Yes, you may include your contracted purchases for School Year 2017-2018. However, please do not include them on the Project Outcomes table. We recommend including it in the Overview of Applicant section or in the “What do you anticipate will change as a result of this project?” question. Be sure to tell us how the equipment purchases will enable you to use additional Minnesota foods in future school years.
The grant is intended to increase the sales of Minnesota agricultural products to elementary schools and secondary schools. The feasibility study may examine the processing of all fruits and vegetables, not just those that may be locally procured. However, the MDA recommends that the proposal demonstrate how the study will enable the school district to purchase more Minnesota grown products; the scoring criteria places substantial weight on a project’s ability to increase the sales of Minnesota agricultural products.
Minnesota Farm to School Grant funding is intended for projects that enable schools to purchase and serve more Minnesota agricultural products in the food service program. Funds may not be used to build or maintain school gardens. Similarly, it is unlikely that a sprinkler system would enable a school to purchase additional Minnesota agricultural products.
The Minnesota Farm to School Grant may be used to purchase equipment that will enable schools to utilize Minnesota grown/raised foods of all varieties, including but not limited to, fruits, vegetables, beans, poultry, meat, eggs, grains, and dairy.
Each proposal will be evaluated against the criteria included in the evaluation profile of the Request for Proposals; the criteria do not specifically account for prior awards. Several schools have received awards in multiple years.
Both public and private schools/school districts that are a part of the National School Lunch Program (NSLP) and serve food to preschool and/or K-12 students are eligible to apply. Therefore, as long as the Christian school participates in NSLP, it would be eligible to apply.
Both public and private schools/school districts that are a part of the National School Lunch Program (NSLP) and serve food to preschool and/or K-12 students are eligible to apply. Therefore, as long as the parochial school participates in NSLP and serve students in at least some of these grades, it would be eligible to apply.
You may include photos in your proposal. The online application system has a limited number of “upload” buttons, so we encourage you to embed them in the Word or PDF files.
You may apply for funds to go towards your remodel. You should demonstrate how the remodel and each piece of equipment will enable your program to use additional Minnesota grown and raised foods. An exact bid from a contractor is not necessary, but you should know the equipment that you need and the estimated cost of that equipment. Bids, estimates, and quotes will only help your application.
Both local and nonlocal produce is available from DoD Fresh. You’ll want to contact the distributor (Bergin) to ensure that your produce is coming from a Minnesota farmer, and to have Bergin and/or the local farmer provide you with a letter of support. A letter from a farmer is strongly recommended.
Yes, an applicant may apply for both equipment and feasibility grants during the same grant cycle. If you choose to go this route, please complete two separate proposals.
Yes, an eligible organization may apply for both equipment and feasibility grants during the same grant cycle. The applicant should submit two separate proposals.
The Agricultural Growth, Research, and Innovation Program (AGRI), which includes the Farm to School Grant, focuses on creating agricultural jobs and profitable businesses. Farm to School reviewers will want to see the impact that your project could have on Minnesota farmers and agricultural businesses. While it’s great to use produce from your school gardens, you should also demonstrate that you will be purchasing from Minnesota farmers. You must include a letter of support from a Minnesota farmer who currently sells to the school, or would sell to the school after the grant is received.
Equipment purchases should be used to primarily support your school meal programs (i.e. the National School Lunch Program) by investing in your school kitchens/cafeterias.
Yes, you will need to apply separately for the feasibility and equipment grants. We recommend referencing the other proposal in each application.
No, these expenses would be considered “training and workshop fees” which are considering ineligible, in accordance with the “Ineligible Expenses” section of the RFP. These expenses cannot be paid using State, Blue Cross, or other matching funds.
Neither of these expenses would be considered eligible. Computers and printers are not unique to a school food service program. Further, costs associated with advertising are ineligible per the RFP.
Nutrition analysis software is not expressly prohibited by the RFP. Grant funds have not been provided for software in the past, so it would be difficult to guess how the review committee would score such an application. The onus is on the applicant to sufficiently demonstrate that the software will enable them to serve more Minnesota grown/raised food.
In the past, most feasibility funding has supported staff/contractor time (and benefits) for activities such as researching and meeting with growers, determining equipment needs, assessing product need and availability, and drafting the study’s findings. Previous grantees have used both in-house and contracted staff. We’ve also covered some mileage and meeting expenses.
No, training and workshop fees are ineligible under the RFP.
No, grant funds cannot be used to pay for field trips. Grants are intended to be used for the equipment needed to use more Minnesota grown and raised foods in the school food service program.
Feasibility study funding may be used to support a trip to another school district that you want to learn from. You should be able to demonstrate that the trip will be “fact-finding” in nature, rather than simply a training on how to use a particular piece of equipment. Further, provide the reasons for needing to visit in person rather than using more affordable means such as video conferences. Grant reviewers will likely look very closely at substantial travel costs.
Yes, grant funds/cash match may be used for staff salaries to support work on the project. Grantees should keep careful payroll records, including timesheets that breakdown the hours worked on a feasibility study.
Yes, that will be acceptable. We recommend that you include some details on how/when the contractor will be selected to show the review committee that you’ve put substantial thought into the process.
We don't have any established guidelines, quotes, etc. We are aware of the return on investments and we do look towards the impact that a proposal would have on Minnesota agriculture. That being said, 25% seems like a very ambitious goal.
Per Minn. Stat.§471.345, grantees that are municipalities as defined in Subd. 1 must do the following if contracting funds from this grant contract agreement for any supplies, materials, equipment or the rental thereof, or the construction, alteration, repair or maintenance of real or personal property:
If the amount of the contract is estimated to exceed $100,000, a formal notice and bidding process must be conducted in which sealed bids shall be solicited by public notice. Municipalities may, as a best value alternative, award a contract for construction, alteration, repair, or maintenance work to the vendor or contractor offering the best value under a request for proposals as described in Minn. Stat.§16C.28, Subd. 1, paragraph (a), clause (2).
If the amount of the contract is estimated to exceed $25,000 but not $100,000, the contract may be made either upon sealed bids or by direct negotiation, by obtaining two or more quotations for the purchase or sale when possible, and without advertising for bids or otherwise complying with the requirements of competitive bidding. All quotations obtained shall be kept on file for a period of at least one year after receipt thereof. Municipalities may, as a best value alternative, award a contract for construction, alteration, repair, or maintenance work to the vendor or contractor offering the best value under a request for proposals as described in Minn. Stat.§16C.28, Subd. 1, paragraph (a), clause (2) and paragraph (c).
If the amount of the contract is estimated to be $25,000 or less, the contract may be made either upon quotation or in the open market, in the discretion of the governing body. If the contract is made upon quotation it shall be based, so far as practicable, on at least two quotations which shall be kept on file for a period of at least one year after their receipt. Alternatively, municipalities may award a contract for construction, alteration, repair, or maintenance work to the vendor or contractor offering the best value under a request for proposals as described in Minn. Stat.§16C.28, Subd. 1, paragraph (a), clause (2).
Support documentation of the bidding process utilized to contract services must be included in the grantee’s financial records, including support documentation justifying a single/sole source bid, if applicable.
For projects that include construction work of $25,000 or more, prevailing wage rules apply per Minn. Stat.§177.41 through 177.44; consequently, the bid request must state the project is subject to prevailing wage. These rules require that the wages of laborers and workers should be comparable to wages paid for similar work in the community as a whole. A prevailing wage form should accompany these bid submittals.