| Overall Rating | Gold - expired |
|---|---|
| Overall Score | 68.23 |
| Liaison | Merry Rankin |
| Submission Date | Sept. 1, 2016 |
| Executive Letter | Download |
Iowa State University
OP-7: Food and Beverage Purchasing
| Status | Score | Responsible Party |
|---|---|---|
|
1.31 / 6.00 |
Karen
Rodekamp Food Stores Manager ISU Dining |
Percentage of dining services food and beverage expenditures on products that are third party verified under one or more recognized food and beverage sustainability standards or Local & Community-Based:
Does the institution wish to pursue Part 2 of this credit (expenditures on conventional animal products)? (If data is not available, respond “No”):
Percentage of total dining services food and beverage expenditures on conventional animal products (meat, poultry, fish/seafood, eggs, and dairy products that do NOT qualify in either the Third Party Verified or Local & Community-Based category):
A brief description of the sustainable food and beverage purchasing program, including how the sustainability impacts of products in specific categories are addressed (e.g. meat, poultry, fish/seafood, eggs, dairy, produce, tea/coffee):
ISU Dining created the Farm to ISU program in 2007. ISU Dining had been purchasing local products for years prior to the creation of the program, however, formed the Farm to ISU name and set forth goals for a targeted program related to local foods.
First steps in developing the program:
- Announced plans to the community, university and local producers.
- Website and purchasing guidelines were created
- Held workshops with ISU Extension assistance to communicate to growers how to work with an organization the size of ISU.
- Invited growers to lunch so they could see our kitchen facilities and eat our food that could one day be their product. This allowed the growers to see our quality and grading standards.
- ISU Dining staff visited local farms for education and to assist in weeding, planting, etc. This allowed us to see their challenges and the efforts the growers had prior to product arriving to our facilities.
As the program took flight, we noticed great gains in the protein purchases. The local produce was not making gains.
Produce growers had concerns with boxes, low-bid process, planning/planting ahead for large volumes of produce.
After 2-3 years of no growth in produce purchasing we implemented contract purchasing for produce.
Bid information was sent out in November communicating our needs/expectations:
- Purchase period (Mid-August through end of September)
- Volume of product
- Specs of produce
- GAP Training
By doing contracts, the selected grower(s) could purchase seeds during December/January when pricing breaks were available. They could plan their plantings according to our delivery criteria. This also provided assurance that we would buy what they grew, taking the chance out of the scenario completely.
Today:
Due to 2-3 years of 0% meal plan increases, we had to make adjustments to our services in dining. Just as “Sushi Saturday” is no longer available, the additional dollars spent on local beef, produce, etc are not being spent.
We continue to purchase local product, but when the pricing lines up very closely to the conventional market.
We continue to see growth in the Organic, Sustainable and Iowa Produced categories.
Wins along the way:
We made strides with cantaloupe grower in ~2009 or 2010. Late season for melons, melons were not moving at Farmer’s Markets due to late ripening. The grower contacted us and we were able to begin purchasing all of our watermelon and cantaloupe locally. This grower became a fan of the Farm to ISU program. They learned the value of being able to drop off 700-1,000 pounds of produce at one stop versus sitting at a Farmer’s Market for 4-5 hours. This grower we able to speak to other growers about their ability to lower pricing due to the ability to pick and deliver (no cooler space needed, no time sitting, no concerns if it rained and the market was cancelled) .
An inventory of the institution’s sustainable food and beverage purchases that includes for each product: the description/type; label, brand or producer; and the category in which it is being counted and/or a description of its sustainability attribute(s):
A brief description of the methodology used to conduct the inventory, including the timeframe and how representative samples accounted for seasonal variation (if applicable):
All purchases for ISU Dining are either ran through the CBORD FSS Menu Management system or accounted for within individual unit’s food expenses within their budget.
Depending on the supplier of the food product, dollar of spends are gathered by: tallying up expenditures directly from invoices, through reports gathered from the menu management system (CBORD’s FSS), food cost expenditures via the university dining’s financial system.
Percentage of total dining services expenditures on Real Food A (0-100):
Percentage of total dining services expenditures on Real Food B (0-100):
Which of the following food service providers are present on campus and included in the total food and beverage expenditure figures?:
| Present? | Included? | |
| Dining operations and catering services operated by the institution | Yes | Yes |
| Dining operations and catering services operated by a contractor | No | No |
| Student-run food/catering services | Yes | Yes |
| Franchises (e.g. national or global brands) | Yes | No |
| Convenience stores | Yes | Yes |
| Vending services | Yes | Yes |
| Concessions | Yes | Yes |
A brief description of purchased food and beverage products that have other sustainability attributes not recognized above :
We purchase Organic, Fair Trade and Rain Forrest Alliance coffee on campus, along with products that are 95% USDA Organic. We also have a purchasing program that works directly with local growers and producers. This product accounts for 2.4% of our spending.
Additional percentage of dining services food and beverage expenditures on conventional products with other sustainability attributes not recognized above (0-100) :
The website URL where information about the programs or initiatives is available:
Additional documentation to support the submission:
Data source(s) and notes about the submission:
The information presented here is self-reported. While AASHE staff review portions of all STARS reports and institutions are welcome to seek additional forms of review, the data in STARS reports are not verified by AASHE. If you believe any of this information is erroneous or inconsistent with credit criteria, please review the process for inquiring about the information reported by an institution or simply email your inquiry to stars@aashe.org.