campus dining 201
TRANSCRIPT
CAMPUS DINING 201:Trends, Challenges & Opportunities for
Farm to College in New England
JUNE 12, 2019
SPEAKERSTania TaranovskiDirector of ProgramsFarm to Institution New [email protected]
Hannah LeightonResearch & Evaluation ManagerFarm to Institution New [email protected]
Annie RowellVermont First [email protected]
Julianne StelmaszykManager of Regional & Sustainable Food SystemsBoston College [email protected]
I. ABOUT FINEII. FARM TO INSTITUTION METRICS
III. 2018 CAMPUS DINING SURVEYIV. CASE STUDY #1: VT FIRST @ SODEXOV. CASE STUDY #2: BOSTON COLLEGE
VI. Q&AVII. CONCLUDE
OUTLINE
Photo courtesy of Intervale Food Hub Photo: Bates College
INTERACTIVE FEATURESQ&A
ABOUT FINE
PART 1 OF 7
OUR MISSIONTo mobilize the power of New England institutions
to transform our food system
WHAT FINE OFFERSNETWORK SERVICES COMMUNITIES OF
PRACTICE
EVENTS & TRAININGS
COMMUNICATIONS
RESEARCH & METRICS
LOCAL FOOD PROCESSORS & HUBS
METRICS COLLABORATIVE
DINING OPERATORS
PROGRAMS
FARM & SEA TO CAMPUS
FOODSERVICE
PUBLIC POLICY
FARM TO CAMPUSThe New England Farm & Sea to Campus Network is a community of higher education and food systems stakeholders who connect, share, and collaborate to develop transparent regional supply chains and educate campus communities about regional food systems.
RESEARCH & METRICSThe information we share about the state of farm to institution through our dashboard, research reports, webinars, and other publications is built from a foundation of primary and secondary research.
FARM TO INSTITUTION METRICS
PART 2 OF 7
Diversified and stable market Serve 3.8 million people per yearBuy 16% local food, on average
Want to purchase more local food
To understand the system we are trying to change,
track our progress, and inform our plans
WHY METRICS?
DATA SOURCES2018 FINE College Dining Survey
(N=110/200; 55% response rate)2015 FINE Food Distributor Survey
(N=56/86; 65% response rate) 2015 USDA Farm to School Census
(N=727/1015 New England school districts; 72% response rate)2016 & 2017 Health Care Without Harm Survey
(N=84/150; 56% response rate) (N=54/150; 36% response rate)2016 FINE Producer Survey
225+ responses across six states
All data presented comes from surveys, is self-reported and may conflict with other data sources.
16% 21.5% 15%
LOCAL FOOD SPEND
Average Percent of Budget Spent on Local Across Sectors: 17.5%
$25 Million
$68 Million
$42 Million
LOCAL FOOD SPEND
Total Local Spend: $135 Million
ONLINE DASHBOARDNEW ENGLAND FARM TO
INSTITUTION METRICS DASHBOARD Your source for cross-sector metrics
measuring the breadth and impact of farm to institution in six states
Explore the dashboard:dashboard.farmtoinstitution.org
2018 CAMPUS DINING SURVEY: RESULTS & RECOMMENDATIONS
PART 3 OF 7
SURVEY RESPONSES BY STATE
RESPONDING COLLEGES BY FOOD BUDGET
FOODSERVICE BUDGETS & MEALS SERVED
Responding colleges spent a total of
$398 millionand served
on food in the 2017-2018 fiscal year
meals during the 2017-18 fiscal year
87 million
LOCAL FOOD PURCHASES BY NEW ENGLAND COLLEGES
Responding colleges spent a total of
$68 MillionAnd spent an average of
on local food of their total food budget on local food
21.5%
Photo: Harvard University
FINE estimates all New England colleges spent $100-$115 million on local food during one year’s time in 2017-18
This estimate is based on data collected in this current survey and the non-respondent survey undertaken on the 2015 survey, and represents a conservative estimate of local food purchases by college.
Photo: Worcester State University
DEFINING LOCAL FOOD
TRACKING LOCAL FOOD PURCHASES
LOCAL FOOD SPENDING BY STATE
TOP LOCALLY SOURCED PRODUCTSPRODUCT AVG. % OF PRODUCTS
SOURCED LOCALLY Dairy/Milk 56%
Seafood 29%
Vegetables 25%
Eggs 23%
Fruits 18%
Value-added Products
17%
Meat 14%
PRODUCTS MOST DIFFICULT TO SOURCE LOCALLYPRODUCT TIMES MENTIONED Chicken/Poultry 50
Meat 31
Seafood & Fish 14
Fruits 13
Lettuce 13
Pork 13
Grains 12
TOP BARRIERS TO PURCHASING LOCAL FOOD
Cost/price point Fulfilling volume needs
Off-season availability/sourcing
Distribution/delivery of products
Availability/supply
Consistency/quality
CHALLENGES WITH TRACKING LOCAL PRODUCTS
Photo: Bates College
OUTLOOK FOR FUTURE LOCAL FOOD PURCHASES
Photo: UVM Dining
RECOMMENDATIONSFor Dining Operators:
● Partner with distributors, vendors, and food service management companies to prioritize local and regional procurement
● Consider working directly with farmers ● Develop meaningful tracking systems● Address potential barriers around cost,
seasonality, and access to local food
For Distributors:● Work with institutions to understand their
demand for local and regional food● Provide reliable and transparent reporting
For Farmers:● Become wholesale ready● Become familiar with the institutions and
distributors in your area
For Government Officials, Policy- Makers, Funders, and Nonprofits:
● Support trainings and innovative farm to institution programs
● Support research and tracking efforts● Prioritize supportive farm to institution policy
READ THE REPORT!Read the full report to learn
more about:1. Defining and tracking regional food
2. Self-op and FSMCs 3. Distributors used in New England
4. Campus farms and gardens5. Campus food pantries
www.farmtoinst.org/campus-report-201
CASE STUDY #1
PART 4 OF 7
CASE STUDY #2
PART 5 OF 7
Increasing local procurement and transparency for institutions
Julianne StelmaszykBoston College Dining ServicesJune 12, 2019FINE Webinar Campus Dining 201
Farming More Land& Extending the Season
Project Goal: to increase the amount of land farmed in New England, extend the growing season and create new markets for new and emerging farmers through collective buying power and ‘forward agreements’
50,000+ meals per day4,000 lbs of beets per month
11,000 lbs of bell peppers per month
Recommendations for Campus Dining
1. Identify target purchases and specs (volume) by month
2. Identify stakeholders and set expectations. Formalize with an MOU.
3. Start the conversation with farms and play matchmaker
4. Keep in constant communication5. Bring stakeholders together to
discuss challenges (i.e. the beet dilemma)
6. Determine shared needs - what crops makes the most sense?
Challenges
1. Some farms needed to meet food safety certifications
2. Cost of local produce is higher
3. Growers can be wary of working with distributors/processors and institutions
4. Local produce is inconsistent in shape, size and challenging to process at high volume
1. Forward purchase commitment helps farmers plan their fields and minimize lost sales
2. Processors/distributors were necessary for us
○ food safety coverage○ processed products○ logistics/delivery
3. Certain crops make more sense than others
4. Communication is key
5. Start way ahead of the growing season
Lessons Learned
Q&A
PART 6 OF 7
CONTINUE THE CONVERSATIONNext Webinars - Coming Soon:National Metrics Collaborative Webinar Series - June 25Product Spotlight: Seafood - TBD
CONTINUE THE CONVERSATION
Via social mediaIn a working groupOn the Dining Operators listservEmail: [email protected]
CONNECT WITH FINE - SHARE YOUR STORIES
CONCLUSION
PART 7 OF 7