May 23, 2012

Contact:  Juli Obudzinski, 202-547-5754

NSAC Comments on Proposed USDA Microloan Program

Washington, DC – Today, Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack announced a proposed rule for a new microloan program that would be part of the suite of credit options available to farmers through the Farm Service Agency (FSA).  The new program would allow FSA to make smaller loans, with a principal balance of up to $35,000, and would streamline the application process to require less paperwork for farmers.

“NSAC applauds the Department of Agriculture for being responsive to the needs of small and beginning farmers who have faced significant hurdles in obtaining loans through federal credit programs,” said Juli Obudzinski, Policy Associate with the National Sustainable Agriculture Coalition.  “This new program is a step in the right direction for the next generation of farmers who often are looking for smaller loans when they’re first getting started in agriculture.”

A modified version of this microloan program that includes a specific priority on beginning farmers is included in the Beginning Farmer and Rancher Opportunity Act (H.R.3236, S.1850), which NSAC and partners such as the National Young Farmers’ Coalition have been gathering support for across the country.  Although the microloan program announced today is not exclusively targeted at young or beginning farmers, the program will be incredibly helpful in allowing these groups to access federal credit and obtain loans to help them start their farming operations.

“Capital is the number one need of young and beginning farmers in the United States,” said Lindsey Lusher Shute of the National Young Farmers’ Coalition. “USDA microloans will fuel new farm businesses and a new generation of family farmers.”

In addition to credit needs, there are several other incredibly important issues for beginning farmers that are currently on the table as the Senate and House take up the 2012 Farm Bill, many of which are included in the Beginning Farmer and Rancher Opportunity Act.  NSAC will monitore the new microloan program throughout the rulemaking process to ensure it meets the needs of beginning farmers and will continue to advocate for programs that serve the next generation of farmers and ranchers as the farm bill process moves forward.

The National Sustainable Agriculture Coalition is a grassroots alliance that advocates for federal policy reform supporting the long-term social, economic, and environmental sustainability of agriculture, natural resources, and rural communities.

###

The Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP), formerly known as food stamps, provides benefits to recipients through an Electronic Benefit Transfer (EBT) card.  With the transition from paper to electronic benefits in the mid-1990s, SNAP purchases at farmers markets declined due to a lack of equipment and technology to accept and process these electronic benefits.

The USDA funding, made available by Congress through the Fiscal Year 2012 agriculture appropriations bill, will work to reverse this trend and boost SNAP sales at local food outlets.  While there are over 7,100 farmers markets in the U.S., a mere 1,500 of these currently have the capacity to accept EBT.

On a press call, USDA Deputy Secretary Kathleen Merrigan explained that the philanthropic community and organizations like NSAC member Fair Food Network and NSAC partner Wholesome Wave are largely to thank for the available EBT technology at some markets.

In looking at the limited capacity to process EBT at farmers markets, Merrigan said that she asked herself “Why couldn’t it be all of them?”  USDA estimates that the $4 million will significantly expand this number, hopefully adding 4,000 additional markets to the list of those accepting EBT.

The funding will be distributed to States and weighted more heavily towards States lacking large numbers of EBT-capable markets.  It will then be up to the discretion of the States to administer the funding.

Later this year through a Federal Register notice USDA will announce a period during which the Agency will accept public comments on disbursements of these funds in future years.

NSAC strongly advocates for expanding EBT access at farmers markets and other direct producer-to-consumer marketing outlets such as community supported agriculture programs (CSAs) and farm stands.  Not only does ensuring EBT capability expand access to healthy, fresh food for low-income Americans but it also bolsters economic development.  When farmers sell directly to consumers, they are able to retain a larger share of the dollar that can then be reinvested in the local community.

The Local Farms, Food, and Jobs Act contains key EBT provisions aimed for inclusion in the final 2012 Farm Bill.  NSAC supports inclusion of all of the provisions of this bill in the 2012 Farm Bill.  We will be alerting members and readers to opportunities to work for this goal as the farm bill moves to the Senate floor and to the House Agriculture Committee, both of which may happen in June.

The bill that the Senate Agriculture Committee voted out of committee last week now makes its way to the Senate floor and hopefully will be taken up by the House later this spring.  While there were some key highlights included on commodity program reform, organic agriculture, and local food, there was not much headway made on sustainable agriculture research priorities in the current bill that came out of the Senate.

A detailed breakdown regarding what research provisions were (and were not) included in the draft bill presented to the Committee by Chairwoman Debbie Stabenow (D-MI) and Ranking Member Pat Roberts (R-KS) is available in this earlier post.  This post focuses on amendments to the bill pursued before and during Committee markup last week.

Seeds and Breeds

We were pleased to see that Sen. Gillibrand (D-NY) filed and offered an amendment in support of classical breeding during the Senate markup.  Her amendment proposed to allocate 5 percent of total funding within the Agriculture and Food Research Initiative (AFRI) to projects involving classical plant and animal breeding – which closely mirrors the report language included in the 2008 Farm Bill which clarifies Congress’ intent in making public breeding a research priority in the newly created competitive grants program.  Despite this congressional mandate and the tremendous demand for more research on conventionally bred and locally adapted seeds and breeds, USDA has failed to sufficiently address the nation’s public breeding needs.  Ultimately, Sen. Gillibrand withdrew her amendment and we were disappointed to see no improvements to the AFRI program in the Senate bill voted out of committee.

Beginning Farmers and Local Food

There were no major revisions to beginning farmer research priorities, aside from one small change made to the Beginning Farmer and Rancher Development Program which added military veterans to the 25 percent set-aside which currently funds projects that meet the needs of socially disadvantaged and limited resource farmers and ranchers, as well as farmworkers aspiring to become farmers.  For more details on other beginning farmer related provisions, see our previous blog post.

On the local food research agenda, we were pleased to see that the local and regional food data collection initiative included in the Local Farms, Food, and Jobs Act was left intact from the draft farm bill presented by Chairwoman Stabenow (D-MI) and Ranking Member Roberts (R-KS) that was released prior to mark up.  We were disappointed, however, to see that there was no money provided to this new initiative, and will be working with other champions in the Senate and House to hopefully obtain mandatory funding to kick start this program.  For more details on other local food related provisions, see our previous blog post.

Horticulture and Organic

There were no changes made to two key mandatory programs that fund research on specialty crops and organic agriculture.  The Specialty Crop Research Initiative received a total of $200 million over the life of the farm bill and its funding levels are made permanent into future farm bill cycles at $50 million per year.  The Organic Agriculture Research and Extension Initiative maintains the funding levels included in the mark – $80 million over the life of the farm bill, or $16 million per year plus an authorization for $25 million per year in appropriations.  This is 20 percent decrease in annual funding, and NSAC will be continuing to advocate for additional resources to support organic research as the farm bill process moves forward.  For more details on other organic provisions, see our previous blog post.

Other Research Provisions

Sen. Leahy (D-VT) filed an amendment that included an authorization for the Regional Integrated Pest Management Centers, a public health reporting requirement for USDA programs and policies, and re-establishing the Agricultural Science and Technology Review Board which has historically provided oversight of federally funded technology development related to agriculture.  We are happy to report that the IPM Centers authorization made it into the final manager’s amendment presented at markup.  Sadly, however, the other two provisions included in Sen. Leahy’s amendment were not accepted.  We will continue to work on them as the farm bill process moves forward.

Another disappointment in the research title was the so-called “sun setting” of the provision that authorizes the Sustainable Agriculture Research and Education (SARE) Program.  SARE has until now functioned under a permanent authorization.  While not an imminent threat in any way, this change now makes the future of this incredibly successful program somewhat more precarious, as sustainable agriculture stakeholders will need to ensure that the program gets reauthorized in every future farm bill.

There were no other changes in the Research Title from what was included in the draft mark released prior to markup.

One issue which NSAC was especially frustrated was not included in the final bill was a proposal to clarify the eligibility requirements within AFRI.  The statute clearly states that USDA should solicit applications from wide variety of eligible applicants, including private organizations, federal agencies, and research foundations, in addition to public and private colleges and universities.   However, the statute has been interpreted we believe in a manner contrary to the intent of Congress, to restrict eligibility for integrated projects to only academic institutions.  The ball is now in Congress’ court to clarify whether the program will be competitive or non-competitive.  We hope before the farm bill process is concluded the farm bill will restore all of AFRI to fully competitive status.

For more information on which research provisions were included in the draft mark, see our previous blog post.

The Senate Agriculture Committee voted the Agriculture Reform, Food and Jobs Act — the proposed name for the 2012 Farm Bill — out of Committee on Thursday, April 26.  The markup and negotiations that immediately preceded the markup resulted in some improvements in the bill for local food systems and rural development, though there is still work to be done to ensure the final bill fully captures the economic opportunities to be gained in these areas of our nation’s agriculture and food policy.

What follows is a breakdown of provisions offered last week that were (and were not) included in the Farm Bill that emerged out of the Senate Committee markup.  A previous blog post on local food and rural development summarizes the provisions as presented in the original draft bill that was released on Friday, April 20.  We will not repeat that information here, but refer interested readers back to the earlier post.  This post focuses on changes adopted immediately before or in the Committee markup.

Nutrition Title

Two amendments were filed that could have bolstered opportunities for schools and other institutions to procure food from local farmers and ranchers.  The first was filed by Sen. Brown (D-OH), the Senate lead sponsor of the Local Farms, Food, and Jobs Act (S. 1773).  The second was filed by Sens. Casey (D-PA) and Leahy (D-VT).  Ultimately, neither of these amendments were offered during markup.  NSAC will continue to pursue Farm to School provisions during the Senate floor process and on the House side.

Thanks to an amendment offered by Sen. Leahy and passed out of committee, the bill now includes a provision that would make it easier for SNAP recipients to participate in Community Supported Agriculture (CSA) programs.  NSAC supports this provision and will advocate for it to remain in the final Farm Bill.

Chairwoman Stabenow (D-MI) championed a new program, with a total of $100 million in  mandatory funding over five years, to encourage purchases of fruits and vegetables by SNAP consumers at retail outlets, including farmers markets.  The grants are modeled after the successful work of Fair Food Network’s Double Up Food Bucks program.

Also noteworthy is the addition of the Healthy Food Financing Initiative (HFFI) – it was not in the original bill presented on April 20 but was included in the revised version on April 25 and included in the bill voted out of committee.  The initiative, which aims to improve access to healthy food in low-income communities, is authorized to receive up to $125 million (no time period is provided for) in discretionary funding through the annual appropriations process.

Rural Development Title

As our earlier post noted, the original bill did not include any mandatory funding for the Rural Development Title.  Unfortunately, despite the efforts of Sen. Brown and others, this sobering fact did not change during the markup process.  The Value-Added Producer Grant (VAPG) program and the Rural Microentrepreneur Assistance Program (RMAP) remain without any mandatory funding.

Brown did offer an amendment to put $25 million each into these two programs plus $100 million to fund water and wastewater projects.  He withdrew the amendment when it was not clear whether $150 million in mandatory funding was still available, given the changes made to the overall bill during markup, above the net $23 billion savings figure the Committee agreed to save over the next decade relative to current law.  Chairwoman Stabenow indicated her support for the Brown amendment, which will re-emerge in some form when the bill comes to the Senate floor.

No-cost policy changes proposed in the Local Farms, Food and Jobs Act to strengthen and improve a variety of rural development programs were not included in the Senate Committee bill.  The same holds true for the research and extension title.

The Senate Agriculture Committee voted the Agriculture Reform, Food and Jobs Act — the proposed name for the 2012 Farm Bill — out of Committee on Thursday, April 26.  The markup and negotiations that immediately preceded the markup resulted in some significant improvements in the bill for beginning farmers, though the bill still needs to do more in this area in our view.

Last year, Sen. Tom Harkin (D-IA) along with Agriculture Committee members Sens. Leahy (D-VT), Kloubhar (D-MN), Casey (D-PA), Brown (D-OH) and nine off-Committee sponsors introduced the Beginning Farmer and Rancher Opportunity Act (S. 1850) as a template for provisions that should be included in the new Farm Bill.  An identical bill (H.R. 3236) was introduced at the same time in the House by Reps. Walz (D-MN) and Fortenberry (R-NE).

Here’s a title by title breakdown of what beginning farmer related provisions were (and were not) included in the Farm Bill that emerged out of the Senate Committee markup.  This post focuses on changes adopted since a week ago when the the draft farm bill bill was first presented by Chairwoman Stabenow (D-MI) and Ranking Member Roberts (R-KS).  A previous blog post on beginning farmers summarizes the provisions as presented in the original draft bill.

Conservation

The popular Transitions Incentive Program (see previous blog post for more details) was championed by Sen. Johanns (R-NE) and included in the manager’s amendment that was presented during committee markup with increased funding of $50 million over the life of the farm bill, rather than just the $25 million included in the bill presented for Committee conservation.  NSAC applauds the Senator for his leadership on this issue which addresses the common challenge of accessing land that many beginning farmers and rancher face when looking to farm.  It is not clear if $50 million will prove to be sufficient for the program over the next five years and it may well be a bit short, but the amendment definitely made it closer to the mark.

Another win for beginning farmers in the conservation title was Sen. Leahy’s addition of “promoting agricultural viability for future generations” to the purpose of the newly created Agricultural Land Easements Program, which consolidates the existing Farm and Ranch Land Protection Program (FRPP) with other conservation easement programs.  The farm viability provision is an important improvement to what is today the FRPP.  The amendment did not cover the full breadth of the proposal in the Beginning Farmer and Rancher Opportunity Act, but is an important step in the right direction.

The existing set-asides, higher cost-share rates, and the advance payment option within the Environmental Quality Incentives Program (EQIP) and the Conservation Stewardship Program (CSP) were left intact, however the proposed increases in these provisions that were included in the Beginning Farmer and Rancher Opportunity Act, were not included.

Two other amendments that were included in the final bill were one that adds veteran farmers to the list of eligible applicants (along with beginning and socially disadvantaged farmers) who can receive an increased cost-share rate under EQIP and one that creates an exemption to allow beginning farmers and ranchers to graze on land enrolled in the Conservation Reserve Program.

Credit

There were no huge changes in the credit title from what was included in the bill prior to markup and the bill that was voted out of committee this week.  Of note, the Down Payment Loan Program maintained the higher value of land that can be financed that was included in the draft bill, as proposed and championed by Sen. Harkin.  This change will increase the utility of the down payment program in areas with high land costs.

The Beginning Farmer Individual Development Accounts program, for which NSAC has been advocating for funding since it creation in the last farm bill, was maintained but unfortunately still not funded.

One minor change included in the final committee bill changed loan eligibility criteria to require a farmer to have “participated in a farm operation” in order to receive a direct farm ownership loan, rather than having “operated” a farm to qualify.

Sadly, language included in the original draft bill presented to the Committee that restricted conservation loans to family-sized farms was stripped out of the final bill that is now headed to the Senate floor.

Finally, we were disappointed to see that despite efforts of key champions on the Committee, an authorization for a microloan program was not included in the final package.  On the bright side, USDA is currently in the process of creating a microloan program, although it is not specifically targeted at beginning farmers nor does it include any special features for young or beginning farmers, as is proposed in the Beginning Farmer and Rancher Opportunity Act.  NSAC will continue to work for an authorization in the farm bill, and also plans to comment on USDA’s forthcoming proposed rule for the new program.

For an overview of other credit programs that were included in the bill prior to mark-up, see our previous blog post.

Rural Development

On the rural development front, Sen. Casey won an amendment that clarifies the priority for beginning farmers within the Value-Added Producer Grant (VAPG) program into the final package.  The new provision requires that at least a quarter of the beneficiaries of a VAPG grant be beginning or socially disadvantaged producers in order to qualify for this priority.  This is a program implementation issue that NSAC has been working on for the past few years, and which has not been sufficiently addressed in the rulemaking process.  Hopefully, if this provision becomes law, more projects will be given priority and funded that benefit and create value-added entrepreneurial opportunities for beginning and socially disadvantaged farmers.

Unfortunately, the funding issue for VAPG has yet to be resolved as the farm bill makes its way to the Senate floor.  Sen. Brown commented during markup that without a strong investment in rural development programs, this bill cannot truly be considered a “jobs bill.”  While there is currently no funding for any rural development programs (other than energy title programs) in the bill as reported by Committee, Sen. Brown did offer and subsequently withdraw an amendment that would have provided some funding for VAPG as well as the Rural Microentrepreneur Assistance Program (RMAP).  There may well be an opportunity for the Brown amendment to be offered and accepted on the Senate floor.

Sen. Casey offered, spoke to the importance of, and then withdrew in light of opposition his amendment to give USDA clear guidance and flexibility to use rural development loan and grant programs to spur new agricultural enterprises that benefit beginning farmers.  This provision is included in the Beginning Farmer and Rancher Opportunity Act, but did not make it into the final package voted on by the Committee.

Research, Education, Extension

Perhaps the most disappointing outcome for beginning farmers of the current bill as it stands is the insufficient funding providing to fund new farmer training and education programs under the Beginning Farmer and Rancher Development Program (BFRDP).  In the bill as reported by the Committee, this program receives $50 million over the course of the farm bill (compared with $75 million included in the last farm bill), which cuts annual program funding almost in half – from $19 million to $10 million per year.  This will severely impact the number of grants that will be able to made under this program, and will decrease the number of new farmer training programs established, and ultimately the number of new farmers successfully entering farming each year.

Despite efforts to introduce an amendment that would create the offsets needed to provide adequate funding for this program, we were unable to secure additional funding for this program during markup.  NSAC will continue to press for $25 million a year for this program as the farm bill process moves forward.

Miscellaneous Title – Minority Farmers and Veterans

There were a few bright spots specifically for veteran beginning farmers hidden in the Miscellaneous Title.  Sen. Nelson (D-NE) championed a new provision that creates a veterans agricultural liaison position within USDA, who would be responsible for assisting returning military veterans in accessing federal programs, specifically new farming training and agricultural rehabilitation programs.  Additionally, this position would advocate on behalf of veterans within the Department.  This was part of the Beginning Farmer and Rancher Opportunity Act.

Sens. Baucus (D-MT) and Johanns pushed to include an emphasis on veterans within the Office of Advocacy and Outreach, and the 2501 Outreach and Technical Assistance for Socially Disadvantaged Farmer and Ranchers program.

NSAC was also pleased to see that $5 million a year in mandatory funding was provided in the final bill for the 2501 Outreach program, compared with zero dollars contained in the draft bill released before committee mark up.  Sen. Harkin, with support from Sens. Baucus and Johanns and others, was instrumental in pushing for this funding and we commend all who helped make it happen.

NSAC collaborated with several other groups that work on minority farmer issues on a letter addressed to the Senate Agriculture Committee urging $25 million a year in funding for both the 2501 program and the Beginning Farmer and Rancher Development Program.  As the farm bill progress proceeds in the Senate, NSAC will continue to work with beginning, minority, and veteran farmer champions in the Senate to renew critical funding for these two programs.

NSAC commends Chair Stabenow and Ranking Member Roberts for including some of the Beginning Farmer and Rancher Opportunity Act provisions in their mark and for working with the various members of the Committee who offered further amendments this week to assist beginning, socially disadvantaged, and veteran farmers and ranchers.

For more information on which provisions were included in the draft farm bill, see our previous blog post on beginning farmers.

Rural Development Subcommittee Chairman Tim Johnson (R-IL) opened the hearing by acknowledging the tight budget situation and the vast number of programs geared towards rural communities.  “It is, in part, the sheer number of programs which makes it difficult to gauge the effectiveness of current policy,” he said.

Ranking member Jim Costa (D-CA) followed, stressing the importance of USDA defining rural.  According to Costa, 98 communities, or 80% of the local loan portfolio, in California will no longer be considered rural unless rural definitions are revised.

Costa later went on to applaud the Value Added Producer Grant Program (VAPG) and suggested giving priority to collaborative projects within the program.

Charles Conner, President and CEO of the National Council of Farmer Cooperatives, stressed the need to streamline both programs and application processes.  He noted that VAPG was one such program that capitalized on group efforts by allowing cooperatives to access “new business opportunities that would go unexplored.”  In his testimony, Conner recommended that USDA “keep the VAPG Program viable and available to farmer co-ops, and streamline other rural development programs.”

Tri-County Council for Western Maryland Executive Director Leanne Mazer testified on behalf of the National Association of Development Organizations (NADO).   She, too, advocated for infrastructure development, as well as streamlining of policies, application processes, and reporting methods.  Mazer pointed out that in her opinion the more flexible programs such as the Rural Business Enterprise Grant Program (RBEG) and Rural Business Opportunity Grant Program (RBOG) had been hit the hardest by budget cuts.

Commissioner of Brookings County, South Dakota, Donald Larson stressed the importance of  the same lending programs– RBEG and RBOG–as well as the Rural Microentrepreneur Assistance Program (RMAP) for increasing capital in rural economies.  Larson echoed the need for rural development programs such as VAPG and sited the Beginning Farmer and Rancher Opportunity Act (BFROA) as “a model…for the kind of initiatives necessary to invest in the next generation of American producers.”  He noted that the Local Foods, Farms, and Jobs Act  provides “important policy suggestions for the Farm Bill” that promote local and regional agriculture.

The agency said today that $3.5 million in funding will be available to help local school districts organize and implement Farm to School programs.  These critical initiatives seek to educate children about where their food comes from and improve the quality of school meals.  At the same time, they also improve local and regional food systems and create new markets for local food producers.

The new competitive Farm to School Grants program was created in the Healthy, Hunger-Free Kids Act of 2010, also known as the Child Nutrition Act reauthorization.  NSAC, together with the National Farm to School Network and Community Food Security Coalition, championed the inclusion of the Farm to School program in that legislation, working with many senators and representatives led by Sen. Patrick Leahy (D-VT) and Representative Rush Holt (D-NJ).  That Act makes $5 million a year available for Farm to School programs, beginning October 1, 2012.  USDA’s plan for the other $1.5 million is still under development.

Schools interested in seeking funding for the first round of Farm to School Grants can learn more from the USDA Request for Applications.  Proposals are due by June 15.

Grant Program Details

In accordance with the legislation, USDA said it will prioritize projects that serve school districts and schools that have high free and reduced price meal enrollment.  Additionally, the agency indicated it will be interested in innovative local and regional food procurement strategies.  USDA also said it encourages eligible entities to submit “cluster” applications where a USDA investment in, for example, one school district working in concert with several additional districts, might benefit a wider geographic area than funding to any one entity.

There will be two kinds of awards, planning and implementation.

• Planning grants will range from $20,000 to $45,000 and comprise 25 percent of total awards.  These awards are intended to help school districts and schools organize and structure Farm to School activities. 
• Implementation grants, accounting for 75 percent of total awards, will range from $65,000 to $100,000.  School districts, schools, state and local agencies, Indian tribal organizations, agricultural producers or groups of agricultural producers, and non-profit entities may use these awards to further develop existing Farm to School programs.

Grant applicants must provide at least 25 percent of the costs of the grant project from non-federal sources.

Key Dates

• May 15, 3:00 EST: Implementation Grants Webinar
• May 17, 1:00 EST: Planning Grants Webinar
• May 18: (Suggested) Letter of Intent Deadline
• June 15: Proposals Due (www.grants.gov)
• July 15: Feedback on the RFA Due to USDA (details below)
• October 1, or shortly after: Awards Announced and Funds Available (pending availability)

Additional Information

To learn more about the Farm to School Grants, register for USDA’s Farm to School Listserve.

You can also contact USDA:

• Deborah Kane, National Director, Farm to School Program, Food & Nutrition Services (FNS), Deborah.Kane@fns.usda.gov or 503.326.2010
• Gregory Walton, Grants Management Specialist, FNS, Greg.Walton@fns.usda.gov or 703.305.1575

Finally, since this is a new program, USDA is still collecting feedback from advocates and stakeholders on implementation of the Farm to School Grants.  You can submit feedback through July 15, 2012 to f2sfeedback@fns.usda.gov with the subject header: F2S Feedback.  NSAC submitted comments to USDA last year on how the program should be implemented and managed.

The program prioritizes educating producers of crops currently uninsured under Federal crop insurance, specialty crops, and underserved commodities, including livestock and forage.  It also prioritizes collaborative outreach and assistance programs for limited resource, socially disadvantaged, new and beginning and other traditionally under-served farmers and ranchers.

The minimum award for a cooperative partnership agreement is$20,000 and the maximum award is $99,999. The awards will be distributed on a competitive basis up to one year from the date of the award.

Projects must fall into one of the following Special Emphasis Topics:

• Insurance and Production: AGR and AGR-Lite insurance; Livestock Gross Margin Dairy; Pasture, Rangeland, Forage Rainfall and/or Vegetative Index; Common Crop Insurance Policy Basic Provisions (‘‘COMBO’’); Enterprise Units; Specialty Crops; Prevented Planting; or Other Existing Crop Insurance Programs; Irrigation; Erosion Control Measures; Good Farming Practices; Wildfire Management; Forest Management; and Range Management or other similar topics;
• Legal: Legal and Succession Planning or other similar topics;
• Marketing: Marketing Strategies; Farm Products Branding; Farmers Markets or other similar topics;
• Financial: Financial Tools and Planning; Farm Management Strategies; Farm Financial Benchmarking or other similar topics;
• Human: Farm Labor; Farm Safety; Food Safety, Risk Management Education

Projects must also demonstrate that education or training will target at least one of the following Producer Types:

• New and Beginning Farmers;
• Women Producers and Ranchers;
• Hispanic Producers and Ranchers;
• African American Producers and Ranchers;
• Native American Producers and Ranchers;
• Limited Resource Producers and Ranchers;
• Asian American and Pacific Islander Producers and Ranchers;
• Transitional Farmers and Ranchers;
• Senior Farmers and Ranchers;
• Small Acreage Producers;
• Specialty Crop Producers; or
• Military Veteran Producers and Ranchers.

Interested parties may submit applications online only via grants.gov.  The deadline is May 24, 2012.

For 2012, $10 million dollars in competitive grant funds are available for projects that expand direct producer-to-consumer market opportunities.  Grant funds may be used for the establishment of new or expansion of existing farmers’ markets, community-supported agriculture programs, roadside stands and agri-tourism activities, to name a few.

As with the 2011 awards, the 2012 funding includes a priority for projects that expand access to healthy foods in food deserts and low-income communities (20 percent poverty rate and higher).  To determine if a project is located in a food desert, visit this AMS food desert website.  To check poverty rate data, check this Economic Research Service poverty rate website.

The minimum 10 percent set-aside of FMPP for new Electronic Benefit Transfer (EBT) projects to expand access to SNAP consumer participation at direct marketing outlets remains in 2012.  Separate applications are required for proposals that contain EBT project activities and non-EBT project activities.

The minimum per grant award is $5,000 and the maximum is $100,000.

The deadline to apply for FMPP funds is May 21, 2012.  Note that for the first time, all applications must submitted via www.grants.gov.  No applications will be accepted by mail, hand delivery, fax, or e-mail.

Guidelines, application instructions, and the mailing address can be found on the AMS FMPP website.

To assist FMPP applicants, NSAC member the Farmers Market Coalition will host a webinar on April 17, 2012: “Winning Grants with Logic Models: Improve Project Management and Evaluate Success.”

NSAC’s Grassroots Guide to the 2008 Farm Bill provides basic information about FMPP, contact information for program staff, and examples of previous FMPP grant recipients.  You can also visit the Know Your Farmer, Know Your Food Compass to explore previous FMPP projects.

FMPP was conceptualized and developed by NSAC and championed in the past two farm bills by then Senate Agriculture Committee Chair Tom Harkin (D-IA).

This legislation would establish a Foundation for Food and Agriculture Research (FFAR), which would solicit private donations to fund food and agricultural research activities in the following areas:

• plant health, production and products;
• animal health, production and products;
• food safety, nutrition and health;
• renewable energy, natural resources and environment;
• agricultural and food security;
• agriculture systems and technology;
• agricultural economics and rural communities.

These priorities very closely replicate the priorities included in the authorizing statute for the Agriculture and Food Research Initiative (AFRI) – USDA’s largest competitive grants program which is administered by the National Institute of Food and Agriculture.

The foundation is intended to complement, not replace, USDA’s research, education, extension, and economics activities conducted by various agencies in the Research, Education, and Economics mission area – which includes the National Institute of Food and Agriculture and the Agricultural Research Service.

The interest in this bill arises from the potential impact that current budgetary constraints may have on federally funded agricultural research programs juxtaposed with the simultaneous need to maintain and expand food and agricultural research in order to meet future needs, including increasing global food production demands.

At $2.7 billion a year, the current USDA food and agricultural research, education, and extension budget represents less than one-seventh of USDA’s total annually appropriated budget and less than two percent of  USDA’s total budget.  The new bill is being proposed as an innovative solution to the nation’s agricultural research needs while taking fiscal realities into consideration.

The Foundation for Food and Agriculture Research proposal is modeled after similar private funding entities previously established to leverage private funding for  the National Institutes of Health, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, National Fish and Wildlife Service, and the Food and Drug Administration.

The authors hope to include the foundation idea in the new farm bill.  Prior to introduction, they had intended to include $100 million in federal funds to jump start the foundation, but difficulty in determining a budgetary offset at least temporarily left initial start-up funding out of the mix.

NSAC recently released its farm bill platform, Farming for the Future, which includes a section on research priorities that will expand and strengthen federal research on sustainable and organic production systems.  We believe private-public partnerships can be strategic and valuable in leveraging scarce federal resources, but we do have some concerns about representation, transparency, accountability, and potential corporate influence on determining national research priorities.

Additional information on the bill can be found here: bill summary and overview, legislative bill text, or list of organizations supporting the bill.