AGRICULTURE, FORESTRY AND FISHING

Program Impact

NIOSH is strongly committed to program evaluation as a way to maximize its contributions to improved occupational safety and health. Regular review of program activities, outputs, and outcomes is essential to demonstrating program performance. The Agriculture, Forestry, and Fishing (AgFF) Program conducts reviews and shares program impact in a variety of ways.

Program Performance One-pager

Program Performance One-Pagers (PPOPs) are a snapshot of NIOSH programs’ priorities, strategies used to make progress towards priorities, recent accomplishments, and upcoming work.

• Agriculture, Forestry and Fishing Program Performance One-pager
• Central States Center for Agricultural Safety and Health
• Great Plains Center for Agricultural Health
• Pacific Northwest Agricultural Safety and Health Center
• National Children’s Center for Rural and Agricultural Health and Safety
• Northeast Center for Occupational Health and Safety
• Southwest Center for Agricultural Health, Injury Prevention and Education
• Western Center for Agricultural Health and Safety

Impact Sheets

Impact Sheets briefly describe an occupational safety or health hazard, the specific NIOSH or NIOSH-funded research activity that was conducted to address the hazard, the resulting impact or recommendations, and relevant statistics.

Safety and health in agriculture

• NIOSH-funded Study Results in Improved Pesticide Testing Methods and Updated Regulations to Protect Agricultural Workers
• NIOSH Pesticide Poisoning Monitoring Program Protects Farmworkers
• Use of Model Farmers Proves Effective in Increasing Safety Practices Among Navajo Agricultural Workers
• A NIOSH-funded Research Study Improves Safety and Health of Farm Workers and Their Families

Safety in commercial fishing

• PFD Manufacturer Adopts NIOSH Research into Product Development Process
• NIOSH Research Cited in Recommendations for Improving Commercial Fishing Safety

Program Reviews

National Academies Review

NIOSH understands that external expert review is one of the most valid and accepted methods of evaluating research programs. Consequently, NIOSH requested that the National Academies evaluate NIOSH research programs with respect to their impact, relevance, and future directions. In 2007 the National Academies was asked to evaluate what NIOSH research programs are producing and to determine the extent to which NIOSH research is responsible for changes in the workplace that reduce the risk of occupational injuries, illnesses, and deaths. More information is available at the National Academies Evaluation of NIOSH Research Programs page.

2012 Independent Program Review

An independent review of the NIOSH AgFF Program was completed in June 2012 as a follow-up to the 2007 National Academies review. The 2012 review covered the period 2006-2011. This review was not conducted by the National Academies, however, many members of the 2007 National Academies review panel participated in the 2012 review and an identical framework, criteria, and scoring structure was used.

The findings of the 2012 review recognized the AgFF Program for building new partnerships, developing a comprehensive set of goals, addressing many of the recommendations from the 2007 review, and achieving multiple impacts and outcomes. The recent progress and accomplishments of the NIOSH AgFF program were reflected in the 2012 review scores of 5 for relevance of its work to improve occupational safety and health within the sector and 4 for impact on reducing workplace illnesses and injuries. Primary recommendations of the five-year review include surveillance, worksite size dilemmas, defining worksite ‘populations at risk’, use of printed media, emerging animal agriculture production practices, forestry and fishing issues, and climate change implications.

• NIOSH Update: NIOSH Thanks Ag Review Panel and Chair for Report, Notes High Grade on Relevance in Priority Areas
• Letter to Dr. John Howard from the AgFF Review Panel Chair and Panel Comments on the NIOSH AGFF Program