Ag Water Treatment Systems on Your Farm Topics Discuss the key aspects of system setup and verification of efficacy Understand key components of each system Hands-on monitoring and calibration activities for each system Introduction to testing methods- chlorine (test strips, titration, meter) PAA (test strips, titration, meter) System troubleshooting- calibrating for appropriate concentration when not hit, Learning Objectives Assess if a system is working properly based upon monitoring data Recommend appropriate corrective actions based upon a given scenario Four videos have been scripted and produced into wire frames that highlight: Overview of treatment technologies and HACCP concepts of validation, monitoring, and verification UV light mode of action and system components Chemigation with PAA, mode of actionand system components for peristaltic and diaphram pumps Tablet chlorination system components and mode of action for chlorine One interactive chlorine test strip app. was also developed to reinforce the pertinent aspects of using test strips to determine concentration of chemical sanitizers which may be used in water treatment. Videos and the cholorine test strip app.were pilot tested with 31fruit and vegetable growers, produce safety experts, and extension educators. The project team is currently revising the videos and app. to incorporate their feedback.
Publications
|
Progress 09/01/16 to 08/31/17
Outputs
Target Audience:Members of the project team(Drs. Danyluk and Critzer) planned andhosted Southern Region Food Safety Outreach Project Meeting May 9-10 at Lake Buena Vista Florida. Twenty-six attendees participated in updates on FSOP funded from the southern region in addition to hearing updates from the Food Safety Preventive Controls Alliance, Produce Safety Alliance and the FDA. This was a rewarding time to network with others in the region also conducting training and outreach activities focused on FSMA implementation in the produce growing communities they serve. Changes/Problems:
Nothing Reported
What opportunities for training and professional development has the project provided?
Nothing Reported
How have the results been disseminated to communities of interest?
Nothing Reported
What do you plan to do during the next reporting period to accomplish the goals?In the next year, team members will complete and pilot the developed curriculum which includes lectures, hands-on activities, and constructing the Mobile Units for Disinfection (MUDs). The team is targeting pilot testing the curriculum at the Southeastern Fruit and Vegetable Conference held in January. Once the pilot iscompleted, feedback will be used produce a final grower curriculum, which can be delivered by each of the co-PIs. Additionally, the team will hold a design summit at New Mexico State University in Marchwhere videos to support the curriculum will be developed.
Impacts
What was accomplished under these goals?
The members of the project team held a project team meeting May 8th in Lake Buena Vista Florida. During that time they finalized the curriculum learning objectives and topics to be covered in each of the three modules. Feedback on proposed topics and objectives are currently being sought out through a qualtrics survey to growers throughout the Southeast through the end of August. Final feedback will be utilized to solidify curriculum learning objectives and topics that the team will use for curriculum development.
Publications
|
|