
































Microsoft Word - 99-Manuscript-1159-1-11-20210427.docx


Minus et al.  Advancements in Agricultural Development 
  Volume 2, Issue 1, 2021 
  agdevresearch.org 

1. Kristoff T. Minus, Agriculture Teacher and FFA Advisor, Mac Williams Middle School, 4644 Clinton Rd, Fayetteville, NC, 
28312, kristoffminus@ccs.k12.nc.us, https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5127-443X  

2. S. Janine Parker Woods, Associate Administrator for Cooperative Extension, Virginia State University, 1 Hayden Drive, P.O. 
Box 9081, Virginia State University, VA 23806, jpwoods@vsu.edu, https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9296-5106 

3. 3Richie Roberts, Assistant Professor, Louisiana State University, 131 J.C. Miller Baton Rouge, LA 70803, roberts3@lsu.edu, 
https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2993-4945 

4. Chastity Warren English, Associate Professor, North Carolina Agricultural and Technical State University, 1601 N. Market 
Street, 251A Carver, Greensboro, NC, 27411 ckwarren@ncat.edu, https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4474-1495 

5. Beatriz M. Rodriguez, Extension Associate - NC AgrAbility and NC Agromedicine, North Carolina Agricultural and Technical 
State University, 107 Coltrane Hall, P. O. Box 21928, Greensboro, NC 27420, bmrodrig@ncat.edu, 
https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0932-7523 

96 

 

Empowering the Caregiver Network of Farmers With a 
Disability: A Case Study of the North Carolina AgrAbility 

Project 
K. Minus1, J. Parker Woods2, R. Roberts3, C. Warren English4, B. M. Rodriguez5 

 
 

 

Abstract 

A majority of farmers with a disability rely heavily on caregivers to ensure they can fulfill their daily 
roles and responsibilities. Family members, such as spouses, parents, siblings, and children, are the 
most common caregivers. However, little is known about the resources and support needed to 
ensure these individuals can successfully navigate this complex role. In response, the North Carolina 
AgrAbility Project has provided caregivers with education, resources, and support so that these 
individuals can better assist farmers with a disability to minimize the job-related obstacles they face. 
In the current study, we sought to examine how caregivers of farmers with a disability have been 
empowered through the North Carolina AgrAbility Project. When viewed through the lens of 
Zimmerman’s empowerment theory, four themes emerged (a) barriers to empowerment; (b) 
intrapersonal empowerment; (c) interactional empowerment; and (d) behavioral empowerment. 
Consequently, findings from this investigation documented that caregivers navigated key barriers to 
become empowered after receiving assistance from the North Carolina AgrAbility Project. Further, 
their experiences in AgrAbility changed how they approached supporting farmers with a disability. In 
response, we provide recommendations for better supporting and leveraging the caregiver network 
of farmers with a disability.  
 

Keywords 

accommodations, assistive technology, professional development, qualitative research, special needs 



Minus et al.  Advancements in Agricultural Development 
 

https://doi.org/10.37433/aad.v2i1.99  97 
 

Introduction and Problem Statement 
 
There are approximately 288,000 individuals in the U.S. involved in the agricultural industry 
between the ages of 15 and 79 who have a disability, which complicates their ability to fulfill 
their job-related duties (Fetsch et al., 2020b). Some of the major difficulties farmers with a 
disability face include: (a) the lack of information about adequate worksite accommodations; 
(b) economic constraints caused from wage loss and a lack of insurance; (c) residing in isolated 
areas that lack necessary services, and (d) limited professionals who have the knowledge 
needed to successfully accommodate their disability (Fetsch et al., 2020a; Fetsch & Turk, 2018). 
 
One program designed to assist farmers with a disability with job-related accommodations is 
the National AgrAbility Project (2021), founded in 1991 it provides education, resources, and 
support to individuals with disabilities to ensure they can succeed in their daily lives. The 
National AgrAbility Project was authorized under the Food, Agriculture, and Trade Act of 1990 
and administered by the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) (National AgrAbility 
Project, 2021). AgrAbility is currently funded in 24 states and has assisted over 10,000 farmers 
in the U.S. affected by physical, sensory, cognitive, and emotional disabilities (Fetsch et al., 
2020a). Previous evidence has demonstrated that with the support of AgrAbility, farmers with 
disabilities have been able to complete up to 86% of farm responsibilities more successfully 
(Hamm et al., 2012).  
 
Many farmers with disabilities receive assistance from individuals who can help them with 
physical tasks, also known as caregivers. A family member is the most common caregiver 
(Jepsen et al., 2011). However, friends, distant relatives, and other farmworkers have also been 
reported to serve in this role (Fetsch et al., 2020b). Despite this, little is known about the 
resources and support needed to ensure that caregivers can successfully navigate these 
responsibilities. On this point, Christen and Fetch (2008) suggested that communication is key 
to empowering the caregiver network. However, little is known about the techniques, 
strategies, and processes that lead to caregiver empowerment in North Carolina. 
 

Theoretical and Conceptual Framework 
 
Zimmerman’s (1995) empowerment theory served as the theoretical framework guiding this 
investigation. Since 2011, the North Carolina AgrAbility Project, administered by the North 
Carolina A&T State University Cooperative Extension Service, has provided resources and 
support to empower caregivers of farmers with a disability. Empowerment has been defined as 
a process by which individuals gain mastery over issues that concern them (Rappaport, 1987). 
Zimmerman (1995) theorized that empowerment involves three interconnected tenets (a) 
intrapersonal; (g) interactional; and (c) behavioral .  
 
Intrapersonal empowerment relates to an individual’s thoughts about themselves and their 
ability to influence others. As such, it affects an individual’s affective dimensions such as their 
perceived control, self-efficacy, motivation, and mastery over issues and problems 



Minus et al.  Advancements in Agricultural Development 
 

https://doi.org/10.37433/aad.v2i1.99  98 
 

(Zimmerman, 1990, 1995). Interactional empowerment refers to an individual’s understanding 
of their environment and how to navigate this context to achieve a desired outcome 
successfully. Through this critical awareness, they are then able to “exert control in their 
environment” (Zimmerman et al., 1990, p. 589) and mobilize relevant resources. The final 
tenet, behavioral, reflects the direct actions that individuals take to affect outcomes. It also 
includes behaviors that help them manage stress and adapt to change (Zimmerman, 1995). 
Figure 1 provides a visual model of the tenets of Zimmerman’s empowerment theory. 
 
Figure 1  

Adapted from Zimmerman’s (1995) Empowerment Theory 

 
 
Using this lens, we investigated how the caregivers of farmers with a disability were 
empowered as a result of participation in the North Carolina AgrAbility Project by analyzing 
their self-reported experiences and those observed during data collection. For instance, we 
sought to understand caregivers’ changes regarding self-efficacy, motivation, and perceived 
competence. We also probed how they learned to navigate their context as well as other 
personal and professional factors. As a result of the analysis, Zimmerman’s (1995) 
empowerment theory served as a useful lens for investigating the empowerment of caregivers.  
 

Purpose 
 
The purpose of this study was to examine the ways in which caregivers of farmers with a 
disability have been empowered through the North Carolina AgrAbility project. 
 
 
 

INTRAPERSONAL 

INTERACTIONAL 

BEHAVIORAL 

EMPOWERMENT 



Minus et al.  Advancements in Agricultural Development 
 

https://doi.org/10.37433/aad.v2i1.99  99 
 

Methods 
 
The current study was nested, methodologically, in Stake’s (1995) instrumental case study 
approach. Case studies allow researchers to describe a phenomenon in a bounded context 
using a variety of data sources. In particular, we bounded the case by place and time. To 
accomplish this, we used a criterion-based sampling procedure by which the North Carolina 
AgrAbility Project Director nominated individuals to participate who: (a) served as a caregiver to 
a farmer with a disability; and (b) had participated in the North Carolina AgrAbility Project in the 
past three years. Using this approach, three individuals agreed to participate.  
 
Participant #1 was a 67-year-old wife of a veteran farmer who was a Vietnam War veteran with 
a right arm amputation, diabetes, and other health limitations. The two main commodities 
produced on their farm were beef cattle and grass hay. Participant #2 was a 57-year-old father 
of a farmer who had a spinal cord injury that resulted in him being in a quadriplegic state. The 
main commodities produced on their farm were sunflowers, soybeans, and poultry. Finally, 
Participant #3 was a 31-year-old, long-term girlfriend of a farmer who had a rare neurological 
condition that began in 1988, which resulted in lower-body paralysis that affected his ability to 
walk. They mainly focused on large-scale vegetable production.  
 
Reflexivity  
When conducting qualitative research, the biases and experiences of researchers often 
influence the investigation (Houghton et al., 2013). Therefore, it is essential to reveal that the 
lead researcher worked with the North Carolina AgrAbility Project as a graduate research 
assistant. In this role, he assumed several responsibilities, such as recruiting new participants, 
educating the public on the mission of AgrAbility, and collecting data regarding farm injuries 
and deaths in North Carolina. The other researchers in this investigation were faculty at North 
Carolina A&T State University at the time of data collection. Further, two of the researchers 
served as the lead investigator and Director for the North Carolina AgrAbility Project. Because 
the director of the program nominated individuals for participation, this could have influenced 
the responses received during our collection of data. As a result, these experiences and biases 
allowed us to obtain unique access to the phenomenon under investigation, which likely 
influenced our interpretation of the data. 
 
Data Sources, Analysis, and Rigor 
In the qualitative paradigm, ensuring rigor is critical. To achieve such, Lincoln and Guba (1985) 
advanced four standards to enhance rigor: credibility, transferability, dependability, and 
confirmability. We achieved these standards through (a) prolonged and varied field experiences 
in which we conducted on-site observations with each participant for three days; (b) 
maintaining thorough fieldnotes and observations; (c) employing member checks; and (d) a 
thick description of our findings. In addition to participant interviews, we also collected multiple 
sources of data to triangulate findings, including observations, and relevant program artifacts 
such as AgrAbility curriculum, pamphlets, and written correspondence.  
 



Minus et al.  Advancements in Agricultural Development 
 

https://doi.org/10.37433/aad.v2i1.99  100 
 

After the data collection, we used Corbin’s and Strauss’ (2015) constant comparative method to 
analyze each source of data. In the first stage of analysis, we employed open coding. During 
open coding, we become intimate with the data by analyzing sources line-by-line. We also 
coded data from various frames of reference and created memos based on conceptual and 
theoretical assertions (Corbin & Strauss, 2015). As a result, the open coding process allowed us 
to discover the meaning hidden in data (Walker & Myrick, 2006).  
 
For the second phase of analysis, we employed axial coding (Corbin & Strauss, 2015). In this 
stage, we reconstructed the data based on similarities by grouping our open codes into 
categories and subcategories. We then reduced the data using Walker’s and Myrick’s (2006) 
three recommendations by which we considered (a) the conditions in which the data were 
collected; (b) the actions and interactions of participants in response to the phenomenon; and 
(c) the consequences of actions taken by participants. This analytic technique helped us distill 
the data corpus into distinct categories as we began to weave our emergent findings into a 
coherent storyline (Corbin & Strauss, 2015). In the final phase of analysis, we used to selective 
coding to transform the categories into substantive, theoretically rich explanations of the data. 
Using this analytic process, our findings emerged through four themes. 
 

Findings 
 
In our analysis of the data, we gained deeper insight into the phenomenon. Our findings 
demonstrated the caregivers’ empowerment was largely shaped by how they reckoned with 
key barriers. Consequently, our emergent findings are presented through four themes of 
meaning (a) barriers to empowerment; (b) intrapersonal empowerment; (c) interactional 
empowerment; and (d) behavioral empowerment.  
 
Theme #1: Barriers to Empowerment  
Through our observations of caregivers, we noted they often experienced barriers that 
hindered them from being empowered while receiving assistance from the North Carolina 
AgrAbility Project. In particular, the barriers to empowerment included (a) lack of trust; (b) poor 
communication skills; and (c) insufficient training. For example, when receiving assistance from 
the North Carolina AgrAbility Project, noticing positive results required time for the caregivers. 
While waiting for resources and equipment, some participants reported they initially 
experienced impatience and a lack of trust with AgrAbility. On this point, Participant #2 
explained that during his involvement with the program, he lost trust because as he was unable 
to observe changes for his son happening as quickly as he expected. Having poor 
communication skills was also a barrier to the empowerment of caregivers. Participant #3 
explained: “Some days are tuff, especially if we are bumping heads [with AgrAbility staff]. There 
is a need for better communication because we move at different paces.”  
 
The final barrier to the empowerment reported by the caregivers was a lack of perceived 
training among the AgrAbility staff. For instance, Participant #1 described how she was 
frustrated with the program staff because at times because she perceived “workers lacked 



Minus et al.  Advancements in Agricultural Development 
 

https://doi.org/10.37433/aad.v2i1.99  101 
 

advanced training on how to work with farmers with a disability in the agricultural industry.” 
This lack of trust appeared to be rooted in a disagreement between the caregivers and 
AgrAbility staff regarding the appropriate accommodations for farmers with a disability.  
 
Theme #2: Intrapersonal Empowerment  
Although the caregivers experienced the aforementioned barriers, over time they learned to 
navigate such to become empowered through the North Carolina AgrAbility Project. The 
caregivers accomplished this through the use of internal processes by which they influenced 
themselves and others, i.e., intrapersonal empowerment (Zimmerman, 1995). As such, the 
caregivers experienced intrapersonal empowerment through (a) perceived control; (b) self-
efficacy; (c) motivation; and (d) growth in competence.  
 
Perceived control represented how the caregivers gained control over their actions, behaviors, 
and mindsets to better support farmers with a disability. As an illustration, Participant #3 
explained that at times, “caregiving can be exhausting both physically and mentally.” However, 
through supports provided by the North Carolina AgriAbility Project, Participant #3 stated, “I 
learned to control [myself] in various situations and better support [my boyfriend].” During 
observations, Participants #1 and #2 made significant strides in learning to control their 
environments when faced with challenges. For example, after receiving resources and support 
from the North Carolina AgrAbility Project, we noted that Participant #1 and #2 used various 
assistive technologies and strategies obtained through the program, which helped them 
support their farmer with a disability more efficiently.  
 
The caregivers also reported making significant strides in improving their self-efficacy. For 
example, before AgrAbility’s assistance, Participant #2 reported “little to moderate” levels of 
self-efficacy to assist farmers with disabilities with duties on the farm. During observations, we 
also noted that Participant #1 was not confident in her ability to make accommodations for her 
husband. However, after receiving assistance from the North Carolina AgrAbility Project, many 
caregivers reported greater levels of self-efficacy. To this point, Participant #1 explained, “a 
Bump N’ Drive gate that was provided by North Carolina AgrAbility was more for me than him 
because it allowed him to become more independent since he no longer had to rely on me for 
opening gates on the farm.” We also observed Participant #2 exhibiting more confidence after 
his son received a mechanical lift from North Carolina AgrAbility to help board his tractor, which 
reduced the stress of lifting his son for the aging caregiver. 
 
Improved motivation also helped caregivers became empowered interpersonally, which 
reflected whether they had a desire to improve their ability to provide assistance as a caregiver 
for farmers with a disability. It should be noted that each participant in this study reported that 
they gained intrinsic motivation as a result of their participation in the North Carolina AgrAbility 
Project. For instance, Participant #1 and #2 maintained that AgrAbility made significant 
improvements in helping their farmers “gain independence” to complete on-farm tasks. As a 
result of these improvements, the caregivers’ motivation improved because they desired to 
make additional progress. Case in point, after her boyfriend received an all-terrain vehicle (ATV) 
that greatly improved his mobility, Participant #3 argued she become more interested in 



Minus et al.  Advancements in Agricultural Development 
 

https://doi.org/10.37433/aad.v2i1.99  102 
 

additional resources and educational opportunities through AgrAbility so that she could provide 
the best support possible. To this point, each of the caregivers in this investigation articulated 
that attending professional development opportunities coordinated by the North Carolina 
AgrAbility Project kept them engaged and motivated to advocate for disabled farmers. 
Participant #1 explained, “I am always excited to go to events [through AgrAbility] and see 
things that allow it to be easier for people with a disability.”  
 
Finally, the caregivers also reported a growth in competence. After receiving assistance from 
AgrAbility, the caregivers explained they felt more competent in using assistive technology and 
research-based strategies to assist their farmers more effectively. For example, through 
incorporating ATV’s, Bump N’ Drive Gates, mechanical lifts, and other assistive technology, the 
physical demands placed on caregivers were often reduced, which helped them give more 
attention to other areas of need.  
 
All three caregivers also said they felt “more educated” about best practices regarding farm 
safety, which helped them to provide guidance to other farmworkers. Participant #1 explained, 
“[I now know] about farm safety and how it is practiced. I have male children who assist my 
husband as well. So, this has really helped.” In the second theme, therefore, we demonstrated 
how the caregiver experienced intrapersonal empowerment through four sources: perceived 
control, self-efficacy, motivation, and growth in competence, after receiving assistance from 
the North Carolina AgrAbility Project.  
 
Theme #3: Interactional Empowerment  
The third theme, interactional empowerment, reflected how individuals began to understand 
how to navigate their context to address issues and problems as a result of AgrAbility. 
Participants reported that interactional empowerment was experienced by developing and 
transferring skills and mobilizing resources. For instance, the caregivers began to develop and 
transfer the skills needed to accommodate farmers with disabilities better while also becoming 
knowledgeable about ways to manage resources effectively. Before receiving assistance from 
the North Carolina AgrAbility Project, all participants reported low skill attainment. However, 
after attending professional development sessions, Participant #2 explained that he acquired 
the skills needed to “lift his son onto farm equipment safely.” He also demonstrated how he 
learned to use a wrench and cable wires to lift his son onto a tractor through education 
provided by AgrAbility during our observations.  
 
The caregivers also became empowered by learning to mobilize available resources. During the 
interview with Participant #3, for example, she pointed to an old ladder that she previously 
used to help her boyfriend mount tractors and other farm machinery. She stated, “I would have 
to go up the ladder with him, lift his legs, step by step until he was high enough to get in the 
combine.” After receiving assistance from AgrAbility, however, the caregivers demonstrated 
greater resource mobilization. In particular, Participant #1 and #3 shared they felt more 
empowered after learning to use assistive technologies such as an ATV and a mechanical lift as 
well as a new organizational structure for their barn recommended by AgrAbility professionals 
to ensure that their farm activities could operate more smoothly. As a result of learning to 



Minus et al.  Advancements in Agricultural Development 
 

https://doi.org/10.37433/aad.v2i1.99  103 
 

mobilize these tangible and intangible resources, Participant #3’s boyfriend gained most of his 
independence back, allowing her to focus on other tasks. Our observations also triangulated the 
interactional empowerment of caregivers. As such, we witnessed each caregiver in the 
investigation develop and transfer skills as well as mobilize resources to achieve goals.  
 
Theme #4: Behavioral Empowerment 
The final theme, behavioral empowerment, reflected the caregivers’ specific actions to 
positively impact the professional lives of farmers with a disability. The caregivers experienced 
this form of empowerment through organizational participation and community engagement. 
Organizational participation referred to how the caregivers became actively engaged in the 
disability community because of AgrAbilty. Participant #3 explained, “I am the only one with a 
smartphone, so I keep in contact [with others in the AgrAbility]…to stay on top of certain things 
and events.” Participant #1 also expressed that she became the “primary source of 
communication” with the disability community through more engagement with the AgrAbility 
network. Further, Participant #1 and #3 also regularly attended disability-focused events out of 
their geographical region, such as the National AgrAbility Training Workshop, which helped 
them learn new strategies for their farm and share their experiences with others.  
 
The caregivers also reported they became more engaged in their local and professional 
communities as a result of the North Carolina AgrAbility Project. For instance, Participant #2 
explained that after observing the distinct benefits of AgrAbility, they began to seek out more 
authentic experiences to connect with others in organizations such as the North Carolina 
Assistive Technology Program, Vocational Rehabilitation, and North Carolina Agromedicine 
Institute. She explained, “I’ve started accompanying my boyfriend when he attends farming 
conferences and receives certifications now.” Meanwhile, Caregiver #3 reported that she has 
now developed a “love for building relationships with other local farmers in the area” through 
attending community-based events. As a result of these connections, Participant #1 illuminated 
that she felt more empowered because she developed the vocabulary to “better communicate” 
about her husband’s needs.  
 

Conclusions, Discussion, and Recommendations 
 
The purpose of the study was to examine how caregivers of farmers with a disability had been 
empowered through the North Carolina AgrAbility project. When viewed through the lens of 
Zimmerman’s (1995) empowerment theory, we conclude that although the caregivers reported 
key barriers, they were empowered at three distinct levels – intrapersonal, interactional, and 
behavioral. As a consequence, several implications and recommendations emerged.  
 
First, because the participants reported a lack of trust, poor communication skills, and 
insufficient training of AgrAbility staff, we concluded that such served as barriers to the 
caregivers’ empowerment. This finding is supported by the findings of Fetsch et al. (2020a) and 
Fetsch and Turk (2018). As such, we recommend that North Carolina AgrAbility provide tailored 
training and professional development for staff regarding how to best communicate with 



Minus et al.  Advancements in Agricultural Development 
 

https://doi.org/10.37433/aad.v2i1.99  104 
 

caregivers as well as farmers with a disability. We also recommend that North Carolina 
AgrAbility embed listening sessions into professional development opportunities so that 
caregivers can be given a space to articulate their concerns and staff can respond accordingly 
(Roberts et al., 2020a). Finally, additional research should seek to understand how caregivers 
could better navigate barriers to become empowered through the North Carolina AgrAbility 
Project and better sustain the agricultural pipeline for future generations (Alston et al., 2019, 
2020). Future studies should also examine caregivers’ preferences regarding receiving 
information about accommodating disabled farmers.   
 
Despite the aforementioned barriers, we conclude the caregivers learned to overcome these 
challenges to become empowered on the intrapersonal level (Zimmerman, 1995). For example, 
the caregivers reported growth regarding their perceived control, self-efficacy, motivation, and 
competence. Such a notion does not appear to have been reported in the broader literature. As 
a result, these outcomes generated several potential questions that could be addressed 
through additional research: In what ways can caregivers’ intrapersonal empowerment be 
leveraged to better diffuse AgrAbility in other states? Is caregivers’ sense of intrapersonal 
empowerment stable over time? and Does the intrapersonal empowerment of caregivers 
extend to the farmers with a disability whom they provide assistance? 
 
In the third theme, interactional empowerment, the caregivers learned to navigate their 
context to address complex issues and problems. We concluded the caregivers were able to 
accomplish this by developing and transferring skills as well mobilizing resources – a notion that 
has not been reported in previous literature on AgrAbility. Because of the importance of skill 
development, we recommend that additional educational and professional development 
opportunities be created that target the needs of the caregiver network based on their career 
phase (Roberts et al., 2020b). Through additional engagement opportunities at conferences, 
exhibits, and agricultural shows, the caregivers could gain access to unique resources and 
innovations in assistive technology. Consequently, we recommend that additional work be 
conducted to understand the types of marketing and communication approaches that would 
likely motivate caregivers of farmers with a disability to engage in outreach programs 
coordinated by the North Carolina AgrAbility Project. 
 
Finally, we conclude the caregivers became behaviorally empowered through greater 
organizational participation and community engagement. As articulated by participants in this 
study, caregiving can be physically and mentally exhausting, which results in unique burdens 
placed on this population. Therefore, we recommend that AgrAbility create a formal support 
group for caregivers of farmers with a disability. Through support groups, caregivers could 
congregate and share practical solutions to navigate the physical, emotional, and cognitive 
demands of this role. Further, because learning to communicate about farmers with disabilities 
needs was critical to the empowerment of caregivers in this study, participation in support 
groups might help these individuals learn to express themselves to individuals who understand 
their experiences on a personal level. Going forward, more research is also needed to 
understand how innovations that could positively impact the lives of farmers with a disability 
might diffuse more rapidly (Rogers, 2003) if buy-in is achieved from the caregiver population. 



Minus et al.  Advancements in Agricultural Development 
 

https://doi.org/10.37433/aad.v2i1.99  105 
 

 
Acknowledgements 

 
This research was partially funded by the USDA-NIFA National AgrAbility Project. 
 

References 
 
Alston, A. J., Roberts, R., & Warren English, C. (2019). Building a sustainable agricultural career 

pipeline: Effective recruitment and retention strategies used by colleges of agriculture in 
the United States. Journal of Research in Technical Careers, 3(2), 1–23. 
https://doi.org/10.9741/2578-2118.1073  

 
Alston, A. J., Roberts, R., & Warren English, C. (2020). Toward a holistic agricultural student 

recruitment model: A national analysis of the factors affecting students’ decision to 
pursue an agricultural related degree. Journal of Research in Technical Careers, 4(1), 1–
28. https://digitalscholarship.unlv.edu/jrtc/vol4/iss1/1/  

 
Christen C. T., & Fetsch, R. J. (2008). Colorado AgrAbility: Enhancing the effectiveness of 

outreach efforts targeting farmers and ranchers with disabilities. Journal of Applied 
Communications, 92(1), 57–73. https://doi.org/10.4148/1051-0834.1216  

 
Corbin, J., & Strauss, A. (2015). Basics of qualitative research: Techniques and procedures for 

developing grounded theory (4th ed.). Sage.  
 
Fetsch, R. J., Leathers, C. L., & Morgan, G. A. (2020a). Why do some farmers and ranchers 

overcome limitations from accidents and illnesses and others do not? AgrAbility works 
for most. Medical Research Archives, 8(2), 1–5. https://doi.org/10.18103/mra.v8i2.2047 

 
Fetsch, R. J., Petrea, R. E., Jones, P. J., Field, W. E., & Aherin, R. A. (2020b). A 25-year overview 

of AgrAbility demographics. Journal of Agromedicine, 25(3), 1–11. 
https://doi.org/10.1080/1059924X.2020.1837318 

 
Fetsch, R. J., & Turk, P. (2018). A quantitative assessment of the effectiveness of USDA's 

AgrAbility project. Disability and Health Journal, 11(2), 249–255. 
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dhjo.2017.10.004  

 
Hamm, K. E., Field, W. E., Jones, P. J., Wolfe, A., & Olson, E. (2012). Twenty years of AgrAbility: A 

retrospective forum. Journal of Agromedicine, 17(4), 410–414. 
https://doi.org/10.1080/1059924X.2012.713844 

 
Houghton, C., Casey, D., Shaw, D., & Murphy, K. (2013). Rigor in qualitative case-study research. 

Nurse Researcher, 20(4), 12–17. https://journals.rcni.com/nurse-researcher/rigour-in-
qualitative-casestudy-research-nr2013.03.20.4.12.e326  



Minus et al.  Advancements in Agricultural Development 
 

https://doi.org/10.37433/aad.v2i1.99  106 
 

 
Jepsen, S. D., McGuire, K., & Poland, D. (2011). Primary caregiver for a farm family member. The 

Ohio State University Extension. 
https://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.225.2551&rep=rep1&type=p
df  

 
Lincoln, Y., & Guba, E. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry. Sage.  
 
National AgrAbility Project. (2021). The vision of AgrAbility. Purdue University. 

http://www.agrability.org/  
 

Rappaport, J. (1987). Terms of empowerment/exemplars of prevention: Toward a theory for 
community psychology. American Journal of Community Psychology, 15(2), 121–148. 
https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00919275  

 
Roberts, R., Stair, K. S., & Granberry, T. (2020a). Images from the trenches: A visual narrative of 

the concerns of preservice agricultural education teachers. Journal of Agricultural 
Education, 61(2), 324-338. https://doi.org/10.5032/jae.2020.02324  

 
Roberts, R., Witte, B. M., Stair, K. S., Blackburn, J. J., & Smith, H. E. (2020). The dimensions of 

professional development needs for secondary agricultural education teachers across 
career stages: A multiple case study comparison. Journal of Agricultural Education, 
61(3), 128-143. https://doi.org/10.5032/jae.2020.03128  

 
Rogers, E. M. (2003). Diffusion of innovations (5th ed.). Free Press. 
 
Stake, R. (1995). The art of case study research. Sage. 
 
Walker, D., & Myrick, F. (2006). Grounded theory: An exploration of process and procedure. 

Qualitative Health Research, 16(4), 547–559. 
https://doi.org/10.1177/1049732305285972 

 
Zimmerman, M. A. (1990). Taking aim on empowerment research: On the distinction between 

individual and psychological conceptions. American Journal of Community Psychology, 
18(1), 169–177. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00922695 

 
Zimmerman, M. A. (1995). Psychological empowerment: Issues and illustrations. American 

Journal of Community Psychology, 23(5), 581–599. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02506983  
 
 
© 2021 by authors. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of 
the Creative Commons Attribution license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/). 


