Brianna Gabel CP-FS
Environmental Health Specialist, Linn County Public Health, Iowa
2018 Fellow in Applied Science, Law, and Policy: Fellowship in Food Protection, International Food Protection Training Institute (IFPTI)

Abstract

This pilot study developed a methodology for examining the patterns of foodborne illness risk factor violations in Iowa regulated retail agritourism establishments and used that methodology to compare the violations with all other regulated retail establishments in Iowa for the period 2014-2018. Agritourism in the U.S. can be defined as “activities that include visiting a working farm or any agricultural, horticultural or agribusiness operation to enjoy the rural setting, be educated, or be involved in a special activity” (Agritourism Profile, 2018). This study created the first database of Iowa regulated retail agritourism establishments; analyzed the 2014-2018 inspection records for these establishments and compared them with all other Iowa retail food establishments; reviewed the methodology and the initial findings with a focus group of Iowa food safety regulators with experience in agritourism inspections; and interviewed two out-of-state experts for their opinions about the methodology and findings. The study concluded that the methodology appears accurate and reliable. Although the agritourism establishments in this pilot study appeared to have a pattern of violations similar to those of all regulated retail establishments statewide, the 2014-2018 period contained insufficient data to reach a firm conclusion regarding the difference between the two groups. The study recommended that the methodology be repeated in alternate years; the data pool be improved by conducting agritourism inspections at the best available time in order to observe critical processes; and that educational outreach efforts to agritourism establishments be guided by the violation patterns found in this study.

Keywords: agritourism, farms, Iowa, retail food safety, foodborne illness risk factors, Iowa Agritourism Master List (AML)

Background

Agritourism in the U.S. can be defined as “activities that include visiting a working farm or any agricultural, horticultural or agribusiness operation to enjoy the rural setting, be educated, or be involved in a special activity” (Agritourism Profile, 2018). Farmers engage in these activities to display their unique farm lives and gain a competitive financial advantage (Rozier Rich, Standish, Tomas, Barbieri, & Ainely, 2016). One of the most common agritourism attractions offered on farms in the United States is on-farm retail operations including food service (Rozier Rich et al., 2016).

Iowa’s agritourism economic sector is sizeable and growing. In 2012, Iowa brought in $4.3 million dollars in agritourism and recreation revenue (USDA, 2012). This was an upward trend from $3.1 million in 2007 and $800,000 in 2002 (USDA, 2007). Iowa agritourism establishments engage in activities such as pick-your-own produce, hayrides, farm tours, corn mazes, on-farm markets with value added products, and petting zoos.

This research project developed and applied a methodology for evaluating the food safety of regulated retail agritourism establishments and comparing those results with the food safety of all Iowa retail food establishments.

Problem Statement

The frequency and distribution of foodborne illness risk factors in the regulated retail agritourism establishments in Iowa has been unknown as the state lacks a methodology for evaluating those risks.

Research Questions

What are the types and frequencies of the common foodborne illness risk factor violations found in routine inspection reports of Iowa regulated retail agritourism establishments from 2014 to 2018?
How do the types and frequencies of foodborne illness risk factor violations found in routine inspection reports of Iowa regulated retail agritourism establishments compare to all other retail establishments in the state during the period 2014-2018?
What are the perceptions of experienced Iowa food safety professionals regarding the methodology and findings of this pilot study?
What are the perceptions of experienced food safety professionals from outside of Iowa regarding the methodology and findings of this pilot study?

Methodology

Phase One

Iowa has an electronic inspection database, USA Food Safety, which can sort and report on inspection records by classifications such as full service and fast food. However, the database cannot sort and report on agritourism inspection records. As a result, the study began with establishing a working definition of ‘agritourism’ based on federal government and industry publications and creating an Iowa Agritourism Master List (AML) that includes all agritourism establishments. The Iowa State University’s ‘Visit Iowa Farms’ program provided the first 68 establishments. Each listing was reviewed and cross-referenced with USA Food Safety to locate establishments with a retail food license. Next, the USA Food Safety database was searched using key words such as “farm” and “orchard” to identify additional establishments. Next, each establishment’s web site was reviewed to ensure that the establishment met the study’s definition of agritourism and to identify the types of food sold. Some establishments did not have an online presence. In these cases, phone calls to the establishment, or the inspector from the region the facility is located were utilized to gather information.

Finally, the AML database was reviewed by the program managers of the 13 state and local territories overseen by the Iowa Department of Inspections and Appeals – Food and Consumer Safety Bureau and corrected to reflect their input. Upon completion of Phase One, the AML contained a total of 200 Iowa agritourism establishments, 98 of which held retail licenses.

Phase Two

A report was generated from the U.S. Food Safety database of those 98 establishments for the period January 1, 2014 to November 1, 2018 and an identical report for all other retail establishments. The two data sets were then compared.

Phase Three

This study’s methodology and results were reviewed on December 14th, 2018 using an online platform by three veteran retail food inspectors with experience regulating agritourism establishments in Iowa. Participants answered a series of questions about the results and methodology based on their experiences in the field.

Phase Four

The final phase of the study involved an external review of the methodology and results with two experienced food safety professionals who had no connection with Iowa Individual telephone interviews were conducted with Joseph Corby (2019) and Doug Saunders (2019).

Results

Data Results

Out of the 98 agritourism establishments, there were 181 routine inspection reports available during the 2014-2018 period. The data reflected in Table 1 represents the total out of compliance percentage for each inspection question based on actual observations only. “Not observed” responses were eliminated. The number of “not observed” responses varied for each inspection question depending on what different processes were occurring at the time of inspection. Table 1 shows the percentage of out of compliance risk factors for agritourism establishments compared to the corresponding data for other retail establishments. The difference between the categories was calculated, and the table was arranged to reflect the greatest differences. There were four foodborne illness risk factor areas where agritourism establishments had a marginally higher rate of violations compared to the statewide retail data set. These areas included using time as a public health control, approved sources, food additives, and certified food protection manager (CFPM).

Table 1

Focus Group

Findings from the focus group were analyzed for major themes. Table 2 reflects the themes and details that were extracted from the focus group regarding the data and methodology. Two primary themes were discovered: issues of food sourcing; and seasonal challenges leading to “not observed” inspection responses and reduced data. The focus group participants identified unique challenges regarding food sourcing in this study population due to a larger utilization of local sourcing and a focus on homemade products such as canned jams, jellies, and salsas that are not permitted under a standard retail license. The participants identified several reasons for the limitations of the agritourism inspection records, in particular the number of inspection questions that were marked “not observed.” The participants agreed that critical processes in agritourism establishments are often conducted outside of normal business hours thus making them difficult to observe. In addition, these businesses also operate on a limited schedule of a few weeks per year and are sometimes only open during evenings and weekends, creating time constraints for inspectors.

Despite the limitations of the data in this pilot study, the participants agreed that repeating the methodology to identify possible patterns would be worthwhile. As one participant noted, “It is relevant to look at agritourism businesses separately to see where we might be able to improve with communication or education.” The group recommended that an agritourism business classification within USA Food Safety be created.

Table 2

External Review Results

Findings from interviews with two experienced food safety experts with no connection to Iowa, Joseph Corby and Doug Saunders, were analyzed for major themes. Table 3 reflects the themes and details that were extracted from the interviews regarding the data and methodology. The food safety experts found the methodology to be thorough and accurate, with the exception of the current limitation on the data available. The experts suggested that varying inspection times could lead to more data collected, but that doing so could be a challenge due to staff shortages, funding issues, union rules, and other factors.

The experts found value in looking at agritourism establishments separately and suggested repeating the methodology periodically in Iowa to search for trends, or having other states use the same methodology to learn more about the industry.

Small changes were suggested based on regional differences if the study was to be repeated in other geographic areas. For example, when building a master list of establishments, the northeastern area of the United States is more likely to use the term “grove” opposed to “orchard” in business operations, and the southwestern area is more likely to use “ranch” opposed to “farm,” based on expert feedback.

A common theme noted was the interest in the approved source percentage. Both interviewees commented on the potential link from unapproved sources to the cottage food industry. Corby remarked that in his experience, “the general feeling is that everybody believes that they are safe when they make food at home, which is not always the case” (Corby, 2019). Saunders shared a similar sentiment while also noting that any differences observed between agritourism establishments and traditional establishments are an “opportunity for communication and education” (Saunders, 2019).

Lastly, thematic analysis of the interview data also found the expert perception that agricultural activities can often be challenging to regulate due to historical exemptions and political variables. Saunders noted that there are many government-sponsored programs to assist with small farmers and agribusinesses, but they are not rooted in food safety. Using available data can again be an opportunity for education.

Table 3

Conclusions

The methodology used in this pilot study appears to be accurate and reliable. However, there were significant limitations in the 2014-2018 inspection records. The limitations prevent any firm conclusions about the differences between agritourism and other retail food establishments in Iowa at this time. Further research is needed when the data is available.

Recommendations

This pilot study methodology should be repeated in the future, possibly in alternate years, in order to accurately compare agritourism with regulated retail food establishments as well as monitor patterns of food safety in agritourism.
Iowa should consider adding a classification for agritourism establishments in the electronic inspection database, USA Food Safety, to assist in monitoring patterns of food safety.
When possible, inspections of regulated retail agritourism establishments should be conducted at the best available time in order to observe critical processes.
The food safety problem areas found in the inspection reports of this pilot study should be used to guide educational outreach efforts to agritourism establishments.

Acknowledgements

I would like to thank Linn County Public Health for encouraging and supporting my participation in the IFPTI Fellowship. Data and support were provided by the Food and Consumer Safety Bureau of the Iowa Department of Inspections and Appeals (DIA) including Bureau Chief Mark Speltz and Retail Food Program Lead Julie Kraling. Special thanks go to Kendra Meyer and the Iowa State University’s Visit Iowa Farms program which provided the foundation for this project. I would also like to thank Joe Corby, Doug Saunders, Harvestville Farms, and the participants in the focus group. Finally, I would like to thank Dan Gump, Dr. Paul Dezendorf, and all of IFPTI’s mentors and staff for the feedback, guidance, and mentorship as well as all of the IFPTI Cohort 7 Fellows for the support and professional encouragement.

References

Ag Diversification and Market Development Bureau: Market development – producers. (n.d.). Retrieved from https://www.iowaagriculture.gov/AgDiversification/marketDevelopmentProducers.asp

Agritourism Profile. (2018, October). Retrieved from https://www.agmrc.org/commodities-products/agritourism

Corby, J. (2019, January 15). Personal phone interview.

Nasers, Melissa Sue (2009). Iowa agritourism consumer profile: Demographics, preferences, and participation levels (Graduate Theses and Dissertations). Iowa State University. Retrieved from https://lib.dr.iastate.edu/etd/10647

Rozier Rich, S., Standish, K., Tomas, S., Barbieri, C., & Ainely, S. (2016). The current state of agritourism research in the United States. Travel and Tourism Research Association: Advancing Tourism Research Globally. Retrieved from https://scholarworks.umass.edu/ttra/2010/Visual/12

Saunders, D. (2019, January 18). Personal phone interview.

United States Department of Agriculture (USDA), National Agriculture Statistics Service. (2007). Income from Farm-Related Sources: 2007 and 2002. Retrieved from https://www.nass.usda.gov/Publications/AgCensus/2007/Full_Report/Volume_1,_Chapter_1_State_Level/Iowa/st19_1_006_007.pdf

United States Department of Agriculture (USDA), National Agriculture Statistics Service. (2012). Income from Farm-Related Sources: 2012 and 2007. Retrieved from https://www.nass.usda.gov/Publications/AgCensus/2012/Full_Report/Volume_1,_Chapter_2_US_State_Level/st99_2_006_006.pdf

Cohort VII Research

Foodborne Illness Risks in Iowa Agritourism 2014-2018