In celebration of the 10th anniversary of National Farm to School Network’s launch into farm to early care and education (farm to ECE), Sophia Riemer, NFSN Program Fellow, sat down with the original trailblazers of farm to ECE and the new leaders in the movement. These inspiring women shared their perspectives on the growth, innovations, and successes they’ve seen, what the future holds for farm to ECE, and what is needed to continue building an equitable and sustainable movement. 

Participants: 

Emily Jackson, Program Director, Growing Minds Farm to School, ASAP  

Zoe Phillips, Director of Administration, Office of Women’s Health, LA County Department of Public Health 

Stacey Sobell, Director of People & Culture, Ecotrust 

This conversation took place with the original leaders in farm to ECE and Co-Leads of the original NFSN Farm to Preschool Subcommittee. The interview has been edited for length and clarity.

Sophia: Please tell us briefly where you were in your career during your time on the subcommittee and why you decided to invest time into supporting the start of farm to ECE? 

Zoe: 10 years ago I was with UEPI, the Urban Environmental Policy Institute at Occidental College, working under Bob Gottlieb. I started back in 2009 as a volunteer. I received my Masters in Public Health in the Spring of 2008. While I was looking for jobs, I bugged him until he gave me an internship. He gave me a set of different projects that he thought could show some promise. At the time I had a preschooler, and he mentioned what we were calling farm to preschool as a potential project. I started immediately writing grants and doing some program planning and development. The grants were awarded and that was the start of my baby. Around April 2009, I created a pilot program for farm to preschool.

Emily: I work with the Appalachian Sustainable Agricultural Project in Asheville, North Carolina. 10 years ago, I was the Program Director for Growing Minds and today, I'm still the Program Director, but I'm retiring this year. We started doing farm to preschool back in 2007. When we first started the subcommittee I was serving as the Southeast Regional lead for the National Farm to School Network, Stacey was the Northwest lead with Ecotrust, and Zoe's organization was one of the core institutions housing the network. So, I was lucky enough to work with them and push this movement into fruition. 

Stacey: 10 years ago I was at Ecotrust, where I still work. I'm in a different role now, doing more people oriented human resources work, but I was in the Farm to School program in our Food and Farms team for about a decade. When I first started, my boss was really excited about getting farm to preschool going, so we did a pilot. After we did that pilot, we received a lot of inquiries, just because there wasn't much information online except from Emily, Zoey, and myself. 

Sophia: What did participating on the farm to preschool subcommittee involve for each of you? 

Emily: Our overarching goal was to grow this movement, since it was nascent at that time. Each of us also spearheaded different work with our own work groups. I was really interested in taking this upstream and embedding this in the community college programs so we could train providers while they're in school - and happy update - it's been a long journey, but we now are working with 22 of the 58 community colleges in North Carolina and hopefully we'll see that number grow even more in the next couple of years. But, the experience of working nationally and getting input from people really helped me see what was needed and how to best navigate that work. 

Zoe: It was very exciting to discover that we had these three different programs in different parts of the country that had been developed somewhat around the same time. Once the three of us got together, we were able to look forward and pool our resources, the best practices we had developed, and the challenges that we had gone through to lead the subcommittee. It was a really special point in time and we got along really well. We shared leading responsibilities for the subcommittee, we were able to help grow the members of the subcommittee so that it was far ranging, from small community based organizations to academia to the CDC. Eventually our program at UEPI moved into other states in the West and we even partnered with a Montessori school with the Navajo Nation. But together, the three of us were able to help build the movement on a national level. 

Sophia: What do you think was your greatest accomplishment while working to bring together the Farm to Preschool movement? Or, in your own farm to Preschool work?

Zoe: I came into this having no gardening experience. I had a health education background and nutrition background, but learning how to garden, how to teach preschool aged kids and their teachers how to garden, and how to find ways to make it economical was so great. Watching the kids dig in the dirt in an urban setting was also incredible to see. I remember one time, we had asked the nutrition director who oversaw a set of preschools if she would start introducing more vegetables, and she said, “well, if I see the kids eat it, then yes, I'll bring them in.” So we had a cauliflower taste test with a lesson plan and we collected the data to show that kids were actually eating it, enjoying it, and wanting more of it, so they put it on the menu. So that was gratifying to see. Also, the building of our website. We were able to bring in partners from all over the country and share their resources and tools on the website, which was special. 

Emily: The three of us showed the network what great promise there was in this and why the network should invest resources and time. So the years that we all spent together trying to build this movement just really paid off in that way. I think that was a great accomplishment. We grew it to where it needed to be and then the network took it over, which was fabulous. The other thing that I'm proud of is creating those critical resources with my organization to make things easy. We have a farm to preschool toolkit that is now being sold all across the country. And in that toolkit is something that the North Carolina Network created together, which we call reach for the stars, which takes the star rating and aligns it to preschool activities. Another piece of the toolkit is the crosswalk between our lesson plans, which are very experiential, and CACFP guidelines. So the children are not only getting a local, healthy snack, but they're also getting the education associated with that product. 

Sophia: Can you speak to the growth that you’ve seen overtime? Is the state of the movement today where you thought it would be 10 years ago? 

Emily: The Association of State Public Health Nutritionists, or ASPHN, pulled down CDC money and were able to distribute that to states for farm to ECE work. North Carolina, along with 10 other states and the District of Columbia received funding. To me, that shows some strength, that there is a lot of infrastructure out there for this, and that it’s growing. It’s a lot harder than K12. They're so much more underfunded and there's a lot of entrenched problems with early care and education. So I think it's even more of a success that we've been able to build out the infrastructure that exists now, with the leadership of the National Farm to School Network, of course. This ASPHN grant is an example of the success of the movement. 

Zoe: I have been a little more removed from it for a while, but have kept in touch with what's happening, particularly in Los Angeles. So it's exciting to hear the developments for the movement, and that it's happening at a local level, state level and national level. 10 years ago, it was our dream that it could develop to that point. There's also been improvements in offering funding at the national level but if there could be even more, that would be better, because funding is really what supports this work. 

Sophia: What do you see as the future of farm to ECE? What do you envision? Any promising opportunities? 

Stacey: I'm thinking about a lot of what my work is focused on right now. We’re putting more of a racial justice focus and anti racist kind of lens to that work, and I know that Farm School Network is also doing a lot of work around that. 

Emily: I hope with the current administration that we're going to see more funding. I think the pandemic showed a lot of things about our country, and one is that our infrastructure for early care and education is just vastly underfunded. So, hopefully, we're going to see more universal child care. That'll also raise up racial equity issues while making room for things like farm to preschool, because people hopefully won't be struggling so much with the funding issue.

Zoe: I think it is hugely important that this movement can find a role in helping decrease structural racism, improve disparities, and move towards improving food insecurity. Having a farm to preschool program in any type of early care setting as a default would be incredible. If it became the norm it would be fantastic, where they're getting food, and bolstering the farmers. 
Emily: Just think of all the joy and wonder out there if every kid could be exposed to a garden. That could be a beautiful thing.

By Sophia Riemer, Programs Fellow

Taxing sugar sweetened beverages (SSB) is a policy strategy that is gaining momentum as a way to decrease sugar consumption, improve the health and wellbeing of communities, and raise revenue for health promotion, food access, and equity related efforts. Boulder, Colorado and Seattle, Washington are two cities that have enacted a SSB tax and have dedicated a portion of the funds raised to farm to early care and education efforts. This month, we will take a look at the comprehensive and inspiring work these cities have been able to accomplish with the help of these funds.

A Natural Fit for Priority Funding
Seattle’s Farm to Table initiative and Boulder’s farm to ECE program work to bring healthy, local foods and hands-on experiences such as gardening and food education activities to their communities. In Seattle, tax fund distribution prioritizes early childhood education and food access: a natural fit for farm to ECE. “We can address these two crucial areas, nourishing these children and improving very underpaid providers’ access to healthy foods,” explained Leika Suzumura, Farm to Table consultant. Thanks to SSB funding, these programs have been true successes, supporting participating sites with the tools and resources needed to create comprehensive farm to ECE programming such as nutrition and garden education, technical assistance, and funds for local food purchasing and gardening tools.

The sugar sweetened beverage tax funds have been integral to the growth of these programs. Once Boulder’s tax was passed in 2016 and the program was able to secure funding, they hired Heather Haurswirth as the farm to ECE coordinator. With a new dedicated staff member, the program greatly expanded. “We started in 2015 with 4 child care programs. We grew to 12 programs in 2016, 37 programs in 2018, 54 programs in 2019, 68 programs in 2020, and now 75 programs in 2021,” explained Hauswirth. This past year they even started to offer additional produce to cities outside of Boulder with limited food access. Seattle’s Farm to Table also brought on more staff with tax funds, first received in 2018, enabling them to greatly expand their program. Increased staff capacity has also allowed them to spend time on developing long term plans that focus on increasing the quality and reach of the program.

A Community Asset During COVID
Both the Seattle and Boulder team explained how invaluable the SSB tax funding became during COVID when food security and food access plummeted. Families still needed to feed their children, so the programs took action and began to send food home with families. This was critical, as Seattle farmer’s markets were closed and store shelves were empty, limiting farmers’ selling opportunities and households’ access to healthy, fresh food. “We were able to respond and build even stronger relationships with our sites. We’re cultivating that trust,” explained Kelly Okumura, Farm to Table’s program manager.

Okumura went on to explain how critical building these relationships has been to the success of Farm to Table. During a visit to a center that had not fully participated in local food procurement, Okumura was able to meet Ms. Patrice, the kitchen lead. “It was magical meeting Ms. Patrice,” Okumura said. “She told me ‘now that I know who you are, I’m going to order the food.’ The shift was visceral.”

The COVID-19 experience also had an impact on how participants in Boulder’s program, and in turn, the program administrators themselves, saw theprogram’s role in the community. “Last year the most profound feedback we received was the increase in food accessibility due to our program. Because of the pandemic, we felt like we were playing a role,” explained Hauswirth. Boulder is now looking to the future to see how they can expand food access through their program. “We’d love to engage with more organizations across the city or county. There’s so many different places our program can go.”

Growing Imagination
Both Boulder and Seattle have used SSB tax funds to give children a healthy start in life, improve the quality of childcare, and provide families with vital assistance. However, as both programs made sure to note, the true value of farm to ECE comes in the excitement and sense of wonder it creates. Suzumura and Okumura shared stories about children rushing out of class to see what’s in that day’s deliver box and finding seemingly magical produce like purple potatoes, rainbow carrots, and lions mane mushrooms; tasting foods like local chickens that, as Ms. Patrice noted, just smell better; seeing worms squirm around in soil; and planting a few potatoes and harvesting four buckets full. These experiences not only teach children to appreciate the fun and often mysterious place our natural environment can be, but can lead to naturally healthier children, both mentally and physically. As Hauswith explained, “certain kids wouldn’t touch a brussel sprout or a tomato, but went on a field trip to a farm, or saw it in their produce box, or grew it in their garden, and now they're asking for it at home or eating it at lunch. It’s something we see time and time again and it always makes me smile. That the intention of the program is actually working.”

This blog was originally posted on August 9, 2021.

‍By Helen Dombalis, Executive Director

Over the past several weeks, National Farm to School Network staff and I have been listening to, learning about, and reflecting on a history that Native and Indigenous people have been naming for generations, but that only recently has gained public attention: the horrific, traumatic, and unjust history of forced boarding schools for Native children.

The US government first opened these schools in 1879 with the express intent of cultural genocide by removing Native children from their homes in order to systemically wipe out Native cultures. Under the management of the US federal government and several Christan church denominations, there were at least 367 schools in 29 states where Native children were punished for speaking their languages, stripped of their cultural clothing and hair, and banned from behaviors reflecting their Native identities. Physical, sexual, emotional, cultural, and spiritual abuse and neglect were rampant. Hundreds of thousands of Native children were removed from their families and forced into these schools. In 1926, it was estimated that 83% of all Native school-age children had been forced to attend. As recent news stories from Canada and the US have retold, many never returned home.

Another piece of this history – which is directly linked to farm to school’s history – was forced agricultural labor in many of these schools. This was a specifically chosen tactic for forcing values of individualism, dismantling communal worldviews, and driving the agenda of a colonistic food system that’s rooted in exploitation, extraction, and profit. It is imperative to understand that this real and traumatic history of Native children gardening at schools in the early 20th century has often been re-spun into a white dominant narrative about the benefits of America’s first school garden movement, which for white children (to be specific) was viewed as "[affording] opportunity for spontaneous activity in the open air, and possibilities for acquiring a fund of interesting and related information.” To be clear, gardening and agricultural labor was anything but a benefit to Native children in these circumstances. (Thank you to Alena Paisano, a former colleague at National Farm to School Network, for previously sharing this history with us.)

Today, National Farm to School Network actively partners on farm to school efforts in Native communities. Through these efforts, we strive to be supporters in work happening to reclaim food traditions, revitalize Native foodways, and build food sovereignty. While there have been shining spots in this work, there have also been shortcomings. Given this, and my deep desire for National Farm to School Network to be a better ally to our Native partners, I have been reflecting: if National Farm to School Network had existed 100 years ago, would we have been complicit in the horrific actions imposed on Native children? In what ways are we complicit to the injustices that continue to persist for Native peoples today? And what changes can I lead to be accountable to and correct this?

One starting way is through this statement you are reading. I state, unequivocally, that National Farm to School Network is committed to standing by our Native and Indigenous partners and their communities in demanding answers, accountability, and justice for past harms and injustices. I am also committed to leading by example, especially for National Farm to School Network staff, in continuing to listen, learn, and reflect on this history. Since actions speak louder than words, I will also be proactive in taking action for justice, including deferring to the leadership of our Native partners and whatever actions they may ask of me and National Farm to School Network – now, and in the future. I acknowledge that sustained commitment and engagement is required, and that my actions – and the actions of National Farm to School Network – will demonstrate the sincerity of this commitment. I openly welcome feedback, conversation, and the opportunity to be held accountable to these things.

National Farm to School Network is committed to a vision of a racially just food system, and as such, we will not keep silent about racial inequities. As a network of farm to school and community food systems advocates, we must address the impacts and legacies of traumatic and unjust histories – past and present – in the spaces we work. If this history of forced residential schools for Native children is new to you, I encourage you to continue listening, learning, and reflecting, and to turn that learning into active support for Native peoples in fighting for equity and justice. Here are some places to start:

• The National Native American Boarding School Healing Coalition
• Lost Lives, Lost Culture: The Forgotten History of Indigenous Boarding Schools (New York Times)
• Reckoning with the theft of Native American children (Vox)
• Atonement and reparations for Native American boarding schools (MPR News)
• Rosebud Sioux Youth Council Returns to Carlisle Indian School to Bring Their Relatives Home (Native News Online)
• Listen to Chris Eagle Bear and Asia Black Bull Chu of Secangu Youth Council speak for the youth who died at the Carlisle Indian Boarding school
• Truth and Healing Curriculum (The National Native American Boarding School Healing Coalition)
• Intertribal Agriculture Council, First Nations Development Institute, and the Indigenous Food and Agriculture Initiative

Thank you to Mackenize Martinez, National Farm to School Network Program Associate, for elevating this history on a recent call with NFSN staff and for encouraging our organization to speak publicly about it.

UPDATE: Thank you to Valerie Segrest, NFSN Advisory Board member, for suggesting that we also elevate the lasting impact of Native children being fed army rations and how that has altered Native peoples' physical taste buds and interrupted the transmission of cultural foldaway knowledge through generations. Learn more in this article written by A-dae Romero-Briones: Fighting for the taste buds of our children.

This blog was originally posted August 5, 2021.

Child nutrition programs across the country exercise collective purchasing power on a massive scale. Pre-pandemic, the National School Lunch Program alone invested $14.2 billion annually to serve 29.6 million lunches every school day. K-12 school meals, early care and education (ECE) nutrition, after-school snacks, and summer meals are an opportunity for every community to express their values through purchasing priorities and to shift power in the food system as a whole.

During our NFSN Community Gathering: Shifting Power, Cultivating Justice in June 2021, we hosted a panel of experts and practitioners to discuss the opportunities and power in values-aligned procurement, including:

• Jennifer Gaddis, associate professor of Civil Society and Community Studies at the University of Wisconsin-Madison and author of The Labor of Lunch: Why We Need Real Food and Real Jobs in American Public Schools
• Jose Oliva, Campaigns Director with HEAL Food Alliance
• Chang Vue, Capacity Building Director with Hmong American Farmers Association
• Jackie Wincek, Procurement and Sustainability Specialist, DC Central Kitchen

In this powerful session, moderated by Janna Parker, NFSN Policy Associate, the panelists articulated how every decision made in our food system signifies a choice being made, whether hidden or apparent. As Jose Oliva shared, “The system shows the values they care about with the choices they make.” Inspired by the drive to shift power in our food system through values-aligned procurement, this session shed light on the interconnectedness of our society’s issues and the importance of intersectionality in the work that we do. Jennifer Gaddis illustrated, “The cafeteria is a place that we can all collectively renegotiate our values.” And as we work to mobilize and shift power, we, with cultural humility, must prioritize and empower our local communities by centering the voices of those who are most impacted by the changes in our food system. Watch the conversation above or here.

This blog was originally posted August 3, 2021.

The Northeast Farm to School Institute model, developed by Vermont FEED, is a unique year-long learning opportunity for schools, districts, and early childhood teams to build robust and sustainable farm to school programs. Lacy Stephens, Senior Program Manager of the National Farm to School Network (NFSN), sat down with Andrew Powers of PEER Associates, lead evaluator for the Northeast Farm to School Institute, to discuss impacts and learnings from the farm to school institute model. Listen to their full conversation and view excerpts below. For background on the farm to school institute model, see NFSN’s recent blog, Driving Sustainable Farm to School Through the Farm to School Institute Model.

Nat'l Farm to School Network · Sustainability in Farm to School Initiatives: Q&A with Andrew Powers

Lacy: You've been involved in the Northeast Farm to School Institute for quite a while now. What are the key components that we should know about the institute?

Andrew: I couldn't stress enough from everything we've learned over all the years the importance of bringing a diverse team together. People from schools can be very siloed and not everyone has a chance to really work together. When you can take an administrator, food service director, teacher coordinator, bringing them together with their coach, and really, everyone is welcome as part of a team, it can be a parent, a community member, any sort of volunteer, but bringing those folks together and really having them understand each other's roles is so valuable and creates such a functional working dynamic. Bringing that team together and building their capacity is such a huge element. Then again and again, I heard about action planning. Farm to school is an evaluation challenge because there are so many different ways to implement it. Having that action plan, having the time to develop a plan of, “Here's where we're going to focus. Here's how we're going to do it,” brings about that clarity of purpose. It becomes that central reference point that they keep coming back to. The coaching is really important, having ongoing support, having that sounding board and that person who has the bigger perspective in the team that can say, “you know, we need an idea for this, or we need a resource for that,” or just help problem solve. Having an expert outside perspective, and that support for an extended period of time, is also really valuable.

Lacy: Can you tell us about your previous engagement and evaluation with that model over the years?

Andrew: I think over the years evaluation has helped to refine and clarify what's important in the model. A high level finding that really speaks to the institute model is the need to invest in people. It's not like here's your little one hour after school professional development. We're going to bring it together in a nice place and really take care of you and give you the space and time to get to know each other and work together. We should talk more about the equity piece and how to make it available to more people and what we're learning about hybrid virtual access. But it's fundamentally about investing in the people who are going to be the ones to do the work. We know farm school can be a heavy lift, it doesn't just happen easily. The institute model focuses on showing people that we value the work by valuing you and your involvement in it. The team’s become that burning heart of the program, being that strong team or strong committee

Lacy: Tell us what you heard in your retrospective study. What did you find? And, I know you also did a lot of work looking at previous literature around sustainability. How did those findings fit with farm to school and your evaluation here?

Andrew: When we talk about sustainability, it’s a buzzword and can be a lot of things. In this case, we are generally talking about just program staying power: How strong is the program? Is it still there? What's helping it last? When it distilled to the highest level, we heard three big factors that really were driving sustainability: capacity, culture, and commitment.

Capacity is about the people power that runs farm to school. We know that it takes a lot of players to make this happen, especially talking about the institute model where you want to be integrated across the cafeteria, the classroom, and in the community. Building that people power and having that sustained people power is so important. Where the institute really thrives is in the leadership and coordination capacity for farm to school – building strong teams, giving them tools, helping them build relationships and then giving them tools to work together in action planning. That management level of capacity is so valuable when you're trying to do something that is not necessarily super simple. Under capacity as well, it takes money, it takes equipment to make some of these things happen. That is a piece of capacity that the institute does not provide, but people did a lot of planning at the institute for finding support and applying for grants.

Culture is an important piece, and much has been written about school culture. The idea of school culture embodies so many things: the values of a school, the traditions, what they define themselves as, what's deemed as important. Getting farm to school into the culture is a really important piece of sustainability. At the institute, teams get a chance to look and see, “where does this fit into what we already believe?” And there's so many ways that farm to school aligns with what people think is important. Of course, you have a wellness policy, or a focus on health and wellness and farm to school fits right into that. Other schools, you can fit it into academics. Part of the institute is seeing how we pull together these disparate threads and make them into a program. You'll find a lot of schools with gardens that aren't really integrated. You'll find a lot of schools with a bit of local procurement going on, but no one really knows about it, or it's not something that's connected to the curriculum, or the community is not aware of it. Another piece of culture is a school’s traditions and rituals. There’ll be a community dinner a school has always done, but then it becomes a harvest dinner, a farm to school dinner where it becomes something that people look forward to in the whole community.

Commitment is all about relationships. Farm to school takes a lot of relationships and commitment. What you see with the institute is a way to build those really strong connections to each other. What it takes is people who really care. You need champions, but you can't rely on those people forever. You have to figure they're going to move on, they're going to need to do something else. It’s about figuring out how to keep recruiting those folks, how to keep bringing people on board, getting people excited.

Listen to the full interview here.

This blog was originally posted on July 29, 2021.

Farm to school legislation is a key strategy for making local food procurement, school gardens, and food education a reality for millions of children, farmers, and communities across the country. We’re excited to share a new resource to help partners and advocates in these efforts: the State Farm to School Policy Handbook: 2002-2020.

Co-authored by the National Farm to School Network and the Center for Agriculture and Food Systems at Vermont Law School, the State Farm to School Policy Handbook summarizes and analyzes every proposed farm to school bill and resolution introduced between January 1, 2002, and December 31, 2020, from the 50 states, the District of Columbia, and the U.S. territories. It enables users to search bills by both jurisdiction and topic, and includes analysis of trends, case studies, advocacy resources and more.

What’s new in this edition?
The State Farm to School Policy Handbook: 2002-2020 builds on a survey that was originally released in 2011, and updated in 2013, 2014, 2017 and 2019. The last update of the Handbook focused on bills that directly advanced the core elements of farm to school – local procurement, school gardens, and food and agriculture education. In this edition, we broadened our scope to also include:

Bills that Support Universal School Meals: One clear takeaway for school nutrition professionals during the COVID-19 pandemic has been the need for universal meals, which allow them to focus more on nourishing kids than on filling out paperwork by eliminating means testing and making all school meals free for all students. This edition of the Handbook highlights bills that support universal meal expansion and implementation through state policies.

Bills that Support BIPOC Producers: Farm to school exists within the broader agricultural economy. Policies addressing the historical and ongoing inequities between Black, Indigenous and people of color (BIPOC) farmers and their white counterparts are ultimately necessary for BIPOC producers to experience a level playing field on which to participate in farm to school. This edition of the Handbook highlights bills that support small farmers and producers of color in aims of spurring more of this type of policy. It also includes a comprehensive case study on key strategies to support Native food and Tribal sovereignty through farm to school policy.

Farm to school policy responses to COVID-19: The public health and economic emergency caused by COVID-19 illuminated valuable lessons about the resilience of our food system and farm to school and ECE work. It also showed opportunities for continued advocacy to ensure communities are better supported in future emergency situations. This edition of the Handbook includes a case study highlighting farm to school, child nutrition, and food system policy challenges experienced during the pandemic, as well as innovations and strategies for future resilience.

What are the other highlights?
Between January 1, 2002 and December 31, 2020:

• 46 states, DC, and the U.S. Virgin Islands have introduced 546 bills and resolutions supporting farm to school activities.
• 43 states, DC, and the U.S. Virgin Islands have passed farm to school policies.
• Between 2019-2020, 26 states proposed 91 farm to school bills and resolutions. Of those, 30 passed.
• The most common bill type has been one that provides funding for farm to school. These bills include annual appropriations, permanent funds, and other revenue streams.

How can advocates use the Handbook?
The time is ripe to leverage relationships and advocate to expand farm to school through state legislation, and the State Farm to School Policy Handbook is a valuable tool you can use to approach policy in ways that make sense for your state. Whether your state is still working to pass its first farm to school legislation or ready to expand, you can use this Handbook to gain knowledge of the wide variety of farm to school policy options that exist and find inspiration and models that can be adapted to meet your states needs. Be sure to check out the Promising Practices section (starting on page 21) and the Advocacy Strategies (starting on page 23) for ideas to seed, grow, and sustain farm to school in your state. The Bill Summaries (starting on page 41) can be helpful comparing your state’s farm to school laws, policies and programs to those of other states.

State-level farm to school policy work is driving a broader expansion of farm to school across the country. Simply put, strong laws facilitate strong programs. But more work is still needed to ensure equitable access to the opportunities and benefits of these programs. The goal of every state and territory should be to pass comprehensive legislation that supports farm to school activities to advance racial equity and benefit those most impacted in their communities. We hope the Handbook provides a roadmap for advocates and policymakers to dig deeper into developing the laws needed to facilitate strong, equity-centered farm to school programs. Download the resource here to start exploring.

Have questions about this new resource or need a thought partner on how to connect with your state lawmakers? Don’t hesitate to contact our Policy team for support! We look forward to hearing how your advocacy efforts continue to grow the farm to school movement, state by state.

The State Farm to School Handbook: 2002-2020 is co-written by National Farm to School Network and the Center for Agriculture and Food Systems at Vermont Law School (CAFS). This project is funded by the National Agricultural Library, Agricultural Research Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture.

This blog was originally posted on July 27, 2021.

By National Farm to School Network and The Policy Equity Group, LLC

The Policy Equity Group and the National Farm to School Network, with support from the W.K. Kellogg Foundation, are pleased to jointly release Lessons from the COVID-19 Experience: Innovations and Strategies for Farm to Early Care and Education Implementation in States and Communities. This brief captures how farm to early care and education (ECE) efforts at the state and community levels were initially impacted by the COVID-19 pandemic. Informed by the experiences of food and early childhood partner organizations in five states – Georgia, Iowa, North Carolina, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin – the brief documents the systemic impacts of COVID-19 and the federal response from a farm to ECE perspective; describes how farm to ECE partner organizations adapted to the new context during the initial months of the pandemic; and provides recommendations for how states and communities can sustain the successful strategies implemented during the pandemic.

The COVID-19 pandemic had profound impacts across food and ECE systems that exacerbated inequities and racial injustices in food, health, and education. This system shock prompted and accelerated emerging education and food access trends, including increased demand for virtual learning and outdoor learning opportunities, like gardening for children and families. The shift to virtual platforms was echoed in demands for online training and professional development for ECE providers and in the food system, where everyone from agricultural producers to consumers moved to online marketplaces. Policy responses included increased flexibility in policy and regulation and increased investments in ECE and food systems through federal stimulus.

In response to the COVID-19 crisis and these emerging themes, farm to ECE stakeholders turned to innovative approaches to navigate challenges and meet the needs of children and families. Existing partnerships across food and ECE systems became vital, and many farm to ECE stakeholders deepened their engagement with emergency food organizations. These partnerships paved the way for farm to ECE initiatives, like family Community Supported Agriculture (CSA) boxes, that supported immediate family needs and maintained a market for local producers. Partner organizations met the needs of families, providers, and producers by facilitating online learning, professional development, and facilitating the transition to online food sales and purchase. Farm to ECE stakeholders creatively layered funding coming from multiple sources to support these ongoing efforts.

As many states and ECE sites continue to stabilize and recover, sustaining these innovations could be beneficial in the short and long term. Maintaining relationships across food, early care, and emergency food assistance stakeholders builds community resilience and can increase access to local foods for all families. Continued opportunities for virtual training and building infrastructure for online marketplaces opens the accessibility of education and local foods to more ECE providers and families. Importantly, the flexibility offered in child nutrition programs should be extended or built into a more permanent policy approach to continue increased access to meals and reduced paperwork burden for providers. The figure below provides a snapshot of lessons captured in the brief. These lessons are vital to informing advocacy in child nutrition policy and upcoming stimulus opportunities. For opportunities to put this information into action, learn more about NFSN policy priorities for Child Nutrition Reauthorization here and read about opportunities to leverage stimulus funding, here: Creative Opportunities for Strengthening Farm to ECE through Emerging Federal Funding Streams.

Read the full brief to learn more about these themes of innovation that emerged during COVID-19 and the policy and practice recommendations we can garner from the experience to build more equitable and more resilient ECE and food systems into the future.

This blog was originally posted on July 23, 2021.

The Northeast Farm to School Institute model, developed by Vermont FEED, is a unique year-long learning opportunity for schools, districts, and early childhood teams to build robust and sustainable farm to school programs. In June 2021, Vermont FEED Project Director, Betsy Rosenbluth, project evaluator Andrew Powers of PEER Associates, Simca Horowitz of Massachusetts Farm to School, LeBroderick Woods of Mississippi Farm to School, and Sarah Smith of the Nebraska Department of Education joined the National Farm to School Network for a special webinar sharing the Institute model and innovative adaptations of the model happening across the country. The following information summarizes content shared on the June webinar, but you can view the full webinar here.

The Northeast Farm to School Institute
The Farm to School Institute uses a three C’s model of change, connecting the classroom, cafeteria, and community. They aim to connect these three essential areas through integrating food education, improving nutrition and food access, and building relationships between students, families, and schools. A key component of the program is action planning, during which schools meet at a summer intensive with their collaborative teams to develop an action plan ready to implement at the start of the new school year. The teams are paired with a coach - an experienced practitioner at the Institute that supports them throughout the year as they plan and implement their action plan. By bringing schools into a shared space for learning, the Institute facilitates peer learning and a sense of shared purpose among participants, with dedicated time to explore the innovations and feedback of the teams’ peers. The Institute builds cross collaborative school teams as well, with teams made of administrators, teachers, school nutrition staff, and other key players needed to create a robust and sustainable program. These teams also receive professional development and role-specific communities to help build capacity.

A recent retrospective evaluation conducted with members of ten Institute alumni teams found that their participation influenced sustainability of the farm to school programs developed and accelerated through the Institute. The study found that attending the summer intensive fostered time to connect and build strong inter-team relationships, making it easier to strategize, plan, and coordinate the program later on. They also found the action plan to be integral to the success of the program and the coach’s guidance and coordination very beneficial. Having paid coordination after the year of coaching also greatly helped sustainability. Another way the Institute fostered success was through its ability to create school commitment through teacher buy-in, building champions, and gaining administrative support, whose support is an essential piece to program sustainability. Finally, by participating in the Institute, schools made farm to school a priority and learned the value of the program. In order to build a sustainable program, farm to school must align with school priorities and goals, it has to be visible, and it has to be prioritized. The Institute helped teams achieve these requirements, effectively embedding farm to school into the school culture.

The Farm to School Institute Community of Practice
The Institute has been so impactful since its start in 2010 that, after five years of supporting Vermont schools with their integrated model of change, Vermont FEED opened the Institute to schools throughout the seven Northeast states, with the goal of supporting states as they replicate and adapt the model. States and communities across the nation have been adapting their model to support sustainable development of farm to school in their own communities. This year there are seven Farm to School Institute adaptations across the country with 2-3 more planned for 2022, a community of practice representing 18 states, and planning tools and guides available on the Vermont FEED website. Three of these states share their approaches to replicating the Institute and customizing the approach for their state.

Massachusetts: Massachusetts Farm to School, an organization that supports local food sourcing and education across the state, participated in the Northeast Farm to School Institute and has been providing schools with their own adaptation of the model since 2017. According to Simca Horowitz, Massachusetts’ Farm to School Co-director, having the opportunity to participate was a learning experience that shifted their programming to a more integrated, holistic approach that includes all three elements of the model, whereas previously they focused primarily on the cafeteria component. They started by sending 1-2 school districts per year to the Northeast Institute. Looking to create a more accessible program, they launched their first Massachusetts Farm to School Institute in 2017 as a pilot with three school districts, building over time to eight teams per year. Massachusetts kept most of the same components as the original model as they found the time tested tools catered to the northeast a substantial foundation to build from. Simca explained the lessons they’ve learned over the years on how to get schools excited about joining.“ We realized how important it was to have a time and place for people to come together in an environment different from their school really was.” According to Simca, the atmosphere at the Summer intensive plays a critical role in drawing schools to the Institute and creating a promising start for their farm to school programs.

By hosting summer intensives at educational farms, they are able to create a space that’s inspiring, connects attendees to the purpose of the work, and allows for experiential learning opportunities. The atmosphere also creates the feeling of a retreat more than a professional development workshop, helping the Institute stand out. Massachusetts has also been able to make their Institute more attractive to schools with financial support for implementation. Thanks to a private funding source, if a district participates in the Institute, they are eligible for funding that is otherwise provided competitively. The Institute also opens doors for funding opportunities, in part because of the action planning and strong whole school teams. Many schools go on to apply for and receive USDA farm to school grants. Simca believes the Institute helps support participant’s applications by helping them create clear goals and articulated plans.

Other key ways that Massachusetts has adapted the Institute to their own needs includes their coaches-in-training program. In an effort to build diverse leadership in the Farm to School movement, they provide an opportunity for those with less experience in farm to school to observe the Institute for one year, and then move into a paid coaching role the second year. They also accept both schools and districts, with districts needing to identify 1-2 schools that are the focus of their activities. Massachusetts requires districts to encourage school administrative participation, as farm to school involves many decisions which benefits from having individual school administrators present.

Mississippi: The Mississippi Farm to School Network has also created an Institute adapted from Vermont FEED’s model. Since their start in 2019, they’ve successfully built interest from potential participants by inspiring schools with the stories of teams that have graduated the program. They also build interest and decrease barriers for their participants by emphasising small steps towards big goals and showing schools how farm to school applies to their mission. Their approach to the Institute during COVID has reflected their focus. Instead of inviting new schools, they made the 2020 Farm to School Institute a celebration of teams that had graduated from the Institute, sharing their wins over the years and highlighting the small steps they made along the way, motivating both current and potential farm to school program teams.

LeBroderick Woods, Mississippi Farm to School Network’s Program Coordinator, emphasized the importance of taking into account turnover by making sure to teach specific participants how to implement farm to school for their specific position and not for the specific person. According to LeBroderick, team collaboration is also key to building sustainable programs. “Getting the whole team involved and not working in silos is so beneficial,” he explained. Mississippi has also embedded equity into their Institute, as Massachusetts and Vermont have, by considering demographics when selecting schools and including early care programs in the Institute to reach an impactful and often under prioritized setting. Mississippi also offers stipends to each team with few restrictions as well as technical assistance. When offering technical assistance, LeBroderick believes in always having a face to the Institute to keep teams invested, making sure to be available and present at all times.

Nebraska: Recognizing a need to further capacity and better organize farm to school work in Nebraska, the Nebraska Extension program decided to start their own Farm to School Institute. Using USDA Farm to School grant funding, they spent one year building their community of practice and leveraged the connections and conversations built in that space to promote the 2021 Institute. They also promoted and built interest in the Institute by requiring schools to include an extension educator on their team. “By having an extension educator on the team, schools heard about it from more than one source, they were hearing it from their own local level as well.” Explained Sarah Smith, Fresh Fruit and Vegetable and Local Foods Consultant for the Nebraska Department of Education. They are also incentivizing the Institute by offering mini-grants for the eight schools participating to put towards projects and travel reimbursement. On top of the week-long intensive, they are also offering technical assistance through the coaches supporting each team. As Sarah explained, Nebraska didn’t originally intend to have coaches, but recognized the value, both for the teams, and for the opportunity to train practitioners and build more awareness around farm to school.

Resources

• Driving Sustainable Farm to School Through the Farm to School Institute Model - Webinar Recording
• Northeast Farm to School Institute Learning Community
• Massachusetts Farm to School Institute
• Mississippi Farm to School Institute
• Nebraska Farm to School Institute

This blog was originally posted on July 22, 2021.