Local Agriculture 

Market Program

Report to Congress

December 2023

USDA is an equal opportunity provider, employer, and lender.
2

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Local Agriculture Market Program (LAMP) grants serve the growing $9 billion U.S. market for local foods1

and have a long history of generating new income sources for small, beginning, veteran and historically 

underserved farmers, building stronger regional food supply chains, and creating new market opportunities 

for value-added products. The 2018 Agriculture Improvement Act, commonly known as the Farm Bill, 

established LAMP by combining the Agricultural Marketing Service’s (AMS) Farmers Market Promotion 

Program (FMPP), and Local Food Promotion Program (LFPP), Rural Development’s (RD) Value-Added 

Producers Grant (VAPG) program, and creating the new Regional Food System Partnerships (RFSP) at 

AMS. The Farm Bill provided LAMP $50 million per year in mandatory funding and the programs received 

significant supplemental funding through the Consolidated Appropriations Act of 2021 and the American 

Rescue Plan of 2021. 

This report responds to the 2018 Farm Bill’s request for an evaluation of the LAMP programs and provides 

both quantitative and qualitative analyses of impacts from each grant program based on self-reporting on 

grant applications and grantee award reports from 2019 through the 2022 funding cycles. Specifically, the 

report compiles final progress report data for 2019 FMPP and LFPP 2- and 3-year grants, 2020 FMPP and 

LFPP 2-year awards, and RFSP 2-year awards. The more recent 2020 3-year FMPP, LFPP, RFSP, and VAPG 

awards will provide final report data in 2024. 

Key Highlights

From 2019 to 2022, USDA’s combined LAMP grant programs awarded more than $374 million to 1,566 

projects. LAMP’s AMS programs (FMPP, LFPP, and RFSP) awarded more than $212 million to 591 projects 

across all 50 states and three U.S. territories. The top five project activities included marketing and 

promotion, training, recruitment, infrastructure, and aggregation. Rural Development (RD)’s LAMP VAPG 

program. awarded $162.1 million to 975 projects in all 50 states, three US territories, and eight Tribal-led 

projects between 2020 and 2022. 

During this time, AMS LAMP grant recipients reported:

z The creation of over 4,237 local and regional food business enterprises.

z Creation or retention of 5,067 jobs in local and regional food sectors.

z The development of 1,128 new careers in local and regional foods, including farmers and farm 

apprenticeships, immigrant/refugee market growers, and agritourism directors.

z A total of 1,336 new and beginning and 1,078 historically underserved farmers started or continued in 

local and regional food production.

z More than 1,000 producers obtained on farm food safety skills, knowledge, and or, certifications 

through FMPP and LFPP-funded work.

z Eighty-seven percent of recipients saw an increase in their customer base, and 79 percent of 

recipients saw an increase in both sales and customers.

z Existing food businesses achieved an average increase in sales and customers of 92 and 112 percent.

z Grantees conducted 8,917 new local and regional food activities in five market channels: farmers 

markets (2,658), roadside stands (1,210), community supported agriculture (1,530), agritourism 

(1,438), and other direct-to-consumer markets (2,081). 

1 2020 Local Food Marketing Practices Survey Highlights. US Department of Agriculture, National Agricultural Statistics Service. April 2022. 

https://www.nass.usda.gov/Publications/Highlights/2022/local-foods.pdf.
3

Seventy-eight percent of 759 agreements VAPG grants were awarded to beginning or historically 

underserved farmers and ranchers, producers operating small or medium-sized farms, ranches structured 

as family farms, farmer or rancher cooperatives, and projects supporting mid-tier value chains, which are 

categories prioritized by the VAPG program.

LAMP grants played a critical role in supporting local and regional food system resiliency during the

COVID-19 pandemic as local producers and distributors had to pivot to new markets as many institutions 

closed and direct-to-consumer markets needed to adapt to offer social distancing. USDA offered additional 

flexibilities in response to the public health emergency. 

Improved Data Collection for Future LAMP Impact Evaluation 

The 2010 Government Performance and Results Modernization Act requires Federal agencies to set 

performance goals. AMS’ evaluation of its grant programs and the subsequent development of new 

performance measures originally occurred as a response to language in the 2018 Farm Bill mandating 

USDA develop performance measures to evaluate the Specialty Crop Block Grant Program (SCBGP). AMS 

later expanded this effort to update performance measures for LAMP as well. Based on these directives, the 

AMS Grants Division conducted a rigorous evaluation of its programs in 2019 and 2020 in partnership with 

the State Departments of Agriculture and other stakeholders. AMS wrote updated performance measures 

for FMPP and LFPP that went into effect for the FY 2022 awards and for RFSP that went into effect for the 

FY 2023 awards. Final performance report data for the new FMPP, LFPP, and RFSP performance measures 

will be collected at the end of 2025 and 2026, respectively and should provide valuable information for 

measuring and evaluating the performance of grants issued under AMS.
4

CONTENTS

Executive Summary .............................................................................................2

Key Highlights .................................................................................................................. 2

Improved Data Collection for Future LAMP Impact Evaluation ..................................... 3

Overview ............................................................................................................5

LAMP and the COVID-19 Pandemic ................................................................................. 6

Program Demand............................................................................................................. 8

Program Impacts .................................................................................................8

Agricultural Marketing Service – FMPP, LFPP, and RFSP ................................................ 9

Rural Development – VAPG ........................................................................................... 14

Performance Measures Development................................................................... 16

Success Stories .................................................................................................. 17

Farmers Market Promotion Program ............................................................................ 18

Local Food Promotion Program .................................................................................... 20

Regional Food System Partnership Program ............................................................... 22

Value-Added Producers Grant (VAPG)........................................................................... 24

Summary .......................................................................................................... 25

Appendix 1: USDA LAMP Implementation ............................................................. 26

Appendix 2: List of Awarded Agreements.............................................................. 28

Appendix 3: Definitions ...................................................................................... 29

Appendix 4: Applications Received in AMS LAMP Grants......................................... 30

Data Notes ...................................................................................................................... 30

LAMP Grant Application Breakdown ............................................................................. 31

LAMP Grants Awarded Rate Breakdown ....................................................................... 32

LAMP Funds Available and Percent Awarded Breakdown............................................ 33

LAMP Grant Project Type Breakdown ........................................................................... 34

LAMP Organization Entity Type Breakdown ................................................................. 35

LAMP Returning Grantee Breakdown............................................................................ 36

Appendix 5: Value-Added Producer Grant Program Addendum............................... 37
5

OVERVIEW

The Local Agriculture Market Program (LAMP) supports the development, coordination, and expansion of 

direct producer-to-consumer marketing; local and regional food markets and enterprises; and value-added 

agricultural products. 

The statutory purposes of LAMP are to: 

z Connect and cultivate regional food economies through public-private partnerships. 

z Support the development of business plans, feasibility studies, and strategies for value-added 

agricultural production and local and regional food system infrastructure. 

z Strengthen capacity and regional food system development through community collaboration and 

expansion of mid-tier value chains. 

z Improve income and economic opportunities for producers and food businesses through job creation. 

z Simplify the application processes and the reporting processes for the program. 

LAMP is an umbrella program and made up of four grant programs: 

z Farmers Market Promotion Program (FMPP): FMPP funds projects that develop, coordinate, and 

expand direct producer-to-consumer markets such as farmers markets, roadside stands, agritourism 

activities, community-supported agriculture programs (CSA), or online sales. other direct producer-toconsumer market opportunities. The goal is to help increase access to and availability of locally and 

regionally produced agricultural products. AMS operates this program, which was authorized in 2002 

and initially funded in 2006. 

z Local Food Promotion Program (LFPP): LFPP funds projects that develop, coordinate, and expand 

local and regional food business enterprises that engage as intermediaries in indirect producer-toconsumer marketing. Grants can be used for the planning stages of establishing or expanding a local 

and regional food business enterprise or to improve or expand a food business that supports locally 

and regionally produced agricultural products and food system infrastructure by performing feasibility 

studies, market research, training, and technical assistance for the business enterprise and/or for 

producers working with the business enterprise. AMS operates this program, first authorized in the 2014 

Farm Bill.

z Regional Food Systems Partnerships (RFSP): RFSP supports public-private partnerships that plan 

and develop relationships between local and regional producers, processors, intermediaries, and 

institutional markets or food service operations to build and strengthen local or regional food system 

economic viability and resilience. The program supports partnerships that coordinate efforts within a 

local or regional food system to set priorities, connect resources and services, and measure progress 

towards common goals. Each partnership determines the size and scope of the regional food system 

in which the project’s activities are to be carried out and brings a variety of financial and technical 

capabilities to the project in order to effectively collaborate in achieving its shared goals. AMS operates 

this program, first authorized as part of the establishment of LAMP in the 2018 Farm Bill.

z Value-Added Producer Grant Program (VAPG): VAPG assists independent producers, agricultural 

producer groups, farmer and rancher cooperatives, and majority-controlled producer-based businesses 

in starting or expanding value-added activities related to the processing and/or marketing of valueadded agricultural products. Rural Development’s Rural Business-Cooperative Service operates this 

program, first authorized in 2000 and expanded in the 2002 Farm Bill.

For more information about USDA implementation of these programs, including outreach, technical assistance, and 

project types, see Appendix 1.
6

This LAMP Report to Congress includes data from 

grants awarded after the passage of the 2018 Farm 

Bill beginning in 2019 through the 2022 funding 

cycle. RFSP and VAPG began funding projects in 

2020. Final progress report data is included for 

2019 awards for FMPP and LFPP 2- and 3-year 

grants and 2020 awards for FMPP, LFPP, and RFSP 

2-year grants. The 3-year grants awarded in 2020 

for FMPP, LFPP, RFSP, and VAPG have not yet 

reached the end of the reporting period, so final 

data is not yet available.

LAMP and the COVID-19 

Pandemic 

Since their inception, LAMP grants have offered an important source of funding to support the development 

of local and regional food systems and food supply chain resiliency. 

Research conducted by AMS and their partners through the Local and Regional Food System Recovery 

and Resilience Project found that local and regional food systems were adaptive and resilient during the 

pandemic, and that many consumers sought out local and direct-from-the-farm food purchasing options. 

A survey of U.S. households in 2020, showed that approximately one-third of respondents purchased food 

from a local food business for the first time that year1. Similar responses were observed in responses to 

the 2021 survey conducted as part of this same project2. Collectively, the survey results indicate that many 

consumers altered their shopping habits during the pandemic to include more local food markets. One 

lesson repeated most often when speaking with local and regional food systems stakeholders: Communities 

with existing relationships, partnerships and regular channels of communication are best positioned 

to adapt when disaster or disruption strikes. 

During the COVID-19 pandemic, USDA made a series of flexibilities available to grant applicants and 

recipients to respond to challenges related to the public health emergency. Grants helped producers who 

previously sold through traditional markets prepare for and connect to new and growing local markets 

in response to shifting consumer demand. Many grant recipients embraced online sales platforms and 

1 Rossi, Jairus. Who is Buying Food from Local Market Channels for the First Time? Local Food Systems Response to COVID, Consumer Food 

Insights 2.0. May 2023. https://lfscovid.localfoodeconomics.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/05/LFS-CFI-2-07.pdf.

2 Christensen, Libby & Thilmany, Dawn. An Overview of the Fall 2021 Consumer Survey on Food Choices. Local Food Systems Response to COVID, 

Consumer Food Insights 2.0. April 2022. https://lfscovid.localfoodeconomics.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/04/LFS-CFI-2-01.pdf.

The Agriculture Improvement Act of 2018 (2018 Farm Bill) authorized LAMP through an amendment to 

subtitle A of the Agricultural Marketing Act of 1946 (7 U.S.C. § 1627c). Its creation linked existing local and 

regional food systems programs: FMPP, LFPP, and VAPG and created the new RFSP program. This legislation 

authorized $50 million in annual mandatory 

funding, allowing USDA to better coordinate 

robust support for local and regional food system 

funding across agencies, while maintaining the 

core mission, priorities, and activities of each 

program. Figure 1 describes the breakdown of 

funding per program including administrative 

overhead to cover USDA program operations.

VAPG 

$17.5M

35.0%

RFSP 

$5.00M

10.0% Admin 

$4.00M

8.0%

LFPP 

$11.75M

23.5%

FMPP 

$11.75M

23.5%

Figure 1. Annual Funding Allocation by Program

Source: USDA, AMS Grants Division Program Calculation, 2019 to 2023.
7

developed mechanisms like food hub networks and processor collectives to increase product availability 

and volumes. LAMP projects addressed value chain coordination and food systems planning. LAMP grants 

also furthered consumption of local foods through markets such as cafeterias and meal programs at schools, 

colleges, universities, hospitals, and operations run by local, Tribal, and State governments. Many of these 

projects focused on value chain coordination, peer learning networks, procurement, and scaling up existing, 

successful farm-to-institution models. 

During the pandemic and supply chain recovery period, Congress and USDA directed increased funding 

to LAMP. The Consolidated Appropriations Act of 2021(Section 753, Division N) allocated $100 million 

in supplemental funding to LAMP for fiscal year 2021. USDA allocated two-thirds of this funding to the 

FMPP, LFPP and RFSP grants, and one-third to VAPG. In fiscal year 2022, USDA also offered $65 million 

in discretionary funds from Section 1001(b)(4) of the American Rescue Plan (ARP) Act. USDA planned to 

offer additional ARP funds in fiscal year 2023, but that supplemental funding was rescinded by the Fiscal 

Responsibility Act of 2023 and therefore was not obligated through grant awards3. Figure 2 shows how 

those supplemental funds increased the total amount of funding offered through AMS LAMP, in addition to 

mandatory Farm Bill funds and discretionary annual appropriated funds.

3 Following competitive external peer reviews, USDA distributed $37 million of these additional FY2022 funds to highly-ranked projects through 

LFPP and RFSP to support the development of institutional markets. While USDA initially offered an additional $65 million in ARP funds through 

its fiscal year 2023 Request for Applications, that supplemental funding was rescinded by the Fiscal Responsibility Act of 2023 and therefore was 

not obligated through grant awards.

Figure 2. LAMP Funding Offered, FY 2019-FY 2023

$0

$50,000,000

$100,000,000

$150,000,000

$200,000,000

FY19 FY20 FY21 FY22 FY23

American Rescue Plan Act

Consolidated Appropriations Act of 2021

Annual Appropriations

Agriculture Improvement Act of 2018

Source: USDA, AMS Grants Division Program Calculation, 2019 to 2023.
8

Program Demand

LAMP applicants have consistently demonstrated strong demand for funds. In fiscal years 2020 and 2021, 

applicants to AMS LAMP requested more than $155 million and $270 million in programmatic funding, 

respectively. In fiscal year 2022, applicants to AMS LAMP requested more than $100 million in programmatic 

funding, and in fiscal year 2023, applicants requested more than $212 million in programmatic funding. 

Applicants made this request in response to AMS’ initial offering of $133 million in February 2023, which 

included supplemental funds that were rescinded in June 2023. 

The number of applications and level of demand for each program has varied over time, but applications 

consistently request more funding than is available. In FY 2020, RFSP received 114 applications and funded 

23, FMPP received 429 applications and funded 49, and FLPP received 207 applications and funded 44. 

FY2020 is a useful benchmark for demand since it occurred prior to the pandemic and supplemental funding 

offered in FY2021 and FY2022. In fiscal year (FY) 2021, applicants to AMS LAMP requested over $271 million 

in programmatic funding. Annually, the Farm Bill provides only $28.5 million to fund AMS LAMP, which 

include the Farmers Market Promotion Program, Local Food Promotion Program, and Regional Food System 

Partnerships. Without supplemental USDA funding, nearly 90% of fiscal year 2021 applications would have 

gone unfunded. In fiscal year 2022, USDA funded 38% of FMPP applications, 47% of LFPP applications, 

and 48% of RFSP applications. In FY2022, AMS LAMP applicants requested $110 million across FMPP, 

LFPP, and RFSP, and in FY2023, applicants requested $198 million. Due to rescissions outlined in the Fiscal 

Responsibility Act of 2023, AMS was only able to award $32 million. 

For more information on program demand over time for AMS LAMP grants, including a summary of types of 

applications received, please see Appendix 2. 

PROGRAM IMPACTS

Evaluations of LAMP have found that grant recipients reduced barriers to entry for new businesses, 

increased business capacity, increased institutional and wholesale market access through training and 

certification in food safety, strengthened ties between businesses and local communities, and sustained 

and grew businesses. Many grant recipients saw a long-term increase in their customer base. LAMP 

continues to produce outcomes such as enhanced marketing practices, improved food safety measures, 

and more efficient aggregation of local foods. LAMP supports the American food system in creative, diverse, 

stakeholder-driven ways. 

Since AMS and RD currently administer different forms of reporting and data collection for their respective 

LAMP programs, the following sections provide separate analyses of programs administered by those two 

agencies. 
9

Economic Impact

USDA relies on self-reported data from LAMP 

grant recipients to gather programmatic data and 

evaluate impacts. USDA provides guidance and 

training on data collection, and recipients provide 

annual performance reports to USDA, based on 

methods that allow individuals and businesses 

to assess the impact of LAMP grant funding on their 

operations and in their communities. 

LAMP is responsible for the creation of at least 4,237 local and regional food business enterprises. These 

businesses support food systems across the US through processing, aggregating, distributing, or storing 

locally, and regionally produced agricultural products.

Agricultural Marketing Service – FMPP, LFPP, and RFSP 

AMS LAMP Awards Distribution

Grant projects supported local and regional foods 

across several sectors. Each grant targeted one 

or more of the 25 program activity focus areas. 

As shown in Figure 3, the most common project 

activities were in Marketing and Promotion (466 

projects), Training (307 projects), and Recruitment 

(263 projects). During program years 2019-2022, 

recipients reported an average of 763 project 

activities across all programs each year. This 

shows the breadth of activities within the LAMP 

portfolio.

Figure 3. LAMP Project Count by Project Activity

466

307

263

241

214

207

201

201

149

149

126

92

90

70

58

43

42

38

33

31

31

29

Marketing and Promotion

Training

Recruitment

Infrastructure

Aggregation

Transportation

Food Safety

Diversification

Value Added

Processing

Farm to Institution

Agritourism

Organic

Season Extension

Food Insecurity

Strategic Planning

Value Chain Coordination

Resource Development

Grantwriting

Production

Food Waste

Other

Source: USDA, AMS Grants Division Program Calculation, 2019 to 2022.

The 591 AMS projects were implemented in all 

50 states and three US territories from 2019 to 

2022. Figure 4 (on page 10) shows the geographic 

distribution of program grants from 2019 to 2022 for 

FMPP, LFPP, and RFSP. 

As shown in Figure 4, the 10 states that received 

the most funding from 2019-2022 were California, 

New York, North Carolina, Kentucky, Virginia, 

Massachusetts, Georgia, Oregon, Pennsylvania, 

and Washington. The 10 lowest funded states are 

North Dakota, Alabama, Delaware, Nebraska, South 

Dakota, Puerto Rico, Nevada, Utah, Idaho, and 

Wyoming. 
10

Figure 4. AMS LAMP Grant Distribution, 2019-2022

Source: USDA, AMS Grants Division Program Calculation, 2019 to 2022.

NM

MN

WA

MO WV

MD

WY MA

ME

MS

MT

OH

ND

NV

OR

GA

NY

NE

OK NC AR

CO

VA

TN

SD WI

PA

UT

CA

MI

AZ

VT

KY

NJ

KS

TX

SC

AL

LA

IN

FL

ID

IA

IL

AK 

HI

PR

Grant Type

FMPP

LFPP

RFSP

2019 2020 2021

$0M

$5M

$10M

$15M

$20M

$25M

$30M

$35M

$40M

$45M

Original Sales A

mount

$0M

$5M

$10M

$15M

$20M

$25M

$30M

$35M

$40M

$45M

Resulted Sales A

mount

$25.98M

$14.08M

$33.12M

$22.10M

$27.75M

$42.41M

Measure Names

Dollar value of estimated final (resulted) sales amount

Dollar value of initial (original) sales amount

Figure 5. LAMP Original and Final Sales

Source: USDA, AMS Grants Division Program Calculation, 2019 to 2022.

Business Growth 

LAMP-funded comprehensive needs 

assessments identified around 973 unmet 

consumer needs. In addition, grantees 

wrote 246 local and regional food 

feasibility plans between 2019-2022. 

As noted throughout this report, LAMP has 

created notable growth for US producers 

across the local and regional food value 

chains. The nation has seen thousands of 

producer and consumer needs met through 

new and expanded programming, new 

career and job development, producer 

risk management and food safety training, 

increasing market and sales opportunities, 

and increasing diversity in local and regional 

agriculture. 

As shown in Figure 5, the dollar value of 

sales reported by FMPP, RFSP, and LFPP 

grant recipients grew annually. The initial 

sales amount from 2019 to 2020 had a higher 
11

Figure 6. LAMP Economic Impacts on Grant Recipient Sales and Customers

Source: USDA, AMS Grants Division Program Calculation, 2019 to 2022.

Avg. Percent Change in Sales Avg. Percent Change in Customers

91.66% 111.62%

-80 -60 -40 -20 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180

Percent Change in Sales

-60

-40

-20

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

Percent Change in Customer Count

Increase in Sales and Customers

79.1%

Decrease in Sales but Increase in Customers

8.1%

Decrease in Sales and Decrease in Customers

5.4%

Increase in Sales but Decrease in Customers

7.4%

##

##

##

##

Data shows that some stakeholders have been able to scale their farm business to increase marketing and 

outreach and grow the number of customers purchasing from them. Reports indicate that 87.2 percent 

of stakeholders saw an increase in their customer base, and 79.1 percent of stakeholders saw in 

increase in both sales and customers. LAMP creates notable economic impact for local and regional food 

businesses. 

LAMP grant recipients have reported significant increases in a range of metrics including sales revenue 

to local food customer counts, food safety training, and technical assistance delivery. The average 

increase in sales and customers reported by grant recipients from 2019 to 2022 was 92 and 112 

percent, respectively. Collectively, LAMP projects, over this period, saw an increase of more than 89,000 

customers. Figure 6 provides more detail on impacts, showing the change in sales and customer count for 

the organizations that provided these data. 

growth rate than final sales, but from 2020 to 2021 the final resulted sales growth rate spiked 52 percent, 

compared to initial original sales growth rate of 27 percent. While AMS did not collect data on the impacts of 

the pandemic on sales, the 2020 figures appear to reflect the impacts felt in local food sectors. 
12

Job Creation

As a result of LAMP activities in 2019-2022, 1,128 

new careers in local and regional foods were 

created including farmers and farm apprentices, 

immigrant/refugee market growers, agritourism 

directors, culinary workers, meat processors, 

content creators, project managers and new farm 

owners. Some projects created virtual job boards 

to increase agricultural job market accessibility. 

In addition, LAMP activities created or helped 

maintain 5,067 jobs in local and regional foods. 

Figure 7 breaks down LAMP impacts on the number 

of new careers created and the number of jobs 

maintains/created.

Figure 7. LAMP Number of New Careers Created and Jobs 

Maintained/Created

Source: USDA, AMS Grants Division Program Calculation, 2019 to 2022.

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

800

900

1000

1100

Number of New Careers Created

357

342

429

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

3000

3500

4000

4500

5000

Number of Jobs Maintained/Created

342

2,163

2,562

Grant Type

FMPP LFPP RFSP

Table 1. LAMP Market Opportunities for Farm and Ranch Operations Serving Local Markets

Grant Type Farmers 

Markets

Roadside 

Stands

Community Supported 

Agriculture Programs

Agritourism 

Activities

Other Direct Producer-toConsumer Market Opportunities

FMPP 2,109 840 1,073 975 1,589

LFPP 326 205 191 354 353

RFSP 223 165 266 109 139

Farmers Markets

30%

Roadside Stands

14%

Community Supported 

Agriculture Programs

17%

Agritourism Activities

16%

Other Direct Producer-toConsumer Market 

Opportunities

23%

Source: USDA, AMS Grants Division Program Calculation, 2019 to 2022.

Figure 8. Percent of Total New Market Opportunities by Market Type

As a result of LAMP implementation in 2019-2022, 

8,917 new local and regional food activities were 

conducted in communities across the country. 

Table 1 and figure 8 show the breakdown of 

activities across five markets, including farmers 

markets, roadside stands, community supported 

agriculture (CSA) projects, agritourism, and other 

direct-to-producer markets. 
13

AMS has entered into a 2-year cooperative agreement with Florida A&M 

University and the University of Maryland Eastern Shore to evaluate 

the accessibility of AMS Grant Programs, with a focus on historically 

underserved individuals and communities. The goals of this project 

include:

1. Evaluating barriers to AMS grant opportunities for historically 

underserved communities

2. Investing in building trust and confidence between these 

communities and the USDA

3. Taking action to rectify inequalities in program access through 

targeted outreach, training, and technical assistance.

AMS will use the results of this agreement to 

improve access and reduce barriers to LAMP 

grants, as well as grant opportunities across its 

portfolio. Those results are expected in early 2024.

Improvements in Risk Management 

and Market Access

The 2018 Farm Bill specifically referenced food 

safety certifications, skills, and investments 

in LAMP, to help farmers access markets and 

improve food safety. In 2019-2022, 1,064 

producers obtained on-farm food safety skills, 

knowledge, and/or certifications because of LAMP 

funding, usually through an FMPP or LFPP project. 

Figure 10 provides a breakdown of food safety 

impacts in the local and regional food system 

because of LAMP investments.

Supporting Beginning and Historically Underserved Farmers 

LAMP creates opportunity and accessibility to applicants and projects 

that support both new farmers and those that have been historically 

underserved. Many projects during the reporting period 2019-2022 were 

developed or expanded to support new, beginning, and underserved 

farmers to grow their operations, increase their customer base, and meet 

food safety compliance so they can improve market access and feed 

more people in their regions.

As a result of LAMP activities in 2019-2022, recipients reported that 

1,336 new and beginning farmers started in local and regional food 

production. Recipients also reported that 1,078 historically underserved 

farmers started in local and regional food production. Figure 9 provides 

the number of beginning and socially-historically underserved farmers 

that received grants, broken down by grant type.

Source: USDA, AMS Grants Division Program 

Calculation, 2019 to 2022.

Figure 9. LAMP Number of Beginning 

and Historically Underserved Farmers

0

200

400

600

800

1,000

1,200

1,400

Number of New Beginning Farmers

0

200

400

600

800

1,000

Number of Historically Underserved

Farmers

124

364

848

26

495

557

Grant Type

FMPP LFPP RFSP

Figure 10. Food Safety of Locally and Regionally Produced 

Agricultural Products

Number That Will Report

Increasing Their Food

Safety Skills and

Knowledge

Number of Growers or

Producers Who Obtained

On-Farm food Safety

Certifications

Number of Growers or

Producers Who Will

Obtain On-Farm Food

Safety Certifications

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

Value

89

276

699

Source: USDA, AMS Grants Division Program Calculation, 2019 to 2022.
14

Figure 11. Value Added Producer Funded Applicant Type

Source: USDA, RD Program Calculation 2020 to 2022.

Agricultural

Producer Group

Farmer or Rancher

Cooperative

Independent

Producer

Majority Controlled

Producer Based

Venture

$0M

$50M

$100M

$150M

Funds Allocated

0

200

400

600

800

1000

Project Count

$146.30M

$1.16M $7.94M $6.77M

37

885

46 7

Rural Development – VAPG 

The Value-Added Producer Grant (VAPG) program helps agricultural producers enter value-added activities 

to generate new products, create and expand marketing opportunities, and increase producer income. 

Funded projects range from support for enterprise diversification – such as new packaging for an on-farm 

creamery – to the development of innovative new products such as powdered lavender drink mixes. Eligible 

VAPG applicants include individual and groups of independent producers, agriculture producer groups, 

farmer and rancher cooperatives and majority-controlled producer-based business ventures. VAPG funded 

975 projects, including 8 Tribal-led projects, to independent producers, cooperative, produce groups, or 

producer venture groups. Figure 11 above shows the total 2020-2022 project count and distribution of funds 

by each applicant type. 

From 2020 to 2022 VAPG allocated $162.1 million on 975 projects across all 50 states and three US territories. 

VAPG also allocated $4.1 million in award funding to Tribes. The VAPG program makes two types of awards: 

Planning Grants (2 percent of total awards) and Working Capital grants (98 percent of total awards). 

Planning Grant activities include conducting feasibility studies and developing business plans related to 

the processing and marketing of value-added products. Working Capital Grants support a broader range of 

project activities, but common uses of award funds include processing, labor, packaging, marketing, and 

advertising expenses. 
15

Figure 12 provides the number of VAPG awards made in each state. VAPG’s top 10 most funded states from 

2020 to 2022 were South Carolina ($10.8M), California ($10.2M), Oregon ($9.4M), Georgia ($8.3M), New York 

($8.2M), Puerto Rico ($8.2M), Wisconsin ($7.8M), Washington ($7.7M), Virginia ($7.6M), and Vermont/New 

Hampshire ($6.1M). The lowest 10 funded states are Arizona ($0.2M), Louisiana ($0.2M), Arkansas ($0.3M), 

Nevada ($0.4M), Wyoming ($0.7M), North Dakota ($0.8M), South Dakota ($0.9M), Utah ($0.9M), Alabama 

($1.0M), and Mississippi ($1.1M). The top 10 funded states make up 51 percent of total LAMP funding while 

the bottom 10 states make up 3.9 

percent. 

Rural Development gives priority 

to applications from beginning 

farmers and ranchers, historically 

underserved farmers and ranchers, 

producers operating small or 

medium-sized farms, ranches 

structured as family farms, farmer 

or rancher cooperatives, and 

projects supporting mid-tier 

value chains. Eighty-eight percent 

(759 grants) of 2020-2022 awards 

were awarded to these priority 

categories. Figure 13 shows the 

breakdown of total awarded grants 

and funds by priority category. 

Figure 12. Value Added Producer Award Count Distribution Map

Source: USDA, RD Program Calculation 2020 to 2022.

Figure 13. Value Added Producer Grant Program Priority Category

Source: USDA, RD Program Calculation 2020 to 2022.

$0M $10M $20M $30M $40M $50M $60M

Funds Allocated

0 50 100 150 200 250 300

Project Count

Beginning

Farmers/Ranchers

Cooperative

Mid-Tier Value Chain

No Priority

Small/Med Family

Farm

Socially

Disadvantaged

Veteran

$24.00M

$42.37M

$37.00M

$47.66M

$7.32M

$1.58M

$2.24M 14

296

228

216

8

40

173
16

PERFORMANCE MEASURES DEVELOPMENT

Establishing processes to review recipient performance, show achievement of program goals and objectives, 

share lessons learned, improve program outcomes, and foster the adoption of promising practices is an 

overarching goal of the USDA’s evidence-based approach to grants management. AMS has made great 

strides in performance measurement and program evaluation since the 2018 Farm Bill which will position 

the agency to provide stronger program and impact evaluations in future reports. From 2019 to 2020, the 

AMS Grants Division conducted a rigorous and objective evaluation of the performance measures used in 

AMS’s grant programs. This evaluation, and the subsequent development of new performance measures, 

originally occurred as a response to language in the 2018 Farm Bill mandating USDA develop performance 

measures to evaluate the Specialty Crop Block Grant Program (SCBGP), which USDA later expanded to 

update performance measures for LAMP as well. This effort allowed USDA to create the data collection tools 

necessary to respond to the 2018 Farm Bill’s mandate for specific outcome reporting in LAMP, where AMS did 

not previously have those outcome measures specified in its reporting requests to grant recipients. 

To conduct this process, AMS engaged Grant Thornton Public Sector LLC (Grant Thornton) to assess 

the existing performance measures for SCBGP and three additional grant programs. Grant Thornton, 

in collaboration with the National Association of State Departments of Agriculture Foundation (NASDA 

Foundation), employed a mixed-methods approach including thorough review of relevant policies, 

past evaluations, grant applications and reports; in-person and virtual feedback sessions; a nationwide 

online survey; and targeted expert interviews. Consulting stakeholders through these mediums provided 

a diverse, comprehensive set of first-person experiences and fulfilled the legislative mandate for State 

consultation as stipulated in the 2018 Farm Bill. Notable stakeholder feedback was gathered from multiple 

NASDA Foundation-facilitated listening sessions and the national stakeholder survey and was used for the 

development of improved performance measures. A robust revision process engaged stakeholders including 

grant recipients, industry experts, researchers, and representatives from State Departments of Agriculture to 

reinforce the findings from the first round of outreach and refine the improved measures. 

The revised performance measures focus on:

z Providing short- and long-term impact indicators.

z More accurately reflecting grant recipients’ accomplishments.

z Reducing burden on grant applicants and recipients.

z Improving AMS’ ability to report on the impact of its grant programs.

z Standardizing measures across programs where appropriate.

With new and more relevant and feasible performance measures, AMS is now able to collect better and more 

reliable data from grant recipients to measure and evaluate project and program performance. AMS has 

also invested in the GrantSolutions grants management system to better monitor and track performance 

report data and has added a data analyst to Grants Division staff, so that analysis of programmatic 

accomplishments can be accurately collected, analyzed, and reported into the future. 

The updated FMPP LFPP performance measures went into effect for the FY2022 awards. Final performance 

report data for those new performance measures will be collected at the end of 2025. The updated 

RFSP performance measures were completed in 2022 and went into effect for the FY 2023 awards. Final 

performance report data for the new RFSP performance measures will be collected at the end of 2026.

Public information on impact reporting will follow the submission of that data. 
17

VAPG continues to track project performance for all projects. Direct and indirect benefits related to the 

VAPG projects are captured at the time of application and detailed by the applicant. In addition, applicants 

provide specific information about plans to track and evaluate progress towards anticipated outcomes. 

Jobs created and saved as a result of the project are estimated at application and verified upon completion 

of the project through applicant reporting. Program income for awarded projects is tracked and verified. 

Applicants submit an application and verify through reporting the number of customers assisted. Finally, 

applicants provide performance evaluation measures for their project and track the success of these 

measures in their reporting.

SUCCESS STORIES 

The AMS Seeds of Success series highlights the accomplishments and lessons learned from FMPP and 

LFPP grant recipients. These StoryMaps are intended to help stakeholders learn from one another to build 

stronger local food systems across the nation.

Additionally, AMS hosts an online LAMP Navigator showing project information from AMS LAMP projects 

funded in 2006-2020. VAPG is not included in this map. The LAMP Navigator allows users to select and sort 

projects by year, state, and activity type, providing insights into trends and geographic coverage of the 

program over the years. AMS is working to update and expand this navigator to include more recent funding 

years and additional data points. 

Following are additional success stories illustrating the impact of LAMP grant awards. 
18

Farmers Market Promotion Program 

Fast Facts

z Marketing project benefited ~300 MI farmers 

markets.

z Farmers markets sales throughout the state 

increased by 243 percent, from $471,850 to 

$1,620,361.

The Michigan Farmers Market Association began 

in 2006 as a statewide member-based non-profit 

to support famers and farmers markets. The 

Association has been essential in helping the 

farmers market sector in Michigan develop into 

a professional and thriving marketplace for local 

food and farm products. The Association’s FMPP 

project focused on building consumer awareness of 

markets and improving customer attendance and 

spending. A statewide consumer outreach campaign 

targeted residents and tourists; technology was 

developed and introduced to improve customers’ 

ability to locate local farmers markets; professional 

development was provided to help market managers 

improve market promotion; and evaluation criteria 

were developed to track market attendance and 

consumer purchasing. Outreach to consumers 

through advertising and promotion helped to 

increase attendance, attract new market vendors, 

and sustain the growth of the farmers market sector.

The comprehensive marketing campaign included 

print and digital media. The project produced 

six videos, and the most successful, “Behind the 

Scenes of Michigan Farmers Markets,” was posted 

on YouTube. These marketing efforts benefited 

the nearly 300 Michigan farmers markets, leading 

to an overall customer increase of 112 percent. 

Through the efforts of the Michigan Farmers Market 

Association, farmers markets sales throughout the 

state increased by 243 percent, from $471,850 at the 

start of the project to $1,620,361 at its completion.

Grant Recipient: Michigan Farmers Market Association

Title: Promoting Michigan Farmers Markets to Residents and Tourists and Tracking Impacts 

on Consumer Attendance and Sales

Location: East Lansing, MI

Grant Program: FMPP

Project Type: Community Development, Training, and Technical Assistance

Grant Period: 2019-2022

Photo courtesy of Hailey Lamb, Michigan Farmers Market Association.
19

Grant Organization: National Recreation and Park Association

Grant Title: Increasing Access to Famers Markets Through Local Parks and Recreation

Location: Ashburn, VA

Grant Program: FMPP

Project Type: Community Development, Training, and Technical Assistance

Grant Period: 2021-2024

The National Recreation and Park Association’s 

mission is to “improve the health of communities 

for all people through parks, recreation and 

conservation.” Although national in scope, its 

FMPP project provides outreach, training, and 

technical assistance and resources to local Parks 

and Recreation agencies and community-based 

organizations in Berea, Kentucky; Kerman, CA; 

and Vivian, Louisiana. The focus is on developing 

innovative strategies to expand farmers markets 

and other direct-to-consumer venues and equitable 

strategies for providing recovery assistance from 

the Covid-19 pandemic. The Association developed 

resources, facilitates a community of practice, 

and shares best practices with farmers markets 

nationwide. 

The project has already assisted roughly 3,300 

beneficiaries in gaining knowledge for accessing 

locally and regionally produced food. Sales have 

increased from $280,790 at to $560,500, a 99 percent 

increase. The number of customers at farmers 

markets in the three communities also increased 

from 13,207 at the beginning of the project to 19,207 

so far, an increase of 45 percent. 

Fast Facts

z Increased market sales by 99 percent.

z Increased market customers by 45 percent.

Photo courtesy of the National Recreation and Park Association.
20

Local Food Promotion Program

Fast Facts

z Producer sales grew by 544 percent, from 

$85,000 to $547,487.

z Customers increased by 516 percent, from 

30,000 to 184,770.

Grant Organization: New Mexico Community Capital

Title: The Native Agribusiness and Food Security Initiative

Location: Albuquerque, NM

Grant Program: LFPP

Type of Project: Implementation

Grant Period: 2019-2022 

New Mexico Community Capital, a non-profit based 

in Albuquerque, NM, was founded in 2004 with 

the goal of developing and improving the Nativeowned business environment through mentorship, 

financial literacy, and digital skills programs, as well 

as specialized technical assistance. New Mexico 

has the highest level of food insecurity and substandard family income in the country, resulting 

in poor health and economic hardship for many 

in the state. Tribal producers lack resources and 

opportunity in multiple areas, including optimizing 

the use of limited inputs, marketing resources, 

and accessing new markets, along with training 

and technical assistance. With this project, New 

Mexico Community Capital sought to build a supply 

chain between markets and indigenous farmers; 

implement innovative marketing tools (branding, 

promotion, etc.); increase local food access; and 

increase purchases by mid-tier enterprises along 

with developing institutional markets.

Remarkably, the Covid-19 pandemic influenced 

progress positively, creating opportunity in areas 

of statewide communication and collaboration 

and bringing about creativity and innovation. 

Collaboration with a statewide mobile grocery 

(MoGro) resulted in expansion of its food access 

network to 10 permanent sites, addressing food 

relief efforts and health disparities. Producer sales 

grew by an impressive 544 percent, from $85,000 at 

the start of the project, to $547,487 at its completion, 

far exceeding the project expectation of $127,500 

in annual sales. Customer numbers also increased 

accordingly, from 30,000 at the start, to 184,770 at 

end of the project, an increase of 516 percent. It was 

reported that 46,193 gained knowledge of the food 

chain and how to establish long term sustainability.

Photo courtesy of New Mexico Community Capital and MoGro Mobile 

Grocery.
21

Organization: Hawaii Ulu Producers Cooperative

Title: Scale-up and expansion of Hawaii Ulu Cooperative to increase local access and 

consumption of breadfruit and specialty crops to replace imported food in the State 

of Hawaii

Location: Kailua-Kona, HI

Grant Program: LFPP

Type of Project: Implementation

Grant Period: 2020-2023

Fast Facts

z Increased sales of breadfruit and other 

starch crops by 74 percent, from $700,000 

to $1,080,112.

z Tripled the number of customers, a 174 

percent increas.

z Project reached 33,040 beneficiaries and 

stakeholders.

Hawaii ‘Ulu Co-op is a farmer-owned cooperative 

formed in 2016 with 9 small, diversified growers on 

the island of Hawaii. Since its inception, it has since 

grown to over 100 member farms on four islands and 

has become the biggest source of breadfruit in Hawaii. 

Breadfruit has been largely forgotten as a viable crop 

and a dietary staple in Hawaii. It is, however, becoming 

an important agricultural product in promoting food 

security, climate change resilience, diversification, 

and cultural preservation. Federal funding provided 

through the Local Foods Promotion Program is helping 

to provide resources and foster partnerships and 

collaborations for breadfruit to become commercially 

viable, and vital to the local food system. Targeted 

promotion and education efforts are helping 

breadfruit and other local and indigenous starches 

to be introduced and distributed into local markets, 

schools, hospitals, restaurants, hotels, food hubs, and 

to other customers. Key infrastructure upgrades and 

capacity building are helping to develop the supply 

chain through increased aggregation and processing 

facilities. Lastly, market diversification is being 

expanded online, as well as through CSA operations 

and retail. 

Hawaii ‘Ulu Co-op has had great success. It was able 

to increase sales of breadfruit and other starch crops 

by 74 percent during the project, from $700,000 to 

$1,080,112. The number of customers nearly tripled 

from 300 during the first year of the project to 822 

at completion, an increase of 174 percent. Roughly 

33,040 beneficiaries and stakeholders were reached, 

including school children, producers, CSA customers 

and Chefs. They reported buying, selling, producing, 

distributing, as well as gaining knowledge in accessing 

and preparing locally produced agricultural products. 

Photo courtesy of Hawaiʻi ʻUlu Cooperative
22

Regional Food System Partnership Program 

Fast Facts

z Alliance partners expanded from 35 to 192, 

increasing issue, economic, and ethnic 

diversity.

z Secured an additional $1.6 million in nonfederal financial aid and technical support.

Grant Organization: Syracuse Grows, Inc.

Title: Syracuse-Onondaga Food Systems Alliance: Collaborating to build a more 

resilient food system in Upstate New York

Location: Syracuse, NY

Grant Program: RFSP

Type of Project: Planning and Design

Grant Period: 2020-2022

The Syracuse-Onondaga Food Systems Alliance is 

an independent food council in Central New York, 

serving the City of Syracuse, surrounding Onondaga 

County, and the Onondaga Nation, which is located on 

over 7,000 acres of territorial land south of Syracuse. 

The Alliance was established in 2019 to develop a 

network of stakeholders representing the regional 

food system production, processing, distribution, and 

consumption. Increasing the viability of agriculture 

in the region, as well as reduced food insecurity and 

access to healthy food are key efforts of the network. 

Federal funding obtained through the Regional Food 

System Partnership grant program offered the Alliance 

opportunities to strengthen and broaden its member 

base and expanded outreach and recruitment of key 

stakeholders. Developing a strategic approach to 

identify needs and opportunities within the County 

food system was also integral to the project.

Partnerships developed through the Alliance grew 

dramatically during the project, from 35 to 192 

active partners. This expansion brought ethnic 

and economic diversity, increasing the number of 

partners identifying as Black, Indigenous, and people 

of color (BIPOC) as well having a full understanding 

of food insecurity and hunger. This growth also led 

to securing an additional $1.6 million in non-federal 

financial aid and technical support from multiple 

sources from partnerships established throughout 

the project. Increased social media, organizational 

meetings, collaborations, community events, and other 

outreach improved understanding and attention to 

the needs of the regional food system. The Alliance 

continues to expand. It has developed relationships 

and shared information with twelve food policy 

councils nationwide, improving the operations and 

sustainability for all. 

Photo courtesy of the Syracuse-Onondaga Food Systems Alliance.
23

Grant Organization: Alaska Food Policy Council

Grant Title: Alaska Food Policy Council and Beyond: Growing Connections and 

Building Networks for Greater Food Security

Location: Anchorage, AK

Grant Program: RFSP 

Type of Project: Planning and Design

Grant Period: 2020-2022

Fast Facts

z Established the Alaska Food Policy Council.

z Created a system of regional nodes 

throughout the state to foster regional 

representation and learning across the 

network.

z Published the Food Security Action Plan, 

which is helping food system organizations 

statewide fundraise and gather support.

Alaska’s location, climate, and short growing season 

limit its ability to grow fresh locally grown food. As 

a result, roughly 95 percent of its food is imported 

from outside the state. With this high dependence on 

outside resources, the likelihood of food insecurity 

and economic loss also increases. The Alaska Food 

Policy Council sought to expand the accessibility, 

availability, and diversity of local food, and increase 

understanding of, and equitable access to, resources. 

The Council recognized that communities statewide 

have been at different levels in food system 

development, with different assets, barriers, and 

needs. In addition, cultural groups throughout the 

State define terms such as “regional,” “food security” 

and “food system,” differently, further complicating 

the development of unified system. 

The Alaska Food System Network was developed 

with project funding. Consisting of existing database 

and other food system resources, it created a system 

of regional node locations to cultivate regional 

representation and a stronger peer-learning and 

sharing. The Food Security Action Plan created 

through the project is being used by food system 

organizations statewide to gather support and 

funding for other various projects.
24

Since beginning operations in November 

2020, the Red Cliff Fish Company has 

conducted over $82,000 in retail sales from 

its onsite retail market, $67,000 in food 

distribution program sales, and $5,700 in 

co-op/grocery sales. The 2022 VAPG project 

aims to expand on this success by driving 

existing and new customer sales through 

product and packaging diversification, 

expanded markets (both geographic and 

demographic), and launching a direct-toconsumer ecommerce market channel.

Value-Added Producers Grant (VAPG)

Fast Facts

z Leveraged a 2015 feasibility study to secure 

funding to develop a business plan, which 

later helped obtain financing for a fish 

processing facility.

z Received a second VAPG to expand production 

of frozen, vacuum-packed fillets and another 

five value-added products.

z Conducted $154,700 in sales since November 

2020.

Organization: Red Cliff Band of Lake Superior Chippewa Indians

Title: Red Cliff Fish Processing

Location: Bayfield, Wisconsin

Grant Program: VAPG

Type of Project: Working Capital

Grant Period: 2022

The Red Cliff Band of Lake Superior Chippewa 

Indians (hereafter referred to as the Red Cliff Band) 

has been fishing the waters of Lake Superior for 

countless generations, serving as the community’s 

primary agricultural activity. Since 2020, The Red 

Cliff Band has operated the Red Cliff Fish Company, 

supporting 34 independently licensed Tribal 

fishermen, and serving as hub for local economic 

development activity.

The emergence of the Red Cliff Fish Company has 

been supported by a progression of USDA support. 

Red Cliff Band received a Value-Added Producer 

Grant (VAPG) Planning Grant in 2015. The grant funds 

were utilized to conduct a feasibility study for a fish 

processing facility on the Red Cliff reservation. The 

study produced positive results and identifying a 

need for infrastructure investments. Red Cliff then 

applied for a USDA Rural Business Development 

Grant in 2019. The grant funds were used to develop 

a business plan. The business plan was used in 

conjunction with the feasibility study to obtain 

financing and build a fish processing facility in 2020. 

The most recent piece of the evolving partnership 

between USDA and Red Cliff Band is a second VAPG, 

awarded in 2022. The $62,975 Working Capital 

award is continuing USDA’s support of the Red Cliff 

Band’s efforts to meet their community and food 

sovereignty goals. VAPG funds are being utilized to 

expand production of frozen, vacuum-packed fillets 

and produce five additional value-added products: 

herring caviar, pickled fish, pre-packaged smoked 

fish, smoked fish dips, and fish cakes. Other project 

activities include the acquisition of ingredients, 

packaging, labeling, marketing, and distribution of 

the value-added products. 
25

SUMMARY

The LAMP grants have invested in a wide variety of local and regional food businesses across the country 

since the passage of the 2018 Farm Bill. Thanks to increased funding from the Consolidated Appropriations 

Act of 2021 and the American Rescue Plan Act, USDA was able to increase awards. As USDA returns to annual 

funding levels, however, funding will continue to be very competitive. A review of fiscal year 2021 requests 

for funding versus annual funding showed that up to 90 percent of demand would have gone unmet without 

supplemental resources.

LAMP funding helps recipients maximize opportunities for economic growth and ingenuity in local 

and regional food systems. Over the years, these grants have generated new income sources for small, 

beginning, and underserved farmers, increased local food access across rural and urban communities

and provided platforms for value-added and new products to penetrate markets. These competitive grant 

programs provided critical assistance during the COVID-19 pandemic and then pivoted to creating new and 

better markets during the ensuing economic recovery. Through robust outreach and technical assistance, 

USDA continues to promote equitable access to these funding opportunities to ensure inclusion of 

historically underserved communities. Future reports will incorporate enhanced performance measures to 

improve impact evaluation and outcomes of this vital program.
26

APPENDIX 1: USDA LAMP IMPLEMENTATION

Each year, USDA offers webinars for new and returning applicants to explain the details of Requests for 

Applications while also providing tips on how to prepare a successful grant application. Frequently Asked 

Questions are posted on the USDA website, and grants management specialists provide answers to specific 

questions via phone and email. During the pandemic, AMS also partnered with non-profit organizations to 

provide enhanced technical assistance through virtual office hours sessions to address applicant questions. 

To target applications and build a path for funding sequential phases of development for applicants and 

their work, AMS implements grant programs using project types. These different project types highlight 

different program priorities and provide applicants with information to help them prepare a successful 

application. 

FMPP is implemented through two project types: Capacity building projects are intended to build longterm organizational capacity to develop, coordinate, and expand direct producer-to-consumer market 

opportunities. Community Development Training and Technical Assistance projects are intended to provide 

outreach, training, and technical assistance to farm and ranch operations serving local markets to develop, 

coordinate, and expand direct producer-to-consumer market opportunities.

LFPP offers four project types: Planning, Implementation, Farm to Institution, and Turnkey Marketing and 

Promotion. Planning projects are used in the early stages of developing, coordinating, or expanding a food 

business that supports locally and regionally produced agricultural products and food system infrastructure. 

Implementation projects are used to establish a new food enterprise or market channel or to improve or 

expand existing food enterprises, market channels, and/or food system infrastructure. LFPP has funded 

Farm to Institution projects since 2020, and AMS added a separate Farm to Institution project type to 

encourage proposals targeting these markets starting in 2022. This project type supports the development, 

coordination, and expansion of institutional markets or institutional food service operations. Farm to 

institution recipients may plan and facilitate supply chains and develop relationships between local and 

regional producers, processors, intermediaries, and institutional markets or institutional food services 

operations. These can include dining facilities within pre-K through grade 12 schools, college, university, 

hospital, local government, Tribal, and State agency cafeterias or meal programs. 

In 2023, AMS developed the Turnkey Marketing and Promotion project type to streamline the application 

process for applicants conducting marketing and promotion activities from a prescribed list. This 

simplified application responds to Congressional direction and will provide a pilot effort for evaluation. 

If the 2023 Turnkey pilot proves successful, AMS may offer more simplified applications for targeted 

activities and/or smaller awards.

The RFSP offers grants for three project types: Planning and Design, Implementation and Expansion, and 

Farm to Institution. Planning and Design projects support partnerships in the early stages of convening, 

envisioning, goal setting and identifying strategies for developing local or regional food systems. 

Implementation and Expansion projects support partnerships building on prior or ongoing efforts within 

a local or regional food system. Farm to Institution projects support public-private partnerships that plan 

and facilitate supply chains and develop relationships between local and regional food businesses and 

institutional markets or institutional food services operations.
27

VAPG offers two project types: Planning and Working Capital. Planning grants fund development of a 

defined program of economic planning activities to determine the viability of a potential value-added 

venture, specifically for paying a qualified consultant to conduct and develop a feasibility study, business 

plan, and/or marketing plan associated with the processing and/or marketing of a value-added agricultural 

product. Working Capital grants provide funds to operate a value-added project, specifically to pay the 

eligible project expenses directly related to the processing and/or marketing of the value-added products 

that are eligible uses of grant funds. The two project types are mutually exclusive. RD also provides specific 

guidance to harvester, local-produced food, mid-tier value chain, and anaerobic digester applicants. 

LAMP awards have a broad funding range from $25,000 for small planning grants to $1 million for large RFSP 

grants. AMS raised the maximum award amount for FMPP and LFPP grants to $750,000 in 2021 while also 

scaling up planning grants to accommodate increased funding and the heightened demand. The Farm Bill 

provided the Secretary of Agriculture with the discretion to increase this maximum funding level above the 

stated $500,000 maximum. RFSP awards range from a minimum of $100,000 to a maximum of $1 million. 

VAPG sets maximum award amounts at $75,000 for planning grants and $250,000 for working capital grants. 
28

APPENDIX 2: LIST OF AWARDED AGREEMENTS

z FMPP Description of Funded Projects, 2019-2022

z LFPP Description of Funded Projects, 2019-2022

z RFSP Description of Funded Projects, 2020-2022

z VAPG Table of funded projects by state, 2020-2022
29

APPENDIX 3: DEFINITIONS

For the purpose of this report, the following definitions are applicable:

Locally and Regionally Produced Food means food that is raised, produced, aggregated, stored, processed, 

and distributed in the locality or region where the final product is marketed to consumers, so that the total 

distance that the product travels between the farm or ranch where the product originates and the point of 

sale to the end consumer is at most 400 miles, or both the final market and the origin of the product are 

within the same State, territory, or Tribal land. 

Local or Regional Food Business means an organization or business entity that functions as an 

intermediary between producers (farmers or growers) and buyers by carrying out one or more local or 

regional food supply chain activities—including aggregating, storing, processing, and/or distributing locally 

or regionally produced food products—to meet local and regional market demand. Examples include but are 

not limited to eligible entities that serve as food hubs, food aggregators, food distributors, food wholesalers, 

food processors, and other value-added production enterprises, such as shared-use kitchen or kitchen 

incubator operations.

Direct-to-Consumer marketing means producers sell food agricultural products directly to the consumer 

(e.g., farmers markets, roadside stands, CSA programs, agritourism activities such as U-pick, online sales, 

mobile markets) with minimal involvement of an intermediary, wholesaler, retailer, agent, broker, or reseller. 

These market channels often provide increased financial returns to the farmers.
30

APPENDIX 4: APPLICATIONS RECEIVED IN 

AMS LAMP GRANTS

The main purposes for this appendix are to share data provided as supporting information to this Report to 

Congress and to share data provided to the public for dissemination. The appendix provides an overview of 

applications to LAMP programs, program funding, and selected grant recipients.

Data Notes

Data in the report includes information broken down by fiscal year, application/grants awarded rates by 

grant program, application/grants awarded counts by entity type, application/grants awarded counts 

by project type, and information on grantees with multiple projects in the programs. Nulls in dataset are 

missing grant information. “Applications” includes all applications, including those later deemed ineligible 

and those not selected based on review. RFSP Program began in 2020.
31

lication Breakdown

2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022

387 363

456

287

163

178

238

129

282 313

362

248

186

194

275

202

145

98 67

2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022

676 818 535 349 470 658 398

Total Applications Received by Fiscal Year and Grant Program

m
32

arded Rate Breakdown

15 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022

% 15% 13% 17% 26% 25% 31% 46%

Grants Awarded Rate by Fiscal Year and Grant Program

5 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022

14% 11% 17%

30%

28%

37%

43%

17% 14% 18% 23%

23% 31%

47%

23% 21%

52%
33

ds Available and Percent Awarded Breakdown

2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022

$26.8M $27.9M $28.0M $26.8M $23.5M $38.9M $97.4M $100.9M

LAMP Funds Available by Fiscal Year and Grant Program

2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022

$13.41M $13.95M $13.98M $13.40M $11.75M

$14.45M

$41.05M

$15.45M

$13.41M $13.95M $13.98M $13.40M $11.75M

$14.45M

$41.05M

$50.45M

$10.00M $15.30M

$35.00M

2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022

94.0% 96.1% 95.8% 99.6% 98.6% 93.4% 92.4% 66.7%

LAMP Percent of Available Funds Awarded by Fiscal Year and Grant Program

2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022

100.0%

99.6% 96.1% 95.8% 99.7%

93.3% 91.2%

83.9%

88.5% 96.1% 95.8% 99.6% 97.2%

93.5% 91.4%

61.7%

93.3% 94.6%

54.7%
34

ct Type Breakdown

LFPP RFSP

7.9% 2.6% 3.2%

0.9%

8%

49.8%

30.6%

60.6%

50.3%

43.9%

Project Type Percent of Total Applications, FY14 to 22

LFPP RFSP

2%

17%

36%

32%

66%

45%

47%

8%

Project Type Percent of Total Grants Awarded, FY14 to 22

Capacity BuildingComm Dev Train/Tech Assist

ImplementationPlanning

Implement. and Expand.Planning and Design

 introduced official project types for each program in RFA. Data includes 2014 and 2015 when project types were not assigned to a specific program. 

ge is 1% or less of the percent total.
35

n Entity Type Breakdown

ut labeled percentage is 1% or less of the percent total.

LFPP RFSP

4% 2%

6%

2%3%

3%

59%

10%

53%

26%

12%

71%

5%

8%

Organization Entity Type Percent of Total Applications, FY14 to 22

LFPP RFSP

3%

5%

3%

2%

% 2% 2%

2%

15%

59%

25%

74%

13%

6%

Organization Entity Percent of Total Grants Awarded, FY14 to 22

Local GovernmentInstitution of Higher EducationProducer Network or Association

Economic Devel. Corp.Regional Farmers Market AuthorityFood Council

Food HubOtherPublic Benefit Corporation

CSATribal Org/Government
36

g Grantee Breakdown
37

APPENDIX 5: VALUE-ADDED PRODUCER 

GRANT PROGRAM ADDENDUM

PROGRAM NAME: Value-Added Producer Grant Program 

AUTHORITY: 7 U.S.C. 1623a. 

APPLICABLE PROGRAM REGULATIONS: 7 CFR Part 4284, subpart J 

APPLICABLE FEDERAL REGISTER NOTICE: 

ADDITIONAL PROGRAMMATIC AWARD PROVISIONS:

RBS and the Recipient agree to the following additional provisions: 

Section II, Paragraph A.1.d. is retained and the following language is added: 

Under extenuating circumstances, you may request a one-time, no-cost extension for up to 12 months, 

as long as the total Period of Performance, including the time period of the extension, does not exceed 

three years. Note that extending the Period of Performance for this award may affect your eligibility 

for additional awards. The extension must be requested at least 30 calendar days prior to the end of 

the period of performance, or it will not be considered. The request must be in writing and addressed 

to the Agency Contact listed under Section I.16. It must include the following information: (1) the 

time period of the extension requested; (2) a revised budget and work plan demonstrating that funds 

will be completely expended by the end of the extension; (3) the reason(s) why the extension is being 

requested; and (4) what steps will be taken by the Recipient to ensure that the project is completed 

by the end of the extension. Submission of a request for an extension does not guarantee that we will 

approve the extension. Extensions will only be approved in cases where significant circumstances 

beyond the Recipientʼs control prohibited timely performance of award activities. Extensions will not be 

approved for changes in scope. If the extension is approved, and you are also approved for an award in a 

subsequent funding cycle, this project must be completed before you may begin work on a subsequent 

award. 

Award funds not expended by the end of the Period of Performance will be cancelled by us. Prior to 

cancellation, we will notify you in writing of our intent to cancel the remaining award funds. 

Section II, Paragraph A.3.b. is retained with the following language added: 

All Performance Reports must include a discussion on the performance benchmarks suggested in your 

application to determine whether the primary goals and objectives proposed in the Approved Work 

Plan and Budget were accomplished during the reporting period. (See 7 CFR § 4284.931(b)(2)(i)). 

In the section of your report that compares actual accomplishments to the objectives for that reporting 

period, objectives should be reported by specific task breakdown as described in Attachment B – 

Approved Work Plan and Budget. 
38

For working capital projects, all Performance Reports must include the following metrics: 

• Expansion of customer base as a result of the project

• Increased revenue returned to the producer as a result of the project

• Jobs created/saved as a result of the project

For all projects, we may request additional information, including but not limited to, the following: 

1. Information that will enable evaluation of the economic impact of program awards, such as:

a. Business starts and clients served;

b. Data associated with producer market expansion, new market penetration, and changes in 

customer base or revenues.

2. Information that would promote greater understanding of the key determinants of the success of 

individual projects or inform program administration and evaluation, such as:

a. The producerʼs experience related to financial management, budgeting, and running a business 

enterprise.

b. The nature of, and advantages or disadvantages of, supply chain arrangements or equitable 

distribution of rewards and responsibilities for Mid-tier Value Chain projects; and

c. Recommendations from Beginning Farmers or Ranchers, Socially Disadvantaged Farmers or 

Ranchers, or Veteran Farmers or Ranchers.

3. Information that would inform or enable the aggregation of data for program administration or 

evaluation purposes.

If any special conditions have been placed on the use of award funds, you must discuss your 

compliance with those conditions in each Performance Report. 

For Final Performance Reports only, you must provide responses to the following questions: 

• What have been the most challenging or unexpected aspects of this project?

• What advice would you give to other organizations planning a similar project? You should include 

strengths and limitations of the program. If you had the opportunity, what would you have done 

differently?

• If an innovative approach was used successfully, you should describe the approach in detail so that 

other organizations might consider replication in their areas.

Section II, Paragraph A.10. is retained with the following language added: 

VAPG is a Federally conducted program. You will not be required to provide data for a Civil Rights 

Compliance Review. 
39

Section II, Paragraph A.12 is retained with the following language added: 

The following Special Conditions apply to your award: [INSERT SPECIAL CONDITIONS ORN/A] 

Section II, Paragraph A.13. is added with the following language: 

Cost Sharing. You must comply with the requirements of 2 CFR § 200.306. Additionally, matching 

funds must be available at the same time award funds are expected to be spent and expenditures of 

matching funds will be pro-rated or spent in advance of award funds. 

Section II, Paragraph A.14. is added with the following language: 

Deliverables. You must provide deliverables for each completed task. Documentation can include, 

but is not limited to, feasibility studies, marketing plans, business plans, success stories, and best 

practices.