►►►and vegetables amongst students. <strong>Farm</strong> <strong>to</strong> school’s positive impacts on schoolfood service staff could potentially be a selling point for sustaining long-lastingand systemic changes in the school food environment.Despite being another side of the farm <strong>to</strong> school equation, concrete data on monetaryand other benefits <strong>to</strong> farmers is scarce. Some data from specifi c programsis available on this outcome, though generalizations are inappropriate due <strong>to</strong>wide variations in types of products, quantities, and scale of local products soldthrough each program. More resources need <strong>to</strong> be invested <strong>to</strong> delve deeper in<strong>to</strong>the impacts of direct marketing programs such as farm <strong>to</strong> school for small andmid size farmers. Data on the economic development benefits of farm <strong>to</strong> schoolfor a city, county or state is currently not available and could provide the muchneeded impetus for local governments <strong>to</strong> invest in a farm <strong>to</strong> school approach.Few studies cited in this <strong>report</strong> document farm <strong>to</strong> school impacts from the parentperspective, though there is enough anecdotal evidence that supports thisintended outcome. Increasingly, parent education is becoming a key componen<strong>to</strong>f farm <strong>to</strong> school, and its impacts need <strong>to</strong> be studied further <strong>to</strong> understand thepositive ripple effects of farm <strong>to</strong> school on families and communities.Th o ugh farm <strong>to</strong> school has the potential <strong>to</strong> affect communities at large, muchmore concrete data and information is needed <strong>to</strong> understand the role of farm<strong>to</strong> school in community dynamics and connections. It is hypothesized that farm<strong>to</strong> school programs have a role in creating and maintaining strong, vibrant communitiesthat support a local/regional food system, but little if any <strong>eval</strong>uationwork has focused on this aspect.Emerging farm <strong>to</strong> school programs should consider conducting a thorough <strong>eval</strong>uationof the various aspects of program implementation, as feasible. The <strong>to</strong>ols and resourcesneeded for conducting an <strong>eval</strong>uation may be already available through previously conducted<strong>eval</strong>uations or may be adapted <strong>to</strong> meet the specifi c needs of a program. Program<strong>eval</strong>ua<strong>to</strong>rs who have conducted the studies cited in this <strong>report</strong>, as well as other nutritionand health researchers, are eager and available <strong>to</strong> assist new farm <strong>to</strong> school program<strong>eval</strong>uations.Conclusions and Recommendationswww.farm<strong>to</strong>school.org 55
EndnotesEndnotes1.2.3.4.5.6.7.8.9.10.11.12.Community Food Project Evaluation Handbook Updated andExpanded Third Edition, March 2006, www.foodsecurity.org.Cornell <strong>Farm</strong> <strong>to</strong> <strong>School</strong> Program, <strong>Farm</strong> <strong>to</strong> <strong>School</strong> in <strong>New</strong> York State: A Survey ofK-12 Food Service Direc<strong>to</strong>rs, available at: http://farm<strong>to</strong>school.cce.cornell.eduTh e Oklahoma <strong>Farm</strong> <strong>to</strong> <strong>School</strong> Report. Including the OklahomaInstitutional Food Service Survey. Oklahoma Food Policy Council, 2003,available at: http://kerrcenter.com/ofpc/farm<strong>to</strong>school.htmIzumi BT, Rostant OS, Moss MJ, Hamm MW. Results from the 2004 Michigan<strong>Farm</strong>-<strong>to</strong>-<strong>School</strong> Survey, J Sch Health 2006 May; 76(5) 169-74.Wilkins J, Mouillesseaux-Kunzman H, Graham M, Bacelli B, Goodsell M, <strong>Farm</strong> <strong>to</strong><strong>School</strong> in the Northeast: Making the Connection for Healthy Kids and Healthy <strong>Farm</strong>s,A Toolkit of Extension Educa<strong>to</strong>rs and Community Leaders. Cornell <strong>Farm</strong> <strong>to</strong> <strong>School</strong>Program, NY <strong>Farm</strong>s! and <strong>New</strong> York <strong>School</strong> Nutrition Association, May 2006.<strong>New</strong> Mexico <strong>Farm</strong> <strong>to</strong> <strong>School</strong> Direc<strong>to</strong>ry 2007, <strong>Farm</strong> <strong>to</strong> Table and <strong>New</strong> Mexico Departmen<strong>to</strong>f Agriculture, available at: http://www.farm<strong>to</strong>tablenm.org/nm_fts_direc<strong>to</strong>ry_oct07.pdfAdapted from “Hawthorne Unified <strong>School</strong> District Student Knowledge Survey” availableat: http://socialmarketing-nutrition.ucdavis.edu/Tools/Downloads/Hawthorne_Unifi e d_<strong>School</strong>_District.pdf Giarratano Russell, S. 2004. Validity and Reliabilityof a Knowledge survey for Hawthorne Unified <strong>School</strong> District. Unpublished.Adapted from “Outcome Expectations for Eating Fruits and Vegetables,” Five a Day PowerPlay! Survey available athttp://socialmarketing-nutrition.ucdavis.edu/Tools/SomarkToolsList.php?key_m=16Baranowski T, Davis M, Resnicow K, Baranowski J, Doyle C, Smith M, Lin L, Wang DT.Gimme 5 fruit and vegetables for fun and health: Outcome Evaluation. Health Education &Behavior 2000; 27(1):96-111.California Nutrition <strong>Network</strong>. (2005) Five a Day Power Play! Pre-Post Impact Survey.Unpublished.Saunders, R. P., Pate, R., Fel<strong>to</strong>n, G., Dowda, M., Weinrich, M., Ward, D., Parsons,M., & Baranowski, T. Development of questionnaires <strong>to</strong> measure psychosocialinfluences on children’s physical activity. Preventive Med 1997; 26, 241-247.Adapted from “General Knowledge,” available at:http://socialmarketing-nutrition.ucdavis.edu/Tools/Downloads/General_Knowledge.pdfHoelscher D, Day RS, Lee ES, Frankowski RF, Kelder SH, Ward JL, Scheurer ME. Measuringthe pr<strong>eval</strong>ence of overweight in Texas school children. American Journal of Public Health2004; 94: 1002-1008.Reynolds K, Yaroch A, et al. Testing mediating variables in a school-basednutrition intervention program. Health Psychol 2002; 21(1): 51-60.Triant Sally Laughter, Ryan Ashley, Mixed Greens: City of WyomingParks and Recreation Summer 2005 Programming Evaluation.Center for Ecoliteracy, Rethinking <strong>School</strong> Lunch Guide, availableat: http://ecoliteracy.org/programs/rsl-guide.htmlAdapted from “Harvest of the Month Survey,” available at:http://www.cdph.ca.gov/programs/CPNS/Documents/<strong>Network</strong>-Compendium.pdfCullen K, Baranowski T, et al. Availability, accessibility, and preferences for fruit, 100% fruitjuice, and vegetables influence children’s dietary behavior. Health Educ Behav 2003; 30(5):615-26.Baranowski T, Davis M, Resnicow K, Baranowski J, Doyle C, Smith M, LinL, Wang DT. Gimme 5 fruit and vegetables for fun and health: OutcomeEvaluation. Health Education & Behavior 2000; 27(1):96-111.56 Bearing Fruit: <strong>Farm</strong> <strong>to</strong> <strong>School</strong> Evaluation Resources and Recommendations