Informing Food Safety Evaluation Tools through Bibliographic Analysis and the Perspectives of Extension & Outreach Professionals

Authors

• Assoumpta Umwali Ujeneza, University of Nebraska-LincolnFollow

First Advisor

Byron D. Chaves

Second Advisor

Joseph Baumert

Committee Members

Jordan Wicks

Date of this Version

7-2026

Document Type

Thesis

Citation

A thesis presented to the faculty of the Graduate College at the University of Nebraska in partial fulfillment of requirements for the degree of Master of Science

Major: Food Science and Technology

Under the supervision of Professors Byron Chaves and Joseph Baumert

Lincoln, Nebraska, July 2026

Comments

Copyright 2026, Assoumpta Umwali Ujeneza. Used by permission

Abstract

Training is a central strategy for improving practices across the food supply chain and addressing the food safety burden, yet evaluation of these programs is often limited, fragmented, and focused primarily on immediate knowledge gains rather than sustained behavior change or organizational outcomes, creating a persistent gap between training investment and demonstrated impact. This study addresses this gap through two complementary approaches.

First, a bibliographic review examined seventeen training evaluation models, assessing their theoretical foundations, evaluation dimensions, and applicability to food safety contexts. Findings informed the proposed Food Safety Training Evaluation Model (FSTEM), an eight-level framework that integrates complementary elements from existing models into a modular, feasible tool for Extension use. Eight of the reviewed models were then applied comparatively to a hypothetical poultry Hazard Analysis and Critical Control Points (HACCP) training program across eight evaluation criteria. The results showed that simpler models were easier to implement but captured fewer organizational and economic outcomes, while more comprehensive models required greater expertise and resources, with no single model performing adequately across all dimensions.

Second, a national cross-sectional survey of 71 U.S. food safety Extension and outreach professionals examined current evaluation practices, priorities, challenges, and resource needs. Respondents were experienced professionals, nearly half with more than ten years in Extension. While professionals most frequently defined training “impact” as behavior change or practice adoption, actual evaluation practice remained dominated by immediate knowledge assessments, with follow-up evaluation, direct observation, and economic analysis used far less often. Chi-square analyses revealed that evaluation timing, baseline data collection, and framework familiarity were significantly associated with more rigorous evaluation practices, though awareness of frameworks such as the Knowledge-Attitudes-Practices model did not reliably translate into use.

This study provides empirical and theoretical support for FSTEM as a practical, flexible model to strengthen food safety training evaluation across Extension and industry settings and emphasizes the need for its future validation.

Advisors: Byron Chaves and Joseph Baumert