2014 Organic Survey –

Results from Cognitive 

Testing

Heather Ridolfo, PhD

United 

Department of

Agriculture

National

Agricultural

Statistics

Service

Research and

Development Division

Washington DC 20250

RDD Research Report

Number RDD-yy-xx

Month 200x

This report has been prepared for limited distribution to the research community outside the U.S. 

Department of Agriculture (USDA). The views expressed herein are not necessarily those of NASS or 

USDA.

United States

Department of

Agriculture

National

Agricultural

Statistics

Service

Research and

Development Division

Washington DC 20250

RDD Research Report

Number RDD-15-04

November 2015
i

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

The 2014 Organic Survey is a data collection project conducted by the United States Department 

of Agriculture’s (USDA) National Agricultural Statistics Service (NASS) for the USDA’s Risk 

Management Agency. The survey is an organic production and practices survey, parts of which 

have been previously conducted in 2008 and 2011. The population of interest is any operation that 

produces organic products according to USDA’s National Organic Program (NOP) standards and 

is certified or exempt from certification. The population also contains operations that reported that 

they were transitioning to organic in the 2012 Census of Agriculture. A new section has been 

added to the 2014 questionnaire (Section 10) that asks about genetically modified organism 

(GMO) presence in organic crops.

The purpose of the current study was to examine respondents’ comprehension of questions in 

Section 10 and the quality of data reported. We also evaluated questions in other sections of the 

survey if respondents indicated that there was a problem or if obvious response errors were found 

during testing. Nine cognitive interviews were conducted in five states. 

One major issue that emerged from this testing was that many respondents felt the survey was not 

designed for their type of operation. Several respondents commented that the survey was designed 

for farmers who grow a lot of one or two crops. Many of these respondents grow a wide variety of 

crops in small quantities. For example, one respondent grows 250 different types of vegetables a 

year. This issue led to several common problems across the survey sections. Across the different 

sections, respondents had difficulty reporting all of the crops grown, the crop varieties, the unit 

and the amount and value of production. 

Across the different sections, respondents reported not being familiar with the term “marketing 

contract agreements” or misinterpreted the meaning of this term. This comprehension issue often 

led to response error. 

Respondents generally understood the intent of Section 10, which asked about GMO presence in 

organic crops. However, a few respondents interpreted the first question in Section 10 as asking 

about the inadvertent spraying of chemicals on an organic crop. 

Finally, in a couple sections of the survey, skip instructions were not obvious and, as a result,

respondents did not proceed through the survey instrument correctly. The layout of the 

questionnaire and, specifically, the placement of questions, were problematic and led respondents 

to inadvertently skip questions. 

Several recommendations are made in the following report to increase question clarity, to improve 

navigational instructions, and to allow additional space for farmers to report their crop types, 

varieties, and units applicable to their operation. 
ii

RECOMMENDATIONS

1. In Section 1, reformat the instrument to make the skip to Question 2 following a “yes” response 

in Question 1 clearer. One possible solution is to tell respondents who answer “yes,” to “Enter 

the name of the certifying agency or organization and then go to Item 2. [An additional 

navigational arrow was added to the instrument.]

2. In Sections 2, 5, 6, and 7 provide an instruction to respondents in the bulleted list that states, 

“If production is not complete, please provide estimates.” [This recommendation was not 

implemented in production because the Organic Team was concerned that instructing some to 

report estimates could prompt all to do the same.]

3. In Sections 2, 3, 5, 6, and 7 provide a unit column similar to the one in Section 10, which 

allows respondents to report in the unit that is applicable to their operation. [In Section 3, the 

reporting unit was changed from tons to pounds. This recommendation was not implemented 

in the other sections because the units of each known crop is how the data are published.] 

4. In Sections 2, 5, 6, and 7 provide respondents with more space to enter the unit by shrinking 

the gross value of organic production sold columns. [This recommendation was implemented 

in production.]

5. In Sections 3 and 4 respondents did not report small quantities of crops. To determine the 

magnitude of the issue, consider analyzing survey data to determine how many respondents 

report in tenths of an acre (instead of acres). Alternatively, have respondents indicate on the 

form that they grow less than one acre, and/or enter partial data. [This recommendation was 

implemented in production.]

6. In Sections 5, 6, and 7, a number of changes could be made to the instrument to allow 

respondents to report more fruits and vegetables: List fewer printed fruits/vegetables in 

Question 2 to allow more space for answering; Add additional rows to Question 2 and move 

the list of fruits/vegetables/codes and question 3 further down the page; If it is not critical to 

ask for fruit/vegetable varieties (e.g., navel oranges, Valencia oranges, etc.), consider 

collapsing varieties to one type of fruit/vegetables (e.g., oranges); ask respondents who grow 

more than 10 types of fruits/vegetables to only report the 10 highest grossing fruits/vegetables; 

place the statement “if more space is needed, use a separate sheet of paper” in bold font. 

Consider similar changes in other relevant sections. [The statement: “If more space is needed” 

was bolded and centered on the page.]

7. In Section 6, determine whether the Organic Production column is necessary. If not, remove 

to save space and eliminate confusion. Consider doing the same in other applicable sections. 

[The Organic Production column was not removed. The column was deemed necessary.]

8. In Section 12, check to see whether this section is consistent with the layout of Schedule F.

[Changes were not made to the layout of this section. The section is formatted in standard 

questionnaire form and not possible to align with tax forms.]

9. For Question 3 in Sections 3-5, move this question above the list of crops/codes. [This 

recommendation was implemented in production.]

10. For Question 3 in Sections 3-5, reword the question to ask: “What percent of the total Organic 

(insert commodity) reported above were sold by another party for market prices?” [This 

question was changed to read: What percent of Total (insert commodity) reported above were 
iii

sold and delivered under a marketing contract arrangement? (A marketing contract is a verbal 

or written agreement reached before harvest of a crop or before completion of a livestock 

production stage, setting a price or pricing formula and market for the commodity.)]

11. Emphasize in promotional materials that we need their data no matter how small of an 

operation they are or how little of a crop they grow. [This recommendation was implemented.]
iv

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1. INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................................. 1

2. METHODS ............................................................................................................................. 2

2.1 Sample................................................................................................................................... 2

2.2 Cognitive Interviewing Procedures....................................................................................... 2

2.3 Data Analysis........................................................................................................................ 3

3. RESULTS ............................................................................................................................... 3

3.1 Section 10 - GMO Presence in Organic Crops..................................................................... 4

3.2 Section 1 - Organic Information ........................................................................................... 5

3.3 Section 2 - Organic Field Crops............................................................................................ 6

3.4 Section 3 - Organic Grapes................................................................................................... 7

3.5 Section 4 - Organic Apples................................................................................................... 7

3.6 Section 5 - Other Organic Fruits, Tree Nuts, and Berries..................................................... 7

3.7 Section 6 - Organic Vegetables Grown in the Open............................................................. 9

3.8 Section 7 - Organic Vegetables Grown Under Protection ................................................. 11

3.9 Section 8 - Organic Floriculture Crops, Nursery Crops, Mushrooms, Christmas Trees, and 

Maple Syrup.............................................................................................................................. 12

3.10 Section 9 - Organic Acres under Crop Insurance ............................................................. 12

3.11 Section 11 - Organic Livestock, Poultry, and Livestock Products................................... 13

3.12 Section 12 - Production Expenses..................................................................................... 13

3.13 Section 13 - Organic Production Practices ....................................................................... 13

3.14 Section 14 - Marketing Practices for Organic Products.................................................... 13

3.15 Question 3 (Sections 3-5).................................................................................................. 13

3.16 Other General Comments ................................................................................................. 14

4. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS ............................................................... 14

5. REFERENCES ..................................................................................................................... 16

APPENDIX A: Interview Protocol............................................................................................... 17

APPENDIX B: Questionnaire Used During Testing.................................................................... 28
1

2014 Organic Survey – Results from Cognitive Testing

Heather Ridolfo1

Abstract

The 2014 Organic Survey is an organic production and practices survey. The last 

Organic Survey was conducted in 2011. In 2014, a new section that asks about 

genetically modified organism (GMO) presence in organic crops, was added to the 

survey. The current study uses cognitive interviews to evaluate respondents’ 

comprehension and responses to questions asked in this new section. Sections of 

the survey that respondents reported having difficulty answering or that exhibit 

obvious response error were also evaluated. In general, respondents felt this survey 

was not designed for their types of operations. This led to problems reporting data 

across the different sections of the survey. For the most part, respondents did not 

have difficulty understanding the intent of the new section on GMO; however, a 

few respondents exhibited comprehension problems. 

Key Words: 2014 Organic Survey, GMO, USDA National Organic Program (NOP), Marketing 

Contract Agreement, Cognitive Testing

1. INTRODUCTION 

The 2014 Organic Survey is a data collection project conducted by the United States Department

of Agriculture’s (USDA) National Agricultural Statistics Service (NASS) for the USDA Risk 

Management Agency. Census of Agriculture funds are being used as directed by the Agricultural 

Act of 2014. The survey is an organic production and practices survey, parts of which have been 

previously conducted in 2008 and 2011. The population of interest is any operation that produces 

organic products according to USDA’s National Organic Program (NOP) standards and is certified 

or exempt from certification. The population also contains operations that reported that they were 

transitioning to organic in the 2012 Census of Agriculture. The questionnaire collects information 

on organic production of field crops, vegetables, fruits, tree nuts, berries, livestock and poultry, 

production practices, production expenses, marketing practices and value-added production and 

processing.

A new section has been added to the 2014 questionnaire (Section 10) that asks about genetically 

modified organism (GMO) presence in organic crops. NASS’s PSM-ASMS-14 mandates that 

significant changes to existing questionnaires be pre-tested prior to fielding the survey. One pretesting method that is particularly useful for identifying how questions perform is cognitive 

interviewing (Willis 2005). The primary objective of cognitive interviewing is to evaluate 

 1 Heather Ridolfo is a Survey Statistician with the National Agricultural Statistics Service, Research and 

Development Division, 3251 Old Lee Highway, Room 305, Fairfax, VA 22030. The author would like to thank Bob 

Garino, Dave Losh, Herman Ellison, Dale Hawks, and Kathy Ott for their assistance on this research project.
2

respondents’ question response process when answering survey questions. Respondents are 

administered the survey questions and then probed (asked follow up questions) to determine how 

they understood the survey questions and the mental process they went through to formulate their 

response. Data are then analyzed to determine whether responses meet the objective of the question 

(i.e., if the question measures what it is intended to measure). The following report details the 

findings from the cognitive testing of the 2014 Organic survey.

2. METHODS

2.1 Sample

Since OMB clearance was not obtained for this testing, we only conducted a total of 9 

interviews. The interviews were conducted in the following states: CA, OR, OH, VA and MD. 

The sample included operations that grow organic crops that are certified organic or exempt from 

organic certification. Operations that only had organic livestock were excluded from the sample 

as they would have skipped out of Section 10. Interviewers in each state were responsible for 

recruiting respondents. Respondents were informed of the intent of the cognitive interviews 

during the recruitment process and that their participation was voluntary. Sample characteristics 

can be found in Table 1.

Table 1. Sample Characteristics

ID State Farm Type

1 CA 321 organic acres; fruit and vegetable crops; also a processor

2 CA 200 organic acres; fruit crops; also a contract poultry grower 

3 CA 60 organic acres; fruit and vegetable crops

4 CA 205 organic acres; field, nut, vegetable crops

5 OR 730 organic acres; field and vegetable crops

6 OH 80 organic acres; mostly wooded, some pasture, 8 acres of crops

7 MD No information provided

8 VA 4 organic acres; field and vegetable crops

9 VA Herb, vegetable and fruit crops

2.2 Cognitive Interviewing Procedures

All interviews were conducted in October 2014, with the survey scheduled to be mailed out in 

January 2015. Interviewers were provided with an interview protocol and interview guide prior 

to data collection (See Appendix A). Version 14 of the 2014 Organic Survey was used during 

testing (see Appendix B). Since the primary mode of data collection for the Organic Survey is 

mail, interviewers were instructed to have respondents complete the survey on their own at the 

beginning of the interview. To save time, respondents completed Sections 1-10 only. After the 

respondents completed the survey, the interviewers reviewed Sections 1-9 for errors and asked 

the respondents if there were any survey questions they were not sure how to answer or had 

questions about. The interviewers then probed generally on those questions to determine how 

respondents interpreted those questions and how they formulated their responses. As mentioned 
3

above, Section 10 is a new section on the survey, and was the primary focus of the testing.

Interviewers then focused the remaining time on probing this section of the survey. Scripted 

probes were provided and interviewers were encouraged to ask emergent probes as necessary. 

All probes were administered retrospectively. The interviews lasted approximately one hour. 

After each interview, the interviewers typed up their notes and sent them back to the project lead 

for analysis.

2.3 Data Analysis

The data from the cognitive interviews were analyzed using the constant comparative method. 

This method involves three steps of data reduction (Strauss and Corbin 1990). The first step 

involved open coding. This entailed reviewing the data with two questions in mind: 1) How do 

respondents interpret the survey questions and 2) How did respondents formulate their response? 

During this initial analysis step, codes were assigned to each respondent for all survey questions 

on which they were probed. In the next analysis step, which is referred to as axial coding, the 

initial codes were reviewed and compared against the raw data. During this step, the codes were 

refined and themes were established. In the final analysis step, selective coding, the core themes 

were specified. These themes served as the unifying link for all codes assigned in the earlier data 

steps. From this final step, a working theory was developed, which depicts how the respondents 

comprehended the survey questions and types of information these questions can be expected to 

measure.

3. RESULTS

There were several overarching findings throughout the testing of this survey. This section will 

briefly present these overarching findings and findings from Section 10. Further details on these 

findings and question specific findings can be found in the question-by-question review below.

Several respondents commented that this survey appeared to be designed for a farmer who grows 

a lot of one or two crops, and a couple of respondents said it was geared towards a “Midwest 

farmer” specifically. Many of the respondents we interviewed grew a large variety of crops 

throughout the year. For example, several respondents grew over 20 different organic vegetables 

a year, and one respondent reported growing 250 different vegetables a year. 

Across the different sections of the survey, respondents had difficulty reporting the number of 

crops grown, crop variety, the unit, and the amount and value of production. It was difficult for 

respondents to report all of the crops they grew due to the size of the answer space provided, and 

the fact that their crops were not all listed. None of these respondents appeared to see the 

instructions to use a separate sheet of paper if additional space was needed. Several of these 

respondents also commented on how tedious it was for them to report all of the crops they grow 

and that it is unlikely that they would list them all out even if space was given. Respondents were 

also dissatisfied with the fact that some crops were broken down by different varieties (e.g., 

green cabbage, red cabbage, and other cabbage) and others were not (e.g., peppers). Respondents 
4

often did not agree with the units provided when reporting amount produced. It was also difficult 

for respondents to report their production amounts and values. Sometimes this was because they 

had not yet begun or had not finished production sales for the crops reported, and other times it 

was because they did not know these amounts for the specific crops reported. Finally, in a couple 

different sections, respondents missed Question 3 in Sections 3-5, which asked about marketing 

contract arrangements. Respondents also did not interpret this question correctly and this resulted 

in response error. 

None of the respondents we interviewed experienced GMO presence in their crops. All 

respondents were familiar with the term “GMO.” Most respondents considered cross-pollination 

from GMO crops to organic crops when answering Question 1 of Section 10; however, some 

respondents considered other things. 

3.1 10 Section 10 – GMO Presence in Organic Crops

Question 1

Most respondents were happy to see this section on the questionnaire. One respondent even 

exclaimed “It’s about time!” Respondents were familiar with the term GMO and said that it 

meant the same thing as GE. Respondents generally understood this question as asking if they 

experienced cross-pollination from GMO crop material drifting into their organic fields. For 

example, one respondent stated that this question was asking, “Were crops I grew contaminated, 

cross-pollinated, by GMO crops and no longer had organic value?” All of the respondents we 

interviewed answered “no” to this question. Respondents often commented that they did not 

grow crops that could be genetically modified and if they did, they felt they lived far enough 

away from farms using GMO crops that it was not a problem for them. One respondent 

mentioned that she purposively does not grow crops that could be affected by GMO. She pointed 

out that in some areas of the country it would be hard for farmers to grow organic crops because 

of the risk of cross-pollination but there are no questions on this survey that ask about that.

Although most respondents interpreted this question correctly, some respondents thought this 

question could include more than just cross-pollination of GMO crops with organic crops. For 

example, one respondent also thought this question could include GMO material that was found 

in organic feed for poultry. He provided an example of a poultry farmer he knows who found 

GMO material in the organic feed he purchased to feed his chickens. In contrast, another 

respondent did not think this question would cover organic feed that was purchased and found to 

be contaminated by GMO since the question states “in an organic crop you have offered for 

sale.” This respondent interpreted this question as asking, “Did you grow a crop, harvest it, and 

try to sell it but the buyer tested it and found GMO?” He also did not think this question would 

include crops you cannot plant because you discover there is GMO in the seed. He further 

pointed out that GMO in one crop affects next year’s crop as well and this question does not 

measure the losses that pursue after the GMO is found in an organic crop. Two respondents also 

thought this question could include instances where organic crops were sprayed with chemicals. 

However, other respondents questioned whether damage to organic crops from the drift or 
5

spraying of chemicals would count in this question. For example, one respondent discussed how 

a friend’s crops were inadvertently sprayed by a crop duster. However, she was not sure this 

would be measured in this question. Note that this did not lead to response error because all of 

these respondents answered “no” to this question indicating that they have never experienced the 

types of contamination they discussed.

Question 1a

No respondents answered this question. This made it difficult to probe for additional information 

about this question. However, a few respondents were probed on the terms used in Question 1a. 

Two respondents indicated that they interpreted “crop” to refer to the intended organic crop that 

was affected by GMO material. One respondent commented that he did not think it was useful to 

report the GMO crop because often you would not know the source of the GMO contamination. 

Four respondents were probed on their understanding of loss and these respondents all indicated 

that they interpreted this column as asking about loss in value. That is, the loss resulting from not 

selling the contaminated organic crop or from selling the organic crop as conventional. 

3.2 Section 1 – Organic Information

Interviewers only probed for additional information in this section if respondents indicated they 

had a problem when filling out the survey or if they made an obvious error on the survey. 

Question 1

After answering “Yes” to Question 1, three respondents missed the skip to go to Question 2 and 

answered the sub-question under the “no” response (Did this operation have any USDA NOP 

organic production in 2014 that was exempt from certification). One of these respondents 

answered “no” to the sub-question and then missed the skip to go to Section 16 and answered

Question 2 in Section 1. After reading the sub-question, another respondent answered “no” to 

question one and proceeded then to Question 2. Finally, the third respondent answered “yes” to 

the sub-question, as she does have organic production that is exempt from certification in 

addition to the production that is certified organic. This respondent was then unsure if she should 

answer Question 2, so she wrote her answers to Question 2 outside of the answer space. 

Questions 2-4

For the most part, respondents had no difficulty answering these questions. One respondent was 

unsure how to answer these questions, specifically whether she should report the total acres she 

owned or the total acres she owned and farmed in Question 2a. She owns 80 organic acres but 

only farms 8 acres. The remaining 72 acres are woodland and pastureland. In the end she thought 

Question 2a was asking how many organic acres that she farmed did she own; however, she 

ended up leaving this question blank. She did enter 0 for questions 2b and 2c and 15 acres for 

question 4.
6

As mentioned above one respondent had both organic production that is certified and organic 

production that is exempt from certification. However, because she was confused by the skip 

patterns, this respondent was unsure if she should answer Question 2. She ended up reporting 

outside of the answer space that she owns 360 organic certified acres and rents 370 organic 

certified acres. She has tomatoes growing in a plastic covered 90 ft x 36 in wide house that are 

exempt from certification. She did not report these tomatoes in the exempt column because they 

are less than one acre. Instead she included them in the 360 certified organic acres that she owns. 

3.3 Section 2 – Organic Field Crops

Interviewers only probed for additional information in this section if respondents indicated they 

had a problem when filling out the survey or if they made an obvious error on the survey. 

Question 1

Five respondents answered “yes” to Question 1 and completed this section of the survey. The 

majority of respondents understood which types of crops this question was asking about and 

three respondents, who answered “yes” to Question 1, did have the crops of interest (grain hay, 

grass hay, Virginia peanuts). However, two other respondents were not sure what types of crops 

were supposed to be included in this section. One of these respondents initially answered “yes” 

to Question 1 but he should have answered “no” as he does not grow any field crops. When he 

first read Question 1 he asked, “What are row crops?” He then commented that he didn’t know 

what pulse crops were and was unsure about what the statement “exclude personal or home use 

crops” meant. When he got to Question 2, he proceeded to enter several of his vegetable crops on 

the form and commented that none of his crops were listed below. He was then redirected by the 

interviewer. Similarly, after reading Question 1, another respondent asked, “What are row 

crops?” This respondent then read the list of crops provided and commented that she grows herbs 

but they are not dried. She then noticed beans and said “Well, I have some pulse crops. I guess 

this means my vegetables, but let me look ahead in this book and see if that is right.” She then 

paged through and found the vegetable section, and then went back to Section 2 and answered 

“no” to Question 1. Finally, one respondent had to read the instructions that indicated “if two or 

more cutting were made from the same acres, report acres harvest for that item only once but 

report total production from all cuttings” twice before she understood it. 

Question 2

The four respondents, who correctly interpreted and answered Question 1, had difficulty 

reporting production. For one of these respondents, this difficulty stemmed from the rental 

agreement he has with the landowner. This respondent indicated that the landlord baled and sold 

the hay that he grew and he did not know how much was produced or sold. He wrote down a 

guess. This same respondent indicated that it is inappropriate to report hay produced in bushels 

as it is sold in tons. He entered tons for the unit. Another respondent, who had difficulty with this 

section, indicated that he could not report production for his peanut crop as it had not been 

harvested yet. This issue arose in Sections 5 and 6 as well. Instead of reporting in tons, the third 
7

respondent reported 50% for the quantity of organic production sold as organic and 0 for the 

amount sold as conventional. However, the interviewer did not probe for further information 

about this response. Finally, one respondent commented that there was not enough space to write 

in the unit for production.

3.4 Section 3 – Organic Grapes

Interviewers only probed for additional information in this section if respondents indicated they 

had a problem when filling out the survey or if they made an obvious error on the survey. 

Question 2

Only two respondents answered “yes” to Question 1 and completed this section. Both 

respondents had some difficulty with Question 2. One respondent has less than one acre of 

grapes but was not sure how to report this in tenths so she entered one acre. This respondent also 

did not agree with the production unit provided in the table. She produces 250 pounds of grapes a 

year. She said she could convert it to tons but it would be, as she described it, “a pain in the 

neck.” Similarly, another respondent stated, “My organic grapes are table grapes and they would 

be in pounds not tons. You wouldn’t ask a table grape grower to report in tons.” He said he could 

convert them to tons and did a calculation in his head. He said table grapes are sold in 19 pound

box equivalents and it would be easier for him to report in that unit. This issue arose in Sections 

5 and 6 as well.

3.5 Section 4 – Organic Apples

Interviewers only probed for additional information in this section if respondents indicated they 

had a problem when filling out the survey or if they made an obvious error on the survey. 

Question 2

Only one respondent answered “yes” to Question 1 and completed this section. This respondent 

had difficulty answering Question 2. She has a little over one acre of certified organic apple trees 

of different varieties. Because she only has 2-5 trees of different varieties, it’s difficult for her to 

estimate the area harvested and produced for each variety. Therefore she placed all of her apple 

trees under “other” and reported that “<1 acre” were harvested and left the remaining columns 

blank. 

3.6 Section 5 – Other Organic Fruits, Tree Nuts, and Berries

Interviewers only probed for additional information in this section if respondents indicated they 

had a problem when filling out the survey or if they made an obvious error on the survey. 

Question 1
8

Five respondents answered “yes” to Question 1 and completed this section. One respondent 

misread the include/exclude statement following Question 1. After reading this statement she 

said “Interesting, this includes home use, so everything. I would have to guess at that part.” It is

not clear how much this affected her response to the subsequent questions. 

Question 2

In Question 2, respondents did not always report all of the organic fruits they grew. This 

occurred for two reasons. First, a few respondents were reluctant to report the fruits they grew 

because they were grown in small quantities. For example, one respondent indicated that the 

amount of fruit he sold was so small it was not worth reporting, stating, “In a million dollars of 

sales, these amount to less than $100 each.” Another reason why respondents did not report all of 

the fruit they grew was because there was not enough space provided on the form. One 

respondent who grew a dozen different types of fruit only reported four. 

One respondent also did not agree with the breakdown of particular fruits into subcategories. 

When looking over the list of fruits, this respondent questioned why so many categories of 

blueberries were offered but only one type of peach was listed. He thought any fruit other than 

blueberries would have more varieties. He also thought plums and prunes should be separated 

and that fresh figs should be separated from processed figs. He indicated that a fresh fruit 

producer does not care about what a processed food producer is growing. Other respondents 

raised this issue in Section 6 as well.

One respondent indicated that she would rather report the amount of organic crops harvested in 

row feet rather than acres and tenths. She knows she has 500 foot rows of fruit and it is hard for 

her to convert this number to acres. 

As in Section 4, two respondents had difficulty reporting the amount of organic production and 

the sale of organic production for their fruits and nuts for several reasons. First, similar to the 

issue reported in Section 5, one of these respondents had not harvested his walnuts yet. He 

indicated that walnut harvesting typically takes place in late September/early October. After that 

it takes six months to process the nuts before they are sold. He guessed that he would produce 20 

tons and 100% of those produced would be sold as organic. Because nuts take 6 months to 

process, this will still be an issue when the survey is fielded in January. Another reason why a 

respondent had difficulty reporting production was these numbers are not tracked. When 

answering Question 2, this respondent commented “I have no idea what my production is.” He 

indicated that they have harvest sheets for each day that records what was harvested and he 

would have to look back through each sheet to get the number of strawberries produced. This 

same respondent also had difficulty reporting production sold. This respondent indicated that he 

could tell us how many strawberries were sold in market but not how many were sold through 

CSA. He knows that strawberries were sold through CSA, but CSA sales are not broken down by 

crop. Other respondents experienced this same problem in Section 6. This respondent ended up 

leaving the organic production, quantity sold and value columns blank. 
9

Finally, as in Section 3, one respondent didn’t agree with the units used to report production. 

This respondent indicated that plum, peach, nectarine (coded as other fruit), apricot (coded as 

other fruit), and navel orange production is measured in boxes instead of tons. This issue arose in 

Sections 4 and 6 as well. Another respondent commented that there was not enough space given 

to write in the unit of measurement. 

3.7 Section 6 – Organic Vegetables Grown in the Open

Interviewers only probed for additional information in this section if respondent indicated they 

had a problem when filling out the survey or if they made an obvious error on the survey. 

Question 1

Eight respondents answered “yes” to Question 1 and completed this section. As in previous 

sections, respondents had several problems with this section of the survey. 

The majority of respondents understood the types of crops that were expected to be reported in 

this section; however, one respondent did not know what the phrase “grown in the open” meant. 

She thought it possibly meant row crops or crops that were grown for CSA. However, after 

reading the title to Section 7 (Organic vegetables grown under protection), she realized what the 

phrase “grown in the open” meant. Another respondent did not read the phrase “grown in the 

open” and reported crops grown in the open and under protection in this section. She only 

realized her mistake after she turned the page to Section 7. 

Question 2

As in previous sections, several respondents indicated that there was not enough space provided 

to report all of the vegetables they grew. This issue was particularly pronounced in this section. 

Respondents handled this issue in different ways. One respondent reported during the interview 

that he grows 250 different vegetables a year. He listed out spinach, fresh red, white and yellow 

onions, and potatoes and then reported all of his other vegetables in one row under “other.” 

Another respondent also reported all of his vegetables that were not listed on the form in a single 

row under “other.” In contrast, a couple of other respondents indicated that they would have to 

report at least 6 rows of “other” crops as their crops were not listed on the form. One of these 

respondents stated that he couldn’t understand why he would have to do this when there are 

seven different types of onions listed. Finally, another respondent commented that he grows 50 

different types of vegetables. He listed as many as he could (seven vegetables) and did not report 

the rest. 

As in the fruit section, respondents were dissatisfied with the types and varieties of vegetables 

listed. One respondent commented that very few of the vegetables he grew were broken out. For 

example, he grows spinach but not the variety listed. He also grows 14 different types of carrots 

and would have to report them all together under one code. Another respondent commented that 
10

there was no distinction made between bell peppers and chili peppers and he would have to 

combine them when reporting how much was harvested and produced. 

One respondent was confused by the first three columns in Question 2. When he first read these 

columns he asked, “What is harvested and production? Are you asking if it’s produced but not 

harvested?” He said he harvests everything unless it is a cover crop. Later in the interview he 

asked, “Are you asking what you planted versus what you harvested?” He said in organic 

farming, you have to rotate your crops to get green manure. You may plant something that will 

produce a crop that you never intend to harvest. However, he then said that the amount he 

produces is the same as the amount sold because he would not count something as “produced” 

unless it was sold. This respondent failed to distinguish between these three columns and ended 

up leaving the column “Organic Production” blank while filling in data for the other two

columns. This respondent also did not report organic production in Section 5. 

Two respondents had difficulty reporting the number of acres harvested in this section. These 

respondents did not keep their records in a format that was easy to transfer to this survey. When 

completing this section, one respondent commented that he grows a small amount of a lot of 

things and for some crops he does not track the yield. When he does track crops, this is done 

using daily harvest sheets. He would have to check each of these sheets to accurately report how 

much of each crop he harvested. He ended up reporting harvest estimates for the few crops he 

reported on the form. Similarly, another respondent commented that she grows a lot of different 

vegetables but not in large quantities. Figuring out how much she harvested in terms of acres 

would be very time consuming for her. This respondent indicated she would not answer this 

question on the survey. Finally, one respondent did not want to report the amount of crops 

harvested in acres and tenths. She would rather report the amount harvested in row feet and 

pounds. 

Some respondents also had difficulty reporting the quantity of crops produced for similar reasons 

as those reported in Sections 2 and 5. One respondent commented that he could not report 

production for certain crops because they are still in production sales. This will be a problem for 

crops that are produced after the survey due date. He said he has 200 acres of vegetables and 

cover crops that will get harvested in 2015. Other respondents reported that this difficulty 

stemmed from the fact that records are not kept for each vegetable in certain types of sales. For 

example, one respondent indicated that while he tracks the quantities of vegetables sold at 

market, he does not track the quantities of vegetables sold through CSA. He described his 

vegetables as ingredients that go in a CSA box, with the CSA box being the product that is 

tracked. When asked how he would answer this question on the survey, he said he would throw 

the survey out and wait for someone to call him. He then said if someone did call, he would just 

give them “ballpark figures.” Similarly, another respondent indicated that 25% of his sales are 

through farmers’ markets and because these are cash sales there is no way of tracking how much 

of each vegetable was sold. Finally, one respondent indicated that she groups vegetables together 

in her records. For example, vegetables like broccoli, cauliflower, and cabbage are all under one 

category in her records and it is difficult for her to separate them out.
11

As in previous sections, some respondents indicated that they do not keep track of organic 

production in the units provided. When filling out the survey one respondent commented, “Oh, 

you can’t do boxes.” He then asked what we meant by cwt. He said he assumed it meant carton 

weight. He indicated that fresh beans and broccoli are usually sold by the box. For example, it 

would be easy for him to report that he sold 2,500 boxes of broccoli. He said typically processing 

vegetables are sold by the pounds or tons. He ended up reporting beans in cwt, garlic in pounds, 

peppers in tons, and “other” vegetables (which was one row for all vegetables that he grew, that 

were not listed) in pounds. Other respondents also indicated that they would rather report the 

number of organic vegetables produced in pounds or in number of vegetables produced (e.g., 

heads of cabbage, fennel bulbs, etc) instead of cwt. 

In general, some respondents indicated that this section was very tedious for them to fill out 

given the variety of vegetables they grow. These respondents all commented on how this form 

appeared to be designed for a farmer who grows one or two crops in large volume. 

3.8 Section 7 – Organic Vegetables Grown Under Protection

Interviewers only probed for additional information in this section if respondents indicated they 

had a problem when filling out the survey or if they made an obvious error on the survey. 

Question 1

Five respondents answered “yes” to this question and completed this section. Respondents 

interpreted this question as asking about crops grown in greenhouses, hoop houses, high tunnels, 

under plastic, and under row covers. One respondent, who has a high tunnel and a low tunnel or 

caterpillar tunnel, asked whether she should report crops that are under nonpermanent plant 

covers. At first, she did not think she should include crops under nonpermanent covering but 

then changed her mind and included them. As mentioned above, one respondent initially 

included all of her crops grown under protection in Section 6. After reading the phrase “grown

under protection” in Question 1, she realized her error. 

Question 2

It was easier for respondents to report the variety of crops grown under protection than in the 

open; however, a couple of respondents still indicated that they grow a variety of vegetables 

under protection in a small amount of space. One respondent commented that a lot of the 

vegetables he grows under protection would have to be listed as “other”, and that there was not 

enough space available to list all of them. 

When reporting the amount of vegetables harvested, two respondents wrote in the size of the 

covered structure. For example, one respondent who only grew tomatoes under protection wrote 

in 90 x 36. However, another respondent listed all of her vegetables on separate rows but then 

wrote in 30 x 96’ in the first cell of the harvest column. 
12

Two respondents also indicated that it is difficult for them to report the production sales and 

values. One respondent indicated that his crop had not been sold yet. This will only be an issue if 

this crop is sold after the survey due date. The other respondent could not report the organic 

production as she did not have the figures available. She then wrote “all” in for organic 

production sold as organic and $1000 in the gross value column. 

As in previous sections, one respondent did not agree with the units provided for reporting 

production and sales. This respondent wanted to report the number of plants produced. 

3.9 Section 8 – Organic Floriculture Crops, Nursery Crops, Mushrooms, Christmas Trees, 

and Maple Syrup

Interviewers only probed for additional information in this section if respondents indicated they 

had a problem when filling out the survey or if they made an obvious error on the survey. 

Question 1

Only one respondent answered “yes” to this question; however, he was not probed on his 

understanding of the question and did not exhibit any errors. Another respondent began to 

answer this question but then stopped and commented that he did not think edible flowers were 

included under floriculture. He stated that flowers are typically defined as things people do not 

eat; however, he grows them for consumption. He generally reports them under vegetables on 

surveys. He grows about 7-8 different varieties on 4 acres of land. He answered “no” to this 

question. 

3.10 Section 9 – Organic Acres under Crop Insurance

Interviewers only probed for additional information in this section if respondents indicated they 

had a problem when filling out the survey or if they made an obvious error on the survey. 

Questions 1 and 2

All but one respondent answered “no” to this question. The one respondent who answered “yes” 

indicated that he has 99% of his crops covered by crop insurance because he does not believe 

coverage is available for one of his crops (persimmons). A respondent, who answered “no” to 

this question, missed the skip instructing him to go to item 2 and as a result did not complete the 

remainder of the section. This respondent indicated during probing that he thinks insurance is 

generally unavailable for the types of crops he grows. He then added that he doesn’t grow 

enough of the crops that could be covered to make it worthwhile. Other respondents who did 

answer Question 2 commented that crop insurance was too expensive or that they did not know it 

existed for their type of crops. 
13

3.11 Section 11 – Organic Livestock, Poultry, and Livestock Products

No respondents answered this section or were probed on this section. 

3. 12 Section 12 – Production Expenses

One respondent glanced at this section at the end of the interview. He stated that we should make 

sure this section is aligned with Schedule F of the tax forms for farms. He said it might be better 

to ask for the previous year’s expenses and to move the due date of the survey to after the due 

date for taxes. 

3.13 Section 13 – Organic Production Practices

No respondents answered this section or were probed on this section. 

3.14 Section 14 – Marketing Practices for Organic Products

Question 3

One respondent looked over this section of the survey at the end of the interview. He commented 

that he would have a hard time answering this question because he does not always know where 

his products are sold. His products are often sold through a third party and he just knows the 

price for which they were sold. He understood that this question was asking about the first point 

of sale, but he questioned whether the question was intending to measure the first point of sale or 

where the products actually end up. 

3.15 Question 3 (Sections 3-5)

Two respondents did not answer this question when answering particular sections of the survey. 

One respondent answered this question in Section 6 but then missed it in Section 7. The other 

respondent answered this question in Section 5 but then missed it in Section 6. 

Five respondents were probed on their understanding of the term “marketing contract 

arrangement.” Respondents did not appear to interpret this question correctly. One respondent, 

who answered “no” to this question in the relevant sections, stated that he had never heard of this 

term before. He guessed that it meant you had a broker that sells your product and pays you in 

the end. He said they would not take possession of the product, they would just sell it. This 

respondent sells directly to grocery stores, wholesale distributors, and a restaurant distributor;

these exchanges are done under verbal agreements. Another respondent, who also answered “no” 

to this question interpreted this term as meaning she sold her products to someone else and they 

did something with them. She indicated that she had no such contracts. Three other respondents 

had a more definitive understanding of this term. These respondents, who answered “no” to this 

question, all interpreted this term as referring to a contract with a fixed price arrangement. Two 

of these respondents added that crops that are grown for processing are often under this type of 
14

contract, whereas fresh crops are sold at market prices. All three of these respondents indicated 

that they had written or verbal agreements that stated their crops would be sold at the highest 

attainable prices on the given day and they did not view these agreements as marketing contract 

agreements. One respondent indicated that had the word “contract” been removed from the term, 

he would have answered “yes” to the question. To him, the word contract indicated that there 

was a set price in the agreement. 

3.16 Other General Comments

One respondent indicated that he was unsure if he should complete this survey as a producer or 

as a processor since his operation produces and processes organic crops. He often has this issue

when completing our surveys. 

One respondent indicated that the amount of acres he reported throughout the survey would not 

total to the number of acres reported in Section 1. This is because of double-cropping. Other 

respondents also mentioned growing several different types of vegetables on the same field 

throughout the year. 

In general, 45 minutes appeared to be an adequate amount of time to complete this survey. 

However, some respondents indicated that they would not report all of the crops they grew due 

to space limitations and the amount of time it would take. One respondent indicated that he 

would not complete the survey if he received it. 

Finally, one respondent indicated at the end of the interview that there is an important question 

that we do not ask on this survey. That is, what is the expected increase or decrease in future 

production for specific commodities? He said we could ask about this in terms of quantity or 

value. He is concerned about the trends in organic production. To him, it is most useful to know 

how much increase or decrease in specific commodities can be expected in the upcoming year. 

4. CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS

In sum, respondents generally understood the intent of Section 10, which asked about GMO 

presence in organic crops. However, a few respondents interpreted the first question in Section 10 

as asking about cross-pollination of GMO crops with organic crops and/or the inadvertent spraying 

of chemicals on an organic crop. In general, the 2014 Organic Survey was not designed for 

operations that grow many crops in small quantities. As a result, these types of operations often 

had difficulty reporting all of the crops grown, the variety of crops, the units, and the amount and 

value of production. A few comprehension and navigational issues were also found in different 

sections of the survey. Minor changes could be made to the form to alleviate these issues. The 

following changes to the form are recommended: 

1. In Section 1, reformat the instrument to make the skip to Question 2 following a “yes” response 

in Question 1 clearer. One possible solution is to tell respondents who answer “yes,” to “Enter 
15

the name of the certifying agency or organization and then go to Item 2. [An additional 

navigational arrow was added to the instrument.]

2. In Sections 2, 5, 6, and 7 provide an instruction to respondents in the bulleted list that states, 

“If production is not complete, please provide estimates.” [This recommendation was not 

implemented in production because the Organic Team was concerned that instructing some to 

report estimates could prompt all to do the same.]

3. In Sections 2, 3, 5, 6, and 7 provide a unit column similar to the one in Section 10, which 

allows respondents to report in the unit that is applicable to their operation. [In Section 3, the 

reporting unit was changed from tons to pounds. This recommendation was not implemented 

in the other sections because the units of each known crop is how the data are published.] 

4. In Sections 2, 5, 6, and 7 provide respondents with more space to enter the unit by shrinking 

the gross value of organic production sold columns. [This recommendation was implemented 

in production.]

5. In Sections 3 and 4 respondents did not report small quantities of crops. To determine the 

magnitude of the issue, consider analyzing survey data to determine how many respondents 

report in tenths of an acre (instead of acres). Alternatively, have respondents indicate on the 

form that they grow less than one acre, and/or enter partial data. [This recommendation was 

implemented in production.]

6. In Sections 5, 6, and 7, a number of changes could be made to the instrument to allow 

respondents to report more fruits and vegetables: List fewer printed fruits/vegetables in 

Question 2 to allow more space for answering; Add additional rows to Question 2 and move 

the list of fruits/vegetables/codes and question 3 further down the page; If it is not critical to 

ask for fruit/vegetable varieties (e.g., navel oranges, Valencia oranges, etc.), consider 

collapsing varieties to one type of fruit/vegetables (e.g., oranges); ask respondents who grow 

more than 10 types of fruits/vegetables to only report the 10 highest grossing fruits/vegetables; 

place the statement “if more space is needed, use a separate sheet of paper” in bold font. 

Consider similar changes in other relevant sections. [The statement: “If more space is needed” 

was bolded and centered on the page.]

7. In Section 6, determine whether the Organic Production column is necessary. If not, remove 

to save space and eliminate confusion. Consider doing the same in other applicable sections. 

[The Organic Production column was not removed. The column was deemed necessary.]

8. In Section 12, check to see whether this section is consistent with the layout of Schedule F. 

[Changes were not made to the layout of this section. The section is formatted in standard 

questionnaire form and not possible to align with tax forms.]

9. For Question 3 in Sections 3-5, move this question above the list of crops/codes. [This 

recommendation was implemented in production.]

10. For Question 3 in Sections 3-5, reword the question to ask: “What percent of the total Organic 

(insert commodity) reported above were sold by another party for market prices?” [This 

question was changed to read: What percent of Total (insert commodity) reported above were 

sold and delivered under a marketing contract arrangement? (A marketing contract is a verbal 

or written agreement reached before harvest of a crop or before completion of a livestock 

production stage, setting a price or pricing formula and market for the commodity.)]

11. Emphasize in promotional materials that we need their data no matter how small of an 

operation they are or how little of a crop they grow. [This recommendation was implemented.]
16

5. REFERENCES

Strauss, A. C., and Corbin, J. (1990), Basics of Qualitative Research: Grounded Theory 

Procedures and Techniques, Newbury Park: Sage Publications. 

Willis, G. B. (2005), Cognitive Interviewing: A Tool for Improving Questionnaire Design,

Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. 
17

APPENDIX A: INTERVIEW PROTOCOL

2014 Organic Survey

Cognitive Interview Protocol

September 24, 2014

Please read this entire document before conducting any interviews to become familiar with the 

data collection procedures, survey questions, and probes.

Background

The 2014 Organic Survey is a data collection project conducted for the Risk Management 

Agency (RMA); Census funds will also be used as directed by the Agricultural Act of 2014. The 

survey is an organic production and practices survey which has been previously conducted in 

2008 and 2011. The population of interest is any operation that produces organic products 

according to USDA’s National Organic Program (NOP) standards and is certified or exempt 

from certification. The population also contains operations that reported in the 2012 Census of 

Agriculture that they were transitioning to organic. The questionnaire collects information on 

organic production of field crops, vegetables, fruits, tree nuts, berries, livestock and poultry, 

production practices, production expenses, marketing practices and value-added production and 

processing. 

Research Goals

A new section has been added to the 2014 questionnaire (Section 10), which asks about GMO 

presence in organic crops. The primary objective of the cognitive interviewing is to evaluate 

respondents’ comprehension of questions in this section and the quality of data reported. 

Sample

Since OMB clearance was not obtained for this testing, we will only be conducting a total of 9 

interviews. Interviews will be conducted in the following states: CA, VA, NH, OR, PA, OH

The sample will include operations that grow organic crops and are certified or exempt from 

certification. 

Cognitive Interviewing Procedures

Recruitment

Interviewers in each state are responsible for recruiting respondents. Interviewers may recruit 

known organic operations in their area that are certified or exempt from certification. We also 

encourage interviewers to search local CSAs for organic producers. 
18

See screener questionnaire at the end of this document. Please only recruit operations that have

organic crops. Please do not recruit any operations that have livestock only. Operations with 

organic crops are needed to test Section 10. 

Respondents should be informed of the intent of the cognitive interviews during the recruitment 

process and that their participation is voluntary. Respondents should also be told the interviews 

will be conducted in person and are expected to last 1 hr – 1 1⁄2 hours (depending on number of 

crops they grow).

Interview Procedures

Each interviewer is expected to conduct 1 interview. Interviewers should bring a copy of the 

interview guide and blank questionnaire with them to the interview (see attached). Interviewers 

should explain the task to the respondent at the start of the interview. See script at top of 

interview guide. Because we have a limited amount of time with the respondents we are going to 

focus our efforts on testing Section 10. The following procedures should be followed during the 

interview. 

All respondents should complete Sections 1 -10 on their own. Have respondents stop after they 

complete section 10. Ask the respondents to circle any questions they don’t understand or are 

having difficulty answering and tell them you will review those questions after they are done 

filling out the survey. Also, if you notice respondents having any problems filling out the survey, 

make a note of it and review the issue with them after they complete the survey. 

Probing

Due to time constraints we will focus the majority of our probing on Section 10. For Sections 1 –

9 we just want to make sure that respondents can easily navigate through these sections and fill 

out the information completely. We also want to see if respondents feel 45 minutes in a 

reasonable amount of time to complete this survey. 

After the respondent completes Sections 1-9, review the questionnaire to make sure the 

respondent filled out all appropriate questions and didn’t miss anything. You may ask emergent 

probes for these sections as needed. Emergent probes could include things like: I see you didn’t 

answer this question. Why did you not answer it? Did you have difficulty understanding this 

question? Remember to follow up on any questions the respondent had difficulty answering: 

What did you think this question was asking? Why did you answer the way you did? What was 

confusing to you about this question? Why did you have difficulty answering this question?

Section 10
19

The majority of the interview should focus on Section 10. Note you will probe on this section 

even if respondents answered “no” to question 1 in this section. Please ask the probes listed and 

any necessary emergent probes. 

Section 10 contains a new question which asks about GMO presence in organic crops. 

For question 1, we are interested in evaluating the appropriateness of the term “GMO”. There is 

concern that this term may be misleading and it would be more appropriate to use the term “GE.” 

Probe: What do you think this question is asking? When this question asks if you have 

experienced economic losses that you can document due to unintended presence of GMO 

materials in an organic crop, how did you interpret GMO materials? What came to mind? Is this 

a term you use to describe the type of materials? If needed: What other term would you prefer?

If the respondent answers “yes” to this question, ask: Why did you answer yes?

If a respondent answers “no” to this question, ask: Have you ever found GMO material in your 

crops? If yes: Can you tell me about this? What was the GMO? What crops did it affect? How 

much of the crop was affected? How did you handle this? Did this lead to any loss in sales?

For question 1A, we want to make sure respondents can understand the instructions and fill the 

table out correctly. See probes below for each column. 

Year: GE crops were first regulated by the USDA in 1986. Our hope is that respondents will 

report the most recent years they had GMO presence since 1986; however, this question gives no 

indication of this. We are interested in learning which years respondents report and why they 

report these years. 
20

Probes: Why did you report these years? Can you tell me about the loss that occurred in these 

years? In necessary: Are these the most recent years? If not: Can you tell me about the loss in 

these more recent years? Why didn’t you report these years? 

Crop: In this column, respondents are supposed to report the organic crop that was affected by 

GMO material. We want to make sure this is clear. There is concern that respondents will report 

the GMO crop that affected the organic crop. We also want to probe on what the affecting crop 

was. 

Probes: Was the crop reported here the crop that was affected by GMO? What was the GMO 

crop that affected this crop?

Loss ($/unit): We want to know how respondents interpret economic loss ($/unit) and how they 

come up with the numbers used to calculate loss. We also want to make sure respondents are 

only thinking about loss due to GMO presence and not loss due to other things 

such as drought or cost of buffer rows. 

Probes: How did you calculate loss? How did you come up with the numbers used in this 

calculation? How did you formulate the dollar amount? What is the unit? Did you only consider 

loss that resulted from the GMO material?

Interview Notes

Interviewers are expected to spend up to one hour per interview writing and summarizing their 

notes from that interview. Please provide detailed notes from the interviews. Notes should be 

emailed to Heather Ridolfo (heather.ridolfo@nass.usda.gov) no later than October 3, 2014. 
21

Screener Questionnaire

Hi, my name is <name> and I am calling from the United States Department of Agriculture, 

National Agricultural Statistics Service. We are contacting operations to ask for help in testing 

the 2014 Organic Survey. This survey will provide important information on organic production

across the United States. Is this something that you’d be willing to speak to us about? 

In order to improve the quality of the data and the ease of reporting, we would like to get your 

feedback on the questionnaire. This would take about an hour of your time and I could schedule 

a time that is convenient for you. During this time I will ask you to complete a portion of the 

survey and provide your feedback on how we can improve the questionnaire. Could I schedule a 

time to meet with you and get your input on this questionnaire?

One of the criteria for this testing is you must have organic crops according to USDA’s National 

Organic Program standards and are either certified or exempt from certification (under $5,000 in 

annual sales). 

Does your operation have organic crops according to NOP standards and is certified or exempt 

from certification? 

YES – [Continue]

NO - [Thank respondent for their time and hang up] 

This means you are eligible to help us out. I have the following days and timeframes open.

<dates, times>

Which of these days and times works best for you? 

I will call you to confirm the appointment a day or two before. If you need to change the 

appointment time, please call me back at <phone number>.
22

2014 Organic Survey

Cognitive Interview Guide

September 24, 2014

Interviewer:

Respondent:

Date: 

Before we begin, I want to tell you a little more about the project and what we will be doing 

today. The 2014 Organic Survey is a data collection project conducted for the Risk Management 

Agency (RMA). The Organic Production Survey is the only wide scale survey of Organic farming 

in the United States. 

This survey was last conducted in 2011. We recently made some changes to the Organic 

questionnaire. Before we send the questionnaire out to the public we want to ensure that 

everyone understands these questions in the same way and that we are collecting the type of 

information we intend to. We are asking people like you to review the questionnaire with us to 

see if the new questions make sense to you and you are able to accurately answer the questions.

First, I’ll have you fill out specific parts of the questionnaire on your own. Please fill it out as if 

you received it in the mail and as if you were filling it out without me here. If you have any 

questions or difficulty answering a question, just circle the question and we will discuss it when 

you are done. After you have completed each part of the questionnaire we will go back over the 

questions you answered. I am also going to ask you some follow-up questions on why you 

answered the way you did and what certain things meant to you when you answered. This will 

help us make sure that everyone who receives this questionnaire understands the questions and 

that it is easy to complete. Again, all of your answers and everything we discuss today will be 

kept completely confidential. 

Do you have any questions on what we’re going to be doing today before we start?

[Hand the respondent the questionnaire and ask them to complete Sections 1 – 10]
23

Sections 1 – 9

Ask all respondents: In the survey instructions, we indicate that this survey will take on average 

45 minutes to complete. Did you read this when completing the survey? How long do you think 

this survey would take you to complete on your own? 

Ask emergent probes as necessary: 

I see you didn’t answer this question. Why did you not answer it? Did you have difficulty 

understanding this question?

Remember to follow up on any questions the respondent had difficulty answering: 

What did you think this question was asking? Why did you answer the way you did? What was 

confusing to you about this question? Why did you have difficulty answering this question?

Section 1: 

Section 2: 

Section 3: 

Section 4: 
24

Section 5: 

Section 6:

Section 7: 

Section 8: 

Section 9:
25

Section 10

What do you think this question is asking?

When this question asks if you have experienced economic losses that you can document due to 

unintended presence of GMO materials in an organic crop, how did you interpret GMO 

materials? What came to mind?

Is this a term you use to describe the type of materials? If needed: What other term would you 

prefer?

If the respondent answers “yes” to question 1a, ask: Why did you answer yes? Tell me about this 

experience.
26

If a respondent answers “no” to question 1a, ask: Have you ever found GMO material in your 

crops? 

If yes: Can you tell me about this? What was the GMO? What crops did it affect? How much of 

the crop was affected? How did you handle this? Did this lead to any loss in sales?

Years: Why did you report these years? Can you tell me about the loss that occurred in these 

years?
27

In necessary: Are these the most recent years? If not: Can you tell me about the loss in these 

more recent years? Why didn’t you report these years?

Crop: Was/were the crop(s) reported here the crop that was affected by GMO? 

What was/were the GMO crop(s) that affected this crop?

Loss ($/unit): How did you calculate loss? How did you come up with the numbers used in this 

calculation? How did you formulate the dollar amount? What is the unit? 

Did you only consider loss that resulted from the GMO material?
153

117

155

122 156

1. Did this operation have any Certified Organic production as determined by the USDA’s National Organic Program

(NOP) standards in 2014?

U.S. Department of Agricultural

National Agricultural Statistics Service

1400 Independence Ave., S.W.

Washington, DC 20250-2000

Phone: 1-888-424-7828

Fax: 202-690-2090

E-mail: nass@nass.usda.gov

2014 ORGANIC SURVEY

OMB No. 0535-0249: Approval Expires 07/31/2017

Please make corrections to name, address, and ZIP code, if necessary.

The information you provide will be used for statistical purposes only. In accordance with the Confidential Information Protection provisions

of Title V, Subtitle A, Public Law 107-347 and other applicable Federal laws, your responses will be kept confidential and will not be

disclosed in identifiable form to anyone other than employees or agents. By law, every employee and agent has taken an oath and is

subject to a jail term, a fine, or both if he or she willfully discloses ANY identifiable information about you or your operation. Response 

to this inquiry is required by law (Title 7, U.S. Code). 

According to the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, an agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to,

a collection of information unless it displays a valid OMB control number. The valid OMB number is 0535-0249. The time required to

complete this information collection is estimated to average 45 minutes per response, including the time for reviewing instructions, 

searching existing data sources, gathering and maintaining the data needed, and completing and reviewing the collection of information.

SECTION 1

Yes - What is the name of the certifying agency or organization?

No - Did this operation have any USDA NOP organic production in 2014 that was exempt from certification

(under $5,000 in annual organic sales)? (Exclude transitional acres.)

111

OPERATION INFORMATION

Yes - Go to Item 2

113

No - Go to Section 16, Transitional Acreage on Page 15

2. In 2014, how many:

21804018 §6qI3¤

C

119

– Go to Item 2

a. Organic acres did this operator own?. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 150 151

Certified

Organic Acres

Organic Acres

Exempt from

Certification

b. Organic acres did this operator rent or lease from others? 152

115

154

. . . . . . . .

c. Organic acres did this operator rent or lease to others?. . . . . . . . . .

3. [Calculate Items 2a + 2b - 2c] Then the total organic acres

operated in 2014 were:

4. Of the total (Item 3) organic acres operated in 2014, how many

acres were organic pastureland or rangeland?

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

+

-

=

Form Number: 14-A623

(09/23/2014) Draft 7

United States

Department of

Agriculture

14-A623

National

Agricultural

Statistics

Service

Risk

Management

Agency

APPENDIX B: QUESTIONNAIRE USED DURING TESTING

28
SECTION 2 ORGANIC FIELD CROPS

21804026 §6qI;¤

2

1. Did this operation grow any organic small grains, row crops, oilseeds, hay/forage, or pulse crops in 2014?

• Include landlord’s share and contractor’s share. Exclude personal or home use crops.

Yes - Complete this Section

2000

No - Go to Section 3

2. For those crops not printed in the following table, enter the crop name and code from the list below for any other field

crop grown on this operation in 2014.

• Exclude from both Quantity Sold and Gross Value Sold, any production used to make value-added products on

this operation. Report value-added products and sales in Section 14, Item 4.

• Report production in the unit specified for the crop name.

• When both dry hay and haylage were cut from the same acres, report for each type.

• If two or more cuttings were made from the same acres, report acres harvested for that item only once but report

total production from all cuttings.

Conventional

$ .00

Organic

bu bu bu $ .00

Code

Organic

Acres

Organic Conventional

Field Crops

Harvested

2040

Organic

Production

QUANTITY of 

Organic

Production Sold As:

GROSS VALUE of

Organic

Production Sold As:

Corn (for grain

or seed)

Winter Wheat 

(for grain or seed) 2360 bu bu bu $ .00 $ .00

$ .00 $ .00

$ .00 $ .00

$ .00 $ .00

$ .00 $ .00

$ .00 $ .00

If more space is needed, use a separate sheet of paper.

Barley for grain or seed (bu)

Buckwheat (bu)

Canola, edible (lbs)

Corn silage or greenchop (tons)

Cotton, Upland (bales)

Cotton, Pima (bales) 

Flaxseed (bu)

Hay, Alfalfa & Alfalfa Mixtures

for dry hay (tons)

Hay, All Other Dry (tons)

Haylage, Other silage or

Greenchop (tons)

Herbs, dried (lbs)

Hops (lbs)

Mint, Peppermint (lbs of oil)

Mint, Spearmint (lbs of oil)

Oats, grain or seed (bu)

Peanuts, Spanish (lbs)

Peanuts, Runner (lbs)

Peanuts, Virginia (lbs)

Peanuts, Valencia (lbs)

Popcorn (lbs shelled)

Potatoes report in Section 6

Proso Millet (bu)

Rice, long grain (cwt)

Rice, medium grain (cwt)

Rice, short grain (cwt)

Rice, cultivated wild (finished 

weight, cwt)

Rice, Other wild (finished 

weight, cwt)

Rye for grain or seed (bu)

Safflower (lbs)

Sorghum for grain or seed, 

including milo (bu)

Sorghum for silage or 

greenchop (tons)

Soybeans,for beans (bu)

Sugarcane for sugar (tons)

Sunflower seed, oil (lbs)

Sunflower seed, non-oil (lbs)

Wheat, Durham for grain or 

seed (bu)

Wheat, Other Spring for 

grain or seed (bu)

Other field Crops, specify above (lbs).

Dry Edible Beans

Black (cwt)

Blackeye (cwt)

Great Northern (cwt)

Kidney, Dark Red (cwt)

Kidney, Light Red (cwt)

Lima, Large (cwt)

Lima, Baby (cwt)

Navy (cwt)

Pink (cwt)

Pinto (cwt)

Yellow Eye (cwt)

Other dry beans (cwt)

Dry Peas

Smooth green peas (cwt)

Yellow Dry Peas (cwt)

Austrian Winter Peas (cwt)

Lentils (cwt)

Other dry peas (cwt)

Chickpeas

(Garbanzo)

Kabuli, small (cwt)

Kabuli, large (cwt)

Desi (cwt)

Other chickpeas (cwt)

2010

2020

2030

2050

2060

2070

2080

2090

2100

2110

2120

2130

2140

2150

2160

2170

2180

2190

2200

2210

2220

2230

2240

2250 

2260

2270

2280

2290

2300

2310

2320

2330

2340

2350 

2370

2380

2390

2400

2410

2420

2430

2440

2450

2460

2470

2480

2490

2500

2510

2520

2530

2540 

2550

2560

2570

2580

2590

2600

Crops Code Crops Code Crops Code

. . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . .

29
SECTION 3 ORGANIC GRAPES

21804034 §6qIC¤

3

1. Did this operation grow any organic grapes in 2014?

• Include landlord’s share and contractor’s share. Exclude personal or home use crops.

Yes - Complete this Section

5000

No - Go to Section 4

2. Total Organic Grapes

Conventional

$ .00

Organic

$ .00

Grape Utilization Code

5040

QUANTITY of

Organic

Production Sold As:

GROSS VALUE of

Organic

Production Sold As:

Fresh (Table Use)

$ .00 $ .00

$ .00 $ .00

$ .00 $ .00

$ .00 $ .00

Wine Production

Raisins

5060

Juice Production 5080

5100

a. How many acres of bearing age organic grapes were harvested on this operation in 2014?

• Please report acres to the tenth of an acre

ORGANIC GRAPES

Acres

Tons Tenths

b. What were the total tons of organic grape production on this operation in 2014?

• Please report production to the tenth of a ton

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5020

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5021

c. Of these total tons of organic grapes harvested in 2014, how many were sold for each utilization listed below:

• Exclude from both Quantity sold and Gross Value Sold, any production used to make value added products

on this operation (such as wine). Report value added products in Section 14, Item 4.

• Please report production sold to the tenth of a ton.

(Tons) (Tenths) (Tons) (Tenths)

Tenths

(Dollars) (Dollars)

Organic Conventional

Other Processing Uses 5120

3. What percent of Total Organic Grapes reported above were sold

and delivered under a marketing contract arrangement? %

Percent

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5999

None

30
SECTION 4 ORGANIC APPLES

21804042 §6qIK¤

4

1. Did this operation grow any organic apples in 2014?

• Include landlord’s share and contractor’s share. Exclude personal or home use crops.

Yes - Complete this Section

4000

No - Go to Section 5

2. Acreage, Production, Quantity, and Gross Value Sold – For those organic apple varieties not printed in the following

table, enter the variety name and code from the list below.

• Include production that was sold and will be sold.

• Exclude from both Quantity Sold and Gross Value Sold, any production used to make value added products on

this operation (such as cider). Report value added products in Section 14, Item 4.

Braeburn, fresh

Braeburn, processing

Cameo, fresh

Cameo, processing

Cortland, fresh

Cortland, processing

Cripps Pink, fresh

Cripps Pink, processing

Empire, fresh

Empire, processing

Enterprise, fresh

Enterprise, processing

Ginger Gold, fresh

Ginger Gold, processing

Gold Rush, fresh

Gold Rush, processing

Golden Delicious, fresh

Golden Delicious, processing

Granny Smith, fresh

Granny Smith, processing

Honeycrisp, fresh

Honeycrisp, processing

Idared, fresh

Idared, processing

Jazz, fresh

Jazz, processing

Jonagold, fresh

Jonagold, processing

Jonathan, fresh

Jonathan, processing

Lady Alice, fresh

Lady Alice, processing

Liberty, fresh

Liberty, processing

McIntosh, fresh

McIntosh, processing

Pinova, fresh

Pinova, processing

Red Delicious, fresh

Red Delicious, processing

Rome, fresh

Rome, processing

Other varieties, specify

above fresh

Other varieties, specify

above processing

4050

4060

4070

4080

4090

4100

4110

4120

4130

4140

4150

4160

4170

4180

4190

4200

4210

4220

4230

4240

4250

4260

4270

4280

4290

4300

4310

4320

4330

4340

4350

4360

4370

4380

4390

4400

4410

4420

4430

4440

4450

4460

4470

4480

Apple Varieties Code Apple Varieties Code

. . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Conventional

$ .00

Organic

$ .00

Code

Organic

Acres

Harvested

Organic Conventional

Apple

Variety

4010

Organic

Production

QUANTITY of 

Organic

Production Sold As:

GROSS VALUE of

Organic

Production Sold As:

Fuji fresh

$ .00 $ .00

Acres Tenths

$ .00 $ .00

$ .00 $ .00

$ .00 $ .00

Fuji

processing

Gala

processing

4020

4030

. . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Gala fresh

4040

Unit

(Bins,

lbs,

Boxes,

etc.)

Pounds

per

Unit

$ .00 $ .00

$ .00 $ .00

$ .00 $ .00

$ .00 $ .00

If more space is needed, use a separate sheet of paper.

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . .

3. What percent of total Organic Apples reported above were sold

and delivered under a marketing contract arrangement? %

Percent

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4999

None

Apple Varieties Code

31
SECTION 5

21804059 §6qI\¤

5

OTHER ORGANIC FRUITS, TREE NUTS, AND BERRIES

1. Did this operation grow any other organic fruits, tree nuts, or berries in 2014?

• Include landlord’s share and contractor’s share. Exclude personal or home use crops.

Yes - Complete this Section

6000

No - Go to Section 6

2. For those crops not printed in the following table, enter the crop name and code from the list below for any other

organic fruits, tree nuts, or berries grown on this operation in 2014.

• Exclude from both Quantity Sold and Gross Value Sold, any production used to make value-added products

on this operation. Report value-added products and sales in Section 14, Item 4.

• Report organic Grapes in Section 3 and Apples in Section 4.

• For two or more pickings of the same crop, report acres harvested for that item only once but report total

production from all pickings.

$ .00

Organic

lbs $ .00

Code

Organic

Acres

Harvested

Organic Conventional

Fruits, Tree

Nuts, and

Berries

6310

Organic

Production

QUANTITY of

Organic

Production Sold As:

GROSS VALUE of

Organic

Production Sold As:

Blueberries,

fresh

Blueberries,

processing 6320 $ .00 $ .00

$ .00 $ .00

$ .00 $ .00

$ .00 $ .00

$ .00 $ .00

$ .00 $ .00

If more space is needed, use a separate sheet of paper.

Apples, report in Section 4

Avocados (tons)

Cherries, sweet (tons)

Cherries, tart (lbs)

Coffee (lbs)

Dates (tons)

Figs (tons)

Grapes, report in Section 3

Grapefruit (tons)

Lemons (tons)

Oranges, navel (tons)

Oranges, Valencia (tons)

Oranges, all other (tons)

Peaches, all (tons)

Pears, all (tons)

Other Fruits, specify above (tons)

Almonds (lbs)

Hazelnuts/Filberts (tons)

Pecans, all (lbs)

Pistachios (lbs)

Walnuts, English (tons)

Other Nuts, specify above (lbs)

6010

6020

6030

6040

6050

6070

6080

6090

6100

6110

6120

6130

6140

6170

6200

6210

6220

6230

6240

6250

Fruits Code Fruits Code Tree Nuts Code

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . .

. . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Blueberries,

wild

Plums/Prunes

Tangerines

6330

6150

6160

$ .00 $ .00

Acres Tenths

tons

lbs

lbs

tons

lbs

tons

lbs

lbs

tons

lbs

tons

lbs

lbs

tons

Berrries Code

Blackberries and Dewberries (lbs)

Cranberries (barrels)

Raspberries (lbs)

Strawberries (cwt)

Other Berries, specify above (lbs)

6300

6340

6350

6360

6370

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

3. What percent of total Other Organic Fruits, Tree Nuts, and Berries reported

above were sold and delivered under a marketing contract arrangement? %

Percent

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6999

None

Conventional

32
SECTION 6

21804067 §6qId¤

6

ORGANIC VEGETABLES GROWN IN THE OPEN

1. Did this operation grow any organic vegetables in the open in 2014?

• Include landlord’s share and contractor’s share. Exclude personal or home use crops.

Yes - Complete this Section

3000

No - Go to Section 7

2. For those organic crops not printed in the following table, enter the crop name and code from the list below for any

other vegetables grown in the open on this operation in 2014.

• Exclude from both Quantity Sold and Value Sold, any production used to make value added products on this

operation. Report value-added products and sales in Section 14, Item 4.

• If more than one vegetable crop was harvested from the same acres, report acres for each crop.

• For two or more pickings of the same crop, report acres harvested for that item only once but report total

production from all pickings.

Artichokes (cwt)

Beans, Snap, fresh (cwt)

Beans, Snap, processing (tons)

Broccoli (cwt)

Cabbage, green (cwt)

Cabbage, red (cwt)

Cabbage, other (cwt) 

Cantaloupes and Muskmelons (cwt). .

Cauliflower (cwt)

Celery (cwt)

Garlic (cwt)

Herbs fresh cut (lbs)

Honeydew Melons (cwt)

Lettuce, all (cwt)

Onions, dry (cwt)

Onions, fresh, red (cwt)

Onions, fresh, white (cwt)

Onions, fresh, yellow (cwt)

Onions, processing, red (cwt)

Onions, processing, white (cwt)

Onions, processing, yellow (cwt)

Peas, Green (tons)

Peppers, Bell (cwt)

Potatoes (cwt) 

Spinach (cwt)

Squash, all (cwt)

Sweet Corn (cwt)

Sweet Potatoes (cwt)

Watermelons (cwt)

Other Vegetables (cwt), specify above. .

3010

3020

3030

3040

3060

3070

3050

3080

3100

3110

3120

3130

3140

3150

3160

3170

3180

3190

3200

3210

3220

3230

3240

3250

3260

3270

3280

3290

3330

3340

Vegetables Code Vegetables Code Vegetables Code

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . .

. . . . . .

. . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . .

. . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Conventional

$ .00

Organic

cwt $ .00

Code

Organic

Acres

Harvested

Organic Conventional

Vegetables

3310

Organic

Production

QUANTITY of

Organic

Production Sold As:

GROSS VALUE of

Organic

Production Sold As:

Tomatoes 

fresh

tons $ .00 $ .00

cwt cwt

Acres Tenths

cwt cwt cwt $ .00 $ .00

$ .00 $ .00

$ .00 $ .00

Tomatoes 

processing

Carrots

3320

3090

tons tons

If more space is needed, use a separate sheet of paper.

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . .

$ .00 $ .00

$ .00 $ .00

$ .00 $ .00

$ .00 $ .00

$ .00 $ .00

3. What percent of the total Organic Vegetables Grown in the Open reported above

were sold and delivered under a marketing contract arrangement? %

Percent

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3999

None

33
1. Did this operation grow any organic vegetables under protection in 2014?

• Include vegetable crops grown under glass, rigid plastic, and plastic film, including “tunnel” protection and hoop

houses. Include landlord’s share and contractor’s share.

• Exclude personal or home use crops.

SECTION 7

21804075 §6qIl¤

7

ORGANIC VEGETABLES GROWN UNDER PROTECTION

Yes - Complete this Section

3900

No - Go to Section 8

2. For those organic crops not printed in the following table, enter the crop name and code from the list below for any

other vegetables grown under protection on this operation in 2014.

• Exclude from both Quantity Sold and Value Sold, any production used to make value added products on this

operation. Report value-added products and sales in Section 14, Item 4.

• If more than one vegetable crop was harvested from the same area, report area for each crop.

• For two or more pickings of the same crop, report area harvested for that item only once but report total

production from all pickings.

Artichokes (cwt)

Beans, Snap, fresh (cwt)

Beans, Snap, processing, (tons)

Broccoli (cwt)

Cabbage, green (cwt)

Cabbage, red (cwt)

Cabbage, other (cwt) 

Cantaloupes (cwt)

Carrots (cwt)

Cauliflower (cwt)

Celery (cwt)

Garlic (cwt)

Herbs fresh cut (lbs)

Honeydew Melons (cwt)

Lettuce, all (cwt)

Onions, dry, all (cwt)

Onions, fresh, red (cwt)

Onions, fresh, white (cwt)

Onions, fresh, yellow (cwt)

Onions, processing, red (cwt)

Onions, processing, white (cwt)

Onions, processing , yellow (cwt)

Peas, Green (tons)

Peppers, Bell (cwt)

Potatoes (cwt) 

Spinach (cwt)

Squash, all (cwt)

Sweet Corn (cwt)

Sweet Potatoes (cwt)

Tomatoes, processing (cwt)

Watermelons (cwt)

Other Vegetables (cwt), specify above. .

3520

3530

3540

3550

3570

3580

3560

3590

3510

3600

3610

3620

3630

3640

3650

3660

3670

3680

3690

3700

3710

3720

3730

3740

3750

3760

3770

3780

3790

3500

3800

3810

Vegetables Code Vegetables Code Vegetables Code

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . .

. . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . .

. . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Conventional

$ .00

Organic

cwt $ .00

Code

Organic

Area

Harvested

Organic Conventional

Vegetables

3300

Organic

Production

QUANTITY of

Organic

Production Sold As:

GROSS VALUE of

Organic

Production Sold As:

Tomatoes 

fresh

$ .00 $ .00

cwt cwt

Square Feet

Under Glass

or Other

Protection

$ .00 $ .00

$ .00 $ .00

$ .00 $ .00

If more space is needed, use a separate sheet of paper.

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . .

$ .00 $ .00

$ .00 $ .00

$ .00 $ .00

$ .00 $ .00

$ .00 $ .00

3. What percent of the total Organic Vegetables Grown Under Protection reported

above were sold and delivered under a marketing contract arrangement? %

Percent

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3998

None

Hundredweight

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

34
SECTION 8

21804083 §6qIt¤

8

ORGANIC FLORICULTURE CROPS, NURSERY CROPS, MUSHROOMS, CHRISTMAS 

TREES, AND MAPLE SYRUP

1. Did this operation grow any organic floriculture crops, nursery crops, mushrooms, cut Christmas trees, or harvest

organic maple syrup in 2014?

• Include landlord’s share and contractor’s share.

• Exclude personal or home use crops.

• Report value-added products and sales in Section 14, Item 4.

Yes - Complete this Section

400

No - Go to Section 9

Code Acres Tenths

Crops Grown

Square Feet 

Under Glass or

Other Protection

Acres in the Open

a. Floriculture and bedding crops

b. Nursery crops, including

aquatic plants

d. Mushrooms

c. Propagative materials sold

Crop

Gross Value

of Sales

401

404

407

410

Code

Acres in

Production

Number of

Trees Cut

e. Cut Christmas trees 451

None

Gross Value

of Sales None

Crop Code Number of Taps Gallons of

Syrup Produced

f. Maple syrup 491

Gross Value

of Sales None

$ .00

$ .00

$ .00

$ .00

$ .00

$ .00

35
SECTION 9

21804091 §6qI|¤

9

ORGANIC ACRES UNDER CROP INSURANCE

%

Percent

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 511

1. In 2014, were any of this operation’s total organic acres covered by crop insurance?

Yes - Continue

510

No - Go to Item 2

a. What percent of this operation’s total organic acres were covered by crop

insurance in 2014?

[If Item 1a is 100%, go to Section 10; otherwise, continue]

2. Which of the following best describes the reason why crop insurance was not purchased for the uninsured organic

acres in 2014? (Check one)

1 Too expensive

512

2 Unfamiliar with crop insurance

3 Other (specify):

513

SECTION 10 GMO PRESENCE IN ORGANIC CROPS

1. Have you experienced economic losses that you can document due to unintended presence of GMO material in an

organic crop you have offered for sale? (Exclude expenses for preventative measures and testing of your crop.)

Yes - Continue

7000

No - Go to Section 11

a. Please list the three most recent occurrences of a loss including: the year, organic crop, quantity affected by

GMO material, unit of measure, and the economic loss ($/unit).

7010

7020

7030

7012

7022

7032

7011

7021

7031

7013

7023

7033

Year 

(YYYY) Crop Quantity Unit(lbs, bushels, cwt, etc.)

Loss

($/unit)

7014

7024

7034

36
$ .00 $ .00

$ .00 $ .00

$ .00 $ .00

$ .00 $ .00

1. Did this operation have or produce any organic livestock, poultry, or livestock products in 2014?

• Include landlord’s share and contractor’s share. Exclude items produced only for home use.

• Exclude from both Quantity Sold and Gross Value Sold, any production used to make value-added products

on this operation. Report value-added products and sales in Section 14, Item 4.

SECTION 11 ORGANIC LIVESTOCK, POULTRY, AND LIVESTOCK PRODUCTS

Yes - Complete this Section

8000

No - Go to Section 12

Organic

PEAK 2014

Organic

Inventory

Organic Conventional

Livestock,

Poultry, and

Livestock

Products

Dec. 31, 2014

Organic

Inventory

QUANTITY of

Organic Production

Sold or Moved As:

GROSS VALUE of

Organic Production

Sold or Moved As:

b. Milk (pounds)

c. Beef Cows

d. Other Cattle

and Calves

e. Hogs and

Pigs

f. Sheep and

Lambs

g. Goats and

Kids

h. Goat Milk

(pounds)

j. Other

Livestock

Specify:

l. Chickens,

Layers

m. Eggs (Dozen)

n. Chickens,

Broilers

i. Mohair

(pounds)

k. Other

Livestock

Products

Specify:

p. Other Poultry

Specify:

8020

8060

8040

8050

8330

8300

8400

8210

8200

8230

8240

21804109 §6qJ*¤

10

a. Milk Cows

(Dry and

milking

8406

8414

8246

2. What percent of the total Organic Milk Production reported above in row 1b was sold

and delivered under a marketing contract arrangement? %

Percent

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8999

None

[If Organic Milk Production was reported above in row 1b, continue; otherwise skip to Section 12]

$ .00 $ .00

o. Turkeys

$ .00 $ .00

$ .00 $ .00

$ .00 $ .00

$ .00 $ .00

$ .00 $ .00

$ .00 $ .00

$ .00 $ .00

$ .00 $ .00

$ .00 $ .00

$ .00 $ .00

$ .00 $ .00

Conventional

8310

8320

8410

8220

8020

C

C

C

37
1517 $ .00 617 %

1. Report total production expenses paid by this operation in 2014 and the portion (percent) of those expenses used

for organic production.

• Include expenses paid by your landlords and contractors.

• Exclude expenses not related to the farm business.

SECTION 12 PRODUCTION EXPENSES

Total Expenses

(Dollars)

1500 $ .00

%

Portion for Organic

Production

(Percent)

1501 $ .00 601

None

a. Organic certification expense . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Expense

b. Fertilizers, lime, and soil conditioners

c. Agriculture chemicals, beneficial insects, and

other organic materials for pest control

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1522 $ .00 622 %

1507 $ .00 607 %

1503 $ .00 603 %

1541 $ .00 641 %

1529 $ .00 629 %

1506 $ .00 606 %

1547 $ .00 647 %

d. Gasoline, diesel, fuels, and oils purchased for the

farm business. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

e. Seed, plants, vines, trees, etc. purchased . . . . . . . . . . . . .

f. Hired agricultural labor including contract labor

(include wages and benefit expenses). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

g. Livestock purchased or leased . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

h. Feed purchased for livestock and poultry . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

i. Interest paid on all debt related to the farm business . . . . .

j. Property taxes paid in 2014. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

1537 $ .00 637 %

1512 $ .00 612 %

1509 $ .00 609 %

1508 $ .00 608 %

1518 $ .00 618 %

k. Rent and lease expenses for land, buildings,

machinery, etc. - include grazing fees. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

l. Custom work, such as custom hauling, custom

planting, custom harvesting, etc. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

m. Repairs, supplies, and maintenance costs. . . . . . . . . . . . .

n. Utilities expense (including water purchased). . . . . . . . . . .

o. All other production expenses - Include animal

health cost, storage, marketing expenses, etc. . . . . . . . . . .

Total Expenses (Sum of Items 1a - 1o) . . . . . . 1599 $ .00

21804117 §6qJ2¤

11

38
21804125 §6qJ:¤

12

SECTION 13 ORGANIC PRODUCTION PRACTICES

1. In 2014, did this operation use any of the following practices for organic agricultural production:

a. Biological pest management?

b. Apply or release beneficial organisms (insects, nematodes, fungi) to manage

pests?

c. Maintain a beneficial insect or vertebrate habitat for the specific purpose of

managing or reducing the spread of pests or disease?

Yes

701

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . No

Yes

702

No

Yes

703

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . No

d. Plan planting locations to avoid cross infestation of pests in order to manage or

reduce the spread of pests? Yes

704

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . No

e. Choose a crop variety because of specific resistance to certain pests for the

specific purpose of managing or reducing the spread of pests on this operation? Yes

705

. . . . No

f. Plant crops at a specific time to avoid cross contamination from other pollen

or weeds? Yes

706

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . No

g. Produce or use organic mulch/compost? Yes

707

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . No

h. Green or animal manures? Yes

708

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . No

i. No-till or minimum till cropping practices? Yes

709

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . No

j. Maintain buffer strips or border rows to isolate organic products from

non-organic crops or land or take a buffer harvest? Yes

710

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . No

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

k. Use water management practices such as irrigation scheduling, controlled

drainage, or structures for water control? Yes

711

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . No

l. Free range livestock production? Yes

712

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . No

m. Rotational grazing? Yes

713

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . No

39
SECTION 14 MARKETING PRACTICES FOR ORGANIC PRODUCTS

21804133 §6qJB¤

13

1. Of the total 2014 gross sales of ALL organic products (including any value-added/processed organic products),

what percent was marketed through:

%

Percent of Total

2014 Gross

Organic Sales

9100

a. Consumer Direct Sales (Include farm stands, U-picks, farmers’ markets, community

supported agriculture shares (CSAs), mail orders, buying clubs, and the Internet.). . . . . . . . . .

b. Direct-to-Retail/Institutions (Include individual grocery stores, restaurants, caterers, and

institutions such as hospitals and schools, colleges, and universities.)

c. Wholesale Markets (Include grocery store distribution centers, processors, mills, packers,

distributors, wholesalers, brokers, sales to other operations, and grower cooperatives.)

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9101 %

9102 %

Marketing Practices

2. In 2014, did this operation market any of its organic products through community

supported agriculture shares (CSA’s)? Yes

865

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . No

TOTAL (Sum of Items 1a + 1b + 1c) 100%

3. Approximately what percent of this operation’s organic products first point of sales were sold:

a. Locally (within 100 miles) %

%

%

%

. . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 841

b. Regionally (more than 100 miles but less than 500 miles). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 842

c. Nationally (500 miles or farther) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 843

d. Internationally. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 844

TOTAL (Sum of Items 3a + 3b + 3c + 3d) 100%

4. In 2014, did this operation produce and market any Processed or Value-Added products from its own organic

agricultural production (Include bottled milk, cheese, processed meat, wine, jam, etc.) (Exclude sales reported in

previous sections.)

Yes - Continue

9503

No - Go to Item 5

a. Please report the product, quantity, unit, and sales of the processed or value-added product.

$ .00

Gross Organic

Value-Added Sales

9203

9206

9209

Unit (lbs,

bushels, cwt, etc.)

$ .00

$ .00

9201

9204

9207

Processed or Value-Added Product Quantity Sold

Specify:

9501

Specify:

9210

Specify:

9211

5. Of this operation’s total organic and conventional sales in 2014, what percent were organic?. . . . . 868

6. Did this operation produce any organic agricultural products under a marketing contract arrangement in 2014?

Yes - Continue

869

No - Go to Item 7

a. What percent of this operation’s total organic production in 2014 was sold and delivered

under a marketing contract arrangement? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 870

7. Did this operation produce any organic agricultural products under a production contract arrangement in 2014?

Yes - Continue

866

No - Go to Section 15

a. What percent of this operation’s total organic production in 2014 was under a production

contract arrangement? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 867

%

Percent

%

Percent

%

Percent

Percent

9202

9205

9208

40
908

1. How many of the 2014 organic acres in this operation were enrolled in the

EQIP Organic Initiative (administered by NRCS)?

SECTION 15 OTHER INFORMATION

21804141 §6qJJ¤

14

5. Which of the following would you consider the primary challenge to you as an organic farmer?

(check one)

Yes

903

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . No

901

Acres

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

2. Did this operation participate in the National Organic Certification Cost Share

Program in 2014?

Yes

904

3. Was this operation able to acquire sufficient amount of organic seed in 2014? . . . . . . . . . No

Yes

905

. . . . . . . . No

4. Were adequate organic production inputs (such as pest control, crop/soil nutrients,

organic feed for livestock, etc.) available as needed for this operation in 2014?

1 Regulatory problems (excessive paperwork/record keeping, certification costs, etc.)

2 Price issues (low premiums, lack of price information, prices inconsistent, etc.)

3 Production problems (high input costs, low yields, poor product quality)

4 Market access (too much competition, not enough volume produced, lack of buyers, etc.)

5 Management issues (overall time requirement, labor management, access to capital, etc.)

6 Other, specify:

969

6. How many years has this operation been growing or raising any agricultural products? 907

Years

7. How many years has any portion of this operation been certified organic?

. . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

8. Over the next 5 years, does this operation plan to: (check one)

1 Increase organic agricultural production

2 Maintain current levels of organic agricultural production

3 Decrease organic agricultural production

4 Discontinue organic agricultural production

5 Discontinue all agricultural production

6 Don’t know

9. What was this operation’s total gross value of sales of ALL (organic and conventional)

agricultural products in 2014? (check one)

0 None

1

2

3

4

$1 - $999

$1,000 - $2,499

$2,500 - $4,999

$5,000 - $9,999

5 $10,000 - $24,999

6

7

8

9

$25,000 - $49,999

$50,000 - $99,999

$100,000 - $249,999

$250,000 - $499,999

10

11

$500,000 - $999,999

$1,000,000 - $4,999,999

12 $5,000,000 or more

%

Percent of Total Gross

Value of Sales

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 911

%

Percent of Net

Household Income

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 912

10. What percent of this operation’s total gross value of sales reported above in

Item 9 came from the production and sales of ORGANIC agricultural products?

11. What percent of your Net Household Income came from the production and sale

of organic agricultural products?

None

906

909

910

41
SECTION 16 TRANSITIONAL ACREAGE

21804158 §6qJ[¤

15

1. In 2014, did this operation own or operate any transitional acres?

Thank you for your response.

Respondent Name Area Code and Phone Number

9911

- -

Date (MM DD YY)

9912 9910

Yes - Continue

9600

No - Go to Section 17

2. In 2014, how many transitional acres did this operation:

a. Own?. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Acres

b. Rent or lease from others? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

c. Rent or lease to others? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

3. [Calculate Items 2a + 2b - 2c] Then the total transitional acres operated in 2014 were:

4. Of the total (Item 3) transitional acres operated in 2014, what percent was:

9606

9607

9601

9608

a. Cropland? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9620

b. Pastureland?. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

c. Rangeland?

9621

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9622

9602

9603

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

5. In general, how large of a price premium (in percent) over conventional prices did you

receive for production from transitional acres?

6. In general, what percent of production from transitional acres were sold and delivered

under a marketing contract arrangement?

SECTION 17 CONCLUSION

Survey Results: To receive the complete results of this survey on the release date, go to www.nass.usda.gov/results/

Would you rather have a brief summary sent to you at a later date? Yes No

COMMENTS:

. . . . . .

%

Percent

%

%

%

Percent

%

9990

42
21804166 §6qJc¤

16

Change

S / E Name

Response Respondent Mode Enum. Eval.

1-Comp

2-R

3-Inac

4-Office Hold

5-R–Est

6-Inac–Est

7-Off Hold–Est

8-Known Zero

9901 9902 1-Op/Mgr

2-Sp

3-Acct/Bkpr

4-Partner

9-Other

1-Mail

2-Tel

3-Face-to-Face

4-CATI

5-Web

6-e-mail

7-Fax

8-CAPI

19-Other

9903 9998 9900 9985

Office Use for POID

Office Use

Optional Use

9907 9908 9906 9916

9989

R. Unit

9921

43