Between January of 2021 and July of 2024, with funding from the U.S. Department of Agriculture National Institute of Food and Agriculture, our team worked on a project to understand the impacts of state-level FTS procurement policies on rural wealth, school meals, local producers, supply chain businesses, and communities.
This study is a collaborative project between Colorado State University, Ohio State University, and the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s Agricultural Marketing Service, and is being supported by an Advisory Committee that includes the American Farmland Trust (AFT), the National Farm to School Network (NFSN), the National Farm to Institution Metrics Collaborative, the USDA, eXtension’s Community Local Regional Food Systems eCommunity of Practice, Michigan State University, the Colorado Department of Education, Nourish Colorado, the Oregon Department of Agriculture, and the Oregon Farm to School & School Garden Network.
We seek to evaluate the extent to which state-level FTS procurement incentives impact school nutrition service director decisions about school meals, and the impact of state-level FTS procurement incentives in generating benefits for local producers and supply chain businesses in and around farm to school districts, and the communities in which they are located.
There are four specific objectives in this study:
Explore the relationship between FTS activities, state FTS policies, and regional community assets.
Evaluate whether state-level FTS procurement incentives impact what school nutrition service directors serve in school meals.
Determine the extent to which state-level FTS procurement incentives generate benefits for local producers and supply chain businesses in and around FTS districts and the communities in which they are located.
Inspire new research and policy dialogue on the role state FTS policies can play in supporting positive rural development, school food procurement decisions, and producer and supply chain business outcomes.
For Objectives 2 and 3, we focus on three partner states and their FTS policies that incentivize local procurement.
Each state has successful FTS programs, and robust data of local procurement, school gardens, and support for schools.
Differences exist across the types of state-level FTS policy.
Important relationships between existing community assets and FTS – including cultural and social capital – is not well understood
Procurement incentives do not drastically shape who participates in FTS.
Although SFAs pay a premium for local apples, we have not yet found evidence that this premium gets passed through to local farmers (*final results pending).
Importance of FTS data and how to make it more usable in evaluation.
Jill Clark’s teaching and research focuses on community
and state governance of food systems, the policy process, and community engagement. She is a part of the leadership for the Ohio Food Policy Network and is an advisory board member for Johns Hopkins national Food Policy Network.
Becca Jablonski is an Assistant Professor and Food Systems Extension Economist in the Department of Agricultural and Resource Economics at Colorado State University. Her work evaluates the farm and ranch profitability impacts of non-commodity markets and the economic impacts of food system policies and programs.
Julia Freedgood is Assistant Vice President at American Farmland Trust where she oversees program and policy efforts to support land retention, transfer and access, as well as planning for agriculture and food systems. Currently she leads AFT’s “Farms for a New Generation” Initiative, which supports beginning farmers and ranchers in gaining access to affordable land.
Shoshanah Inwood is rural sociologist and an assistant professor in the School of Environment and Natural Resources at Ohio State University. Her research and Extension programs study both the role of communities in food system development and the household-level social and cultural processes that underlay the American food and agriculture system.
Differences exist across the types of state-level FTS policy.
Colorado State University Extension is an equal opportunity provider. | Colorado State University does not discriminate on the basis of disability and is committed to providing reasonable accommodations. | CSU’s Office of Engagement and Extension ensures meaningful access and equal opportunities to participate to individuals whose first language is not English.
Colorado State University Extension es un proveedor que ofrece igualdad de oportunidades. | Colorado State University no discrimina por motivos de discapacidad y se compromete a proporcionar adaptaciones razonables. | Office of Engagement and Extension de CSU garantiza acceso significativo e igualdad de oportunidades para participar a las personas quienes su primer idioma no es el inglés.
Col.st/ll0t3
