Community-Supported Agriculture (CSA)

1. Community-Supported Agriculture (CSA) Participant demographics and experiences 2012

2. What is the CSA? • Community Supported Agriculture (CSA) programs allow consumers to buy produce directly from local farmers • Consumers commit to buying a specific amount of produce throughout the growing season, traditionally paying upfront for the full season • EBNHC and LGM partnered with Farmer Dave’s CSA in Dracut

3. History of the CSA at LGM • Began with 10 households in 2008 • Originally fully subsidized by EBNHC and contributions from other CSA members • 2012 saw expansion of program (average of 38 households per week, vs 15 in 2011) • Starting in 2012 participants were responsible for paying for shares • Weekly payment option • SNAP/EBT option

4. 2012 Participation • 50 total participants • 16 enrolled online and paid upfront; 34 paid weekly • Average of 38 households received produce each week • Focus on weekly payers • Remove barrier of high one-time cost • Able to pay with cash, check or SNAP/EBT • Some individuals shared boxes • Additional subsidy for LGM households

5. 2012 Participation

6. 2012 Participation • 30 people purchased 24 Small Vegetable shares • 20 individuals purchased a full share • 3 pairs of participants shared Small Vegetable boxes • 1 group of four shared a Small Vegetable box • 2 participants purchased Large Vegetable shares • 8 participants purchased Fruit shares • 6 had also purchased small vegetable shares • 2 only purchased fruit shares

7. Payment methods • 24 participants paid weekly with cash/check (71%) • 8 participants used EBT weekly (24%) • 2 participants used a mix of EBT and cash (6%) • EBT use was similar among all groups • 33% of LGM participants used EBT or EBT/cash • 27% of EBNHC employees used EBT • 27% of unaffiliated community members used EBT

8. Length of Participation • Participants were allowed to enroll after the first week • Participants had the option to discontinue at any point

9. Length of Participation

10. Length of Participation – by group 58% 42% Differences not statistically significant at 5% level of significance; X2=4.693, df=2, p=0.096

11. Length of Participation – by payment type 58% 42% 60% 40%

12. Follow-up Survey • Sent to all participants in January 2013 • Follow-up phone calls 2+ weeks after mailing • Incentive - $25 gift card drawing • Overall response rate: 76% • Response rate for 11-20 week participants: 89% • Response rate for 1-10 week participants: 57%

13. Follow-up Survey – Demographics Table 1: Demographic characteristics of participants who participated for 11-20 weeks vs participants who stopped after 1-10 weeks 2-tailed t-tests for continuous variables 2-proportion z-tests for dichotomous variables

14. Follow-up Survey – Reasons for Joining 1) Freshness/quality of produce (11) 2) Health/nutrition (6) 3) Education (5) 4) Support local agriculture (3) 5) Convenience (2) 6) Cost (2)

15. Follow-up Survey – Benefits of Participating 1) Improve your diet – 100% 1) Support local farms – 100% 3) Try new foods– 82% 4) Better tasting food – 77% 5) Less time shopping for food – 59% 6) Cook more meals at home – 53% 7) Reduce food costs – 41% 7) Eat less fast food – 41% 9) Introduce my children to new foods – 29%

16. Follow-up Survey – Primary Benefit 1) Improve your diet – 29% 2) Try new foods – 24% 3) Support local farms – 18% 4) Better tasting food – 6% 4) Less time shopping for food – 6% 4) Cook more meals at home – 6% 4) Reduce food costs – 6% 4) Eat less fast food – 6%

17. Follow-up Survey – Effect on diet During the months that you were receiving the CSA, did the amount of vegetables you and your family ate:

18. Follow-up Survey – Effect on diet During the months that you were receiving the CSA, did the variety of vegetables you and your family ate:

19. Follow-up Survey – Effect on diet During the months that you were receiving the CSA, did the amount of money you spent on food:

20. Follow-up Survey – Participant Satisfaction How happy were you with the cost of the program?

21. Follow-up Survey – Participant Satisfaction How happy were you with the quality of the produce?

22. Follow-up Survey – Participant Satisfaction How happy were you with the variety of the produce? * *Siempre habia las mismas tipas de frutas con muy poca variedad

23. Follow-up Survey – Participant Satisfaction How happy were you with the convenience of pickup?

24. Follow-up Survey – Participant Satisfaction Did you feel that the amount of produce you received each week was:

25. Follow-up Survey – Reasons for Stopping 1) Not enough value for the money – 63% 2) Too expensive – 50% 3) Too much food/had to throw some away – 38% 3) Didn’t like types of produce – 38% 5) Didn’t know how to cook some vegetables – 25% 5) Prefer to get produce somewhere else – 25% Not chosen: Inconvenient pickup times/location, didn’t like quality/freshness of produce, transportation issues, scheduling issues, no place to store produce at home

26. Follow-up Survey – Reasons for Stopping “I have very little money because I don’t have much work. And it seemed to me very little variety and quantity” “Cost and the amount of produce. It didn’t seem like you’re getting enough for what you paid” “When I heard about the program, I thought it was a program for low income families like mine. To me it seemed very expensive and it provided very few fruits and vegetables”

27. Follow-up Survey – Suggestion from Participants “I calculated the price that I paid in comparison to shopping at Market Basket, and it came out more expensive” “Too many unfamiliar vegetables” “I prefer to make my own choices at the supermarket” “I would rather be able to pick and choose what I want rather than have it picked for me”

28. Participant Satisfaction: 1-10 week participants How happy were you with the cost of the program?

29. Participant Satisfaction: 1-10 week participants How happy were you with the quality of the produce?

30. Participant Satisfaction: 1-10 week participants How happy were you with the variety of the produce?

31. Participant Satisfaction: 1-10 week participants How happy were you with the convenience of pickup?

32. Participant Satisfaction: 1-10 week participants Did you feel that the amount of produce you received each week was:

33. Participant Satisfaction: Cross-group comparison Table 2: Rates of dissatisfaction with various aspects of the CSA program: A comparison of participants who participated for 11-20 weeks vs participants who stopped after 1-10 weeks

34. Planning for the Future Do you plan to participate in the CSA again this coming year?

35. Planning for the Future If you do participate, would you be interested in free monthly cooking classes that focus on using foods found in the CSA boxes?

36. Planning for the Future • Data Collection • New survey questions incorporated into 2013 application • Will quantify F&V servings both for applicant and for children • Will quantify current household food expenditures • Questions will be repeated at end of CSA season

37. Follow-up Survey – Suggestion from Participants • More variety • Less unfamiliar vegetables • Instructions/information about unfamiliar items • Option to choose your own items • Option to buy 1 box with both F&V • Option to buy 1 box every other week • Home delivery

38. Follow-up Survey – My suggestions 1) More information about unfamiliar items - Cooking classes, recipes, labels, etc 2) Consider adding option to choose some items - Some of Farmer Dave’s pickup sites currently offer “choose your own” model 3) Additional financial support for very low income families? 4) Consider limiting program to families with children - Only 8/17 participants who completed 11-20 weeks reported having children in household

39. CONCLUSIONS

40. Conclusions • Both the garden and CSA program are serving populations that are demographically representative of the East Boston community • Both the garden and CSA program are primarily serving families with low income/at risk for food insecurity • The great majority of participants in both programs reported an increase in fruit and vegetable consumption

41. Conclusions • Nearly all garden participants reported a decrease in food expenditures; a sizable minority of CSA participants reported a decrease in food costs • Demographic characteristics were not significantly associated with participants’ decision to continue or stop participating in the CSA • Dissatisfaction with the cost of the program and/or the variety of produce were significantly higher in participants who dropped out of the CSA early

42. THANKS!