Harvesting What`s Planted - Coulee Food System Coalition

Harvesting What’s Planted:
First Steps to Designing a Formal Assessment of our
Community Food System
Meeting held at Myrick Hixon EcoPark
June 5, 2013
2:00 pm to 5:00 pm
Session facilitated by Rande Daykin, Director of Resource Development at
Western Technical College
Harvesting What’s Planted: Planning Session Report
TABLE OF CONTENTS
List of Participants ................................................................................... 3
Original Design and Content/Responses ................................................... 4
Key Deliverables ...................................................................................... 8
Top Ideas/Actions .................................................................................... 9
SWOT Assessment ................................................................................ 10
Page 2 of 17
Harvesting What’s Planted: Planning Session Report
LIST OF PARTICIPANTS
Keith Baker ............................................................................ Cornerstone Church
Sara Bentley ...................................................... Coulee Partners for Sustainability
Erica Black .................................................................... Community Food Activist
Heidi Blanke............................. Community Member (prior Exec Dir of WAFER)
Karlena Brailey .............................................. Masters of Public Health Candidate
Kassidy Cable ................................................................................ Organic Valley
Kim Cable .................................................................................... CouleeCap, Inc.
Leanne Carlson ................................................ Hillview Urban Agriculture Center
Zack Gaugish .......... Hillview Urban Agriculture Center, Upstream Forest Garden
Steve Hansen ................................................................................... Vivid Writing
Beth Hartung ...................................................................................Options Clinic
Shelly Krause ................................................................... The Hunger Task Force
Lewis Kuhlman .......................................................................... City of La Crosse
Jason Larson ................................................................... Great Rivers United Way
Keith Lease ............................................................ Coulee Council on Addictions
Tiffany Lein ................................................ La Crosse County Health Department
Nick Lichter .................................................................................. Organic Valley
Curtis Miller ............................................................................................... AMOS
Jill Miller .......................................... YMCA – Pioneering Healthier Communities
Vicki Miller ..................................................... Hillview Urban Agriculture Center
Dana McConnell........................................................................................... Artist
Nick Nichols.............................................................................. La Crosse County
Susan Oddsen ......................... La Crescent Area Healthy Community Partnership
Erin Waldhart ........................................................................................... WAFER
Jason Witt........................................................ La Crosse County Human Services
Janet Wollam ................................................. Mindoro/Stevenstown Food Pantries
Page 3 of 17
Harvesting What’s Planted: Planning Session Report
ORIGINAL DESIGN, AGENDA, AND CONTENT OF SESSION
The goal of the session was to move work forward in a reasonable and collaborative way, and to build consensus towards specific
action steps that can be taken in developing the assessment any Community Food System needs to fully incorporate resources and
needs in the region. We first laid out the goals and parameters of the meeting within the context of the work that had been done so far.
The bottom row of Table One shares the rules we used to guide a respectful discussion.
Table One: Background and Guidelines for the Session
Background (Assumptions)
CFS is holistic by design…
incorporates and networks
existing structures.
Interest appears high
among all stakeholders, not
sure about high-barrier
populations?
Overall Purpose
To move from discussion to
action in a collaborative,
respectful way.
Purpose of Session
To report on consensus from
last meeting (WHY are we
here?)
Non-Purpose of Session
To challenge the assumption
that success is possible.
To develop five key actions
for beginning to assess our
structure and connections
(WHAT needs to be
addressed first?).
To establish a model of
organization (HOW will we
work together?).
To define for others what
their role or purpose is.
To apply organization to next
action steps (WHO will do
the steps and WHEN do we
hope to achieve them?)
To discuss at this time what’s
grant fundable.
Food systems incorporate
several stakeholders and
attempt to create responses
to “food deserts.”
There appears to be some
friendly competition among
food pantries.
To pull through assessment
and development two new
“key members of each
component into the work.
Lots of activity but some
disorganization.
Common elements include
or are based on small farms,
sustainable distribution,
local markets, and
gardens/grow-your-own.
To contextualize the big
picture actions and stages of
growth with resource
availability and thoughtful
planning.
Four aspects of
CFS: proximity, security,
self-reliance, and
sustainability, or PSSS
There are LOTS of models,
all similar but few exactly
the same… this is a new, or
newly identified, process.
To clarify purpose of the
System.
Breakout Groups ID’d
following essential
characteristics:
Processing/Distribution;
Core Values are focused
around Fairness and ID or
Concern about Resources
To identify what high-value
actions can be taken.
To use this session for what’s
working or not working (to
assess current operations or
programs).
To Save the Earth.
Page 4 of 17
Harvesting What’s Planted: Planning Session Report
Policy/City Planning; Food
Access;
Healthcare/Education;
Growers/Producers.
Food Access appears to be a
key issue, both in terms of
local need and assessment
of current practice.
IF we assume the responses
are reflective of desire, we
can say that people feel
resources are extremely
necessary but don’t feel
motivated to communicate.
Definite indications that
people are not sure what’s
out there in terms of steps
being taken.
Low-income populations
are thought to have largest
challenges to access.
To identify a work-group that
will (or can) start assessment
work within the next 60 days.
Formal assessment of
existing patterns and
structures is usually first
step.
PROCESS RULES
No speechmaking.
Suspend judgment.
Listen to each other.
Spin/churn thoughts into
rich ideas.
In the second meeting, the group identified core values and an idealized food system. Informal scoring of that work shows a deep
concern for resources (whether there are enough, not knowing how much is there, not knowing who will do the work) and some
uncertainty about the importance of communication. As such, we focused our spinning/churning of ideas to explore strengths and
weaknesses of the ability of the group to collaborate (Questions 1 & 2); the target or focus area of need that should be addressed more
than any other (Knowns: question #3); and the most important questions to answer (Unknowns: Question #4). The group’s responses
to these are on Table Two, page following.
For dots and explanations, turn to Session Deliverables, pp 8.
Page 5 of 17
Harvesting What’s Planted: Planning Session Report
Table Two: Header Questions and Responses
Question 1:
When you speak about our
ability to work together to other
organizations or communities,
what do you brag about?
Question #2:
What do we not admit to each
other when we talk about that
collaboration?
Question #3:
If we could only address one
essential need or weakness in
our community’s food system,
what would it be?
Question #4:
What’s most important to
learn? What don’t we know?
Transparency between partners is
evident.
We are too nice—typically do not
address what’s not working (two
dots).
Experience gap—too many cooks in
the kitchen and some of them may not
know how to cook (two dots).
Actually getting food to the hungry.
What could we really do to solve
hunger (two dots)?
Regional resource coordination and
availability.
Duplication of services (five
dots).
Comprehensive map/database of the
food system.
Generational commitment to the
community: families stay in the area
for multiple generations and are
invested.
Lots of volunteerism.
La Crosse paradigm for getting things
done.
Reducing barriers at the policy level.
How do you create nourishment
(broadly across a community) (four
dots)?
How do we all become producers of
food, change the culture of
consumerism (one dot)?
How do we ensure effective work
meets human needs?
Class tensions exist and are hard to
break down (one dot).
Knowledge and info sharing on
community gardening.
Vital associational life.
Self-protection of interests (three
dots).
The number of coalitions—there is a
structure in place for partnering and
engaging with different organizations.
Traditionally marginalized people are
often not at the table (two dots).
Access to available land and selfsufficiency in land use (related to
gardening).
Developing gardening as a civic
virtue.
Culture of inclusiveness.
Organizational identities are selfprotected as well, and funding is
viewed as life-sustaining or
threatening (two dots).
Suspicion of hidden agendas.
Birth through graduation hunger and
nutrition education and self-advocacy
in parenting culture and youth having
access to healthy choices/eating.
Structure to knowledge sharing.
Midwest culture ethos (respect and
politeness… good neighbors to one
another).
Genuinely interested in helping each
other (as community members).
Willing to try new things and be in
front of the curve.
Innovation and/or Bravery to try.
Breaking down walls of territorialism.
Making sure the right people are in
the room and are interested in what’s
being created to respond to their
needs.
Desire to meet the needs of clients—
clients don’t always self-identify (two
dots)?
Need to know data on needs,
strengths, capacity on a
regional basis (eight dots).
Lack of leadership development.
Page 6 of 17
Harvesting What’s Planted: Planning Session Report
The group then split into three smaller groups of six, who were asked to come up with one key action or response to improve or
strengthen the six main components of a Community Food System. The group had 15 minutes to generate discussion which was meant
to encourage good listening and collaboration but also to quickly get to top ideas. Each top idea was meant to also be based on the
strengths and weaknesses of the collaboration identified in Table Two, and the Knowns and Unknowns of the System itself. In the
table, the top-dotted idea is placed in the top row across under the header.
Table Three: Top Ideas for Community Food System Component Structure
Production,
Growers (includes
community
gardens)
Create and enable
gardeners by
training,
educating, and
actually gardening
more (six dots).
Create a vast listing
of production
resources (five
dots).
Create a gleaning
project (four dots).
Processing &
Distribution
(kitchens,
transportation of
goods)
Create more
community
kitchens (six dots).
Decrease wasted
food through use of
community
kitchens.
Consumers to
product (in terms of
transportation… get
user to the food
instead of getting
food to user).
Access (food
pantries,
accessibility)
Consumption
(Education of
cooking, nutrition,
health)
Policy, City
Planning
Waste and Recycling
Increase selfsufficiency in
community by
identifying areas
of under-served
(three dots).
Coordinate
transportation to
existing resources
and vice versa (two
dots).
Continue/extend
farm-to-school
programming
(eight dots).
Strengthen
utilization and
protection of land
for growing (five
dots).
Create a city-wide
composting system
(seven dots).
Re-instate cooking
classes into broad
educational
curricula (two dots).
Advocate for (?)
ordinances to
support house
garden, shared
resources, outlaw
pesticides (one
dot).
Neighborhood
composting waste site
(one dot).
Develop a Fresh
Food meals-onwheels program
(one dot).
Purchase a digester
for
commercial/household
waste (three dots).
Page 7 of 17
Harvesting What’s Planted: Planning Session Report
KEY SESSION DELIVERABLES
Observations
The group was excellent to work with. When discussing collaboration, it’s interesting to note
that the group focused on the ability to collaborate and the willingness of people to come
forward, but nobody in the group mentioned achievement of results—The question only asked
what we like about ourselves, yet nobody mentioned “I like that we have accomplished X, Y, or
Z.” The statements are all focused around capacity and strength of character.
Another note of interest is that most of the responses to Question #2 tend to focus around issues
of identification, class, and the relations between different tiered social structures, indicating that
there is some evidence of work needing to be done in bridging relationships between non-like
groups. This is probably not a surprise.
There appears to be conflict between the group’s answers to Question #1 and Question #2 (We
work well together! No we don’t!) but I believe that’s because of the way the questions were
structured.
Top Ideas
The group voted on the key strategies they would focus on and the greatest potential threats to
success, and spoke briefly of the key resource(s) or agency(ies) that would be important to start
with when beginning the assessment. This is represented below, Table Four, on page 9.
Action Team
The group voted on three models of taking action—with one being easier to get things done but
less democratic, one that is more democratic but harder to organize, and one being MOST
democratic and inclusive but necessarily slower in process. The group voted for a small action
team to run the assessment and report back to the larger CFS collective. It is recommended that
representatives of this team be selected by members of the collaboration who share their affinity
(so members who are farmers/growers select one of their own to serve as the representative of
their group).
Contextualization
The Header Questions provide input to contextualize the Assessment Step within a SWOT
(Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities, and Threats) analysis. Questions 1 & 2 are
INTERNAL—how we can/will work as a collaborative—and Questions 3 & 4 are
EXTERNAL—issues we may face when going outside the collaborative to gather that data.
These are the key thoughts and priorities the Action Team should focus their needs assessment
around.
Page 8 of 17
Harvesting What’s Planted: Planning Session Report
Table Four: Top Ideas and Challenges to Consider to Achieving Them
Structure
Production, Growing
Priorities
Create and enable
gardeners by training,
educating, and actually
gardening more (six
dots).
Key Sources UW Extension,
to Approach Hillview
Possible
assessment
question
How much
organic/healthy food is
out there? What is the
total capacity to grow
in the region in
X=amount of food per
{Y=either hungry
people, malnourished
people, or Y=area of
habituated space?}
Processing &
Distribution
(kitchens,
transportation of
goods)
Create more
community
kitchens (six dots).
Access (food
pantries,
accessibility)
Consumption
(Education of
cooking, nutrition,
health)
Policy,
City
Planning
Waste and
Recycling
Increase selfsufficiency in
community by
identifying areas of
under-served (three
dots).
Continue/extend
farm-to-school
programming
(eight dots).
Create a
city-wide
composting
system
(seven dots).
Parks and Rec,
Churches, K12
Hunger Task Force,
WAFER, Mayo,
Gundersen,
University for
data/research
Farm-toSchool.org,
Viroqua and West
Salem for models.
Strengthen
utilization
and
protection
of land for
growing
(five dots).
Local
Gov’t
Current
local plans
and
strategies
vs. cost vs.
sustainabili
ty?
See left.
How many
kitchens in area
are running how
many educational
courses? Who
attends? Who
doesn’t? Who
would but can’t
get there?
Number of lowincome people vs.
number of services,
vs. number of
unused goods, vs.
number of available
goods?
LAX Health Sci
Consortium,
United Way?
Health effects in
the community of
unhealthy eating?
City Gov’t
Page 9 of 17
Harvesting What’s Planted: Planning Session Report
SWOT ASSESSMENT BY GROUP INPUT
When planning how to begin the data analysis of table four, the action team should take into
careful consideration the following strengths and weaknesses. These are the tools and the
environment that they should be conscious of when beginning the assessment.
Internal
(collaborative)
External
(community)
Areas to draw from
Strengths
Areas to be wary of
Weaknesses
There exists a tremendous sense of
community here. A strong,
innovative culture of
collaboration, paired with
Midwestern sense of ethos and
openness, create valuable
resources for social needs.
Despite this, a perception of duplication
of services and wariness of interorganizational purpose (likely due to
increasing scarcity of funding) could
easily disrupt new solutions, as
generational territories create a parochial
sense of the right way and wrong way to
do things.
Opportunities
Threats
There is a sense that food
resources or systems exist, but
access or education about them
should be the priority. In an
environment of shrinking financial
resources, this is a good thing—
the region needs to build bridges
TO the main structures, not the
structures themselves.
There is evident concern that the will of
the community at large may not match
up with the need of the population at
greatest risk. A very apparent wish to
prioritize data illuminates willingness to
do it right but potentially once again
illustrates disconnect between
components that must work together to
achieve goals.
Incomplete Work
The facilitator did NOT get to determine the Action Plan or the Communication Plan. The
following needs to be done to fully complete the work:
 Bring forward suggestions for team members who represent the key component groups
who will represent the action team that will carry out the assessment/gap analysis;
 Agree on the Steps/Formal actions to be taken by this group;
 Arrange a communication plan that focuses on Key Messages needed by the ENTIRE
team, who needs to know them, when they need to know, how they will learn the
messaging, and who will tell them.
The facilitator will attempt to get this information by a simple online survey, submitted at a later
date, and will send one out to the entire group along with this report of the afternoon’s work.
Page 10 of 17
Harvesting What’s Planted: Planning Session Report
ATTACHMENT A: VISUALIZATIONS OF FOOD SYSTEMS AND CONCERNS
Figure A
Source: Taos County Economic Development Corp. Viewed online on June 3, 2013, at
http://www.tcedc.org/communityModel.html
Page 11 of 17
Harvesting What’s Planted: Planning Session Report
Figure B
Source: University of Washington, Seattle. Viewed on June 5, 2013, at:
http://students.washington.edu/uwfarm/2011/05/18/food-and-justice-inserting-equityinto-our-food-system/
Page 12 of 17
Harvesting What’s Planted: Planning Session Report
Figure C
Source: Community Roots Garden, viewed online on June 5, 2013, at:
http://communityrootsgarden.org/community-food-assessment/
Page 13 of 17
Harvesting What’s Planted: Planning Session Report
Figure D
Figure E
Source: NourishLife.org; Food System Tools, viewed online on June 4 th, at:
http://www.nourishlife.org/teach/food-system-tools/
Page 14 of 17
Harvesting What’s Planted: Planning Session Report
Figure F
Source: eatwell-livelocal.org, Northwest Louisiana, on June 5th, 2013, at: http://www.eatwelllivelocal.org/images/HLFSDiagram7-11.jpg
Page 15 of 17
Harvesting What’s Planted: Planning Session Report
Figure G
Source: Metro Vancouver Agriculture Advisory, viewed on June 5th, 2013, at:
http://www.metrovancouver.org/planning/development/AgricultureAndFood/FoodSyste
mPics/Food-System-Diagram.gif
Page 16 of 17
Harvesting What’s Planted: Planning Session Report
Figure H:
Garrett and Feenstra: Growing a Community Food System. Washington State University and
University of California; a Western Regional Extension Publication. Viewed on June 4, 2013.
PDF at http://smallfarms.wsu.edu/wsu-pdfs/WREP0135.pdf
Page 17 of 17