Overall Program Assessment - Agriculture Forestry and Fishing Research at NIOSH - page 37

Inputs
Planning Inputs
Planning inputs include surveillance data, stakeholder needs, partner aims,
information emanating from symposia and conferences, program evaluations, and
program goals. Complete and accurate surveillance data with complete detail are
critical for the success of the AFF Program and are required to define the current
health status of the population at risk, identify health risks within the population,
track changes in the population health risk, and identify the need for and evalu-
ate the effectiveness of interventions. Most available data on occupational illness,
injury, and hazard surveillance have relied heavily on the Bureau of Labor Statistics
Survey of Occupational Injuries and Illnesses (SOII). However, the SOII has short-
comings that result in incomplete information on the AFF Program population at
risk: it does not cover farming establishments with 10 or fewer full-time workers
(which make up more than 95 percent of U.S. farms) and does not track injuries
on farms that have no hired workers (74 percent of U.S. farms) (NIOSH, 2006a).
NIOSH has attempted to fill the surveillance gaps through various means, includ-
ing intramural and extramural programs in illness surveillance, injury surveillance,
and traumatic death surveillance. Despite those efforts, the surveillance input
remains inadequate, and the size and characteristics of the populations at risk, the
health risks, and changes remain uncertain. The uncertainties hamper the ability
of AFF Program personnel to plan and to evaluate the effectiveness of previously
implemented programs.
Shortcomings in the program goals themselves have been described previously:
the stated goals of the AFF Program are general and do not include specific mea-
surable objectives that would guide the subprograms and allow for assessment of
progress. The strategic goals do not appear to have been developed specifically for
each AFF sector. Thus, progress toward measurable objectives cannot be used as a
planning input to direct future activities.
The lack of more specific program goals and objectives also limits the effec-
tiveness of program evaluations. The AFF Program has undergone several evalua-
tions over the last decade to examine various components of the overall program
(NIOSH, 2006a). The evaluations included review of the extramural cooperative
agreement programs (Kennedy, 1995), review of intramural research by the sub-
committee for agricultural review of the NIOSH Board of Scientific Counselors
(NIOSH, 2000), and an annual self-evaluation of the NIOSH Centers for Agri-
cultural Disease and Injury Research, Education, and Prevention (Ag Centers)
orchestrated by the High Plains Intermountain Center for Agricultural Health
and Safety (HICAHS). NIOSH has responded to recommendations made in the
1995 and 2000 evaluations, but the ability of those review groups to evaluate the