Lacrosse FR Eval Summary

Lacrosse FR Eval Summary

LaCrosse County Farm Accident Rescue Training Evaluation Summary

Situation/Response: On August 21, 2010 a Farm Accident Rescue Training was held at the Greg Jenniges Farm, Mindoro WI. This training was promoted to La Crosse area firefighters, first responders and EMS workers. While initially limited to 75 participants as word of the training spread the actual attendance number increased to more than 100 participants. Reinforcing the need for this type of training was the distance participants traveled as responders came from River Falls, Fond du Lac, Green Lake WI and Minnesota.

Mike Hesse, Farmington Emergency Medical Team Inc, was the lead coordinator and a main factor in the success of this program. He used his connections in the emergency rescue and agricultural communities to arrange session instructors and for the use of specialized equipment to enhance the quality of training provided. Steve Huntzicker, UW Extension LaCrosse County provided leadership in program coordination including involvement from UW Center for Agricultural Safety and Health; development and dissemination of marketing materials and program evaluation. Individuals from the UW Center for Agriculture Safety and Health, along with Steve Huntzicker also served as trainers for the event. Cheryl Skjolaas, UW Extension Agricultural Safety and Health Specialist was a key partner in organizing and helping to host the event.

A key factor in the success of this training was the location – an actual farm. Greg and Julie Jenniges provided use of their farm and facilities. While the training was focused on rural emergency responders, many of these individuals have limited or no familiarity with farm operations.

Participants were offered nine sessions but in due to time limitations of the day were only able to attend six sessions. Since participants hadn’t registered for sessions, they were assigned their first session and then selected sessions based on their interest.

Evaluation Results: A written survey was sent to 86 participants after the training via US mail. 25 completed surveys were returned for a response rate of close to 30%.

5 respondents indicated that they had attended a farm rescue training in the past and 20 indicated that they had not previously attended training.

Participants were asked to indicate their degree of understanding of the session topics before the training and after the training on a scale of 1-4 with 1= very little; 2 some; 3 quite a bit and 4 a lot.

Topic / Number of Respondents out of 25 / Before Training
(Average Response) / After
Training
(Average Response) / Difference
Understanding Grain Structures / 24 / 1.42 / 3.45 / 2.03
Corn head entanglement / 20 / 1.55 / 3.30 / 1.75
Issues Unique to the Farm / 23 / 1.65 / 3.30 / 1.65
Building Cofferdam / 23 / 1.86 / 3.35 / 1.49
Ropes and Rigging from a Grain Structure / 20 / 1.65 / 2.85 / 1.20
Stabilizing and Lifting a Tractor / 24 / 2.38 / 3.33 / .95
Impalement / 21 / 2.24 / 3.1 / .86
Auger Entanglement / 23 / 1.57 / 2.39 / .82
Animal Movement / 21 / 2.28 / 2.95 / .67
Extrication from cab / 21 / 2.24 / 2.81 / .57

Participants were asked “What did you gain from this training?” and allowed to check all that apply for the following items:

What did you gain from this training? / Number Responding (25 Respondents)
Techniques/practices I can try immediately / 19
Potential training topics for my department / 17
Answers to my questions / 16
Resource materials that I can use / 16
Names of other people to contact / 9
Nothing new / 0
Anything else / Wonderful exercise; Exposure to emergency situations I have not experienced yet

Respondents were asked “How do you plan to use the information from the training?”

Seven respondents indicated plans to use the training information with local training to their departments or units. Two of the seven indicated an interest in planning a similar training in their area in the next year. The next common response by five respondents was that they would use it in their response to farm or rural calls. One respondent indicated working for a local grain elevator in addition to being a first responder and would be able to share the information on visits to grain facilities. Additional comments were “We live on a very rural area and all of these stations were very helpful on area we don’t always have training on.” “I gained a lot of info from all the stations. Great training. Well organized”

A final question asking respondents if they had any suggestions for future training topics was offered. Topics identified included:

  • Management from EMS side, more management of injuries, treatment and triage (2)
  • Lowering victim from silo or grain bin
  • Using ICS/unities command at farm incidents
  • Overview of all the types of machinery that are used on farms
  • Confined entry 2
  • Tractor rollovers again
  • Grain bin extractions again-more scenarios
  • Tractor trailer roll over w/animals, cows/horses
  • Treatment within milking parlor

Two respondents noted interest in having more of these types of trainings. It was noted by one respondent that there should be more time per station. Two respondents provided words of thanks. “Thank you for all your hard work. This training day was a major under taking and well worth participating in. Thanks again.”

Conclusion: There is great interest and need by rural emergency responders in the area of farm rescue training. While hosting training on a farm takes additional planning and extensive resources, the actual experience training with farm structures and machinery adds to the learning experience. There was a positive increase in knowledge for every session offered. 4 of the 5 sessions with a positive change of greater than 1 were related to grain harvest and handling. Grain handling and storage rescues is a significant topic as it involves complex technical rescue issues in an environment that most rural rescue departments do not have the expertise or equipment to handle.

Most rural rescue departments are volunteer departments with limited funding. As indicated in the question on “What did you gain from this training?” most respondents will be able to use training immediately in their work and that they would conduct training in their departments. Departments’ incorporating this training into their training schedules prepares a department for handling agricultural emergencies and also is a cost effective means of disseminating training out into the rural areas.

Media coverage of this training has created additional interest in other areas of the state for 2011 programming. UW Center for Agricultural Safety and Health and respective area UW Extension Agents are developing similar on-farm programs for the Eau Claire/Chippewa Valley Region in April, Waupaca in June. Additionally, a pilot webinar will be offered in March 2011 to provide departments with an introduction to farm rescue trainings.

LaCrosse County Farm Accident Rescue Training Evaluation Summary

Prepared by Steve Huntzicker, UW Extension La Crosse County Agricultural Agent, Cheryl Skjolaas, UW-Extension/Madison Center for Agricultural Safety and Health Agricultural Safety Specialist, and Kari Johnson, Student Assistant, UW-Extension/Madison Center for Agricultural Safety and Health Agricultural Safety Specialist.

December, 2011

1