Research Regarding Mountain Products: Cropping and Benefits for the USA and Canada - Knowledge Shares With Global Mountain Entrepreneurs

Research Regarding Mountain Products: Cropping and Benefits for the USA and Canada

The main objective of the project is to sustain bilateral scientific research regarding: Research regarding mountain products: cropping and benefits for the USA and Canada - knowledge shares with global mountain entrepreneurs. Activities: A1. Project management; A2. Research regarding mountain products health benefits from the USA, Canada and worldwide; A3. Research regarding mountain products in the USA, Canada and worldwide; A4. Research regarding mountain area for mountain products crops from the USA, Canada and worldwide; A5. Land acquisition and sustainability in the USA, Canada and worldwide. Project 002/01.04.2022. Date: 04/01/2022-09/15/2025 (CBM International University), held in Sierra Blanca, Hudspeth Texas, USA; Cherokee Village, Fulton Arkansas, USA; Lynn Lake, Manitoba, Canada (17655 USD).

Study Overview

• Status: Completed
• Conditions: Well-being; Financial Support; Financial Wellbeing

• Study Type: Observational
• Enrollment (Actual): 45

Contacts and Locations

Study Locations

• United States
  • Arkansas
    • Cherokee Village, Arkansas, United States, 72529
      • CBMIU

Participation Criteria

Eligibility Criteria

• Ages Eligible for Study: Adult; Older Adult
• Accepts Healthy Volunteers: N/A

• Sampling Method: Probability Sample

Study Population

Except children, no one excluded

Description

Inclusion Criteria:

• Persons consuming mountain products
• Persons visiting mountain regions
• Persons using all types of services in mountain area
• No others inclusion criteria

Exclusion Criteria:

• No children
• No persons under 21 years old

Study Plan

How is the study designed?

What is the study measuring?

Primary Outcome Measures

Outcome Measure	Measure Description	Time Frame
Achievement of external funding objectives	The proportion of respondents who reported achieving their funding objectives, based on Question 13 of the study survey. Respondents could select Yes or No. [1-2]	36 months

Secondary Outcome Measures

Outcome Measure	Measure Description	Time Frame
Source of first information about external funds	The source through which respondents first learned about external funds, based on Question 1 of the study survey. Response options included television, radio, newspapers, magazines, internet or website, friends or relatives, and other sources. Results are reported as the number and proportion of respondents for each response category. [1-2]	36 months
Characteristics of external funding accessed	Characteristics of the external funding accessed by respondents, assessed using Questions 2 through 7 of the study survey. Variables included duration of use, contracting institution, type of financing, subtype of financing, priority axis, and accessed funding measure. Results were reported according to the response categories for each variable. [1-2]	36 months
Perceived quality of external funding application compared with other financing	Respondents' assessment of the quality of the application of funding compared with other types of funding, assessed using Question 8 of the study survey. Responses were recorded on an ordinal five-category scale ranging from Much worse to Much better. [1-2]	36 months
Overall perceived quality of implementation of external funds	Respondents' overall assessment of the quality of implementation of external funds, assessed using Question 9 of the study survey. Responses were recorded using the ordinal response categories provided in the survey. [1-2]	36 months
Importance of factors considered when choosing an external grant	The importance assigned by respondents to factors considered when choosing an external grant, assessed using Question 10 of the study survey. Factors included application quality, co-financing, need, cost-benefit ratio, and familiarity with the desired funding measure. Each factor was ranked from 1 (least important) to 5 (most important). [1-2]	36 months
Recommendation of external funding to others	The proportion of respondents who would recommend external funding to other people, assessed using Question 11 of the study survey. Responses were categorized as Yes or No. [1-2]	36 months
Recovery of the full amount requested for financing	The proportion of respondents reporting recovery of the full amount requested for financing, assessed using Question 14 of the study survey. Responses were categorized as Yes or No. [1-2]	36 months
Perceived needs for improvement of external funding	Respondents' reported advantages and disadvantages of external funding and their perceived needs and suggestions for improving the financing of external funds, based on the open-ended responses to Questions 12 and 15 of the study. [1-2]	36 months

Collaborators and Investigators

• Sponsor: Covaci Brindusa

Publications and helpful links

General Publications

• [2]. https://www.survio.com/survey/d/V5G8Z4C6J8B4L7X1B
• [1]. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.10135392

Helpful Links

• File 002-01.04.2022_eng.docx (Survey in English)
• Survey in Romanian
• Answers: jpg files (screenshots)

Study record dates

Study Major Dates

• Study Start (Actual): April 1, 2022
• Primary Completion (Actual): April 1, 2024
• Study Completion (Actual): August 15, 2025

Study Registration Dates

• First Submitted: August 11, 2026
• First Submitted That Met QC Criteria: August 19, 2026
• First Posted (Actual): August 20, 2026

Study Record Updates

• Last Update Posted (Actual): August 20, 2026
• Last Update Submitted That Met QC Criteria: August 19, 2026
• Last Verified: August 1, 2026

More Information

Terms related to this study

• Other Study ID Numbers: 002/01.04.2022