The Ideal Agriculture, Forestry, and Fishing Research Program - Agriculture Forestry and Fishing Research at NIOSH - page 30

and often are not native English speakers. New approaches need to be developed to
reach such disparate groups. In some instances, research is needed to develop new
approaches and to evaluate their effectiveness and efficiency in reaching the at-risk
population. That would be a critical activity in the ideal AFF Program.
Technology transfer refers to the application of new approaches that can reach
at-risk working populations. There are opportunities to develop highly technical
approaches to reducing illnesses and injuries among AFF workers, but these ap-
proaches would need to be useful in extreme work conditions with highly variable
temperatures and weather conditions and with minimal disruption of work pro-
ductivity. Field testing of new equipment and approaches is essential in an ideal
AFF Program because the work environments of farmers, hired farm workers,
loggers, and fishermen are substantially different from those in manufacturing
and other work settings.
Public Policy and Regulatory Advice
As the research arm in occupational safety and health, the ideal AFF Program
would offer independent, scientifically sound advice to inform public policy and
assist regulatory agencies in protecting AFF worker populations. Research would
include retrospective cohort studies that aid decisionmaking and inform regula-
tory activities to reduce workplace injury and illness. In Appendix F, the committee
provides detailed information about federal and state policies and regulations that
directly affect AFF workers.
Program Evaluation Initiatives
Effective periodic evaluation throughout the NIOSH process as indicated in the
logic model is crucial. All aspects of the AFF Program—including activities, out-
puts, and outcomes—need to be evaluated for relevance and impact. Assessment of
the impact of such programs and use of the assessment results in priority-setting
are essential. For such assessment to be useful, the program needs both clear and
repeatable processes for tracking and collecting information on fatalities and inju-
ries. Robust surveillance data constitute an absolute foundation for quantitatively
measuring program impacts.
In some cases, research initiatives would be evaluated on an ongoing basis by
third-party professionals who contract directly with the AFF Program. Whenever
practical, interventions developed by the AFF Program would rely on the “gold
standard” of evaluation: comparing workers exposed to the hazard with all or
randomly selected non-exposed workers. An essential element of evaluation is
transparency, which can be enhanced by holding local, regional, or national con-