Food Protection Trends - May/June 2018 - 161

TABLE 1. Background information of New England small- and medium-grower
respondents (n = 301) (cont.)
Financial ability to invest in on-farm food safety related practices (n = 296)
Yes
No
It depends on cost

Frequency

71
35
190

24
12
64

Farm size based on annual Gross Cash Farm Income (GCFI) categories, established by the USDA Economic Research Service and
National Agricultural Statistics Service, 2015 (data as of January 2017).

Includes themselves, family members, full-time or part-time and seasonal workers.

b
c

"Other" listed: maple syrup, meat and fiber, small grains, vegetable and herb seedlings.
Total food sales of < $500,000 (over a 3-year average) and the majority of food is sold directly to qualified end users in-state or less
than 275 miles away from the farm.

Note: The specific number of respondents (n) is shown with individual questions to indicate where some respondents didn't answer
the question.

relationship between such attendance and farm size, in that
small farms had lower attendance than expected and medium
farms had higher participation than expected. Even though
GAP audit participation was low, the majority of farmers
(>70% for both farm size categories) indicated implementing
on-farm food safety practices. Evaluation of GAP-trained
farmers in Pennsylvania (22) also found that few respondents
(20%) intended to seek third-party audit certification for
their farms. Food safety training and implementation of
on-farm food safety practices were compared among the
FSMA exemption categories. As would be expected, for
those respondents reporting that they do not qualify for the
PSR qualified exemption, 87% attended a GAP or equivalent
food safety training, 67% have participated in a GAP audit
and 100% are implementing on-farm food safety practices.
A surprising outcome of the survey was the high number
of respondents who were either not covered by or met the
requirements for qualified exemptions from the Produce
Safety Rule, but who had received GAP or equivalent food
safety training, 48% and 60%, respectively. In addition,
the majority of these farms were implementing on-farm
food safety strategies, 66% and 74%, respectively (Table 2).
Overall, a majority of survey respondents had received food
safety training and were implementing on-farm food safety
practices, regardless of their FSMA exemption category.
The majority of farmers (74%) indicated that they
packed produce in a packing facility - either temporary
or permanent - and were washing their produce (72%)
(Table 3). A small pool of respondents, 5%, reported packing
produce in their home kitchen, where cross-contamination
could be particularly high if cleaning and sanitizing is not

adequate because of family use. Postharvest handling of
produce in a packing facility can be a significant source of
pathogen risk, particularly Listeria monocytogenes, in the
absence of good knowledge of hygienic practices and proper
use of postharvest water (10). Interest in local and regional
food as a way to connect with food and community has
stimulated growth in direct marketing opportunities (20).
The majority of survey respondents sold their products
directly to consumers (DTC sales) and retail outlets, via farm
stands (72%), farmers' markets (44%), retail/grocery outlets
(44%), restaurants (36%), CSA (32%), and pick-your-own
arrangements (31%) (Table 3). This would be expected of
farms that were either not covered or met the qualifications
for exemption (45). Donation was higher than expected
(35%), and sales to wholesalers/distributors was 28% (Table
3). All six NE states were reported to be among the 10
states that had the largest percentage of farms selling their
products to qualified end users (i.e., grocery stores, restaurants,
schools, and hospitals) (42). Nationally, small farms have
been reported to account for 58% of DTC sales (43). Market
channels may influence the implementation of GAPs among
small- and medium-scale produce growers, who may choose
sales to qualified end users (e.g., farmers' markets, roadside
stands, restaurants, etc.) that may be less likely to require GAP
certification or other food safety requirements (21, 30, 35).
Tables 4 and 5 illustrate the rank ordering of the
knowledge questions from high to low by mean and
content mean category scores, respectively. Total
knowledge had an alpha reliability of 0.83, indicating
that the data were reliable measures of knowledge.
The questions were grouped into content categories

May/June Food Protection Trends

161

Table of Contents for the Digital Edition of Food Protection Trends - May/June 2018