Upload
ngonhu
View
228
Download
2
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Prepared by Spark Policy Institute | www.sparkpolicy.com 1
Part III: Farm to School Grant Template
Assistance in Applying for Farm to School Funding
Farm to
School Task
Force
January
2013
Prepared by Spark Policy Institute | www.sparkpolicy.com 2
FARM TO SCHOOL GRANT TEMPLATE
Contents
Introduction ............................................................................................................................................. 4
What is the Farm to School Grant Template? .......................................................................................... 4
Grant Template ........................................................................................................................................ 6
Overview ................................................................................................................................................... 6
Obesity as a Nationwide Health Problem ............................................................................................ 6
Childhood Obesity in Colorado ............................................................................................................ 7
Community Agriculture and Economy ............................................................................................... 10
Farm to School ................................................................................................................................... 10
Statement of Need ............................................................................................................................. 11
Specifics: Proposal Narrative .................................................................................................................. 12
Project Need ....................................................................................................................................... 12
Objectives, Activities, and Timeline ................................................................................................... 15
Evaluation ........................................................................................................................................... 16
Staffing ............................................................................................................................................... 17
Prepared by Spark Policy Institute | www.sparkpolicy.com 3
Additional Benefits ............................................................................................................................. 18
Sustainability ...................................................................................................................................... 18
Budget..................................................................................................................................................... 18
Conclusion or Abstract ........................................................................................................................... 20
References ............................................................................................................................................. 21
Last updated on January 31, 2013
Prepared by Spark Policy Institute | www.sparkpolicy.com 4
INTRODUCTION
WHAT IS THE FARM TO SCHOOL GRANT TEMPLATE?
The FTS Grant Template is a document that contains information, citations, and text that can be
used in your own grant applications. While every funder has its own set of requirements and
application instructions, there are broad similarities. Most funders want to know the what, where,
when, why, and how of a proposed request.
This template provides a way to explain the following:
General Overview
1. What is the big problem you are addressing? For many districts, you will want to tie your
equipment and/or personnel funding requests to the nationwide childhood obesity epidemic and
Colorado’s alarming rate of increase (2nd only to Nebraska). There are two main methods for
addressing childhood obesity: increased physical activity and increased intake of healthy food.
Schools are sites where both changes can occur. In terms of offering healthy food, for schools to use
fresh, local produce in their salad bars or scratch-cooking, many will need new equipment, skills,
and staffing. This template can help you connect childhood obesity to school nutrition and your
need for a facility upgrade, new kitchen equipment, or additional staff training.
2. What is Farm to School? Two sections address local food procurement from a big picture
perspective. One describes the state of our food system and how the centralization and
globalization has made it difficult for small, local producers to be competitive. Another section
describes Farm to School generally with specifics about Colorado Farm to School.
Proposal Narrative Customized to Your District
This section of the template has text that is easily customized for your own district.
3. Project need: All grants require a statement about why the requested funds are needed. This
section provides language and customizable fields in the following areas:
School district and Farm to School background information
Readiness and need
Justification
4. Objectives, Activities, and Timeline: Some grant applications require a more sophisticated
timeline that tracks objectives and activities. This section provides examples of these additional
components that can be customized.
5. Evaluation: Some grants require evidence of change. Sometimes a grant is large enough to
support an external evaluator; oftentimes, it is not. This section provides basic language around
evaluation as well as FTS evaluation tools to aid a district in implementing evaluation internally.
6. Staffing: Most grant applications include information about the key staff who will carry out the
project.
Prepared by Spark Policy Institute | www.sparkpolicy.com 5
7. Additional Benefits: If an application has space to articulate additional benefits, it is good to
use this area to identify program components that address the funders' scoring criteria.
8. Sustainability: Most funders will want to know how their investment will lead to long term
sustainability.
Budget
Every proposal will need to submit a budget. Typically, the grant application has a form to be
followed. This section provides an example table.
Conclusion or Abstract
Some applications dedicate space for the grantee to summarize their funding request. This may be
at the end of the application (Conclusion) or at the beginning (Abstract).
Grant Writing Resources
Much information has already been compiled on how to write an effective grant, sample proposals,
and other tools. Check out these resources as needed.
Grant Writing Tips recommended by the School Nutrition Association,
http://www.k12grants.org/tips.htm#Grant%20Writing%20Tips
The GrantHelpers.com blog, http://www.thegranthelpers.com/blog/
Grant Writing Basics, http://grant-writing-proposals.com/grant-writing-basics
Throughout the template you will find pullout boxes with instructions and resources.
Now, let’s get started!
Prepared by Spark Policy Institute | www.sparkpolicy.com 6
GRANT TEMPLATE
OVERVIEW
Obesity as a Nationwide Health Problem
Obesity is a major health problem affecting children in the United States. Presently 17% of all
children and adolescents are obese, which is 3 times the rate of the previous generation (CDC,
2011). Figure 1 depicts the percentage of high school students who are obese by state.
Figure 1. Percentage of High School Students Who are Obese1
Obesity particularly affects low-income children (See Figure 2). Only 22% of children living above
400% of the poverty line are overweight or obese, compared with 45% of those living in poverty
(The Child and Adolescent Health Measurement Initiative, 2007).
1 Adapted from the Youth Risk Behavior Survey (2011). Available at: http://www.cdc.gov/healthyyouth/obesity/obesity-
youth.htm
Grant writer instructions: Overview. In the overview section you briefly review a significant
societal problem, connect it to your organization’s challenge, and then introduce a solution (in
this case, Farm to School). You may not want to use the exact wording below, but you can use the
format and content as guidance.
Prepared by Spark Policy Institute | www.sparkpolicy.com 7
Figure 2. County Obesity Prevalence Among Low-Income Children Aged 2 to 4 Years.
Adapted from the Centers for Disease Control (2011). Available at:
http://www.cdc.gov/obesity/childhood/data.html
Obese youth are more likely to have high cholesterol or high blood pressure (Freedman, Zuguo,
Srinivasan, Berenson, & Dietz, 2007), pre-diabetes (Li, Ford, Zhao, & Mokdad, 2008), and social and
psychological problems (Office of the Surgeon General, 2010). These changes in the proportion of
overweight and obese children are likely due to increased availability of high-calorie, low cost food
(Office of the Surgeon General, 2010). Children also drink more sugar beverages than ever before,
and are less likely to drink water or low-fat or skim milk (Nielsen & Popkin, 2003).
Childhood Obesity in Colorado
Although Colorado has the lowest adult obesity rate in the United States, childhood obesity in the
state has increased 23% between 2003 and 2007, second only to Nevada in increased rate of
childhood obesity.
Prepared by Spark Policy Institute | www.sparkpolicy.com 8
Figure 3. Change in Obesity Rates in Colorado vs. the National Average2
Figure 4. Childhood Obesity by Race/Ethnicity in Colorado3
One source of higher obesity among low income children is “food deserts,” or locations where
access to inexpensive, fresh, and nutrient dense foods is limited. According to the U.S. Department
of Agriculture’s (USDA) food desert locator4, almost 80,000 children live in areas defined as food
deserts in Colorado (See Figure 6). Figure 5 depicts the percentage of children who are obese or
overweight in 25 Colorado counties. Examine Figure 5 and Figure 6 to compare childhood obesity
rates in those 25 counties with Colorado food desert locations.
2 Figure adapted from the Colorado Children’s Campaign Healthy Moms, Health Kids report.
3 Figure adapted from the Colorado Children’s Campaign 2010 Kids Count in Colorado! report.
4 Available at: http://www.ers.usda.gov/data-products/food-desert-locator.aspx
Prepared by Spark Policy Institute | www.sparkpolicy.com 9
Figure 5. Children who are Overweight and Obese by County in Colorado (2008-2010).5
Figure 6. Food Deserts in Colorado.
5 Figure adapted from 2012 Kids Count in Colorado! (Figure 29, page 25). Kids Count focuses on a different set of
counties each year. This map represents the childhood obesity rates in the 25 most populous counties in Colorado.
Prepared by Spark Policy Institute | www.sparkpolicy.com 10
Community Agriculture and Economy
Another challenge facing U.S. communities is the dramatic decrease of small family farms in the past
30 years. Presently farms with sales of $250,000 or more now account for 48% of farm sales,
versus only 23% in 1982 (Hoppe, Korb, O’Donoghue, & Banker, 2007). Five multinational
agricultural corporations produce 42% of food sales, versus 23% in 1982 (Hoppe et al., 2007). Most
small producers earn little from the retail cost of their products, with the bulk of resources going to
transportation, advertising, energy use, and labor costs (Unger & Wooten, 2006), and are forced to
lower prices to compete with consolidated commodity markets (Kirschenmann, 2005). However, if
small farmers were able to access local markets, import substitution would occur, where buyers
would purchase locally produced rather than imported products, benefiting local markets, and
preventing stimulus “leaking” out to remote corporations (Martinez et al., 2010; Northern Colorado
Regional Food System Assessment, n. d. (c)).
Farm to School
Farm to School (FTS) is an initiative to educate K-
12 students on agriculture and nutrition, unite
schools and local farms with the joint goal of
providing local and fresh meals to students,
develop student nutrition, and support local and
regional farming communities.
In Colorado, the Colorado Department of
Agriculture has funded FTS through a Specialty
Crops Block Grant from the U.S.D.A. In 2010, the
state legislature launched the FTS Task Force
(FTS-TF). Colorado FTS supports policies that
connect schools and producers, and expand the presence of FTS throughout Colorado. Schools in
Colorado with FTS programs can have a variety of activities including sourcing local, fresh food for
school meals, nutrition and agricultural curriculum in the classroom, hands-on education through
school or potted gardens, field trips to farms, classroom visits by farmers, and local chefs to provide
culinary lessons.
There are multiple benefits to FTS. Agricultural and nutritional education connecting children to
their farming communities has been documented as raising participation in the school lunch
program (Bowers & Adams, 2002; Joshi, Azuma, & Feenstra, 2008). Increased student consumption
of nutritious and fresh food improves student academic performance, attentiveness, and decreases
obesity levels (Hollar, Lombardo, Lopez-Mitnik, Hollar, Almon, Agatston, et al., 2010; Storey, Pearce,
Ashfield-Watt, Wood, Baines, & Nelson, 2011). Not only does the mere act of increasing fruit and
vegetable consumption improve nutrition levels, but the minimization of food transportation
through purchasing locally preserves greater nutrition levels in the food (Heaton, 2001; Watada,
Ko, & Minott, 1996; Worthington, 2001; Shah & Nath, 2006). Farm to School can also enhance
opportunity for local farms and economy through increasing local spending, economic output, and
employment (Ecotrust, 2011). Lastly, FTS can reduce GHG emissions and nonrenewable fuel
Prepared by Spark Policy Institute | www.sparkpolicy.com 11
consumption through minimizing long-distance food transportation (Cowell & Parkinson, 2003;
Pirog, van Pelt, Enshayan, & Cook, 2001).
Statement of Need
[school/district name] is unable to provide healthy, local food due to infrastructural capacity limits.
[Equipment] is needed in order to [chop/process/prepare/store/serve] fresh, healthy food. Funding
from the [grant name] would overcome this barrier to providing [school/district name] children
with access to healthy meals, and facilitate the development of relationships with local producers
that could bring economic stimulus and stability to regional agriculture and our community.
This grant application will focus on a request for funding to [grant purpose] with the intention of
supporting child access to healthy school lunch and forging stable relationships with local
producers.
Grant writer instructions: Citations. Citations are important tools to persuading the grant
organization that 1. The problem is real, significant, and prevalent, and 2. Your solution is fitting.
Multiple citations were listed above, and are available in full in the References section. However,
other excellent public sources of research include:
http://wonder.cdc.gov/
http://www.ars.usda.gov/main/main.htm
http://www.farmtoschool.org/resources.php
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/
http://catalog.gpo.gov/F
http://www.eric.ed.gov/
http://www.fedstats.gov/
http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/search/advanced/advsearchpage.action
http://health.nih.gov/
http://www.science.gov/
http://www.chna.org/Home.aspx
Prepared by Spark Policy Institute | www.sparkpolicy.com 12
SPECIFICS: PROPOSAL NARRATIVE CUSTOMIZABLE TEXT
Project Need
School District and the Farm to School Background Information
Since [date], [school/district] has participated in Farm to School through [list Farm to School
activities]. Each of these Farm to School activities have occurred in [number] of [schools/districts].
Early on [school/district] Farm to School directors realized [lessons/problems]. In order to overcome
these challenges, [stakeholders] collaborated to [solution]. These successes, garnered through
community support, encourage [school/district] to expand its Farm to School efforts, with the
knowledge that our community will ensure sustainability.
[School/district] has thus far only investigated the potential for initiating a Farm to School program.
[School/district] has been astounded by local interest from parents and producers. [State evidence
of interest here].
Readiness and Need
Readiness. Currently [school/district] is able to allot [resources] to a Farm to School program and can
take advantage of [infrastructure/systems/processes] in place to [prepare/procure] food. With these
Grant writer instructions: Project need. In the Project Need section you will describe the
current state and successes of your program [Background Information], what is not being
addressed by your program [Need], and what the sources of the gaps in your program are
[Problem]. In describing your program, you will cover the target population [School or District],
and provide statistical and empirical data to support your argument that the problem exists.
Relevant data may include:
Percent students on free and reduced lunch plan
Percent ethnic minorities
Obesity rates by county
Poverty rates by county
Documented changes in participation in school lunch program, student health indicators,
or academic performance before and after implementing FTS
Dollar amount or pounds of local produce, dairy, protein, and starches
Citation sources for data on your community and your district are listed below, respectively:
U.S. Census: http://www.census.gov/acs/www/
Colorado Department of Education: http://www.cde.state.co.us/index_stats.htm
Colorado State Demography Office: http://www.colorado.gov/cs/Satellite/DOLA-
Main/CBON/1251590805419
Prepared by Spark Policy Institute | www.sparkpolicy.com 13
existing resources and relationships in place [school/district] is prepared to begin and sustain a
Farm to School program.
[School/district] anticipates several challenges to initiating a Farm to School program. [Describe
anticipated challenges]. However, a [grant name] grant would facilitate [school/district] in
addressing these challenges through providing resources to create a deliberative plan of
implementation. This planning process will assist [school/district] in preparing for and responding
to these challenges through [describe how planning process will aid school/district regarding
challenges].
Need. Presently [school/district] cafeteria is unable to [prepare/store/serve] meals, due to a lack of
[equipment]. As a result, the purchase of fresh [produce/dairy/meat] is unfeasible, and
[school/district] must purchase pre-prepared and processed [produce/dairy/meat]. Were
[school/district] to be awarded [grant name], [number of students on school/district lunch plan] of
students would benefit from substituting processed, pre-prepared meals with freshly prepared
lunches that are more likely to retain their nutritional value (Martinez et al., 2011). For example, if
[school/district] could purchase [equipment], [school/district] would be able to prepare and offer
children fresh [insert produce types]. Further, research supports the assumption that participation
in the school lunch program increases after Farm to School programs are implemented (Bowers &
Adams, 2002; Brillinger, Ohmart, & Feenstra, 2002; Joshi, Azuma, & Feenstra, 2007; Mascarenhas &
Gottlieb, 2000), which would improve [school/district] revenue, increase access to nutritious food,
heighten [school/district] demand for locally produced food, and promote sustainability in the FTS
program.
The purchase of [equipment] would further increase the number of schools able to offer the school
lunch program, as food prepared at [school] can be transported to and sold at [other school names].
[Other school names] currently lack a cafeteria/sufficient cafeteria space and equipment to serve
meals, but [school]’s increased capacity through purchase of [equipment] will permit shared
benefits among [school, and other schools].
Currently the equipment is [age] years old, and is unable to [prepare/store/serve] fresh meals. The
rural location of [school/district] is additionally problematic when considering the frequency of
food deliveries. Fewer food deliveries increase [school/district]’s reliance on processed, pre-
prepared meals. Because [school/district]’s lunch program budget and/or operating balance is only
[program budget/operating balance amount], [school/district] is unable to purchase [equipment]
without outside assistance.
Prepared by Spark Policy Institute | www.sparkpolicy.com 14
Justification
[School/district] aspires to purchase [equipment] in order to [prepare/store] fresh meals.
[Equipment] will permit [school/district] to improve school meal adherence to dietary guidelines.
The recent upgrades in school nutritional standards based on the Hunger-Free Kids Act of 2010
create urgency for [school/district] to improve infrastructure in order to provide children meals
consistent with nutritional standards.
[School/district] intends to purchase [equipment] in order to prepare meals more safely. Presently,
without a cold (or a blast chiller)/hot holding equipment, [school/district] is unable to ensure that
cold potentially hazardous food is kept at or below 41°F and hot potentially hazardous food is kept
at or above 135°F, which increases risk for the growth of bacteria related to foodborne illness.
Additionally without a milk cooler, [school/district] cannot guarantee that milk temperature is
satisfactorily lowered to prevent the growth of microflora. Additional refrigeration and freezer
space will facilitate [school/district] in providing locally purchased, fresh meals year-round, without
losing food due to spoilage. An additional safety issue regards proper cleaning of dishes and
utensils. With the purchase of a dishwasher [school/district] will be able to ensure that dishes are
washed and rinsed at a high temperature to ensure fully sanitized dishes.
[School/district] allocates [$ amount] to providing sufficient energy for current [equipment]. The
purchase of an energy-efficient [equipment] would save [school/district] [$ amount] each year. That
money could instead be spent on purchasing [amount] of local [produce/meat/dairy], offering
[number] more hours of agricultural and nutritional education, or purchasing [$ amount] of school
garden equipment.
Research has demonstrated that salad bar installation increases school lunch participation (Bowers
& Adams, 2002; Mascarenhas & Gottlieb, 2000; Brillinger et al., 2002) and student consumption of
fruit and vegetables between 25%-84% (Slusser & Neumann, 2001). Recent upgrades in school
food nutrition requirements require that students6 are provided a weekly minimum of 2 1/2 --5
cups of fruit, 1/2 cup of dark green vegetables, 3/4 -- 1 1/4 cups of red/orange vegetables, 1/2 cup
of legumes, 1/2 cup of starchy vegetables, and 1/2 -- 3/4 cup of other vegetables (Food and
Nutrition Service, 2012). Currently [school/district] provides an average of proportion of X% fresh
to Y% canned vegetables. A salad bar would enable [school/district] to exceed current nutrition
standards, and increase offerings of fresh, locally sourced, fruits and vegetables. A [grant name]
award would permit [school/district] to purchase equipment necessary to install and maintain a
salad bar, such as an insulated food bar, slide trays, a sneezeguard, cold retention pans, buffet
6 Fruit and vegetable standards vary by students' grade levels. (See Food and Nutrition Service, 2012).
Grant writer instructions: Justification. Examine whether one or more of these focus areas
relates to your equipment purchase, and modify and expand. Any research or statistics from your
school/district supporting your need for a particular piece of equipment need to be integrated.
Refer to “Grant writer instructions: Citations” for a list of databases to search.
Prepared by Spark Policy Institute | www.sparkpolicy.com 15
chilling pads, and serving tongs. The purchase of such equipment would offer students the
opportunity to select a greater variety and amount of fresh fruits and vegetables.
[School/district] presently serves [number] of school lunch participants each year. However, were
[school/district] able to purchase [equipment], [school/district] would be able to serve meals in
[nontraditional setting] and/or better use cafeteria to space.
[School/district] currently employs [number] kitchen staff. A [grant name] award would permit
[school/district] to retain [number] staff and would create [number] new jobs. These estimates are
based on [rationale].
Objectives, Activities, and Timeline
Below are listed [school/district's] objectives organized temporally, starting at the beginning of the
anticipated grant period, with the final goal at the end of the grant period.
Objectives and Activities Date of Completion
Objective 1: Upgrade [school/district name] kitchen(s) to permit scratch
cooking.
Activities:
Order [equipment name] 9/12
Install [equipment name] 10/12
Objective 2: Train cooking staff at [school/district name] on scratch
cooking techniques and recipes.
Activities:
Staff attend 7 sessions on scratch cooking at [program name]. 9/12-10/12
Staff develop menus that integrate scratch cooking. 10/12
Staff begin preparing portions of every meal through scratch
cooking.
11/12
Objective 3:
Activities:
Grant writer instructions: Objectives, Activities, and Timeline. Some grant applications
require a more sophisticated timeline that tracks objectives and activities. Below are example
models with these additional components you made to address.
Prepared by Spark Policy Institute | www.sparkpolicy.com 16
Evaluation7
Currently [school/district] documents the source of its food purchases, and the number of school
meals purchased by students throughout the year. If awarded the [grant name] grant, we would be
able to initiate/expand our current Farm to School program and would likewise diversify our
tracking mechanisms. [School/district] has a successful history of both implementing and
responding to multi-method evaluations, as evidenced by [list previous evaluations and their
outcomes].
The Colorado Farm to School Task Force has developed a FTS Evaluation Toolkit,8 which we will
use to design and implement our evaluation. As shown in the table below, we will evaluate [choose
the audience(s) to be evaluated and the types of outcomes to be measured. Delete audiences and
outcomes you will not address.]:
Table 1. Farm to School Program Evaluation - Audience and Outcome Types.
Type of Audience Types of Outcomes
Students Gains in knowledge/awareness Improve attitudes/willingness to try new foods and eat
healthier
Increased satisfaction with school meal options and increased participation
Improved eating habits Improved health behaviors beyond eating Increased demand for local food
Parents Improve attitudes Increase knowledge Change eating habits
Get involved in programs
Teachers Improve attitudes Increase knowledge Change eating habits Get involved in programs
Food Service Staff & Operations
Improve staff attitudes/commitment Increased staff knowledge
Increased use of local foods, seasonal foods, salad bars, etc. Affordability of FTS program, increased revenue, and
lower purchase price for some locally sourced foods Changes in waste management Facilities changes
7 If you choose to hire a professional evaluator, contact FTS-TF for evaluator referrals at
[email protected]. 8 Colorado Farm to School Task Force Evaluation Toolkit is available at www.coloradofarmtoschool.org.
Prepared by Spark Policy Institute | www.sparkpolicy.com 17
Type of Audience Types of Outcomes
Producers Increase awareness of FTS opportunities Improve food safety knowledge Improve food safety practices Increased local sales
Get involved in programs
School Leadership Improve attitudes and/or knowledge Change policies/funding
Community Improve attitudes and/or knowledge
Increased local food programs/activities
Project Management and Quality Assurance
In order to properly initiate/expand [school/district’s] Farm to School program, it is crucial that we
maintain both a schedule and budget. Currently at [school/district] engages in [list accountability
measures for implementing school of objectives and maintaining school budget]. These accountability
measures are appropriate for application to a Farm to School program as they similarly involve
multiple stakeholders, restricted budgets, and a need to integrate sustainability into project
management.
Staffing
The following staff [or contractors] will manage [school/district’s] Farm to School program, due to
their extensive experience with both project and financial management:
Staff Name Project
Role/Title
Project
Responsibilities
Qualifications Relevant
experience
1.
2.
3.
Prepared by Spark Policy Institute | www.sparkpolicy.com 18
Additional Benefits
A [name of grant] grant would not merely benefit [school/district], but will also impact
[collaborating schools/districts]. [School/district] currently engages in [group buying/kitchen
sharing/trainings] with [collaborating schools/districts]. [School/district] anticipates additionally
sharing [knowledge gained through developing a Farm to School implementation plan, the Farm to
School implementation plan itself, etc.] with neighboring school/districts.
Sustainability
Sustainability of [school/district's] Farm to School program is an integral component of the planning
process. Although [school/district] will continue seeking external funding through grants,
[school/district] intends to primarily sustain its program through the following measures: [lowering
prices through group buying, extending the season through food preservation, serving local food in
appropriate portion sizes to keep costs low, etc.].
BUDGET
Every proposal will need to submit a budget. Typically, the grant application has a form to be
followed. The Michigan Farm to School grant program has two sample grant applications that
include budget tables and budget narratives.
Planning Grant Application
Example: http://www.mifarmtoschool.msu.edu/assets/files/grant/Sample%20Planning%
20Grant%20Application.pdf
Implementation Grant Application
Example: http://www.mifarmtoschool.msu.edu/assets/files/grant/Sample%20Implementa
tion%20Grant%20Application.pdf
Below is an example of a budget table used in a Colorado grant application for food services
equipment.
Equipment Price
• Whiteboards- various sizes $100- $500
• Salad Spinner- 5 gallon capacity $150
• Rice Cooker- 22 cup capacity $225
Grant writer instructions: Additional Benefits. Many grant organizations will either overtly
or tacitly prefer to award grants to organizations that are collaborative. If you are currently
working with other schools or districts, reach out to them to co-write a grant. If you are not
presently working with another organization, brainstorm possible collaborators. It is useful to
look at the scoring criteria and use this space as an opportunity to articulate how your project
aligns with the priorities of the funder.
Prepared by Spark Policy Institute | www.sparkpolicy.com 19
Equipment Price
• Analog Scale- 25 # $80
• Digital scale- 10 # $120
• Big Stix Immersion Blender $350
• Rapi-Kool Ice Paddles $30 each
• Portable Butane Stove and Fuel $50 each
• Taylor Digital Thermometer $15 each
• Wusthof Knives (items can be purchased separately not only in sets only)
$90 for Chef’s Knife
• Sunkist Sectionizer with various blades $300 + $60 per blade
• Hobart Food Processor $3700
• Robot Coupe Food Processor $1350
• Stainless Steel Carts $150- $250
• Speed Racks $ 275- $500
• Salad Bars for Elementary and High School Levels $700- $1500
Grant applications may also require information regarding delivery cost, installation cost, and labor
cost, vendor or service provider quotes, and the number of jobs that will be created or retained
upon the award of the grant. Vendors of large equipment may be found on the School Nutrition
Association’s CN Marketplace. Local restaurant supply houses often provide ideal prices and access.
Below are several recommended Colorado school kitchen equipment vendors:
United Restaurant Supply, Inc., 725 Clark Place, Colorado Springs, CO 80915, (719) 574-3200, Contact: Tammie Taylor
Grady's Restaurant & Bar Supply, 430 W 4th St,Pueblo, CO 81003, (719) 542-5583.
Food Service Warehouse, 5670 Greenwood Plaza Blvd Ste #501, Greenwood Village, CO
8011, (303) 801-0644
Hockenbergs, 580 Burbank Street, Ste 120, Broomfield, CO 80020, (303) 466-6929, Contact:
Tom Kowal
If you are also requesting funds to support personnel, you may need to include a budget narrative.
A budget narrative explains in words how the numbers in your budget table were derived. eSchool
News 9provides this advice and example:
Budget narratives should explain every line item that appears on the budget form that contains a
dollar figure. Salary and benefit line items, for example, should explain the annual salary for the
position(s) of the people working on the project, their required experience or education, the
percentage of their time they will spend on the project, and the percentage of fringe benefits that
9 See ESchool News “A strong budget narrative can help sell your proposal” at
http://www.eschoolnews.com/2010/07/01/a-strong-budget-narrative-can-help-sell-your-proposal/
Prepared by Spark Policy Institute | www.sparkpolicy.com 20
corresponds to the salary amount requested. To illustrate, here is a sample personnel segment of a
budget narrative from the Office of Safe and Drug Free Schools on the ed.gov web site:
Project Director (1.0 FTE): $50,000
The project director will have oversight of the program and provide supervision, recruitment,
and training of the program liaisons. At a minimum, this position requires a master’s degree
with an emphasis in social work or other related field.
Program Liaisons (2 @ 1.0 FTE): (2 x $35,000) = $70,000
Two program liaisons will be responsible for day-to-day school/community outreach activities.
At a minimum, staff will hold a bachelor’s degree (or equivalent) in the social services field. It
is anticipated that each liaison will be responsible for 25 annual events.
Staff Assistant (1.0 FTE): $25,000
The staff assistant will perform all clerical duties for the project staff. This position requires a
high school diploma or equivalent.
CONCLUSION OR ABSTRACT
This funding request will contribute to [initiating and/or sustaining] a Farm to School program at
[school]. The purchase of [equipment] through funding from [grant] will further contribute to
community health and economic development through increasing child access to healthy lunches,
and farmer access to stable, local markets.
Grant writer instructions: Conclusion or Abstract. Most applications have a section at
either the end or the beginning where you have a limited number of words to summarize your
request. Below is example language to use. Please complete, modify, and expand the text to be
applicable to your school(s) or district’s needs. Use this section to reiterate the major takeaway
points you want the grant awarding organization to remember about you.
Prepared by Spark Policy Institute | www.sparkpolicy.com 21
REFERENCES
Bowers, C., & Adams, P. (2002). Assessment of the Juanamaria healthy school program and salad bar
of the Ventura Unified School District. Los Angeles: Center for Food and Justice, Urban and
Environmental Policy Institute, Occidental College.
Brillinger, R., Ohmart, J., & Feenstra, G. (2002). Crunch lunch manual: A case study of the Davis Joint
Unified School District farmers’ market salad bar pilot program and a fiscal analysis. Davis,
CA: Sustainable Agriculture Research and Education Program, University of California,
Davis.
Center for Disease Control and Prevention (2011). Youth risk behavior survey. Washington, DC:
Author.
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (2012). Trends in the prevalence of extreme obesity
among US preschool-aged children living in low-income families, 1998-2010. JAMA,
308(24), 2563-2565.
Colorado Children’s Campaign (2011). Healthy moms, healthy kids: A series on maternal and child
health in Colorado. Denver: Author. Retrieved from:
http://www.coloradokids.org/data/publications/healthymomshealthykids.html
Colorado Children’s Campaign (2010). 2010 Kids Count in Colorado. Denver: Author. Retrieved
from: http://www.coloradokids.org/data/kidscount/.
Colorado Children’s Campaign (2012). 2012 Kids Count in Colorado! Denver: Author. Retrieved
from: http://www.coloradokids.org/data/publications/2012kidscount.html.
Colorado Farm to School Task Force & Spark Policy Institute (2013). Farm to School Evaluation
Toolkit. Retrieved from: www.coloradofarmtoschool.org/schools/evaluation
Cowell, S. J., & Parkinson, S. (2003). Localisation of UK food production: An analysis using land area
and energy as indicators. Agriculture, Ecosystems, and Environment, 94, 221-236.
Ecotrust. (July, 2011).The impact of seven cents. Examining the effects of a $.07 per meal investment
on local economic development, lunch participation rates, and student preferences for fruits
and vegetables in two Oregon school districts. Portland: Author. Retrieved from:
http://www.farmtoschool.org/files/publications_386.pdf.
Food and Nutrition Service (2012). Nutrition standards in the National School Lunch and School
Breakfast Programs. Federal Register, 77(17), 4088-4167. Retrieved from:
http://www.fns.usda.gov/cnd/Governance/Legislation/nutritionstandards.htm
Grant writer instructions: References. The more data you can use to support your grant
application, the better. However, you must cite sources and organize your source information in a
standardized format. The references below are based on APA style, however, MLA, or Chicago
citation styles are also commonly used.
Prepared by Spark Policy Institute | www.sparkpolicy.com 22
Freedman, D. S., Zuguo, M., Srinivasan, S. R., Berenson, G. S., Dietz, W. H. (2007). Cardiovascular risk
factors and excess adiposity among overweight children and adolescents: the Bogalusa Heart
Study. Journal of Pediatrics, 150(1), 12–17.
Heaton, S. (2001). Organic Farming, Food Quality and Human Health. A Review. Bristol, England: Soil
Association.
Hoppe, R. A., Korb, P., O'Donoghue, E. J., & Banker, D. E. (2007). Structure and finances of U.S. farms:
Family farm report, 2007 edition (No. EIB-24). Washington, DC: United States Department of
Agriculture Economic Research Service.
Joshi, A., Azuma, A. M., & Feenstra, G. (2008). Do farm-to-school programs make a difference?
Findings and future research needs. Journal of Hunger & Environmental Nutrition, 3(2/3),
229-246.
Kirschenmann, F., Stevenson, S., Buttel, F., Lyson, T., & Duffy, M. (n.d.). Why worry about the
agriculture of the middle? Agriculture of the Middle Project. Retrieved from
http://www.agofthemiddle.org/papers/whitepaper2.pdf
Li, C., Ford, E. S., Zhao, G., Mokdad, A. H. (2009). Prevalence of pre-diabetes and its association with
clustering of cardiometabolic risk factors and hyperinsulinemia among US adolescents: NHANES
2005–2006. Diabetes Care, 32, 342–347.
Martinez, S., Hand, M., da Pra, M., Pollack, S., Ralston, K., Smith, T., Vogel, S., et al. (2010). Local food
systems: Concepts, impacts, and issues (No. ERR 97) (p. 87). Washington, DC: United States
Department of Agriculture Economic Research Service.
Mascarenhas, M., & Gottlieb. R. (2000). The farmers’ market salad bar: Assessing the first three years
of the Santa Monica–Malibu Unified School District program. Los Angeles: Center for Food
and Justice, Occidental College. Retrieved from:
http://departments.oxy.edu/uepi/cfj/resources/FTS-October2000.PDF
Michigan Farm to School & Michigan State University Center for Regional Food Systems (n.d.). Sample
planning grant application. Retrieved from:
http://www.mifarmtoschool.msu.edu/assets/files/grant/Sample%20Planning%20Grant%20Applic
ation.pdf
Michigan Farm to School & Michigan State University Center for Regional Food Systems (n.d.). Sample
implementation grant application. Retrieved from:
http://www.mifarmtoschool.msu.edu/assets/files/grant/Sample%20Implementation%20Grant%20
Application.pdf
Nielsen, S. J., Popkin, B. M. (2003). Patterns and trends in food portion sizes, 1977-1998. JAMA, 289(4),
450-3.
Northern Colorado Regional Food System Assessment. (n.d.(c)). Agricultural inputs: Labor and
purchases. Northern Colorado Regional Food System Assessment. Retrieved from
http://www.co.larimer.co.us/foodassessment/inputs_labor_purchases.pdf
Office of the Surgeon General (2010). The Surgeon General's Vision for a Healthy and Fit Nation.
Rockville, MD, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services.
Prepared by Spark Policy Institute | www.sparkpolicy.com 23
Pirog, R., van Pelt, T., Enshayan, K. & Cook, E. (2001). Food, fuel, and freeways: An Iowa perspective
on how far food travels, fuel usage, and greenhouse gas emissions. Ames, Iowa: Leopold
Center for Sustainable Agriculture, Iowa State University.
Shah, N. S., & Nath, N. (2006). Minimally processed fruits and vegetables - Freshness with
convenience. J Food SciTech, 43(6), 561–570.
Unger, S., & Wooten, H. (2006). A food systems assessment for Oakland, CA: Toward a sustainable food
plan. Oakland, CA: Mayor's Office of Sustainability.
United States Department of Agriculture (1999). Team nutrition presents: A guide for purchasing
food service equipment. Alexandria, VA: Food and Nutrition Service. Retrieved from:
http://teamnutrition.usda.gov/Resources/equip01.pdf
The Child and Adolescent Health Measurement Initiative (2007). National Survey of Children’s Health.
Portland: Author. Retrieved from: http://www.childhealthdata.org/learn/NSCH
United States Department of Agriculture (2011). National School Lunch Program fact sheet. Food
and Nutrition Service: Alexandria: Virginia.
Ward, D. (2010, July 1). A strong budget narrative can help sell your proposal. eSchool News.
Retrieved from: http://www.eschoolnews.com/2010/07/01/a-strong-budget-narrative-
can-help-sell-your-proposal/
Watada, A. F., Ko, W. P., & Minott, D. A. (1996). Factors affecting quality of fresh-cut horticultural
products. Postharvest Bio Technol, 9, 115–125.
Worthington, V. (2001). Nutritional quality of organic versus conventional fruits, vegetables, and
grains. J Altern Complement Med, 7(2), 161–173.
Prepared by Spark Policy Institute | www.sparkpolicy.com 24