SCHOOL LUNCH ADVISORY COUNCIL

Meeting Summary – October 20, 2017

In Attendance:

NYS Office of General Services (OGS):

Maureen Barbic

Diane Green

Barbara Marshall

Ryan Sluus

Kelly Draper

NYS Education: Raemie Swain, Nutrition Program Administration

USDA: Adrienne Vingiello, Food and Nutrition Services (FNS)

Matt Chotkowski, Food and Nutrition Services (FNS)

SLAC Area Representatives:

Area A - Gregory Elliott, Food Service Supervisor, GST BOCES, Prattsburgh Central School

Area C - Tami Augugliaro, Food Service Director, Lancaster Central School District

Area D - Kim Corcoran, Food Service Director, Bainbridge-Guilford School

Area E - Chris Whitmore, Food Services Director, Rome City School District

Area F - Dave Gravlin, Director of Food Service, Potsdam Central School

Area G - Michael Robinson, Food Service Director, New Paltz Central School District

Area J - Lisa Ostrowski, Food Service Director, North Colonie Central School District

Area K - Regina Dunne, Food Service Director, Smithtown Central School District

Area L - Brian Wright, School Lunch Director, Baldwinsville Central School District

Area W - Pablo LastraCristina Perez, Office of School Food – New York City Board of Education

Absent: Jennifer Martin, School Nutrition Association (SNA)

Maureen Barbic led the introductions.

Jennifer Martin of SNA was unable to attend, and sent an e-mail to all participants with her report. Diane Green read/summarized the information from the e-mail. (This report is attached.)

Adrienne Vingiello provided the following updates regarding progress pertaining to items discussed at a previous SLAC meeting. Her purpose today was to answer questions and take notes and convey the information up the channels. They want to take the comments today into consideration and make related changes.

Update #1:Regarding the anticipated DOD solicitation for upstate New York - OGS is working to fine tune the DOD school listing. DOD has received the final list and is moving forward to start market research to see what vendors are out there to bid on this large service area. The huge change is that schools will have weekly deliveries direct to the school. The current contract ends in May 2018 and USDA/DOD is hoping to have a new contract in place by then so that DOD should be available for the 2018-19 SY for the whole state. DOD is currently available in Areas G and K. USDA worked with MA, ME, RI, CT, NH and MA for the contract for this school year (Gargiulo’s). The vendor is new, rolling out new states on a monthly basis, so as to not overwhelm the vendor.

Update #2: The Business Management Improvement (BMI) Project started in October 2015 and was a joint effort by the USDA Food and Nutrition Service (FNS) and Agriculture Marketing Service (AMS) regarding what is working and what is not working. New York was the only state represented on this project. The group worked on where things could be fine-tuned and set forth goals and proposals. The process now is to develop Pilots on some of these proposals. The specific topics have not been decided upon yet. A consulting company was brought in to the Business Management Improvement Project and there was a need for much education from the workgroup to help the consulting company understand what it is that USDA does. The driving force were what were referred to as pain points. These pain points drove goals and the ideas that came out – the need to order so early; uncertain supply; cancelled orders; uncertain demand (new products); the whole administration of the program/how many people were touching the same parts and how can the process be streamlined.

  1. Improve Produce Availability – Demand comes from the bottom up. Food Service Directors know what they want. They have to procure before the orders come in – The thought was to have food already there before ordering to increase reliability that the food will be there. Long term contracts ensure availability for yearlong need.
  2. Improve on time delivery – Have USDA get into the transportation component. USDA would have the infrastructure to delivery.
  3. Improve produce storage and distribution - Allow for mixed product loads (this has been tested on shipments of two types of pasta). USDA would establish regional distribution centers. USDA would forecast based on historical ordering history and have the produce already in the distribution center before ordering. Should distribution centers be established, pallet size ordering would be available. This would allow states the opportunity to try new products by the pallet.
  4. Reduce order management - minimize changes in delivery times. Allow for another stream for processed products whereby USDA places orders with vendors with long term contracts. USDA would monitor the processor. The National Processor would deliver to distributors the finished product, alleviate the need for New York State to enter into processing contracts.

Discussion about new products. Not easy to do taste tests. Regional Industry Seminars are a great opportunity to see new products. Schools are not as willing to risk entitlement for new products they have not seen. The School Nutrition Association conference may be another opportunity for introducing new products (the new dried fruit mix will be available for taste testing at the state SNA conference – made of predominately dried apples).

It was suggested that the SLAC meeting would be a good place to have a taste test and spread the results throughout the state.

USDA want to be sure that the messaging surrounding new products is accurate.

Discussion continued around USDA food products not being the same year to year. Broccoli florets were great last year but this year the Product Information Sheet did not specify “florets”.

State Education Report – Raemie Swain–first responded to questions raised through SLAC members:

Q. In Area K (Long Island) the COOP is considering using a bid program called Interflex. Are electronic bids acceptable in New York State?

A. There is nothing that prohibits the use of electronic bids.

Q. Schools are having issues with T.A.Morris. TA won the distribution bid, however schools can’t get their products. What can they do?

A. What does the contract say? If the distributor is not responsible, the school should review their contract to see how to handle vendors that are not responsible.

Q. If a school can purchase under the OGS Procurement contracts (Sysco) with proper procurement, then why under procurement law do we have to write “or equal” when we should be able to spec exactly what we want?

A. “Or equal” must be included as to not limit competition. Not including “or equal” would result in a finding on a procurement review.

Q. Regarding State Reviews-When we are reviewed, do we need to have contracts with the processors we choose to process government commodities?

A. Please note processors must be properly procured and win the bid, not chosen. School Food Authorities (SFA)s must properly procure processors and maintain documentation for the review. If it was a formal procurement, the SFA would have a contract with the processor, which would be required for the review.

Q. I see that NYS holds the agreements for processors. If a processor produces product for more than one state, they have a National Processor Agreement with USDA. Should we be receiving copies of these contracts to provide during our state reviews or should OGS speak to states about the contracts they have with the processors that they are sending our products to? We need to know what to do in this situation.

A. USDA and OGS have agreements with processors. They have not procured and contracted with processors on the school’s behalf. Schools are required to procure processors.

  • SFAs up for review in 2017-18 are listed on the State Ed website along with the representative who will be conducting the review. We are in the process of finalizing a web-based review tool that will be phased in over the school year. In order to avoid SFAs doing duplicative work, reviewers will be contacting each SFA separately to request review documentation and to establish a review date.
  • State Ed has conducted several webinars - Buffalo Farm to School, Basic Meal Pattern, Food Service Management Company Contract, Meal Pattern for Menu Planners, RCCI/Jail, Eligibility, Preschool Meal Pattern, Fresh Fruit and Vegetable Program – which are available on our website under Training. There are also tutorials, snip-its and Summer Food Service Program (SFSP) training info in the training tab on the NYS Education Department Child Nutrition Website:
  • A question was asked about an Equipment grant for 2017-18:
  • UPDATE: USDA just approved our request for the equipment grant. We have $1.3 million to award. We will begin the process to get approval from SED. We hope to have it approved and out to SFAs in December. The grant will work the same as past years - SFAs will have a year to purchase equipment once they’ve been awarded. SFAs that have received an equipment grant in the past can apply, the only difference is they will not get bonus points. SFAs that have not received an equipment grant in the past will get bonus points. Priority goes to SFAs with 50% or more free or reduced and SFAs with 40% participation or higher will receive bonus points.
  • It was asked if SED could create a contract template for processors.
  • UPDATE: Unfortunately, a one size fits all won’t work. So, at this point we cannot provide a contract template.

Discussion about schools not being able to get product through distributor that won bid: The answer is – what does your contract say?

A suggestion was made to go to your processor to put pressure on your distributor.

USDA has an agreement with processor to receive USDA foods and it is up to the processor to get business. USDA holds the bond for national processors on the state’s behalf. At the State level – processors enter into a State Processing Agreement (SPA) with New York State. New York State will work with processors to get the school’s business. The SPA incorporates USDA’s requirements and then adds New York requirements.

Pricing – November 15th file – official prices to be used for processing for the upcoming School Year. NYS SPA determines pass through value i.e. FFS or NOI. The value pass through method must be clearly identified to ensure that you are getting the discount of the USDA commodity in the finished product. Fee for Service (FFS) – need to procure with processor. Net Off Invoice (NOI) procure through the distributor for the product. The distributor is procuring the product.

Raemie Swain

  • Buy American. Products not grown in US – you still have to do the work to try to get domestic and document your steps. (Mandarin oranges/pineapple – limit their use – you can use it if you can prove it for excessive pricing – try to substitute another product.) If you bid domestic and it comes in and it is not domestic, then contact the vendor and document the steps you took..
  • Schools up for review this year – State Ed has a new electronic Administrative Review Tool. It is on the website and contains the list of schools and the school’s State Ed representative contact information. The tool (from Colyar) has the official approval. Next year will be completely electronic. Will upload paperwork. The whole process will be on the tool and web-based. This may shorten time on-site. Schools would like to extend the review to every five years instead of every three years. The new procurement tool is more user-friendly and straight forward. Administrative reviews and procurement reviews will be done in tandem.
  • Secretary of Agriculture – sodium levels not increasing and the whole grain waiver was extended. If you have a waiver in place you don’t have to do anything further. If you want flavored low-fat milk you can put in for a waiver.
  • The bulk upload for out-of-district students was not working at the beginning of the year but is working now. Food service directors must have the student’s ID to do the state match. The database was not updated until mid-September thus not capturing new students, kindergarten or transfer students. State Ed gets data from SNAP and Medicaid (does not come at the same time). SNAP and SNAP extension trump all other categories.

Matt Chotkowski –

  • USDA Secretary of Agriculture Sonny Purdue went to aNew York CitySchool for an agriculture event last week.
  • FNS has a new Administrator, Brandon Lipps. There is a lot up for discussion. Let your voices be heard through SNA.
  • USDA Farm to School grants are due the end of December. They are giving out $50,000 - $100,000

OGS Update:

Maureen Barbic –

  • Some oven roasted chicken orders will be cancelled due to vendor capacity. Entitlement will go back to schools. We will then be looking at opening the catalog.
  • In February 2017, WBSCM rolled out an update requiring users to update their security questions and answers. If users have forgotten the answers to their secret questions, they will need to contact OGS Food Distribution and the user will need to e-Authenticate again.
  • Meal counts have been uploaded in WBSCM.
  • Reminder to schools. The distributor contract requires delivery to schools between the hours of 7 am and 2 pm. Contact OGS Food Distribution if they are receiving deliveries outside these times.

Diane Green–

  • Pilot program – There is a new invoice reconciliation process for the 2017-18 School Year. Some of the larger schools are finding the new process very difficult. Guidance is available on the OGS Food Distribution Website Pilot page.
  • Area G/K schools may “switch” entitlement out of the Pilot and into DOD. Once funds are taken out of the Pilot, you cannot put them back as another school from the waiting list will be added.

Barbara Marshall –

  • DOD Area G and K: School information was sent to DLA for upload into the Ffavors system. OGS Food Distribution has requested the amount of entitlement they would like to allocate to the program. The DOD catalog will reflect current market value. Schools will be responsible ordering and receipting for DOD in Ffavors. Reminder, that the contract is for direct delivery to schools, and there is no procurement necessary for DOD. The current contract is a three-year contract, with two one-year extensions.

Area A – Gregory Elliott:

  • Requested that OGS Food Distribution send an updated area contact list to all SLAC members.
  • Requested that meeting minutes or notes be posted to the OGS Food Distribution website.
  • ECS is much smoother this year.
  • Peanut butter is in a different container this year, in a jar instead of tub, which makes it difficult to scoop out. Schools are reminded to send commodity complaints to OGS Food Distribution. The forms are on the website.
  • Schools in Area A have entitlement dollars available and asked if the catalog could be opened.

Area C - Tami Augugliaro:

  • Tami requested allergy information be printed on USDA foods. The current practice is USDA is advising that you retrieve the name, number from the box and seek information from the vendor. This process is very time-consuming, and typically an answer is needed immediately. The allergy information is not on the USDA product information sheet. Tami asked the USDA if they could put in the bid specs that they need to have the allergy information on the packaging. Adrienne will take the comment forward.

Area D – Kim Corcoran:

  • The whole grain requirement is relaxed now. You still need to get a whole grain waiver. Does USDA plan to take a step back on whole grain? Adrienne will ask.
  • Recommends the Child Nutrition Conference in Cincinnati at the end of April.

Area E - Chris Whitmore:

  • Questions answered in State Ed Section. Procurement contracts.

Area F – Dave Gravlin

  • Sysco Albany sub-contracted to Sysco Syracuse for deliveries to some schools. Sysco Syracuse left product on the loading dock after hours. OGS Food Distribution was contacted and talked to Sysco Albany
  • There was a conversation at the last meeting regarding ordering two times a year, instead of just once. Adrienne stated that USDA has long-term contracting. They need information more in advance. This leads to more predictability and reliability. With the BMI, the USDA may become distributors for the program, a model they are looking at. They have other feeding programs that use this model, and the model is working. Dave said that it is difficult to base a menu on ordered food, and must wait until the food is received.

Area G – Michael Robinson