The community composting movement in the United States has grown substantially in recent decades. A survey of U.S. composting operations found that most are private organizations that offer both compost collection and processing. These operations employ diverse methods and revenue sources to support their work. Community composting provides environmental and economic benefits but also faces challenges in scaling operations and managing food waste.

1. The Growing Community
Composting Movement

5. Private
66.3%
Nonprofit
24.4%
Public/private
4.7%
Participants
86 complete responses
33 states (+DC, PR, Canada)
Public
4.7%
74%
Offer both composting
and collection

6. Sales of
compost
Collection
service fees
1
2
3 Trainings/ workshops/
speaking fees
4 Sales of compost-
related products
5 Grants
Top 5 Revenue Sources Community
composters have
diverse & dynamic
operations.

7. 0% 20% 40% 60%
Windrow
Bin system
Vermicomposting
Static pile
Forced aeration
Passive aeration
Batch system
In-vessel
Tumbler
Bokashi
Continuous flow system
& more
1.
Windrows
2.
Bin
System
3.
Vermicomposting
1 2 3 4 5+
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
Percent
of
operations
Number of methods
Number of Composting
Methods Used

8. of Census
respondents
report handling
food scraps
of U.S. composting
operations compost only
yard trimmings
Food = single largest component of
solid waste in landfills and incinerators.
Food scraps = only around 10% of the total
municipal solid waste composted in the U.S.

9. use some,
most, or all of
their product
on-site
82%
72%
71%
Community Impact
of composting
sites located
within areas
served by
collection
provide
community
engagement
opportunities

10. 6.2
full-time jobs per
10,000 tons per
year of material
composted
1
job per 10,000
tons per year
of material
incinerated
2
job per 10,000
tons per year
of material
landfilled
Jobs
Job creation
compared to
waste
industry:
33%
Respondents
report an average of
male
Community
composters:
Waste
industry:
83%
male
That's over
4.5x
the national percentage
of LGBTQ+ identifying
adults in 2021 (x).
32%
LGBTQ+
staff

11. 1
9
8
8
1
9
8
9
1
9
9
0
1
9
9
1
1
9
9
2
1
9
9
3
1
9
9
4
1
9
9
5
1
9
9
6
1
9
9
7
1
9
9
8
1
9
9
9
2
0
0
0
2
0
0
1
2
0
0
2
2
0
0
3
2
0
0
4
2
0
0
5
2
0
0
6
2
0
0
7
2
0
0
8
2
0
0
9
2
0
1
0
2
0
1
1
2
0
1
2
2
0
1
3
2
0
1
4
2
0
1
5
2
0
1
6
2
0
1
7
2
0
1
8
2
0
1
9
2
0
2
0
2
0
2
1
2
0
2
2
15%
10%
5%
0%
Growth
Over 90% of
programs started
since 2010
Over half since 2017
Operations scaling up
food scrap
processing 2021-
2022
Percent
of
operations
Year Compost Program Began
Average annual growth
rate 1988-2010: 11%
Average annual growth
rate 2010-present: 19.6%

12. Access to land
Measuring impacts / metrics
#1: Scaling up (63%)
Challenges
Scaling up operations
(Business / financial & site)
Funding / financing
Marketing / outreach /
education
Lack of adequate
equipment available
for small-scale
operations
Customer's
willingness to pay/
price sensitivity
Space constraints
Insurance
Staffing / staff turnover Contamination of feedstocks
Partnerships with local government
Outreach / education
Local government regulations
State enforcement agency regulations
Business planning & sustaining business operations
Lack of diversity in staff / volunteers
Access to processing sites (for tipping)
Product testing
Volunteer coordination
Adequate carbon feedstocks
Meeting demand
for compost
Site maintenance
Identifying appropriate equipment
Critters
Staff / operator training
Following good composting
management practices
Advocacy
Odors
Competition with other collection service providers
Access to best management
practices and experience of others
Competing / qualifying for
government contracts
Government franchise
solid waste districts
Partnerships with other organizations
Lack of demand for compost
& compost-based products
Client billing, tracking, routing (e.g., adequate apps)
Graphic included = Over 40%

14. Networking
Peer Learning
Community
Events
Knowledge-sharing
Census results
Grants
Leveraging
collective
power
Working groups
Pledge
Circle.so?