Food Protection Trends - May/June 2021 - 269

Trainings held for traditional grower populations reached
1,735 individuals (year 1 = 648 and year 2 = 1,087), whereas
trainings targeting special populations reached 509 (year 1
= 119 and year 2 = 390). There were higher pretest scores
for traditional grower trainings (16.6 points on a 25-point
scale) than for special population trainings (14.8 points)
(P = 0.001). This indicates that individuals who attended
trainings not targeting a special population had a higher
incoming knowledge of the PSR than did special populations,
on average. Similarly, on average, growers participating in
training that did not target special populations also had
a higher total score change from pretest to posttest (4.0
on a 25-point scale) than did special populations (3.6 on
a 25-point scale) (P = 0.005). When the pretest versus
posttest for all the special population training populations
was compared, there was a difference (P = 0.001), indicating
knowledge gain. When special population trainings were
separated by specific population, participants in trainings for
plain growers averaged a total pretest score of 14.3 (57%) and
total posttest score of 17.9 (72%), with a total score change of
3.6 (P = 0.001); participants in trainings for minority farmers
averaged a total pretest score of 15.2 (61%) and posttest score
of 19.1 (76%), with a total score change of 3.8 (P = 0.001);
participants in trainings for non-English and limited English
proficiency growers averaged a total pretest score of 10.1
(40%) and an average total posttest score of 11.5 (46%), with
a total score change of 1.36 (P = 0.035); and participants in
trainings for other special populations averaged a total pretest
score of 16.0 (64%) and posttest score of 19.7 (79%), with a
total score change of 3.8 (P = 0.001).

When all training populations were combined along
with both years, participants scored the highest on both the
pretest and posttest in module 1 (Introduction to Produce
Safety), module 2 (Worker Health, Hygiene and Training),
and module 3 (Soil Amendments) (Fig. 1), which, in turn,
provided the lowest increase in score (module 2 increasing by
0.1, module 3 by 0.2, and module 1 by 0.6 on a 5-point scale).
This indicates that participants had higher knowledge of
these three modules than of the other modules prior to taking
the training. Participants scored the lowest on both pretests
and posttests in module 4 (Wildlife, Domesticated Animals,
and Land Use), module 5 (Agricultural Water), module 6
(Postharvest Handling and Sanitation), and module 7 (How
to Develop a Farm Food Safety Plan) consistently across
both years. Whereas participants' scores were the lowest in
those modules, their scores improved the most from pretest
to posttest on these modules. Analysis of specific questions
in the knowledge assessment tool identified that questions
11, 13, 17, 22, and 24 (modules 4, 5, and 7) were particularly
hard for respondents to answer correctly in both years (Table
3).
The 12-month behavioral change survey revealed that
199 (72%) of 276 growers responding to the survey made a
change on their farms between the time they took the PSA
Grower Training and the time when they took the survey.
Most common changes included implementing new or
different training for employees on food safety and hygiene
protocols (44%), writing, completing, or modifying farm
food safety plans (40%), implementing new or different
practices for monitoring on-farm facilities (37%), and

FIGURE 1: Average total module score and the total change in pretest to posttest score on a 5-point scale.
***Significant difference between pretest and posttest using an alpha of 0.05.

May/June Food Protection Trends

269
Food Protection Trends - May/June 2021

Table of Contents for the Digital Edition of Food Protection Trends - May/June 2021
