Regional Food System Partnerships

Outcomes and Indicators 

The grant program outcomes and performance measures outlined below reflect direct stakeholder 

feedback and provide a framework that allows grant recipients to evaluate project activities more 

accurately in relation to each program’s statutory purpose. 

For recipients, the measures are: 

• More feasible to accomplish and measure within a grant’s period of performance; 

• Better aligned with grant program purpose and recipient activities; and 

• More reflective of work performed during the project. 

These performance measures will go into effect beginning with the FY2023 grant application cycle. 

Outcome 1: Encourage Collaborative Approaches to Strengthen the Capacity of a Regional 

Food System

1.1 Number of partnerships and/or collaborations established through project activities ___. Of those, 

the number of: 

1.1a Formalized written agreements (i.e., MOU’s, signed contracts, etc.) ___.

1.1b Partnerships with underserved organizations ___.

1.1c Partnerships between producers and institutions ___.

1.1d That reported:

i. Higher profits ___.

ii. More efficient use of resources ___.

iii. Increased access to institutional consumers ___.

iv. Other mid-tier value chain enhancements (such as improved capacity to 

transport products to market) ___.

1.2 Number of new/improved distribution systems developed ___. Of those, the number that: 

1.2a Stemmed from new partnerships ___. 

1.2b Stemmed from increased efficiency ___.

1.2c Stemmed from reduced costs ___. 

1.2d Stemmed from expanded customer reach ___.

1.2e Stemmed from increased online presence ___.

1.3 Number of stakeholders that gained technical knowledge about resources within the regional food 

system ___.

1.4 Number of stakeholders that gained knowledge about more efficient and effective distribution 

systems ___.
1.5 Number of stakeholders that adopted best practices or new technologies to improve distribution 

systems ___.

1.6 Number of stakeholders trained on how to develop or maintain a direct-to-consumer enterprise

___.

1.7 Amount of non-Federal financial, professional, and technical assistance resources secured because 

of project activities, measured in dollars ___.

Outcome 2: Develop New Market Opportunities for Regional Producers and Processors

2.1 Number of partnerships and/or collaborations established between producers/processors and 

market access points ___. Of those, the number:

2.1a Formalized with written agreements (i.e., MOU’s, signed contracts, etc.) ___.

2.1b With and/or between underserved organizations ___.

2.1c That reported:

i. Higher profits ___.

ii. Increased access to institutional consumers ___.

iii. Other mid-tier value chain enhancements (such as improved capacity to 

transport products to market) ___.

2.2 Number of producers/processors who increased production to meet increased demand ___.

2.3 Number of market access points that gained knowledge about how to procure or access local foods

___. Of those, the number that were:

2.3a Farmers markets ___.

2.3b Roadside stands ___.

2.3c Agritourism ___.

2.3d Grocery stores ___.

2.3e Wholesale markets/buyers ___.

2.3f Restaurants ___. 

2.3g Agricultural cooperatives ___.

2.3h Retailers ___.

2.3i Distributors ___.

2.3j Food hubs ___.

2.3k Shared-use kitchens ___.

2.3l School food programs ___.

2.3m Community-supported agriculture (CSAs) ___.

2.3n Other ___.

2.4 Number of new strategies developed to improve local/regional food processing, distribution, 

aggregation, or storage ___.

2.4a Number of stakeholders trained to use new strategies ___.
2.5 Number of market access points that reported increased or improved processing, distribution, 

storage, and/or aggregation of regionally produced agricultural products ___.

Outcome 3: Improve the Infrastructure of a Regional Food System Through Development of 

Business and/or Strategic Plans and Feasibility Studies (Planning and Design Projects Only)

3.1 Number of supply chain analyses, market assessments, feasibility, or other relevant studies 

developed ___.

3.2 Number of supply chain analyses, market assessments, feasibility, or other relevant studies 

conducted ___.

3.3 Number of projects:

3.3a Deemed viable after conducting studies ___.

3.3b Deemed not viable after conducting studies ___.

3.4 Number of business development plans created ___.

3.5 Number of strategic plans developed ___.

3.6 Amount of non-Federal financial, professional, and technical assistance resources secured because 

of the developed plan(s), measured in dollars ___.