How to Develop and Implement Farm to School Policy: Learning Best Practices from Alaska and Washington, D.C. - presentation


Published on

How to Develop and Implement Farm to School Policy:
Learning Best Practices from Alaska and Washington, D.C.

Published in: Economy & Finance, Technology
1 Like
  • Be the first to comment

No Downloads
Total views
On SlideShare
From Embeds
Number of Embeds
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

How to Develop and Implement Farm to School Policy: Learning Best Practices from Alaska and Washington, D.C. - presentation

  1. 1. Developing andImplementingFarm to SchoolPolicy:Learning BestPractices fromAlaska,Washington,D.C., and StatesIn-between
  2. 2. Workshop Presenters Matt Benson PhD Candidate, Virginia Tech Johanna Herron Alaska Farm to School Program Coordinator Andrea Northup Founder & Former Director of D.C. Farm to School Network National Farm to School Network
  3. 3. Workshop Outline & Format1. Policy Presentations 1. National Overview 2. Washington, D.C. Case Study 3. Alaska Case Study2. Breakout Activity3. Discussion & Questions
  4. 4. Farm to School Legislation In 2001, states started to develop and implement legislation supporting Farm to School (National Farm to School Network, 2010). California (SB19) and New Mexico (HJM34) were first two states (National Farm to School Network, 2010). Currently, 38 states have passed at least 80 locality-based policies. President Obama signing Healthy, Hunger Free Kids Act.
  5. 5. Types of State-based Farm to School Legislation Number of PoliciesCategory of Legislation (Thru Sept. 2011)Project implementation 15Local preference 15Promotional event or program 12Grant money allocation 11Budget appropriations/ official state fund 10Creating a task force/council/ working group 10Resolutions 9Creating a directory or database 8Additional reimbursements 4Wellness policies 4Pilot program implementation 3
  6. 6. Recent State-based Farm to SchoolLegislation (Post September 2011)State Legislation Summary Status The Farm to SchoolAlabama HB670 (2012) Passed Procurement Act Nutritional Alaskan Foods forAlaska SB 160 (2012) Passed Schools Governor Connecticut Grown forConnecticut Proclamation Passed Connecticut Kids Week (2011) Taskforce to encourage theConnecticut HB5326 (2012) Passed purchase of CT Grown foods. Governor May 2012 as MichiganMichigan Proclamation Passed Asparagus Month (2012) Mississippi Farm to SchoolMississippi HC112 (2012) Passed Week
  7. 7. Growth of State-based Farm to School Legislation (To Date)9080 80 7470 656050 5040 40 38 36 3330 30 2720 22 20 17 12 1310 9 9 8 4 4 0 2 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 Total Number of Jurisdictions with Farm to School Legislation Total Number of Farm to School Policies
  8. 8. Recent State-based Farm to School Legislation (Failed)State Legislation Summary Status Additional $0.05 reimbursement for every mealCalifornia AB909 (2012) Failed served with California produce.Hawaii HB1718 (2012) The Farm to School Bill Failed Development of “Farm toIndiana HB1089 (2012) Failed School" plans in schools Creation of an interagencyMississippi HB828 (2012) Failed Farm to School Council
  9. 9. Five Recommendations forState-based Farm to School Legislation
  10. 10. 1. Legislation that provides incentives and allows forFood Service Directors and/or School Nutrition Directorsto purchase more local, regional, and in-state food.Such as legislation that: Increases the small purchase threshold for school districts. Provides greater emphasis and incentives to purchase in-state products over out of state products. Provides tax credits for in-state producers selling to schools. Establishes a minimum percent of commodity funds that must be used to purchase local and regional food. Mandates a minimum percent of local food purchases. States new school construction projects must consider kitchen facilities. Asks school food officials to report types and amounts of in- state farm products purchased.
  11. 11. 2. Legislation that brings together diverse individuals andorganizations from agriculture, public health, education, andcommunity development to form a Farm to School network,advisory board, task force, or working group. Often times thefocus of this legislation is to: Assess or implement Farm to School programs and make recommendations for future actions. Explore ways Farm to School related activities can be incorporated into existing positions. Explore external funding sources to support and strengthen Farm to School. Examples states and legislation include:  Colorado (SB 10-081),  Maine (HP 784), or  Texas (SB 1027). In Missouri and North Carolina, Farm to School has been written into legislation that creates a state food policy council.
  12. 12. 3. Legislation that establishes a designated Farm to Schoolday or week within the National Farm to School Month takingplace each October. Often times this legislation: Gives farmers, schools, state agencies, and communities an extra incentive to develop and promote local Farm to School programs. Allows for those individuals involved with Farm to School to share in celebrating local, healthy food and better child health and nutrition. Can come from a variety of decision makers including the state legislature, governor, and secretary or commissioner of agriculture or education. Examples states and legislation include:  Maryland (SB 158/ HB 696),  New York (2002 Laws), or  Virginia (HJR 95).
  13. 13. 4. Legislation that establishes an official state Farm to Schoolprogram in a state department of agriculture, education,public health, or cooperative extension service. State agencies are often tasked with matching up farms, distributors, and schools that are looking to buy, sell, or distribute local and regional foods. One example is the Oklahoma Farm to School Program Act (2006).  Formally establishes the Oklahoma Farm to School Program and designates the Oklahoma Department of Agriculture, Food and Forestry as the lead agency. Other excellent examples include:  Alaska (HB 70),  Oregon (HB 3601), or  Washington (SB 6483).
  14. 14. 5. Legislation that creates a Farm to School grant program tofund Farm to School pilot projects, needed infrastructure,school gardens, experiential education programs, or thepurchasing of more local and regional healthy foods. Seed money to help grow Farm to School Programs. Funds can support purchasing school food equipment such as salad bars, stovetops, ovens, extra pots, pans, and utensils. Funds can compensate for school staff members’ time when preparing local food or planting and maintaining a school garden. Some examples include:  Alaska (HB 70),  Illinois (HB 78), or  Michigan (W.K. Kellogg Foundation).
  15. 15. Recommendation Conclusions Recommendations 1-4:  Best suited for states or localities that are in the process of developing Farm to School programs. Recommendation 5:  Better suited for states or localities that have already researched best Farm to School practices, developed programs, and are looking to further strengthen Farm to School. Passage of legislation is often best done through:  Partnership building and collaboration between individuals and organizations.  Working closely with a key representative.  Including a mix of education and advocacy.  Connecting Farm to School to pressing social issues.
  16. 16. Case Studies Exploring Farm to School PolicyFive case studies exploring the development andimplementation of primarily state-based Farm to Schoollegislation.1. Alaska2. Texas3. Washington, D.C.4. Washington State5. Wisconsin
  17. 17. Acknowledgements CDC Communities Putting Prevention to Work Program Grant Special thank you to the many individuals and organizations who provided contributions and significantly improved the case studies including individuals at the:  Community Food Security Coalition,  National Farm to School Network, and  W.K. Kellogg Foundation.
  18. 18. Washington, D.C. Farm to SchoolPolicy Case Study
  19. 19. Mission To improve the health and well-being of schoolchildren in the District of Columbia, and of ourlocal environment and food economy, by increasing access to healthy, local, sustainable foods in all Washington, DC schools; and to connect D.C. schoolchildren with where their food comes from. Housed at:
  20. 20. Activities Direct assistance Tools/resources Website, e-newsletter Trainings/workshops Advocacy Local committees/coalitions National farm to school efforts D.C. Farm to School Week Strawberries & Salad Greens
  21. 21. Washington, DC Approx. 100,000 school-aged children 3 in 10 live in poverty 5 in 10 at risk of hunger 4 in 10 in DCPS overweight/obese 8 in 10 NOT getting enough fruits & veggies
  22. 22. School Food Landscape Approx. 100,000 school-aged kids in DC  46,000 students in D.C. public schools (126 schools)  32,000 students in public charter schools (96 schools) 49,000/day participate in school lunch (NSLP) 30,000/day participate in school breakfast (SBP) Approx. 72% eligible for free/reduced price meals
  23. 23. School Food Pre-HSA Primarily “vended” school food through food service management companies Huge variety in school kitchen facilities Both dry and cold storage space very limited School food an “afterthought” Mainly pre-packaged airplane-food style meals
  24. 24. Key Developments D.C. Farm to Michelle ObamaSchool Network Tales from a DC launches Founded School Kitchen Let’s Move Oct. 2008 Jan. 2009 Feb. 2009 Email fromHealthy Schools Councilmember First D.C. Farm toAct introduced Mary Cheh’s School Week Dec. 2009 office Sept. 2009 Nov. 2009
  25. 25. Formulated Policy “Ask” Gathered stakeholder input  notices, emails, calls and meetings to identify common issues Researched state-level farm to school policies Talked with experts across the country Collaborated with other local organizations Formulated policy recommendations Drafted one-pager of recommendations Drafted sample policy language
  26. 26. Advocacy Educated stakeholders Meetings with councilmembers Call-ins Sign-ons Formal letters from organizational partners Advocacy trainings Participated in working group meetings Testified at hearings
  27. 27. Healthy Schools Act Passed May 2010,Effective August 2010  Extra five cents/meal with a fresh, local fruit or vegetable component  Schools must participate in at least one farm to school educational event each year  Higher nutrition standards (whole grains, fruits & veggies) tied to extra ten cents/meal reimbursement  School garden FTE  Central kitchen/warehouse  Environmental Literacy Plan
  28. 28. Funding Battles Initially, proposed excise tax on soda in April 2010 Coke/Pepsi lobbied Council Petitions, signatures, meetings with councilmembers, organizational sign-ons Council approved extending sales tax to include soda May 2010 Huge budget shortfall ($188 million) – Mayor proposes cutting HSA in December 2010 More testimony, meetings with councilmembers, sign-ons HSA funding restored in FY2010 budget (even amidst huge cuts)
  29. 29. Implementation
  30. 30. Lessons Learned Think through your position – from policy language through implementation Make sure your law has measurable outcomes Make friends in the Council to win the inside game (especially with funding) Be creative and touchy-feely with your advocacy Broad based partnerships are hard to get in the way of – draw upon farm to school’s diversity Make it easy for folks to show their support Break policy into easy-to-remember sound bites Identify specific, dedicated funding source Get to know your local fiscal policy watchdog organization
  31. 31. Thank you! Andrea Northup (Formerly) D.C. Farm to School Network Director Karissa McCarthy
  32. 32. Alaska Farm to School PolicyCase Study Johanna Herron Farm to School Program Coordinator Department of Natural Resources, Division of Agriculture
  33. 33. Background • SunsetMay 2010 – date,House Bill 70Signed into end of Law June 2013 Top priority: Local procurement in schools Sustain Action Plan Interest
  34. 34. Implementation Tracking Engaging • Resources• Strategic plan• Feasibility • Media • Process studies • Grants & • Listserv Evaluation scholarships • Newsletters• Product • Data development • Contests tracking• Resources • Tours • Reports Planning Communicating
  35. 35. Identify Stakeholders Middlemen Other • Processors • Co-ops • Distributors • Policy makers • Community members • Parents Schools Food Producers • Food Service Professionals • Farmers • Cooks • Fishermen • Ranchers Farm to • Youth • Administrators School
  36. 36. Involve Stakeholders in Strategic PlanningHouse Bill 70 legislation Goals – Objectives – (Tasks) Professional planner Advisory group input Public input Program purpose A state-wide program that will offer expertise and support to all areas of the state to pursue farm to school activities and interests.
  37. 37. Goal #2: ResourceDevelopment and Sharing School gardens Outreach about available resources 2 gardens / year Distribute AK resource book Create toolkit New users of resources Resource guide for using local or school garden produce Distribute to interested stakeholders‘Seasonal Harvest’ pilot On Farm Food Safety Workshop Create toolkit Participation rates 2 workshops / year Agriculture statistics 3 farms and 3 school districts represented
  38. 38. Goal #3: Strengthen Relationships between FoodProducers and School Food Services• 5 farmer tours Product• 5 schools availability • Communicati kitchen tours and use ng projects • Discussion, • 20 product input, and availability forms questions from farms • 20 product use School / forms from schools Farm Tours Tri-annual farm to school summits
  39. 39. Goal #4: Networking, Education, and Marketing - Connect stakeholders - Serve as a resource and information center - Resource distribution - FTS monthly newsletter - 20 FTS presentations Create a resource - 200 people in contact database Create fact guide sheets and adapted from - Reach 1000 students promotional Vermont FEED with Alaska Agriculture in materials publication the Classroom
  40. 40. Reminder – Background • SunsetMay 2010 – date,House Bill 70Signed into end of Law June 2013 Top priority: Local procurement in schools Sustain Action Plan Interest
  41. 41. Revisit: Implementation Tracking Engaging • Resources• Strategic plan• Feasibility • Media • Process studies • Grants & • Listserv Evaluation scholarships • Newsletters• Product • Data development • Contests tracking• Resources • Tours • Reports Planning Communicating
  42. 42. Farm to School Grant 34 funded state farm to school mini-grant projects  16 urban Sample Projects  18 rural Bison farm visit and meat purchase Fish to school effort Taste testing Alaska grown product School gardens Growing potatoes and cabbage for school kitchen use
  43. 43. Alaska Farm to School Challenge • Opened October 3rd, 8am When • Ends November 4th, 5pm • Anyone in Alaska who plans to engage in a farm to school activity during the 2011-2012 school year Who • Idea’s and examples at: • Quick and easy! • Electronic application: How • Paper applications available • Change the way we think about food • Support local economy Why • And much much more!
  44. 44. Resource Development
  45. 45. Product Development
  46. 46. Cabbage Project1. Alaska Gateway School District  Calculated the cabbage purchase was ½ the cost of what they purchase commercially  Cooks were surprised and thrilled to find the kids noticed the difference and really liked it!2. Fairbanks School District – 1 batch comparison Yield Labor Total cost including labor Local ~75% (Need 12 hours $1150 [$1/pound] 850 pounds to ($1.79/pound) get 640 pounds shredded) Pre-cut 100% 3 hours $1558 [$2.32/pound] (2.43/pound)
  47. 47. Into the Schools
  48. 48. Recent Policy Update Legislation passed Quick Solutions Housed in a different Producers Food state and food Policy Agency collaboration agency service not Council than farm to prepared school Provide suggestions Conference Webinar for future presentations success
  49. 49. Lessons Learned Not everything works Make your program visible Utilize your collaborations Breathe; you can’t do everything!