1. SPECIFIC AIMS STUDY METHODS AND DESIGN ISSUES OF CONCERN BACKGROUND PUBLIC HEALTH CONCERN RECOMMENDATIONS CONCLUSIONS REFERENCES ACKNOWLEDGMENTS  The main harvest season in Southwest Arizona is from October to March  More and more farm workers are staying in the region and do not follow the traditional migration loop to California, Oregon or Washington and back to the Southwest  Granted in 1976 4, many of those who are eligible collect Unemployment Insurance Benefits  Maximum an individual can collect is $240 per week for a maximum of 6 months This research was conducted to 1) Gain further understanding of unemployment during the off-season for domestic, seasonal farm workers 2) Provide an assessment of the particular concerns associated with farm worker unemployment 3) Offer recommendations to aid in development of effective programs, methods and policies to assist in greater sustainability, self-sufficiency and independence ASSESSMENT OF THE UNEMPLOYMENT SEASON IN THE YUMA COUNTY SEASONAL FARM WORKER COMMUNITY by: Brenda C Pecotte de Gonzalez, MPH 1.Bartley, M. (1994). Unemployment and Ill health. Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health. 48: 333-7. 2.Dooley, D. et. al. (1996). Health and Unemployment. Annual Review of Public Health. 17: 449-65. 3.Frumkin, Howard, ed. (2010). Environmental Health: From Global to Local, 2 nd edition. San Francisco, CA: John Wiley & Sons, Inc. 4.Sakala, Carol. (Fall 1987). Migrant and Seasonal Farmworkers in the United States: A Review of Health Hazards, Status, and Policy. International Migration Review. 21(3): 659-687. Although limited research exists on unemployment for seasonal employees, the links between unemployment and health have been documented 1,2,3. There are many associated health concerns, specifically for farm workers, which include: Physical Diet Activity level / exercise Psychosocial Lack of social interaction Self-esteem Anxiety Demoralization Psychiatric Substance abuse Depression Suicide *Univariate, demographic data collected *Qualitative semi-structured, open-ended interviews *27 interviews with farm workers *11 interviews with local, community key informants *convenience sampling at two farm worker orientated NGOs in San Luis, Arizona *Content analysis was performed on all interview data *Common themes were identified as issues of concern LEVELRECOMMENDATION Local  “Rapid Response Teams” - a proactive collaboration of the Dept. of Economic Security and local NGOs at the end of the harvest season to educate the community on UI benefits and available services  Financial Literacy workshops - a local NGO or collaboration of NGOs to present workshops and seminars to the community before and/or during unemployment on subjects such as budgeting, debt, taxes, fraud, identity theft, credit and loans  Educational class offerings - an assessment of the level, need, variety and interest of classes and training programs, such as ESL, GED, computer and job skills with consideration of language, location, time of day, cost, and season  Advocacy - continue efforts from the local Farm worker Coalition and local agencies to effect change on the county, state and national level surrounding the identified issues County/ State  Introduction of industry in Yuma County - during the off-season there is not an industry to support the surge in unemployed, low-skill workers  Transportation - the current rural, county transportation system that connects the rural areas, it is not sufficient nor reliable for individuals to access services or rely on to secure employment outside of farm work  UI benefits - a review of the current State’s minimum and maximum benefits along with investigation into enforcement regulations of employers. An extensive review would consider the applicability of the general UI program to the farm worker population Federal  Basic Education Policy & Services - Reevaluation of current federal educational funding policy and restrictions, such as residency or language proficiency that make needed classes and subsequent classes and training opportunities inaccessible  UI Benefits - each state’s UI policy is based off of federal guidelines and mandates including the farm worker program; perform an assessment of all state farm worker programs to report best-practices and potential changes Indirect Factors Disability and Aging No longer able to work Cannot work as long No other option  The well-being and overall health of farm workers is important to the security and production of the US food supply  Stakeholders need to be identified and included in the collaborative dialogue in addressing issues surrounding farm worker unemployment The author would like to acknowledge: the farm workers of Yuma County; the local key informants; Arizona AHEC, Ms. Janine Duron of C.I.T.A.; Dr. Cecilia Rosales; Ms. Jill de Zapien; Ms. Maia Ingram Economic Stability Financial literacy Credit cards & loans Budgeting Identity theft Income taxes Educational Opportunities Classes & Training Programs When & where? Logistical barriers Employment Issues Arizona UI policy Max. $240/wk Discrepancies in working Lack of regulation Available employment Lack of options Requirements Job support Obtaining & retaining employment SES Health Factors Transportation Reliable Costs Technology Discomfort Necessity Health Insurance Unsure about qualifying Instable coverage Residence Cost of living Determines eligibility for services