Search

No. Currently these are considered fully processed by USDA and not eligible as an MN LFPA expense.

Documentation is always required. The documentation needed will depend on who is conducting the work, and how those expenses are reconciled internally. As examples:

• If a lead applicant organization is paying staff from their organization to transport food using the org or staff’s vehicles, the organization may choose to use LFPA funding for expenses such as staff time, gas, and/or mileage. If that is the case, when developing your application budget, estimated gas and mileage expenses should be grouped within the “Food Transportation” budget category. Staff time should be grouped within the “Administration” budget category. If selected as a grant recipient, required documentation will include items such as:
  • Timesheets and cleared checks/direct deposition documentation for staff time
  • Receipts for gas purchases
  • Mileage logs (and pay stubs if expenses are reimbursed to employees)
• If the lead applicant organization is renting a vehicle and choosing to use LFPA funding for that rental, estimated rental expenses should be grouped within the “Food Transportation” budget category. Examples of documentation would include invoices and proof of payment.
• If a lead applicant conducts their own delivery and chooses to calculate expenses differently, for example by setting a flat charge per box rather than by submitting for reimbursement for staff time, mileage, etc., then that pricing must follow a standard. If a standard does not currently exist, for example if an org does not currently offer this service, then a standard must be established that remains consistent through the duration of the program.
• If a lead applicant is working with a partner (i.e. a subrecipient) to carry out services that relate to food transportation, that partner may choose to expense their services in a variety of manners, similar to the options available to the lead applicant (should the lead applicant be conducing transportation services themselves). The lead applicant will be responsible for collecting and maintaining documentation of these expenses.
• If a lead applicant is working with a contractor for delivery services, then the project budget should align with the way that you will be paying for these services from the contractor and accompanying documentation you’d have in the form of an invoice. For example, the contractor may charge a flat fee, or a specific rate per box, etc. If the contractor’s billing format includes a distinct line item for their time, that should be grouped under the “Administration” section of the budget. Otherwise, all expenses would likely be grouped within the “Food Transportation” budget category. Awardees would need to submit proof of purchase and proof of payment for services contracted for.

Your budget should align with the way that you will be paying for these services and accompanying documentation you’d have. If you are purchasing food from a partner or a collaborator and the prices that they are charging for the food include storage and transportation costs, then the expenses should be considered “food procurement” expenses and should not be broken out into procurement vs. storage vs. transportation expenses. You may want to note in your budget that that those prices included for food procurement incorporate storage and transportation, so that reviewers can have an accurate understanding of your budget.

Feedback will be available on request. The current Request for Applications indicates that new applicants will be prioritized above grantees already receiving MN LFPA funds.

Additional text from the question asked: The scoring criteria in the application are worded in a way that suggests only the sourcing from new suppliers will be rewarded with points. On the food recipient side, there is not wording to indicate a reward for reaching new or different groups of underserved people. 

Answer: 

Within the outcomes section of the application and rubric, points are given to projects that source food from socially disadvantaged farmers and emerging farmers. Points are also given for the establishment of new sources of food or food products. There are no specific points within the outcomes section or associated scoring given to projects that expand distribution to new underserved communities. However, points elsewhere are given to projects that demonstrate opportunities to build sustainable relationships within communities. Points are also awarded to projects that have clear definition of where the work will happen and can demonstrate alignment between those producing food and those receiving it, as well projects that share power, including through models for food distribution outside of the traditional emergency food/hunger relief distribution structures.

If you have feedback that you’d like to share about the current Request for Applications, including the application questions and/or scoring rubric, you are welcome to share that with us. Stakeholder comments can be emailed to LFPAgrant@MDA.state.mn.us. We are limited in how we can engage with that feedback while the current grant process is open, but feedback will be considered in the development of future MN LFPA RFAs and/or program plans.