FOODCORPS FOR RURAL MONTANA SUMMATIVE EVALUATION

Transcription

1 FOODCORPS FOR RURAL MONTANA SUMMATIVE EVALUATION PAMELA MAVROLAS AND DR. BARBARA RUSMORE December 2013

2 2 FOODCORPS FOR RURAL MONTANA SUMMATIVE EVALUATION Submitted to: Kathy Hadley, Executive Director Crissie McMullan, Program Specialist National Center for Appropriate Technology 3040 Continental Drive P.O. Box 3838 Butte, MT December 19, 2013 Prepared by: Pamela Mavrolas Dr. Barbara Rusmore 2015 Williams 1429 South Grand Avenue Helena, MT Bozeman, MT For questions, contact Nancy Moore, NCAT Program Manager: (406) Or

3 3 Table of Contents I. INTRODUCTION... 4 II. PROGRAM BACKGROUND AND HISTORY... 5 III. METHODOLOGY OVERVIEW... 6 EVALUATION CHANGES... 7 IV. EVALUATION FINDINGS: OUTCOMES AND CHALLENGES... 8 PROGRAM HIGHLIGHTS... 9 V. FINDINGS: PROGRESS TOWARD OUTCOMES...11 Finding A. Improved and Increased School Food Procurement and Access to Healthy and Local Food Finding B. School Gardens and Student and Community Engagement Finding C. Nutrition Education and a Healthy Environment Finding D. Growing New Leaders Finding E. Building Capacity and Informing Policy VI. FINDINGS: PROGRAM PERFORMANCE...21 A. Site Selection and Development B. Supervision and Work Plans C. FoodCorps Program Support and Training D. Program Management and Development VII. CONCLUDING REMARKS AND RECOMMENDATIONS...26 THE RIPPLE EFFECT: STRENGTHENING FOOD SYSTEMS CHANGE...28 The key question...29 All photos by FoodCorps for Rural Montana

4 4 I. INTRODUCTION This report is the summative evaluation of the FoodCorps for Rural Montana (FCRM) program s first two years, August 2011 through August It reviews the accomplishments of the project, draws conclusions, and makes recommendations about future activities. The first two years of FCRM form a remarkable chapter of work across 13 Montana communities that includes a strikingly successful range of accomplished goals and growth in program resources for citizens concerned about access to regional and nutritious food for Montanans in need. In year one, the core element of work centered on the services of AmeriCorps VISTA, while in year two, the program collaborated with the newly created National FoodCorps, which collaborates with a different branch of national service called AmeriCorps Direct. Through both years, 15 FoodCorps members worked to develop and expand farm-toschool programs in 13 primarily rural Montana communities. Each FoodCorps member was based in a specific rural community with three over-arching goals: 1) build a more localized, nutritious school food supply chain; 2) help create nutrition education programs in local schools and create student-operated school gardens that produce food for school meals; 3) expand the capacity of Montana s community-based food production systems to deliver high-quality food for communities in need. The National Center for Appropriate Technology (NCAT), located in Butte, Montana, served as the statewide host site for FoodCorps Montana, with NCAT s program director, Crissie McMullan, providing state-level leadership. In year two, the program director was supported by a National FoodCorps Fellow who is a previous FoodCorps member selected nationally to assist with program development and support the FoodCorps members who work in the local sites. This report highlights program accomplishments and challenges over this two-year period, and lessons learned in program design and delivery. It also makes recommendations for future program development of Montana s FoodCorps by NCAT and its partners. This evaluation report may help inform other states engaged with the National FoodCorps.

5 5 II. PROGRAM BACKGROUND AND HISTORY The roots of this program began in 2006 when NCAT s food policy coalition Grow Montana 1 launched the nation s first FoodCorps effort by recruiting and training a team of four full-time Montana Campus Compact AmeriCorps VISTAs. These young leaders were charged with establishing and growing farmto-cafeteria programs on four sites: Salish-Kootenai College, the tribal college located on the Flathead Indian Reservation; Montana State University, a land-grant college with a long history of work in agriculture; University of Montana Western, a small public college in southwestern Montana s sheep and cattle ranching region; and Missoula County Public Schools. Excited by the success and potential of Grow Montana s initial program, Crissie McMullan, the program s director, obtained a Kinship Conservation fellowship for social entrepreneurs in She used that summer to create a concept and plan for a scaled-up version of Montana s innovative program. McMullan, along with five other experienced food activists from around the country, recognized the model s potential to significantly contribute to changes in America s food production and for feeding public school students. Moving quickly, they received planning grants from both AmeriCorps and the W.K. Kellogg Foundation in In 2011 National FoodCorps was formed and recruited its first cohort of FoodCorps members who were assigned to set up pilot programs in 10 states. Working as the project director of NCAT s FoodCorps for Rural Montana, McMullan became one of National FoodCorps first board members and she continues to serve on that board. Simultaneously, in late 2009 NCAT developed a new proposal to continue to fund this important collaborative work. McMullan submitted the proposal to USDA s National Institute of Food and Agriculture and in late 2010 NCAT was awarded a three year grant for this program which was called FoodCorps for Rural Montana. The goals of this program were to: 1. Improve access to local, healthy, sustainably-grown food in rural Montana schools with high levels of poverty and limited food access. 2. Connect Montana s food producers with local school food service markets with specific efforts geared toward beginning or transitioning farmers and ranchers. 3. Galvanize statewide and national investments in community-based food systems. In August 2011, NCAT launched the new FoodCorps component of the program with a team of nine VISTA /AmeriCorps members deployed across the state. Due to changing VISTA program requirements and the emergence of the new national nonprofit FoodCorps, NCAT switched to the national FoodCorps organization to acquire AmeriCorps volunteers in While initially Montana s FoodCorps program and the national programs were administered separately, they began to partner in Currently Montana hosts one of the largest components of the National FoodCorps program. 1 For a richer history of how NCAT s Grow Montana came together and shaped this program, see Appendix A

6 6 III. METHODOLOGY OVERVIEW From the very beginning of FoodCorps for Rural Montana, the project team decided to make a comprehensive effort to formally evaluate this experimental program so that its performance could be tracked and improved and lessons shared with similar groups around the country. An Evaluation Team was established, representing diverse sectors of the Montana food system, and this group helped guide the evaluation and reviewed the formative evaluation report in year one. To implement this participatory evaluation, FoodCorps members, project staff, and host site supervisors gathered baseline data, tracked and monitored progress, participated in evaluation discussions and helped develop recommendations. When NCAT partnered with National FoodCorps to provide volunteers, additional evaluation resources for the program were established, including a web-based data collection protocol. This summative evaluation of FoodCorps for Rural Montana s first two years grows directly out of the decision to carefully document and learn from its efforts to create new and innovative ways to improve Montana s food production system for rural schools. Several major evaluation questions guided the evaluation from the start and fit well with National FoodCorps efforts to track progress. 1. What was the increase (in dollars and percentage of food budget) in the purchase of Montana grown and processed foods by participating schools, and what were the significant levers and actions that helped facilitate this change? 2. What difference did the project make in participating students knowledge and actions in making healthy food choices? 3. How did the project contribute to institutional, local, and/or state-level policy and support for community-based food systems, including its impact on beginning and transitioning farmers and on meeting new USDA nutrition guidelines? 4. To what extent was new capacity for food systems change (infrastructure, social capital, knowledge, etc.) created in the participating rural communities? 5. What lessons were learned about placing emerging leaders in rural Montana communities as facilitators of local and statewide food systems change and did their efforts help other organizations working on K- 12 nutrition, farm to school and community-based food systems in Montana?

7 7 Evaluation Changes When Montana FoodCorps opted to partner with National FoodCorps program in SY 2012/13, the program components and the evaluation data collection processes became more standardized to address national requirement and needs. The data collection was directly tied to FoodCorps members performance and stipend. Because of this mid-term shift, in some instances data is not available or consistent over the two years. Program alterations created by partnering with national FoodCorps in the second year also focused the scope of work for each FoodCorps member and included: Each FoodCorps member placed more emphasis on nutrition education for children, with a goal of spending at least 10 hours per week on this activity. The Neophobia Survey (a study to measure resistance of young people to eating new foods) was implemented with a sample set of students exposed to at least ten hours of nutrition education over the course of a school year. (Unfortunately the Montana results of this assessment are not available by the writing of this report). FoodCorps members were prohibited from becoming involved in public policy activities. In addition, Montana s FoodCorps members put less emphasis on working with beginning and transitioning Montana farmers because staff learned that serving a local school food market was new for nearly all producers and could involve many different food producers locally. Data collection procedures also changed, resulting in differing, overlapping data sets. In year one, each FoodCorps VISTA member completed a quarterly tracking sheet on relevant indicators tied to the evaluation questions. Supervisors, food service directors and community Steering Committee members recruited by each FoodCorps VISTA were surveyed online for their views about progress. In year two, FoodCorps members submitted a weekly online log to National FoodCorps documenting their progress in a number of key areas. This created a much larger and more detailed data set. A Montana online database of producers and vendors was built and in both years a record of school purchases of Montana foods was maintained. FoodCorps member blogs were posted on the NCAT website, providing new insights and learning experiences for both individuals and organizations engaged in school food systems work. In both years, FoodCorps members met twice each year to reflect on their individual and collective experiences and successes, identify key lessons learned, and provide recommendations for program improvements. These gatherings were deeply influential for member education and program development. The findings and recommendations in this report come from two years of data collection and participatory analysis. (See Appendix A: Evaluation Tools, Processes and Data Sources)

8 8 IV. EVALUATION FINDINGS: OUTCOMES AND CHALLENGES This section provides an overview of the progress FoodCorps for Rural Montana made toward its stated goals. FoodCorps for Rural Montana achieved remarkable successes in its first two years. The highlights listed below are notable in their scope and in how affected school systems changed their on-site production and purchase of food supplies in Montana. Thousands of students across Montana were affected by these efforts, and the shifts in food use has the potential, over time, to shift how food is grown and used in public school systems across the vast agricultural lands and communities of the state. The dynamic and hands-on nutrition education in school gardens, in the classroom and in the cafeteria show promise to help young people develop healthy eating habits. Fifteen FoodCorps and/or FoodCorps VISTA members worked in 50 schools in 13 Montana communities, some serving two years at one site. 2 Table A. FoodCorps Sites in Montana Community Billings FY 2011/12 FY 2012/13 Boulder 3 X X Bozeman Dillon X X X FoodCorps Members Served 2 Years Ennis X X X Forsyth (partnering with Northern Cheyenne Boys and Girls Club) Glendive X X X Kalispell X X X Livingston Missoula Red Lodge X X X Rocky Boy Ronan 4 X X X X X X 2 Year 1: 9 FoodCorps sites that proved to be a manageable number. Year 2: Montana s FoodCorps approved 15 sites, but was only funded by Americorps for 10. Expansion in year two was desirable. 3 FoodCorps member became a FoodCorps fellow. 4 FoodCorps member was hired as staff.

9 9 Program Highlights Three key strategies were in play at each site. As expected, few of the sites excelled in all three nutrition education, creating school gardens, and/or changing school food procurement practices but each site had its own central focus based upon the staff, culture and experiences of the school s leaders and expectations, and the abilities of the FoodCorps member. In half of the 50 schools, 50 percent or more of the students qualified for Free and Reduced Lunch, which means that the FoodCorps program is reaching children who are most in need and who rely on school meals to obtain nutritious food. In year two, FoodCorps members provided direct, hands-on nutrition education to more than 8,000 students, which represents 10 percent of the roughly 80,000 students who participate in Montana s school meals programs. Thirteen percent of students at FoodCorps schools were Native Americans. Some were in towns like Missoula with a high percentage of Native students, or in communities on or near tribal reservations. Some examples: A FoodCorps site in year two was located on Rocky Boy s Reservation 5 ; the Ronan FoodCorps staffer served several schools near or on the Flathead Indian Reservation; and a year one program site was a partnership between extension agents in Forsyth and the Lame Deer Boys and Girls Club on the Northern Cheyenne Indian Reservation. FoodCorps members helped their schools serve healthy local food to more than 35,000 K-12 students. In the first year of Montana s FoodCorps, $34,254 of locally produced Montana foods were procured for school cafeterias. In the second school year the amount nearly doubled to $81,944 (17,384 lbs). Also in the second year, 9,100 pounds of local food was served in the classrooms, with some grown by students and volunteers in the school garden, magnifying both nutritional gains and educational activity. 6 This multiplier effect of combining education and nutrition is one of the key outcomes of Montana s FoodCorps program at every site. Working with community volunteers, FoodCorps members built, tended, or reinvigorated more than a dozen school gardens for a total of 44,010 square feet (12,352 square feet were new gardens, breaking new ground). The gardens were used to engage students in growing food and for education in math, science and nutrition. These activities, along with other classroom and cafeteria-related education curricula, provided hands-on nutrition education to 3,512 students in the first year and 8,379 young learners in the second year. In year two, 756 of these students 7 each received more than 10 hours of 5 Unfortunately, this was the only FoodCorps member in the entire program not able to complete her year of service. 6 No figures available for SY 2011/12. 7 No figures available for SY 2011/12.

10 10 garden-enhanced food and nutrition education activities that have shown promise in changing early-age attitudes toward consuming healthy food. A key emphasis of FoodCorps work is built around increasing a local community s capacity to engage adults in the school system and in building parent support to sustain this work over time. It relies on engaging residents as volunteers and adult learners. Over the two-year program, more than 500 volunteers were engaged in FoodCorps member activities, from building new gardens and processing vegetables in the school cafeteria to helping organize community and school education events and farm visits. The majority of these volunteers (432) were recruited in the second year, reflecting how FoodCorps members learned from the first year and reached out in new ways to recruit volunteers as they gained experience. Nearly all sites had an ongoing community group (formal or informal), composed mostly of volunteers who provided guidance and support for the FoodCorps member. These groups helped spread the word in their communities about the new school-related food production and nutrition activities and engaged producers, parents and business leaders in their efforts. FoodCorps member accomplishments have not gone unnoticed. FoodCorps started a weekly blog to record and share its activities. This blog, in less than two years, now boasts readership from some of Montana s most senior-level government officials and hundreds of local readers in home communities. The FoodCorps team earned more than 200 media hits from local and state publications, including television, radio, internet videos and newspapers. In year-end interviews, nearly all site supervisors said that the increased buzz and local awareness of the new school food program activities in the community was one of the year s most important accomplishments.

11 11 V. FINDINGS: PROGRESS TOWARD OUTCOMES This section documents the program s progress toward its outcomes and indicators of success. Findings are divided into four categories that integrate the goals of the Montana program (year one) and the national program (year two) in order to accommodate their differing emphases. Highlights of success are listed and illustrated with examples for each of the major goals or outcomes of 1) increased local food procurement, 2) school gardens, 3) nutrition awareness, and 4) new leadership and capacity for food systems change. The report also identifies key levers for success and lists some barriers/ challenges that should be addressed. Table B. Indicators of Success Success Indicators/Progress Year 1 Year 2 Cumulative Healthy local food served 16,000 K-12 students 19,000 K-12 students FoodCorps sites 9 sites 10 sites + FoodCorps fellow Local food procured for cafeterias $34,254 $81,944 (17,384 lbs). Local food served in classrooms or farm field trips (much grown in school gardens) Students received direct/hands-on nutrition education Number of school or community gardens built, tended, or revitalized 1,914 lbs. 9,100 lbs. served in classrooms 3,512 8,158 (756 received 10 or more hours.) 35,000 K-12 students 1 additional site + fellow (See Table A) $125,075 11,014 lbs. 11, Average: 20 Community volunteers (2,794 hours) FoodCorps members successfully completed one-year term FoodCorps members signed-up for 2 nd year term 100 % (9 of 9) 5 (includes fellow) 90 % (9 of 10) 529 Average 95 % 4 9

12 12 Finding A. Improved and Increased School Food Procurement and Access to Healthy and Local Food The successes here are dramatic, encouraging and measurable. Food-purchasing practices are changing at Montana s FoodCorps sites. $125,075 of Montanagrown foods were procured by participating FoodCorps schools over two years. Prior to the program, schools (with the possible exception of milk) purchased very little local food. In the first year, $43,131 of local foods were purchased. This nearly doubled in the second year to $81,944. In addition, 9,100 pounds of local food were served in classrooms in year two, often grown in the school garden. 8 New infrastructure and capacity was developed to support local healthy food in the schools: o By the end of the second year, all but one of the 25 were actively interested and little local food was being purchased. o o o o o Half the schools in the second year s sites now have salad bars. Nearly all are serving fresh food rather than canned vegetables. Two are serving local produce regularly. Kalispell and Missoula purchased cosmetically imperfect produce when in season and most affordable, and froze and stored it for the school year. A year-round geothermal greenhouse was put into service for growing food specifically for the school system. Greenhouses and hoop houses were constructed and used at five school sites and all of these provided some fresh produce during the school year. Mission Mountain Food Enterprise Development Center in Polson now is using new flash freezing equipment to preserve food for winter use by several of the FoodCorps sites. An online database of producers was established as part of NCAT s statewide Farm to Cafeteria project, based in part on FoodCorps members research, and now serves any interested citizen. The biggest accomplishments of my service have almost all had to do with procurement. Making the switch to local beef patties was a big one, if only for the amount of money it puts directly into the Kalispell economy (but there are many other reasons). But our absolute biggest accomplishment is going from $0 spent on local food the year before our arrival, up to $25,000+ our first year, and $65,000+ during our second year. This second year, we are the biggest institutional purchaser from the Western Montana Grower's Co-op with a number of $28,000+. I also believe the relationship I have built with the faculty, staff and students at Elrod Elementary is one of the best things that came from my service, and something that I will greatly miss. FoodCorps member after two years of service FoodCorps activities are supporting the local economy. FoodCorps members identified 110 local food producers and shared purchase information on a common interactive school food database. The school systems were a new market for nearly all these Montana producers. For instance, a thriving market is 8 No figures available for SY 2011/12.

13 13 emerging for the processer of locally produced beef burgers in Kalispell; five FoodCorps sites purchased produce from Western Montana Growers Coop, which enabled the Coop to significantly increase its local production; and a FoodCorps fellow launched the Montana Beef to School Coalition, an on-going initiative to make local beef the norm in Montana schools. Procurement Examples Several FoodCorps members used the Fresh Fruits and Vegetables Program (FFVP) of the Department of Defense (funds for schools to purchase fresh food for snacks) as a vehicle to get local produce into schools. One FoodCorps member reported: Working on FFVP and implementing Snack Facts has also been a highlight and big accomplishment. FFVP is what taught us to not be scared to take risks and buy local, and Snack Facts enable us to reach 2,200 students with a snippet of nutrition education three times/week. The FoodCorps fellow in the second year carried out a research and development project to get local beef in the schools. This project engaged statewide stakeholders in researching the opportunities and barriers, and formed an ongoing Montana Beef to School Coalition of agencies, nonprofits, school food service directors, producers and processors. It also provided training and materials to FoodCorps members and school sites, developed and taste-tested beef products (including a lentil/beef taco mix), produced an educational film on the value of local beef, and built on-going institutional relationships and support for this initiative. This statewide project is continuing with staffing from NCAT, and strong support from the local beef industry and other stakeholders. Procurement levers and actions that helped success Montana FoodCorps used a common vendor database. FoodCorps members made entries regularly, and purchases were shared and recorded, which supported all of Montana s FoodCorps efforts. As noted earlier, the involvement of each food service director in local food procurement was a key to success. Also essential were local community members with contacts and ability to mentor the FoodCorps member and communicate with the local community. Partnering with other enterprises co-ops, natural food stores, processors, etc. helped FoodCorps members arrange deliveries and prepare the food for serving. A prime example: Partner site Mission Mountain Food Enterprise Development Center hosted a year one FoodCorps member and then hired her for the next year. They also provided information, contacts and processing support to many FoodCorps sites. State agency resources opened many doors, especially the Montana Office of Public Instruction (OPI) and the Montana Department of Agriculture. They shared contacts, manuals, and food safety training for staff and volunteers.

14 14 Special funds from the national FoodCorps fellows program, and additional grants raised by the Montana program from the U.S. Department of Agriculture, Montana Blue Cross Blue Shield Foundation for Healthy Montanans, and other businesses provided additional vital support. Procurement barriers and challenges Increasing local food in schools is very complex. Much of the work involves convincing local institutions that the needed change is good for students and beneficial to the institution. This takes human capital and time to work effectively. Often products and services must be built from scratch. It is not simply a matter of finding something off the shelf. There is a limited supply of foods at the right price and processed for use by schools. It takes a lot of specific and time-consuming work to track down products available in forms usable for the schools, and deal with availability of processing and transportation. For example, sourcing local produce was difficult in all of the sites, but much more so in the eastern parts of the state because there was much less local supply, processing infrastructure or efficient transportation options. School food systems leaders need special support. In some situations the school kitchen was not very interested in local food or had too much else to do. Implementing the new federal meals nutrition guidelines was all some could handle. Over time, many kitchen staff became more supportive as FoodCorps members built relationships and offered simple, cost-effective, and specific solutions. Many FoodCorps members described their initial successes in the cafeteria as baby steps. Finding B. School Gardens and Student and Community Engagement Gardens are the nexus and catalyst where active learning and community volunteerism come together around healthy local food. In the first year, nearly all FoodCorps members created or revitalized a school garden for hands-on food education. In the second year, school gardens and square footage continued to increase. Now only eight of 25 schools do not have a garden. In the second year, 14 schools used their gardens as an educational resource for some or all grades, and nine were developing garden plans. In the first year, 97 volunteers served on community steering committees to mentor and support the FoodCorps members work. In year two, FoodCorps members recruited 432 local volunteers who dedicated 2,794 hours toward helping children build an enduring relationship with healthy food. 9 I've been watering the school garden in the evenings and just recently there are kids up on the playground every time I water. They gravitate over to the garden and help me out, snacking as they go. Natasha Hegmann, FoodCorps member in Ennis Nearly all gardens engaged community volunteers, school children and school staff in garden maintenance, usually with a small group of regulars who ensured the upkeep of the gardens. 9 Different data collected in Year 1 and Year 2

15 15 Many delightful educational events were held at the schools and in the communities of each site. Some were instituted by the FoodCorps member like the Fun Fit Run, or Meet Your Farmer. Others sites used existing event venues such as local fairs and community gatherings to inform and engage community support. School Garden Examples School garden levers and actions that helped this happen Engagement of local leaders is essential. Successful school gardens enjoyed support and interest from school leaders such as principals and teachers. Some had garden sites already in place or easily available for development. Community members support of gardens was often described as the lynchpin for success. FoodCorps member s personal interest and willingness to do gardening tasks proved essential. Creative energy and love of teaching by FoodCorps members, backed by training and curriculum materials from MSU, Montana Department of Agriculture, and OPI s Team Nutrition, enhanced the hands-on nutrition education. The best part of the day was having [high school students] sample kale chips made from the garden and seeing their initial skepticism turn into exclamations of Whoa, these are actually really good! Camille McGovern, FoodCorps member in Boulder School garden barriers and challenges: Lack of consistent maintenance, availability of water, and year-round engagement of local leaders (especially during summer months) took a toll on the school gardens. Some sites were very creative in forming summer garden groups, and getting staff to water plants. Sites for gardens are not always easy to arrange. At some schools, sites are not available. Volunteers may have different priorities about gardens, their use and locations. There are no consistent, common curricula available for Montana that can integrate gardens into classroom subjects as part of the core instruction. Garden-based learning is not integrated across school curricula nor is it part of state learning standards. Finding C. Nutrition Education and a Healthy Environment Nutrition education and creating a positive and healthy school environment around food are the main ways to help students learn and adopt life-long healthy eating habits, and reduce childhood obesity, diabetes and hunger. In the first year, 3,514 students and in the second year 8,376 students received hands-on nutrition education by FoodCorps staff members. By the second year, 756 students received 10 hours or more of nutrition education. These activities led to 10 percent of students who participate in

16 16 Montana s school meal programs being involved in at least one food and nutrition educational activity. In half of the schools, 50 percent or more of the students qualified for Free and Reduced Lunch, meaning the program reached children who most rely on this kind of program to access nutritious food. At the start of the first year, very few teachers taught nutrition in the classroom, or were interested in FoodCorps doing this teaching. FoodCorps members persisted, incrementally introducing nutrition education in the classroom. By the end of year two in half the schools, the majority of teachers were receptive to teaching nutrition in the classroom. On a Healthy Food Environment rating scale from National FoodCorps, Montana rated fourth-highest in improvement during the second year. Indicators of a healthy food environment also went up significantly in many schools, including nutrition and food education with Harvest of the Month, and other food activities such as tastings, visits by farmers, chefs, and more. Nutrition Education Examples In Missoula County Public Schools, FoodCorps member Peter Kerns reflections at the end of the year demonstrates the many unique ways FoodCorps members help shift the food environment: I think one of my biggest accomplishments is the menu development team. It is simply a group of food service staff members around the district who come to the central kitchen and try new dishes and discuss changes and the menu. I also think the production beds at the kitchen are a big accomplishment. I helped build them, fill them, plant them, and maintain them. It is a really cool idea to grow food right outside the kitchen that cooks it. Also one of my biggest accomplishments was to develop two good vegetarian patty recipes with Hellgate's Culinary III class and test them with Hellgate students and then serve them at Hellgate. Nutrition education levers and actions that helped this happen: A FoodCorps member s knowledge and creativity, familiarity with classrooms, and comfort with teaching helped them succeed. Support from Team Nutrition on curriculum materials and training in hands-on nutrition education taught good skills, knowledge and tips for improvement. Nutrition education barriers and challenges: I did a math activity and taste test with snap peas last week for all 100 kindergartners. This week the lunchroom served snap peas and the food service employees reported back to me that all the kindergartners chose snap peas and ate them! Erin Jackson, FoodCorps member at Hyalite Elementary School in Bozeman

17 17 There is a lot of random educational material available on the web and elsewhere and some FoodCorps members spent a great deal of time finding and developing their curricula. None of the schools have adopted a consistent and acrossall-grades approach. While many schools have a wellness policy intended to guide school practices on health and well-being, they are very general and have no consistent or planned implementation. Almost none of the schools have an active wellness committee. There is lots of room for improvement in the healthy eating environment that promotes good eating behaviors. For example, only half the schools have salad bars, most could do much more on presenting and using nutritional and educational materials on the serving lines, and students often wait in long lines. Only 25 percent of schools have recess before lunch for at least some grades, though others are considering it because exercise before eating is shown to improve health and attention in afternoon classes. Nearly all FoodCorps members reported resistance or hostile attitudes within the schools to local foods, changes in nutrition education, and cafeteria practices. Progress was made, however, by persistent, positive energy and working with interested and supportive people and by demonstrating small successes through their work with classes, gardens and kitchens. One of my biggest challenges is the food service staff. Sometimes some of the staff members can be very much against change, even if it is a positive change in their view. Some staff members do not believe in healthy food. Some staff members do not believe in local food. Some staff members just do not want to work any harder. Some staff members are not supportive of the healthy items we test in the schools and tell the students they don't support the food. Of course, there are also wonderful staff members who are my biggest allies but it is difficult to convince many staff members of changing a very popular and unusually unhealthy menu item to a healthy, local alternative. FoodCorps member s annual summary Finding D. Growing New Leaders The FoodCorps members are emerging as new leaders, and people in communities and school systems are beginning to taken on new roles and activism. FoodCorps members are emerging leaders and bring a lot of energy and ability to make things happen. They also gain leadership skills. The experience pushed them to learn how to take initiative, take risks and organize people to make things happen. They learned to be community organizers and provided new energy-and others learned and got engaged because of their presence. FoodCorps members developed their commitment to improving the food system. In their close-out logs and exit interviews it is clear that this work has been a life changing experience, and nearly all FoodCorps members went on after their Montana experience to related educational or work positions. FoodCorps members supported the Growing Leaders Retreat in April Local community members gained new energy and activism for healthy food in the schools. Individual volunteers and local organizations, from the PTA to sustainable farming organizations and the Scouts, got involved and became active supporters.

18 18 Across the sites, the supervisors have shown increased support for the work initiated by FoodCorps and are beginning to recognize that they can support each other to continue expanding this work. New Leaders Examples Erin Jackson, Hyalite Elementary, said, I am most proud of all of the connections I made over the past 10 months both at Hyalite and in the greater Bozeman community. I did not know anyone when I first moved to Bozeman, and now I feel like I am very much a part of the community and that people understand and respect the work I do, including the teachers at Hyalite. Having developed these trusting and dependable relationships will help me have an even greater effect in my second year with FoodCorps. Other accomplishments include starting the composting program at Hyalite, creating weekly nutrition lessons for all kindergartners, teaching kids to enjoy spinach so much that they want to eat it every day at recess, organizing volunteers to maintain the garden this summer and starting a summer program. Growing leaders levers and actions that helped this happen The site supervisor s attention and support, along with community activists who also supported and guided the FoodCorps members, were instrumental in nurturing FoodCorps leadership skills. Making a commitment to two years at one site allowed the FoodCorps member to build on relationships, experience and see much more success, and gain confidence in their abilities. Two years of FoodCorps activity and successes at a site also strengthened local and school leadership for food system change. Training from national and Montana s FoodCorps, and meeting together at least quarterly helped FoodCorps members build a sense of purpose and support, and reach for more success. Site supervisors who attended face-toface gatherings also reported increased understanding of and efficacy in supporting the mission of FoodCorps. Growing leaders barriers and challenges The challenges of getting started in a new community I feel that overall my biggest accomplishments were efforts and projects that enabled me to get the school, community members, teachers, and parents on board around farm to school efforts (whether garden based/ educational or sourcing wise). Starting the new Youth Garden was an important step in making a resource available to teachers and partner groups (children s center, boys & girls club) as well as having a physical presence in town that the community is able to observe and partake in. And finally, the Farm & Garden Camp this summer was valuable for FPC to be able to provide youth programming on its own for kids to learn about healthy, local food. Getting into the schools and securing a commitment from teachers was initially a challenge, but it just took getting to know teachers through singular activities and engaging their students more to get them on board for more involvement in FoodCorps projects. There's definitely room to continue engaging teachers and students who are not yet involved. Additionally, Red Lodge has a very active volunteer community so it can be a challenge to a) find dates for events that work for everyone and b) track down volunteers who aren't already committed to other ongoing events. Alyssa Charney, FoodCorps member in Red Lodge

19 19 were both an obstacle and a catalyst for the FoodCorps members leadership development. Many members noted in evaluations that they would have liked better orientation for how to get to know and work in their site, a clearer process for getting started, better pre-work with site supervisors. Detailed work plans would help them get going more quickly and effectively. Finding E. Building Capacity and Informing Policy Montana s FoodCorps raised new resources, helped install new infrastructure and food supply, built enduring partnerships and informed and engaged new people. Fundraising and resources. Nearly all the sites raised some additional funds and/or donations of materials for projects. The program director, fellow and Missoula FoodCorps member developed a model for building local awareness, and fundraising. Missoula s Try the Tray fundraiser offered school parents and community members an opportunity to try school lunch for dinner. This event was held in a local school cafeteria and for $3 each, 300 people came far more than anticipated. This friendraiser increased awareness about FoodCorps and farm to school. The food was prepared in the school kitchen, and was reported to be delicious and enjoyed by kids and adults alike. This model is being documented in a Toolkit with information and templates that can be adapted for other sites. New capacity in the supply chain. The beef to school project research conducted by a FoodCorps fellow will be carried on by NCAT staff. See also the list of infrastructure in the earlier section of this report on improved food procurement and access. Partnerships. At local sites the number and diversity of community partners working with FoodCorps on activities has increased and there are nearly 3 times as many active volunteers; this demonstrates increased social capital. Important collaborative players statewide include Blue Cross Blue Shield, which provided key funding; OPI s support provided credibility and moral support; Team Nutrition connected FoodCorps members Importantly, this project has also brought considerable attention to our FoodCorps program in Montana and more deeply ingrained it into the fabric of this state. We have grown and strengthened existing partnerships and created new ones with organizations such as Grow Montana, AERO, Montana Farmers Union, Montana Stockgrowers Association, Montana Meat Processors Association, the Office of Public Instruction, Montana Department of Agriculture, the Governor s Office of Community Service, Montana Team Nutrition, and many others. Creating these long-term relationships between institutions and producers was one of the big priorities at the outset of this project. Leah Howe, final report on the beef to school project to resources and nutrition education network; AERO found the FoodCorps members friends and connections to AERO members; Montana Dept. of Agriculture and Montana Farmers Union provided funding support, information on farm to school policy, and connections with farmers and reporters. Awareness and engagement. The FoodCorps Blog and other outreach activities, website and media hits all worked to inform community locally and statewide, helping to create the buzz.

20 20 Active support. The communities that participated in FoodCorps were also actively supportive of a statewide legislative initiative to support local food in the schools. While FoodCorps members did not do anything on this bill, their involvement with the schools helped community members recognize the value of local food and therefore support this legislation. The Montana Farm to School Act would have created a competitive grant program with state funds to be used by individual schools for the direct purchases of local food. While it passed with a supermajority on the house floor, it was killed in the house budget committee. There is strong groundwork for trying this idea again in Capacity Building Examples Many new partners emerged to assist FoodCorps member, some of which supported the program in unexpected ways. New partners identified at the FoodCorps year-end meeting included 4-H, Girl Scouts, day cares, libraries, chefs, conservation districts, other AmeriCorps programs, Northern Plains Resource Council, MSU Extension, Team Nutrition, school districts, a county health department, custodians, master gardeners, other non-food nonprofits, and hospital staff. Capacity building levers and actions that helped this happen FoodCorps members gained a broad understanding of Montana food system issues and players, and made connections with statewide leaders by going to other statewide organizations meetings and conferences. Program director Crissie McMullan and Grow Montana members built awareness and support for the program so that it was perceived as a resource and a valuable partner. Long-term relationships between the leaders of FoodCorps, Grow Montana, NCAT, and the Montana Food and Ag Development Centers formed a base of support and trust for the program and opened doors and made many useful connections for FoodCorps members in their communities and across the state. Capacity building barriers and challenges With a federal grant, FoodCorps members cannot be involved in or activate people on legislative issues.

21 21 VI. FINDINGS: PROGRAM PERFORMANCE FoodCorps for Rural Montana is a high-performing and effective program. Over the first two years, the program s design and implementation has been strengthened by NCAT staff, FoodCorps National staff, and FoodCorps members all continuously striving for program improvement by reflecting on their experience, articulating collective learning, and experimenting with new approaches to improve and grow the program. This approach should be continued and duplicated in additional community sites. Progress was accelerated in all sites in the second year. The impacts were markedly greater when a FoodCorps member stayed for a second year. It takes time for FoodCorps members to develop knowledge of the community and the trusted relationships necessary for success. For supervisors and community mentors, it takes time to understand the FoodCorps programs and expectations and how best to engage, oversee and support a FoodCorps member s work. It is a testament to the program s effectiveness that eight of the thirteen FoodCorps members committed to a second year term, (four in 2012/13 and four in 2013/14), and only one FoodCorps member did not complete her term. 10 The key factors that influenced program effectiveness over the two-year scope of this evaluation were host site selection and community support, site supervision, program management, support and professional development. These elements should be emphasized and studied for engagement in future program planning. A. Site Selection and Development Community sites were selected through an application process to establish the site s readiness for a FoodCorps member. Local host sites might include: a school district, individual school or a local nonprofit. Community and school readiness to put a new FoodCorps member to work is a key driver of success, particularly in the FoodCorps member s first year. Readiness can be measured by a community s track record of past support for locally produced foods, the presence of an effective site supervisor, and the school food director s interest in local food. On-going activity in a community for healthy and local food proved essential for the FoodCorps members easy entry and success. For example, in Ennis, Montana, Farm to Fork was an existing robust group of food and agricultural activists who welcomed and supported the FoodCorps member, and provided continuing connections, support and guidance. When the program director chose sites based in part on the presence of active community leaders, the FoodCorps member got off to a good start. A school or school system host and supervisor proved to be more effective in most cases, particularly where efforts were focused on nutrition education and developing school gardens. An inside position aids in communication, program integration and better access to teachers, students 10 This individual was located on the Rocky Boy Reservation and her social, economic and geographic circumstances were challenging and different from typical FoodCorps members. This experience identified some of the difficulties and limitations of FoodCorps to support members in Indian Country. The Montana program is working to develop a relational approach and more culturally appropriate programming, over time, that may prove more successful.

22 22 and parents. One FoodCorps member commented that having her own school was a real boon to her legitimacy and helped in coordinating and scheduling her work. Missoula s community fundraiser, Try the Tray, was publicized though school-based invitations sent directly to students families. FoodCorps members are much more likely to succeed when a site s food service director is interested in healthy and local food. As well, the largest quantities of local food procurement happened in western Montana along the Highway 93 corridor running from Kalispell to Missoula, where local food production, aggregation and distribution are the best developed. Challenges for the FoodCorps site selection include the geographic range of sites across Montana and whether to select an individual school or larger multi-school districts. While there is no conclusive evidence yet on the single site vs. multi-school sites, some lessons are being learned on geography and working on Indian reservations. Supporting and managing FoodCorps members who were in more remote locations proved a particular challenge. FoodCorps members, particularly in eastern Montana, felt challenged by their isolation. To address this issue the program director intends to cluster future sites for FoodCorps and/or to provide two FoodCorps members per site for support and interaction, particularly when adding new sites. Unfortunately, the director was not able to implement this approach for expanding to 15 sites (in 2013/14) because AmeriCorps was only able to fund 10 sites. Indian Country sites had challenges due to isolation when located in the eastern part of the state. The work in Salish-Kootenai had some long-term connections to build on, however the other sites lacked long-term trusted engagement. Recruiting and enrolling a local FoodCorps member is a logical strategy for working in Indian country, and Montana s FoodCorps did that at Rocky Boy Reservation. She did not complete her service term due to personal reasons and health complications of her site supervisor. Montana FoodCorps is now working with Quentin Means, a graduate student in Environmental Studies, to help make connections and design an effective program with Native communities. Montana s program is also looking at other programs in the Southwest to learn from their experiences. Additional ideas that emerged in the evaluation process included working with partner organizations such Hopa Mountain or the tribal colleges, which could help build successful bridges into the community. Culturally appropriate programming could be developed or adapted from other similar programs to enhance trust and communications. Perhaps OPI s Indian Education for All could be of assistance with curricula. B. Supervision and Work Plans The FoodCorps member s supervisor is the linchpin to creating a successful experience for both the community and the FoodCorps member. The site supervisor s skills and enthusiasm for changing school food and child nutrition, and their relationships and leadership in the community, are critical factors for success. Some elements and characteristics that help ensure successful supervision include: 1. Experience and skills in supervising employees. 2. Staying on track with the member s service plan and reviewing weekly timesheet reports. 3. Regularly scheduled time to meet with the FoodCorps member weekly. Failure to maintain regular contact with a member almost always creates misunderstanding and poor communication,