Agricultural workers—individuals employed for labor in agriculture—are at high risk of various negative health outcomes, with many impacted by both the existence of health disparities and stress. While the issue of farm stress and associated psychosocial health outcomes has been studied in the general agricultural population, research investigating these issues specifically within the agricultural worker population is sparse. This study presents data from the United States Western Region Agricultural Worker Stress Survey (N = 354), which gauged workers’ perceived stress levels, sources of stress, desired stress management topics, and preferred methods of receiving information and support services. Long working hours, working in extreme temperatures, and a lack of time emerged as the top three stressors. On average, workers across the Western region of the U.S. are experiencing a moderate level of stress, with younger workers reporting greater stressor pileup than their older counterparts. Retirement planning was cited as the most preferred stress management topic, regardless of demographic. Lastly, workers chose in-person counseling as the support modality that they would most likely utilize. This research provides a variety of stress management recommendations such as working with farm owners to increase the safety of their operation, investing in face-to-face counseling services, and utilizing community health workers as sources of support.

The present study examined the impact of COVID-19 and recovery experiences among Family Consumer Science (FCS) Extension Agents in Montana. All participants (n = 10) completed a survey with fixed-item and open-ended responses, and six also participated in in-depth interviews. A deductive qualitative case study approach was used. Agent experiences were analyzed using The Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction (SFDRR) four action priorities: (1) understanding risk, (2) strengthening disaster risk governance, (3) investing in disaster risk reduction for resilience, and (4) enhancing disaster preparedness for effective response and to “build back better” in recovery, rehabilitation, and reconstruction. Pandemic risks for Agents included the need to adapt in-person programming to be accessible online and the shift in content priorities. Agents reported low levels of well-being at the onset of the pandemic. Inconsistent policies for risk management from local, state, and federal sources proved difficult for FCS Agents to implement consistent programming. Navigating community member perspectives on the seriousness of COVID-19 was another struggle. Agents invested in increased communication and collaboration across Extension colleagues, which decreased some risks. After returning to in-person programming, most Agents reported “back to normal” operations in their counties, as well as higher levels of well-being.