CAMPUS DINING 201:Trends, Challenges & Opportunities for

Farm to College in New England

JUNE 12, 2019

SPEAKERSTania TaranovskiDirector of ProgramsFarm to Institution New Englandtania@farmtoinst.org

Hannah LeightonResearch & Evaluation ManagerFarm to Institution New Englandhannah@farmtoinst.org

Annie RowellVermont First CoordinatorSodexoAnnie.Rowell@sodexo.com

Julianne StelmaszykManager of Regional & Sustainable Food SystemsBoston College Diningstelmasz@bc.edu

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: campus@farmtoinst.org

CONNECT WITH FINE - SHARE YOUR STORIES

CONCLUSION

PART 7 OF 7