From Field to Fork

In the 2008 farm bill, $20 million was provided to the USDA Food and Nutrition Service for pilot projects to evaluate health and nutrition promotion in the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program [SNAP—formerly the Food Stamp Program]. Under this legislation, funds are targeted to support projects that provide incentives at the point of purchase to encourage households participating in the SNAP to purchase fruits, vegetables, or other healthful foods.

One such project is the Healthy Incentives Pilot. Yesterday, the USDA announced that Hampden County, Massachusetts, will conduct the first-ever Healthy Incentives Pilot. In a statement, Agriculture Secretary Vilsack noted that “this pilot project will empower low-income Americans to eat more nutritious food and has the potential to strengthen the SNAP program that serves as a critical safety net to the most vulnerable in our society. Increased consumption of fruits and vegetables, especially in the place of higher calorie foods, can help move America towards healthier lifestyles and a healthier future.”

HIP will enroll 7,500 randomly selected SNAP households to receive incentives. For every dollar participants spend on fruits and vegetables using their SNAP Electronic Benefit Transfer cards, 30 cents will be added to their benefit balance - thus cutting the cost of fruits and vegetables by almost one-third. After the pilot ends, an evaluation will focus on whether incentives increase the consumption of fruits and vegetables and how participants’ overall diets are affected. Researchers will also study HIP effects on the State, retailers, and other SNAP stakeholders and assess the feasibility of implementing HIP nationwide.

If the pilot program is a success, it could be implemented nationally. More than 30 million people (significantly more during the recession) receive SNAP benefits. If they eat more produce, that’s a win for them and our industry.

Yesterday, U.S. Rep. George Miller (D-California), chair of the House Education and Labor Committee, introduced the “Improving Nutrition for America’s Children Act,” which seeks to dramatically improve the quality of meals children eat both in and out of school and in child care settings, support community efforts to reduce childhood hunger and, for the first time, establish nutrition standards for all foods sold in schools.

Shortly after the bill’s introduction, Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack said that the legislation “takes yet another step toward the passage of a robust bill that reforms our school meals programs by reducing barriers to participation, improves program access, and enhances the quality of school meals and the health of the school environment. We simply must pass this critical legislation this year, for the future of our children.”

Child nutrition reauthorization is long, long overdue and it appears that the bill may finally get passed. However, to make that happen, Congress needs to hear from you. Visit the PMA Advocacy Action Center to write Congress on this important issue. We thank those members who have taken action already but we know there are many more that have not. What are you waiting for? Using the Advocacy Action Center takes less than 3 minutes and makes a difference on Capitol Hill. Write today!

Here on Field to Fork on Friday I highlighted the USDA aspects of the Washington, DC meetings PMA Chairman of the Board Bill Schuler, PMA’s Washington representative Tom O’Brien and I had recently. Today I’ll update you on our Congressional visits.

PMA Chairman Bill Schuler, Senator Dianne Feinstein (D-CA), PMA President Bryan Silbermann, and United Farm Workers of America President Arturo Rodriguez at a May 12 luncheon to show industry and labor support for AgJOBS.

During a luncheon held in her honor organized by Tom O’Brien and our association allies (ANLA, SAF, United Fresh, and Western Growers), Bill and I met with Senator Dianne Feinstein (Calif.). We thanked her for her continued leadership on the AgJOBS immigration reform proposal and discussed food safety and the Center for Produce Safety – for which the Senator had helped secure funding.

(Note: Following the PMA Board of Directors meeting in Tucson recently – held against the backdrop of the controversial Arizona immigration law – it is clear that the AgJOBS proposal is absolutely critical to the sustainability of the U.S. food supply.)

Bill and the Senator talked about immigration reform, and he noted the support and unity for AgJOBS represented by the farmworker (United Farm Workers President Arturo Rodriguez sat directly across from us), association, and business communities among the luncheon guests.

After lunch, Bill, Tom and I met with Keith Jones, staff director of the House Agriculture Committee’s Horticulture and Organic Agriculture Subcommittee. PMA has a longstanding relationship with Keith, and we were pleased to bring him up to speed on the latest food safety issues.

Staying with the House Ag Committee, we met Representative Jean Schmidt (2nd-OH) and her staff. Schmidt, who is the Ranking Minority Member on Subcommittee on Horticulture and Organic Agriculture, was interested in learning more about industry steps to enhance food safety. After updating her on industry food safety practices, we shared the specific produce industry economic impact district data from PMA’s benchmark study. We also used the economic impact data when we met with Representative Geoff Davis (4th-KY), who serves the district in which Castellini Company is based. During that meeting, Bill underscored the importance of immigration reform and how Castellini’s 1,500 employees in the district would be adversely affected if reform measures are not enacted to provide a sustainable source of farm labor. This has been a consistent message from PMA’s buyer members: AgJOBS is more than just about farm workers, it’s about the entire supply chain.

Looking back after a very busy two days, the importance of bringing industry knowledge and real-world experience to our legislative and regulatory partners has never been more important. Many thanks to Bill for taking time out of a hectic schedule to share his insights on the Hill and at USDA.

In comments filed yesterday with the USDA, PMA supported the recommendations made by the Fruit and Vegetable Industry Advisory Committee concerning proposed license fee increases for the Perishable Agricultural Commodities Act. In our comments, PMA Vice President of Government Relations & Public Affairs Kathy Means stated that, while PACA fees have not been increased in 15 years, “USDA’s PACA Branch has taken significant cost-cutting measures in recent years, but those cuts are not sufficient to maintain adequate funding now and into the future.”

She added that PACA “provides important tools for the fresh produce industry. Our members throughout the supply chain rely on those tools for fair trading practices, upholding contract requirements, ensuring full and prompt payment, removing unscrupulous individuals from trade as needed, and mediating disputes. The produce industry needs a strong PACA to continue to provide the tools and resources the industry has counted on for 80 years.”

Over the years, I’ve gotten to know several members of USDA’s PACA branch (Chief Karla Whalen, Assistant Branch Chief Lorenzo Tribbett, and their predecessors) and I can say that their team is very committed to enforcing fair business practices and helping resolve business disputes among trading partners. Given the perishable nature of the produce industry, having access to a team of mediation experts when you’ve got questions about contracts, inspections, and payments is a valuable resource. To learn more about PACA and its services, visit the USDA Web site.

Last week I attended the USDA/Health and Human Services Nutrition Summit, where speakers addressed the benefits of fresh produce (and referenced the benefits of non-fresh fruits and vegetables). The issue of access to produce arose again and again. The summit was fittingly titled “Changing the Food Environment,” and featured a powerful lineup of speakers, including HHS Secretary Kathleen Sebelius and Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack (via video).

Looking at what they said, it becomes clear that access to produce is both a solution and part of the problem when it comes to better diets in the United States. I’ll offer some sound bites from the speakers below. One of my takeaways from the summit was that PMA members are in the best position to help improve access to fresh produce and boost their sales at the same time. Some solutions may come from new, even unusual, distribution opportunities. Others may be part of community and charitable efforts. And many of these solutions are already under way.

What the speakers had to say gives us greater insight and reinforces what we’ve already heard about the Obama administration’s direction on this issue:

• Secretary Sebelius: The impact of diet-related diseases is a “silent crisis” that needs focus and attention…. We have an opportunity in 2010 to commit ourselves to a healthier and more prosperous America….It’s hard to make personal changes if your choices are not healthful options, or if lack of access makes good choices impossible…. Millions of Americans live in food deserts with no easy access to fresh produce. Selling through nontraditional outlets can help.
• CDC director Thomas Frieden: Get junk food out of schools, health care and government facilities….We must change the environment so healthy choices are the default choices. We need to change the pricing of foods to encourage healthy choices.
• FDA commissioner Margaret Hamburg: Obesity and diet-related disease is the defining public health issue of our time….Decisions we make must resonate for generations to come.
• FDA deputy commissioner Mike Taylor: The Obama administration and FDA are raising nutrition as key issue for action….(linking food safety and nutrition) An equally important goal to safer produce is that people have adequate access to fresh fruits and vegetables. Better safety improves consumer confidence so they will consume more fresh produce.
• Janey Thornton, USDA deputy undersecretary, Food, Nutrition and Consumer Services: The challenge is not to provide healthy school meals, but to offer healthy meals kids will choose and eat.

Speakers at the summit also spent a great deal of time on front of package labeling, an issue we’ve dealt with in other Field to Fork posts, and improving school meals. In an aside, it’s interesting to watch the choices of a group of government, health, and industry representatives at the lunch during the summit – far more took the grilled vegetable option!

Stay tuned to Field to Fork for more information on this emerging and important issue of access to fresh produce as a solution to public health issues and to industry sales growth.

A couple of weeks ago, we mentioned here on Field to Fork that FDA was considering the issues related to nutritional labeling placement on food packages, possibly moving the location from a back-of-the-package strategy to a voluntary front-of-package labeling strategy. In today’s Federal Register, FDA established a docket to seek comments and information from industry and the public about front-of-package nutrition labeling and on shelf tags in retail stores as the agency deliberates how to enhance the usefulness to consumers of point-of-purchase nutrition information. FDA is accepting comments until July 28; the issues it seeks to learn more about are:

• the extent to which consumers notice, use and understand nutrition symbols on front-of-pack labeling of food packages or on shelf tags in retail stores;
• research that assesses and compares the effectiveness of particular approaches to front-of-pack labeling;
• graphic design, marketing and advertising data and information that can help develop better point-of-purchase nutrition information; and
• how point-of-purchase information may affect decisions by food manufacturers to reformulate products.

As the parent of a seven-month old, I almost always flip over any package I pick off my grocery store’s shelves and look at the nutrition facts before it goes into the cart, and if I don’t my wife usually does. Moving nutrition labeling to the front may make it easier for shoppers to identify more healthful choices. Produce goes into our cart or basket all the time but, relative to labeling, most fruits and vegetables are part of a voluntary nutrition labeling system, and would not be affected by the FDA proposal.

Many produce marketers already voluntarily label their products, and our industry has a great story to tell - especially with all the recent attention given childhood obesity and nutrition. There’ll likely be guidelines from FDA on a voluntary front-of-package labeling program at some point. We’ll definitely keep an eye on this issue and provide comments to FDA.

For some time, Kathleen Sebelius, Secretary of Health and Human Services, has been talking about having some nutrition information on the fronts of food packages. Late last year, FDA was conducting consumer research on front of package icons, possibly to create a universal system to help people quickly identify healthier choices. In the last week, we’ve seen a lot of reports on remarks the secretary made about having FDA update the nutritional labeling on the back of packages and move to a front-of-package labeling strategy. Nothing is a done deal, but it’s important to watch this development as it has implications on two fronts – the expense of changing packaging and a strong marketing opportunity for produce.

Of course, most fresh produce is part of a voluntary labeling system, and would not be affected by this. FDA checks every few years to see whether enough stores are labeling fresh produce, and as long as that number is high enough, we keep the voluntary system, which we like. Many produce marketers do voluntarily label their products. After all, fresh produce has a great nutrition story to tell. Some items are required (like other foods) to carry the nutrition facts information – the requirement is triggered when a product has a health claim associated with it or when it contains items that are required to have a label (e.g. when a salad mix has croutons or dressing in it).

So what do we make of this talk about change? Certainly the greatest opposition to this so far has centered around the expense of changing packaging, and there’s no question that would be a large expense, should this move from consideration into reality. However, for produce, it may also represent another great marketing opportunity that many have already seized. Telling our nutrition story on our packages, in the store, or on the menu, adds to the health halo that fresh produce wears. The current bright spotlight on improving nutrition, eliminating childhood obesity, and changing the way consumers eat shines on fresh produce over and over again. At the recent USDA Fruit and Vegetable Industry Advisory Committee meeting, USDA Deputy Secretary Kathleen Merrigan said: “This is the year for fruits and vegetables.”

Packaging changes are always difficult – and it’s possible nothing will come of this. But given that Secretary Sebelius has been talking about nutrition labeling changes for some time, it’s certainly something we have to keep an eye on. And we’ll have to assess the pros and cons of such a change – from both logistical and marketing perspectives.

At the USDA’s Fruit and Vegetable Industry Advisory Committee (March 30-31 in Washington, D.C.), industry representatives tackled issues such as food safety, nutrition, consumption, and more as they worked to advise USDA on industry needs. I attended the meeting last week, and here are some of the highlights.

USDA Deputy Secretary Kathleen Merrigan addressed the group, calling 2010 “the year for fruits and vegetables” and noting that lack of access to fresh produce is a problem for boosting consumption. She asked the committee to let USDA know about bureaucratic hurdles industry faces in getting fruits and vegetables into federal feeding programs, noting that USDA is committed to meeting Institute of Medicine’s recommendations for increased fruits and vegetables in school feeding programs. She said that USDA wants industry’s input on farm to school programs, particularly on the practical components, and called on industry to be creative in getting produce into government procurement programs.

In discussions, the committee frequently raised the issue of taste, noting that getting more fruits and vegetables into the federal feeding programs is a wasted effort if the products do not taste good and program recipients do not eat them. Last year, cut apples were introduced into the school meals program, and this year baby carrots have been added. The committee questioned the length of time it takes to get items like these incorporated into the feeding programs. Other conversations also revealed the chasm between the decision-making pace of government versus industry.

In another sign of increased collaboration between USDA and FDA, the USDA committee heard from several FDA officials about pending food safety efforts, including Leanne Skelton, on loan to FDA from USDA for an additional six months. She noted that the produce rule under consideration (comments due May 24) will also be informed by external sources such as USDA and the Environmental Protection Agency, and will look at the potential conflicts raised between food safety and environmental rules. FDA’s Jim Gorny noted that the produce rule will focus on preventive controls that each firm will tailor to its needs and risks. He also said FDA will provide assistance – guides, technical help, reasonable implementation schedules, and he said FDA wants input on the impact on small growers.

The committee also received updates on Perishable Agricultural Commodities Act fee increases (comments due May 10) and the proposed leafy greens marketing agreement.

The committee formed four working groups to delve more deeply into particular issues: Know Your Farmer, Commodity Procurement, Labor, and Food Safety (including traceability and GAPs). Committee members spoke forthrightly about their opinions, asked questions, and even asked the USDA staffers to stop using all the acronyms that the committee wasn’t familiar with. It’s great to have these committed industry members (more than half are also PMA members) who devote their own time and expertise to helping USDA in its oversight of programs that affect out industry.

On March 24, the Senate Agriculture Committee unanimously approved Chairman Blanche Lincoln’s Healthy, Hunger-Free Kids Act of 2010, reauthorizing childhood nutrition programs. This bill makes a significant investment in child nutrition programs, creates national school nutrition standards, expands access to more children, and increases the reimbursement rate for the National School Lunch Program, all of which bode well for increased produce consumption and sales. We support the bill as a crucial effort to improve nutrition standards for school children and others who depend on federal feeding programs. We know our members share the goal of a healthier America as we strive to improve accessibility to fresh produce, an essential ingredient for good health and a tasty diet. This bill strengthens the nutrition building blocks for our kids and those who are vulnerable in our society. We are eager to work in partnership to ensure that fresh produce is available everywhere Americans make food choices.

Congress will work on a five-year reauthorization (including a $4.5 billion increase in funding over the next 10 years) for key programs such as school lunch and breakfast, the Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants, and Children, (WIC), and more. Though this bill falls short of the funding sought by the Obama administration ($10 billion over 10 years), it is still a significant increase in funds and a philosophical and potential regulatory increase in support for fresh produce in these programs. Join us in urging Congress to support better nutrition for kids.

A pair of Senate bills introduced last week seek to improve the health of the nation’s children through improvements in federal feeding programs and incorporation of locally grown foods into those programs. U.S. Senator Blanche Lincoln, D-Arkansas, Chairman of the U.S. Senate Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition and Forestry unveiled the Healthy, Hunger-Free Kids Act of 2010. Her bill provides $4.5 billion in new child nutrition program funding over ten years, a significant increase over previous efforts. Specific to fruits and vegetables, the proposal seeks to connect more children to local produce through farm-to-school programs.

Dovetailing into this arena is the “Growing Farm to Schools Program Act,” sponsored by Senator Patrick Leahy (D-Vermont). This bill seeks to boost the use of local farm products in the school lunch program; it would provide $50 million in startup funds to local schools and districts, through competitive grants, for technical help in connecting school food service providers with local small- and medium-sized farms for efficient and cost-effective purchases of locally produced foods for school lunchrooms. It’s likely that the Leahy bill will be incorporated into Senator Lincoln’s child nutrition reauthorization bill.

Child nutrition reauthorization is long overdue and, given the intense focus on childhood obesity, the stars are lining up for the bill to finally get passed. But to ensure that happens, Congress needs to hear from you. Visit the PMA Advocacy Action Center to write Congress on this important issue. We thank those members who have taken action already but we know there are many more who have not. What are you waiting for? Using the Advocacy Action Center takes less than 3 minutes and makes a difference on Capitol Hill. Write today!