Good Food Purchasing Standards 2.0 – September 2017 Update

Good Food Purchasing Standards 2.0 – September 2017 Update2017-11-06T21:35:40+00:00

The first regular review of the Standards was completed in September 2017.

  • Contributors: these panelists contributed sustained guidance and direction during the development of the Good Food Purchasing Standards, Version 2.0.
  • Reviewers: these panelists provided invaluable input on a draft of the Good Food Purchasing Standards, Version 2.0.
  • Process: The Standards update process began in March 2016 and concluded in July 2017. The update was released in September 2017.
  • Summary of Updates: See Structure & Scoring Updates for changes to the scoring system. See Value Category Updates for changes within the categories of Local Economies, Environmental Sustainability, Valued Workforce, Animal Welfare, and Nutrition.

For more information or to receive a copy of the Good Food Purchasing Standards, please email Colleen McKinney (cmckinney@goodfoodpurchasing.org).

CONTRIBUTORS

Angela Amico Center for Science in the Public Interest
JuliAnna Arnett San Diego County Department of Public Health (formerly)
Sujatha Bergen Natural Resources Defense Council
Erin Biehl Johns Hopkins Center for a Livable Future
Brian Bowser American Heart Association
Sarah Chang
Andrew deCoriolis Farm Forward
Claire Fitch Johns Hopkins Center for a Livable Future (formerly)
Kari Hamerschlag Friends of the Earth
Christina Hecht University of California, Division of Agriculture and Natural Resources – Nutrition Policy Institute
Carolyn Hricko Johns Hopkins Center for a Livable Future
Jonathan Kaplan Natural Resources Defense Council
Cat Kirwin
Julien Kraus-Polk Friends of the Earth
Kathy Lawrence School Food Focus (formerly)
Kerstin Lindgren Fair World Project
Toni Liquori School Food Focus
Bob Martin Johns Hopkins Center for a Livable Future
Shaun Martinez International Brotherhood of the Teamsters
Abby McGill International Labor Rights Forum
Suzanne McMillan American Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals
Dennis Olson United Food & Commercial Workers
Lucia Sayre Health Care Without Harm
Juliet Sims Prevention Institute
Gail Wadsworth California Institute for Rural Studies
Michelle Wood Los Angeles County Department of Public Health

REVIEWERS

Shaniece Alexander Oakland Food Policy Council
Michele Beleu Oakland Food Policy Council
Jaya Bhumitra Animal Equality
Renata Brillinger The California Climate and Agriculture Network
Selene Castillo Austin Resource Recovery
Teresa Chapman Austin Resource Recovery
Jennifer Clark Los Angeles County Department of Public Health
Aiden Cohen Austin Resource Recovery
Pam Cook Tisch Food Center, Teacher’s College of Columbia University
Rodger Cooley Chicago Food Policy Action Council
Nick Cooney Mercy for Animals
Rachel Dreskin Compassion in World Farming
Alexandra Emmott Oakland Unified School District
Nina Farley Compassion in World Farming
Gail Feenstra University of California, Davis Agricultural Sustainability Institute
Zachary Fleig Real Food Challenge
Liana Foxvog International Labor Rights Forum
Gillian Frye Johns Hopkins Center for a Livable Future
Dana Geffner Fair World Project
Bob Gottlieb Urban & Environmental Policy Institute
David Gould International Federation of Organic Agriculture Movements
Brennan Grayson Cincinnati Interfaith Workers Center/Cincinnati Good Food Purchasing Coalition
Dana Gunders Natural Resources Defense Council
Kenton Harmer Equitable Food Initiative
Zoe Hollomon Twin Cities Good Food Purchasing Coalition
Dena Jones Animal Welfare Institute
Neil Kaufman University of Texas at Austin Department of Housing and Food Service
Kristen Klingler Twin Cities Good Food Purchasing Coalition/City of Minneapolis Health Department
Karen Law Los Angeles Food Policy Council (formerly)
Cheryl Leahy Compassion Over Killing
Alice Lichtenstein Tufts Friedman School of Nutrition Science and Policy
Edwin Marty City of Austin Office of Sustainability
Blanca Melendrez University of California, San Diego Center for Community Health
Socheatta Meng Community Food Advocates/New York City Good Food Purchasing Coalition
Kristie Middleton Humane Society of the United States
Marley Moynahan Coalition of Immokalee Workers
Nina Mukherji Real Food Challenge
Miriam Nelson Tufts Friedman School of Nutrition Science and Policy
Erik Nicholson United Farm Workers
Peter O’Driscoll Equitable Food Initiative
Jose Oliva Food Chain Workers Alliance
Antigoni Pappas American Heart Association
Michelle Pawliger Animal Welfare Institute
Diana Robinson Food Chain Workers Alliance/New York City Good Food Purchasing Coalition
Amanda Rohlich City of Austin Office of Sustainability
Kate Seybold Twin Cities Good Food Purchasing Coalition/Minneapolis Public Schools
Bjorn Skorpen Claeson US Sweatfree Consortium
Christina Spach Food Chain Workers Alliance
Angie Tagtow United States Department of Agriculture, Center for Nutrition Policy and Promotion
Sapna Thottathil Oakland Food Policy Council
Julie Ward Los Angeles Food Policy Council, Food is Medicine Working Group
Stefanie Wilson Animal Legal Defense Fund

PROCESS

The Standards Update process began in March 2016 and concluded in July 2017. Key steps included:

  • Convened Value Category Expert Subcommittees (Spring-Summer 2016)
  • Developed a Straw Proposal of Good Food Purchasing Standards 2.0 (Fall 2016)
  • Center for Good Food Purchasing Governance Board Review (October 2016)
  • Subcommittee & Additional Expert Reviewers (November 2016 – December 2016)
  • Local & Institutional Partner Review (December 2016 – March 2017)
  • Subcommittee Review and Updates (March 2017 – May 2017)
  • Tested Recommended Updates (May 2017)
  • Final Governance Board Review and Approval (June-July 2017)
  • Release of Good Food Purchasing Standards 2.0 (September 2017)

STRUCTURE & SCORING UPDATES

The Standards retain their overall structure, featuring five value categories and tiered rankings for certifications or attributes that define the value at each level. However, three key scoring changes were made:

EXPANDING INCENTIVES FOR SOURCING LEVEL 3 PRODUCTS:

  • In the Local Economies, Environmental Sustainability, and Animal Welfare categories, institutions now receive one point for each five percent of product that meets Level Three criteria (rather than three points for each 15 percent of product that meets Level Three criteria).This change was made because for each of these categories, it was uncommon for institutions to earn points at Level Three with a 15 percent threshold, so many institutions continued to source additional product from Level One suppliers rather than shift some purchases toward Level Three suppliers. This update creates greater incentive for purchasing from Level Three farms.

CREATING ADDITIONAL PATHWAYS TO MEET THE BASELINE IN CHALLENGING CATEGORIES:

  • In the Environmental Sustainability and Animal Welfare categories, the Center added alternative options for meeting the baseline requirements. Within the Environmental Sustainability category, we introduced a carbon and water footprint reduction for animal products and food waste reduction as an option, and within the Animal Welfare category, we introduced a meat reduction target (with plant-based protein as replacement) as an option for meeting animal welfare goals.

    These alternative options encourage a cost-neutral, best practice in the field of values-based food procurement, in which institutions reduce the amount of meat they purchase and redirect savings toward sustainable and humane products. This change permits both pathways as options for achieving the baseline requirement.

RE-INFUSING VALUE CHAIN EQUITY & INNOVATION INTO EACH OF THE VALUE CATEGORIES:

  • The initial release of the 2012 Good Food Purchasing Guidelines for Food Service Institutions included criteria throughout many of the five value categories related to health and economic equity. In 2015, we incorporated a sixth, bonus point only category for Value Chain Equity & Innovation to emphasize these criteria more explicitly.For the updated Good Food Purchasing Standards 2.0, the Center opted to return to the original format to reinforce that equity goals are inextricably linked across all of the value categories. To this end, equity criteria are distributed throughout each of the categories, particularly within Local Economies (e.g. creating economic opportunities for producers and entrepreneurs of color, women, and veterans); Valued Workforce (e.g. union or non-poverty wages, worker-owned cooperatives, etc.); and Nutrition (e.g. implementation of initiatives that expand access to good food for low income residents and/or communities of color).

VALUE CATEGORY UPDATES

Most changes within each of the individual value categories relate to 1) the certifications or attributes that define each of the values (e.g. adding/removing certifications or moving them to another level); 2) creating better alignment across value categories or with other food procurement initiatives; or 3) creating pathways for participating institutions to meet the baseline standard in value categories that have proven to be challenging for most institutions to meet under the existing definitions. The following is a brief overview of notable updates in each of the value categories:

LOCAL ECONOMIES

  • Aligned definitions with USDA’s definitions for farm size and ownership structure: The standards now specify that a farm should be family-owned to qualify as local, and refer to revenue rather than acreage to determine size.
  • Created greater focus on mid-sized farms: Institutions are still encouraged and rewarded for purchasing from small farms when possible, however there is an increased focus on creating more opportunity for mid-sized farms, which are often better positioned to provide institutions with the volume needed.
  • Extended local radius from 200 to 250 miles: 250 miles is a commonly used radius for local across the country and by other procurement initiatives.
  • Adjusted scoring so that each five percent increment of Level Three product receives one point.

 

ENVIRONMENTAL SUSTAINABILITY

  • Included an addition of a carbon and water footprint reduction for animal products and food waste reduction as an alternative option.
  • Set a baseline standard for third-party verified animal products produced without routine antibiotics.
  • Adjusted scoring so that each five percent increment of Level Three product receives one point.
  • Harmonized animal welfare and environmental meat reduction targets and antibiotic usage definitions.

 

VALUED WORKFORCE

  • Developed an expanded list of criteria for evaluating voluntary third-party certifications at Level Three. (for criteria, see footnote 34 of the Good Food Purchasing Standards 2.0).
  • Included disqualifier for slave labor, child labor or pattern of willful, serious, repeated violations over three years.
  • Included labor peace agreement as a bonus point.
  • Included option for worker education/training program on Good Food Purchasing Program at Level One.
  • Included a modified weighting system, which differently weights credit for Level Three along the supply chain, consistent with product availability (i.e. greater credit for product from Level Three farms than for Level Three processors/distributors).

 

ANIMAL WELFARE

  • Addition of a meat reduction target (with plant-based protein as replacement) as an option for meeting animal welfare goals
  • Included only certifications with third party verification (i.e. no “label claims”).
  • Adjusted scoring so that each five percent increment of Level Three product receives one point.
  • Harmonized animal welfare and environmental meat reduction targets and antibiotic usage definitions.

 

NUTRITION

  • Prioritized subset of checklist items based on recommendations for high impact practices from subcommittee members.
  • Created new checklist items that focused on prioritizing the purchase of whole or minimally processed foods, rather than moderately or ultra-processed products, and encouraged the reduction of purchases of red and processed meats.