Urban farms not only grow food, but they also build community, create green space, and increase access to healthy food. Yet, farmers in urban and suburban areas are not immune to the pressures of higher input costs and competition for resources. These issues simply present in different ways. Farmers in more residentially dense areas feel the pressure of development and competition for land, resulting in tenuous land access or complicated zoning ordinances; access to safe water for irrigation can be extremely costly or entirely reliant on rainwater; the smaller size of their business can make it difficult to benefit from bulk purchases in the same way as traditional farming operations. 

These issues are more common among farms than expected. Analysis of 2022 Agricultural Census data — overlaid with USDA Economic Research Service Rural-Urban Continuum Codes — shows that 839,049 farms are located in metro counties, and another 708,857 operate in non-metro counties adjacent to metro areas. Altogether, more than 1.5 million farms face unique urban and suburban pressures that farmers located outside these areas do not face. 

The 2018 Farm Bill took significant steps to dedicate US Department of Agriculture (USDA) resources to addressing these challenges by creating the Office of Urban Agriculture and Innovative Production (OUAIP). Since its creation, OUAIP has quickly implemented programming, grants, and cooperative agreements. These activities have provided vital support to urban farmers while identifying new and ongoing barriers for the upcoming farm bill reauthorization to address. 

USDA Offices Meet Farmers Where They Are 

The creation of the Office of Urban Agriculture and Innovative Production stole the spotlight of the 2018 Farm Bill, understandably so since it has invested over $85 million through 199 grants and 146 cooperative agreements across 43 states and Puerto Rico since 2020. However, an often overlooked win in the farm bill was the creation of the Farm Service Agency (FSA) Urban County Committees and their respective USDA Service Centers.

Local USDA Service Centers are essential for farmers to access resources. Oftentimes, they serve as the primary point of service for farmers seeking support from USDA. In an effort to ensure Centers respond to the unique needs of the geographical regions they serve, farmers also elect their peers to serve on FSA County Committees. These committees ensure farmer representation in local decision-making that affects the delivery of services in the area. This model was authorized in 1935. Today, nearly 2,300 Centers are nestled within farming communities nationwide, and since 2020, USDA has named 27 new FSA Urban County Committees and corresponding service centers to specifically serve farmers in urban and suburban settings. The map below shows the locations of all 27 FSA Urban County Committees.

Partnerships Expedite Implementation and Increase Reach

In an effort to strengthen new Service Centers and Urban County Committees, FSA has partnered with community organizations to provide technical assistance and conduct farmer outreach to promote FSA resources to farmers who have less experience navigating USDA services. In 2023, FSA entered into dozens of new Urban Agriculture Outreach, Education, and Technical Assistance cooperative agreements with community-based technical assistance providers. Agreements varied in scope to respond to unique geographic needs, but all maintained key elements: 

• assisting farmers with required FSA annual reporting; 
• providing business planning;
• matching technical assistance with a micro-grant that corresponds with their business growth goals. 

Several National Sustainable Agriculture Coalition (NSAC) members across the country received agreements, including Community Alliance with Family Farmers, Farm to Table New Mexico, PASA Sustainable Agriculture, Sprout, Renewing the Countryside, and Cultivate Kansas City, while many more partnered closely with cooperators. The map below shows the location of NSAC members with FSA cooperative agreements to support urban farmers. 

In order to reach farmers, organizations developed curricula, technical guides, and organized services via group settings or 1-1 services. While many USDA Urban Service Centers were slow to open their doors, these local partners scheduled farm visits, hosted community events, and ensured services were accessible to all interested farmers. Organizations offered traditional farm technical assistance such as help filing for a farm number, acreage reporting, and production planning, along with contextual support to navigate local zoning restrictions and access city utilities. 

Due to the distinct challenges of urban settings, farmers are often proactively addressing these concerns. As a result, organizations often found that farmers were more than ready for education and training on topics such as sustainable pest management, urban landscaping, water runoff management, rainwater collection, compost infrastructure and management, and soil health through cover crops and other techniques. 

Partnerships Remove Barriers to Capital Access 

One key element of the Urban Agriculture Outreach, Education, and Technical Assistance agreements was the inclusion of subawards in the form of micro-grants to farmers. Capital access for new, beginning, and small farm operations can be difficult due to limited revenue history, lack of collateral, or small initial profit projections. These challenges for urban farmers can be exacerbated by limited land ownership and competitiveness in limited USDA annual funding pools. 

To address these challenges, many organizations allocated a portion of their organizational funding for implementing micro-grant awards to producers. Since these same partners were intimately involved in business development and planning with the farmers, the awards were well timed and led to sizeable impact. 

One Cooperator – Farm to Table New Mexico – shared that their competitive micro-grant application process was designed to support farmers in increasing their production capacity. All the recipients operate with a gross cash income of $250,000 or less annually. They focused on supporting capacity building for a diverse range of small-scale producers in urban communities as an important investment in the state’s food ecosystem that will help deliver locally grown and nutritious products directly to urban communities. Because Farm to Table is deeply engaged with technical assistance for urban producers, they were well equipped to support farmers in the application process and identify which applications would be most impactful.

Farm to Table implemented 3 years of grant cycles, funding 40 projects for a total of $341,961 directly invested in local farming operations. One project included funding for the Williams Family Farm, which operates the region’s only winter tomato production using natural and organic practices. They quickly exceeded their own capacity after they launched winter operations. Grant funds supported the construction of a third winter greenhouse, enabling the farm to supply all San Juan County schools and day care centers through the New Mexico Grown program. 

Similarly, Community Alliance with Family Farmers (CAFF) awarded 52 microgrants across seven California counties valued at $607,500. Microgrant awards were primarily used for production supplies, infrastructure, and associated labor costs. Project examples include refrigeration for farmstand and wholesale operations, irrigation installation and automation for seedlings, compost systems, and more. 85% of farms that received these micro-grants sell their produce in communities with greater need, such as to seniors and low-income families. 

One project that received CAFF funding was Local Ecology and Agriculture Fremont (LEAF), which used their grant to purchase a small, used tractor with a front loader to improve the efficiency of their operation. This purchase facilitated tasks such as mulching, composting, and planting. The tractor greatly expanded their operational footprint from .33 acre to 1.3 acres while supporting their mission of increasing food production for underserved families and fostering community resilience. A before and after funding photo is below.

Farmers from other regions have shared additional details about their individual experience. 

With the micro-grant, I was able to update the irrigation, seed container, tools, and plumbing in the farm. I really enjoyed how simple the application process was, and it was useful for our small farm,” shared a 9th Ward community garden in New Orleans. 

In Kansas City, Ophelia’s Blue Vine Farm was funded to upgrade their greenhouse to increase year-round production capabilities. It is estimated that improvements will increase yield in the greenhouse by 20-30%. These upgrades will improve insulation, extend the growing season, and lower energy costs, creating a more efficient and sustainable system for growing fresh, affordable food in Kansas City’s 18th & Vine District.

The Case for Ongoing Investments in Partnerships 

The Urban Agriculture Outreach, Education, and Technical Assistance agreements have been instrumental in introducing new services and processes for farmers unfamiliar with USDA services. The timing of these agreements led to even greater impact due to the high turnover in local field office staffing in the past fourteen months. FSA lost 21% of its federal staff between January 2025 and January 2026 and an additional 8% of its FSA county staff during the same time period. The loss of these FSA staff makes it even more difficult for urban farmers to get the support they need. Partnership agreements such as these provide continuity of services from trusted partners that can help support farmers and USDA staff alike. 

Relatedly, despite funding for OUAIP, staff turnover in the national office last year interfered with full implementation of Congressionally mandated programs, such as the Urban and Innovative Production Grants. The Notice of Funding Opportunity (NOFO) was withdrawn in February 2025, and there were no grant awards made in Fiscal Year 2025. Unfortunately, we are rapidly approaching the end of Fiscal Year 2026 and have not seen OUAIP post a NOFO for this year’s grants. Community partners, such as the ones highlighted above, have demonstrated their abilities to administer similar grant and training programs, filling a critical gap when USDA’s operations are delayed or otherwise hampered by insufficient staffing. 

A Farm Bill Solution 

Congressional leaders in the Senate recognize the potential of community partnerships and have introduced legislation that could increase capacity to OUAIP while maximizing reach of direct-to-farmer investments.

Last month, Senators John Fetterman (D-PA), Elissa Slotkin (D-MI), Adam Schiff (D-CA), Tina Smith (D-MN), Cory Booker (D-NJ), Michael Bennet (D-CO), Martin Heinrich (D-NM), and John Hickenlooper (D-CO) introduced the Supporting Urban and Innovative Farming Act, S.4470. This bill seeks to strengthen existing OUAIP services and expand the Office’s reach by supporting ongoing outreach, education, and technical assistance partnerships. 

Specifically, the bill would: 

• direct OUAIP to develop resources and engage local and state USDA Service Centers to serve the unique conservation and business-planning needs of urban and small-scale farmers; 
• expand existing grant eligible entities to include farmer cooperatives; 
• direct formal agreements with community organizations and technical assistance providers that can readily reach farmers; 
• enable subawards so that farmer training and education can be paired with a modest influx of capital to strengthen on-farm impact; and
• secure reliable, mandatory funding of $15 million annually to continue its essential operations.

As the Senate Agriculture Committee prepares to introduce legislation reauthorizing the 2018 Farm Bill, it must provide sufficient resources to meet the new and persistent challenges facing farmers nationwide, including the unique challenges of farmers in urban and suburban areas. The Supporting Urban and Innovative Farming Act provides a clear pathway to do so.

The post USDA Sows Trust and Farm Success in Urban Communities appeared first on National Sustainable Agriculture Coalition.

After a year of funding freezes, cancellations of programs, and disruptions to grant fund distributions, the US Department of Agriculture (USDA) has opened applications for several sustainable agriculture grant opportunities. This blog post provides an overview of each funding program currently open, the application deadline, and eligibility criteria. This list serves as a useful reference for family farmers and eligible entities looking to advance sustainable agriculture. Anyone applying for federal funding should review this great resource developed by Farm Commons, that helps grantees navigate new compliance requirements under USDA’s updated Terms and Conditions.

The grant opportunities listed below are sorted into three categories:

• Local Food and Nutrition 
• Education and Business Development
• Specialty Crops

The Requests for Application (RFAs) are organized by category, and then by earliest to latest application deadline. Most deadlines are spread throughout June, with the earliest deadline on June 5, 2026!

Editor’s Note: USDA is now using the term “Notice of Funding Opportunity” or “NOFO” for all grant funding announcements. We continue to use “Request for Application” or “RFA” here out of familiarity but will soon shift toward using NOFO in our postings as well for continuity.

Local Food and Nutrition Programs

Farmers Market Promotion Program (FMPP)

Deadline: June 5, 2026

The Farmers Market Promotion Program (FMPP) is a competitive grant program through the Agricultural Marketing Service (AMS) that funds projects meant to promote direct-to-consumer markets. There are a variety of project types that support capacity building, training, technical assistance, and marketing and promotion. There is approximately $13 million available in funding this year. Projects have a 25% match requirement that can be satisfied by in-kind or cash contributions. Apply here.

Eligibility: Agricultural businesses or cooperatives; community supported agriculture (CSA) networks or associations; economic development corporations; food councils; local government; nonprofit corporations; producer networks or associations; public benefit corporations; regional farmers market authorities; tribal governments

Local Food Promotion Program (LFPP)

Deadline: June 5, 2026

The Local Food Promotion Program (LFPP) is an AMS competitive grant program that supports the development of entities that enhance intermediary supply chain activities, more specifically initiatives that help connect agricultural products to local markets. For example, eligible projects include support for processing, aggregation, distribution, and storage of local and regional food products. There is approximately $13 million in funding available this year for planning, implementation, marketing, recruitment, or training projects. All projects require a 25% cash or in-kind contribution. Apply here.

Eligibility: Agricultural businesses or cooperatives; community supported agriculture (CSA) networks or associations; economic development corporations; food councils; local government; nonprofit corporations; producer networks or associations; public benefit corporations; regional farmers market authorities; tribal governments

Regional Food System Partnerships (RFSP)

Deadline: June 5, 2026

The Regional Food System Partnerships (RFSP) program is an AMS grant that provides support for partnerships that bridge public and private resources for the development of local and regional food systems. There is approximately $4.7 million available to fund planning or implementation projects. Each project will require a 25% cash cost share. Apply here.

Eligibility: Community supported agriculture (CSA) networks or associations; economic development associations; farmer or rancher cooperatives; food councils; local governments; majority-controlled producer-based business ventures; nonprofit corporations; producers; producer networks or associations; public benefit corporations; regional farmers market authorities; tribal governments

Gus Schumacher Nutrition Incentive Program (GusNIP)

Deadline: June 26, 2026

The Gus Schumacher Nutrition Incentive Program (GusNIP) funds projects administered by government agencies and non-profit organizations that aim to increase fruit and vegetable purchases among SNAP participants through incentives provided at the point of purchase. Projects increase accessibility and affordability of fruit and vegetable purchases by offering discounts or matching funds. NIFA is allocating $36 million to this program, with award amounts ranging from $10,000-$15,000,000 based on the scale of the project. Each project requires a 50% cost share that can be satisfied through cash or in-kind contributions. Apply here.

Eligibility: Government agencies; non-profit organizations 

* Award recipients may sub-award to organizations ineligible to apply if those organizations are necessary for the project

Education and Business Development Programs

Rural Business Development Grant (RBDG)

Deadline: June 15, 2026 (Strategic Economic and Community Development) OR June 30, 2026 for all other applicants

The Rural Business Development Grant (RBDG) provides grant funds to public bodies or government entities, tribes, or nonprofit entities for economic development and job creation projects in rural areas on the outskirts of cities with a population of 50,000 or more. RBDG grants fall into two different categories: business opportunity grants and enterprise grants. 

Eligibility: Public body or government entities; tribes; nonprofits focused on rural service 

Beginning Farmer and Rancher Development Program (BFRDP)

Deadline: June 16, 2026

The Beginning Farmer and Rancher Development Program (BFRDP) provides support for projects that provide training, education, outreach, or technical assistance to beginning farmers and ranchers. These projects are aimed at helping beginning farmers and ranchers make informed decisions about their operations and enhance their sustainability. This year, NIFA announced the availability of $44 million in grant funds, with award amounts ranging from $49,999-$750,000. 

Eligibility: Land-grant institutions; colleges and universities; foundations maintained by colleges or universities; state cooperative extension services; federal, state, municipal, or tribal agencies; community-based organizations (CBOs); nongovernmental organizations (NGOs); private for-profit organizations

Rural Microentrepreneur Assistance Program (RMAP)

Deadline: June 30, 2026

The Rural Microentrepreneur Assistance Program (RMAP) provides funding for Business Development Organizations such as nonprofits, federally-recognized tribes and higher education institutions to help small businesses and micro entrepreneurs through training, technical assistance, and microloans. The program will assist the growth and founding of microenterprises in rural areas with a population of less than 50,000 residents. 

Eligibility: Nonprofits; federally-recognized tribes; institutions of higher education

Meat and Poultry Processing Expansion Program (MPEPP)

Deadline: August 7, 2026

The Meat and Poultry Processing Expansion Program (MPEPP) has $60 million in funds available for capacity-building for very small, small, and intermediate-sized meat and poultry facilities that primarily process cattle, though multi species plants may apply. MPEPP aims to increase competition, sustainable development, and supply chain resilience. Funding will be distributed equally between two applicant pools, one being very small (0-10 FTE) and small (10-500 FTE) processors, and the other being intermediate processors (here defined as 500-3000 FTE). Awards will be given to two types of projects, with $50,000 – $2 million available for processing expansion projects, and $10,000 – $250,000 available for equipment-only projects.

Eligibility: Very small processors; small processors; intermediate processors 

Specialty Crop Programs

Specialty Crop Block Grant Program (SCBG)

Deadline: June 8, 2026

The Specialty Crop Block Grant Program (SCBG) provides funds for projects undertaken by State departments of agriculture to increase the competitiveness of specialty crops. States have flexibility to focus on a variety of specialty crops, such as fruits and vegetables, tree nuts, and horticultural and nursery crops. Projects are required to benefit a network of growers or the industry broadly and are not intended to serve a single entity. Examples of previously funded projects include field day trainings for organic small fruit production or food safety practice workshops. Funding availability varies by state. More information can be found in the Notice of Funding Opportunity. 

Eligibility: State departments of agriculture

Specialty Crop Research Initiative (SCRI)

Deadline: June 15, 2026

Specialty Crop Research Initiative (SCRI) provides funding for research and extension projects on specialty crops that are multidisciplinary, participatory with key stakeholders, and systems-based. Examples of projects that have met SCRI’s priorities in the past are research on managing nematodes or developing IPM solutions to pests found on cucurbits. 

Eligibility: Federal agencies; national laboratories; colleges and universities; research institutions and organizations; private organizations; foundations; or corporations; state agricultural experiment stations; cooperative extension services; individuals

There are a number of exciting funding opportunities currently available. Hopefully this post has helped introduce them! NSAC will continue to monitor funding opportunities, so stay tuned for any updates. 

For more information on these and other federal agricultural policies and programs, please visit the Grassroots Guide to Federal Farm and Food Programs!

The post RFA Roundup: Current Funding Opportunities appeared first on National Sustainable Agriculture Coalition.

The year was 1988, and in rural Minnesota during the cold of winter, several dozen sustainable agriculture leaders across the Midwest gathered for the first time to build a policy campaign to address the aftermath of the farm crisis and build a more sustainable future for farmers. This first small gathering contained the seeds of what would eventually become the National Sustainable Agriculture Coalition of today: over 170 members, a staff of 18, and decades of legislative achievements in Washington.

Those founding organizations of the Sustainable Agriculture Coalition, NSAC’s predecessor, made one important early structural decision: they built SAC to operate under fiscal sponsorship. Fiscal sponsorship is a nonprofit organizing structure where a project or initiative is housed by a parent nonprofit, which provides administrative support and a pathway to receive funding. Little did those founders know that a decision they made in 1988 would stand for 38 years!

With growth can come a time for change. As part of our continued expansion and evolution, NSAC is proud to announce that as of April 1, 2026, we are now operating as a fully independent 501(c)3 nonprofit. We’re proud to mark this occasion by sharing a bit of the history behind our structure.

Fiscal Sponsorship for a Fledgling Coalition

In its earliest years, SAC was a small, nimble coalition founded by 13 initial organizational members who wanted to organize together to advance support for sustainable agriculture through federal policy reform. Funds were scarce and the coalition operated grant-to-grant, with members co-leading campaigns and funds initially supporting a single on-contract advocate – NSAC’s founding Policy Director Ferd Hoefner – along with a cohort of grassroots organizers based with member organizations. Under this model, members of SAC rotated who would receive a grant and administer funds across the coalition’s members and contractors, with organizations like the Center for Rural Affairs, Kansas Rural Center, Catholic Rural Life, and The Minnesota Project stepping up in rotation.

As SAC established a track record of success – these early years featured some of our very first wins, including the creation of the Sustainable Agriculture Research and Extension (SARE) program, the Wetlands Reserve Program, and Beginning Farmer loan programs, among others – members began to feel that this coalition might have some staying power. They had big policy goals to achieve and more organizations interested in joining the fight, both of which would need more funding and more staff. So in 1994, during a summer coalition meeting in Wisconsin, SAC members collectively made a decision that lasted decades: they selected the Center for Rural Affairs, a founding member, to serve as the coalition’s fiscal sponsor. This allowed SAC to hire additional staff and benefit from increased administrative stability, all of which in turn strengthened its member-led campaign work. That fiscal sponsorship relationship lasted for over 30 years.

In the 1990s, as SAC operated steadily under the fiscal sponsorship of the Center, another national network was founded: the National Campaign for Sustainable Agriculture (learn a bit more about the history of NCSA on our history page). These two organizations operated as partners and peers on federal policy campaigns from 1994 until 2007, a period in which SAC grew from a few dozen to over 45 members and expanded beyond its Midwest origins and the Campaign grew to over 100 affiliated organizations. In 2007, the two partners began a 2-year process to merge into one combined entity: the National Sustainable Agriculture Coalition, which formally commenced in 2009 and doubled the Coalition’s formal membership to over 80 organizations.

Longtime Partnership with the Center for Rural Affairs

The Coalition’s fiscal sponsorship partnership with the Center carried forward through the merger and into a period of continued growth for NSAC as our staff and membership more than doubled again from 2009 to 2024. Over those years, the Center grew too, from a team of 28 to 60 today, adding an affiliated Community Development Financial Intuition (CDFI) and expanding the geographic reach of its staff and programming. Fiscal sponsorship historically is a role the Center has played for partners – they fiscally sponsored a range of organizations over the years, including the National Campaign’s early years, the National Young Farmers Coalition, and Mississippi River Network, among others. Today the bulk of the Center’s work is focused on policy change, capacity building and capital access for the communities they serve. 

Fiscal sponsorship has worked remarkably well for NSAC: it has allowed us to offer more comprehensive benefits as a small employer and kept our financials audited and sound, which in turn has helped us focus our daily attention on our core campaign advocacy efforts to best serve our members.

Time for Transition

The question of if – or when – to transition out of fiscal sponsorship into independent 501(c)3 status is a big one for any nonprofit. For NSAC and the Center, it was regularly integrated into our 3-year renewal cycles as a matter of intentional, collaborative governance. We knew the time might eventually come, but also hoped to find time to make the transition when we had the resources and capacity to do it smoothly.

In 2024, we came to a mutual understanding: our two growing organizations, both of whom have taken on work of increasing scope, complexity, and specialization in recent years, were ready to begin the separation process. NSAC and CFRA worked closely to set a timeline, and NSAC’s team and Organizational Council charted a process that included incorporating as a DC-based nonprofit, applying for and receiving 501(c)3 status, chartering new member-approved bylaws, transitioning our Organizational Council into a formal Board of Directors, and setting up independent financial, human resources, administrative, and operations systems in-house. It was no small project: planning and executing the spin-off took nearly two years!

NSAC is now proudly its own independent 501(c)3 nonprofit, with all the administrative and organizational systems in place to ensure our continued stability, growth, and strategic flexibility into the future. The Center remains a Represented member of NSAC and a trusted partner in our work, and we are deeply grateful for our decades of collaboration through fiscal sponsorship.

Where do we go from Here?

To the outside world, not much will change! The NSAC you know and trust will continue sharing policy analysis, leading campaigns, and building power for a more sustainable, equitable farm and food system into the future. We took this big step — amidst turbulent times in Washington — to ensure NSAC can continue to serve our members and the larger movement into a future where we are needed more than ever.

As we step into this new chapter as an independent 501(c)(3), we carry forward decades of proven federal policy advocacy on behalf of farmers, ranchers, and local communities nationwide. Our work has always been powered by and for the movement we serve: those who believe in a more resilient, equitable, and sustainable food and farm system.

We are ready to keep building toward the next 30+ years of our work together! This is a moment where your support matters more than ever: can you make a donation to mark this major milestone and help us remain effective, strategic, and future facing? Your support, at any level, helps us ensure family farmers and local advocates have a voice in Washington, DC. We are counting on you to help sustain and grow this work in 2026 and beyond. Donate now: https://secure.everyaction.com/ATKAsUdFNEa6QkTSgXvoqA2

The post NSAC Marks its Transition to an Independent 501(c)3 appeared first on National Sustainable Agriculture Coalition.

On April 29, the House Appropriations Committee approved, by a 35-25 vote, the fiscal year (FY) 2027 Agriculture, Rural Development, Food and Drug Administration, and Related Agencies Appropriations bill. The markup lasted nearly 6 hours, covering a wide range of issues – from staffing shortages at the US Department of Agriculture (USDA), to cuts to conservation programs, to the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) and the Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants, and Children (WIC).

The House bill sets FY27 USDA spending at $22.5 billion, which is $675 million below FY26 levels. These funding reductions come at the expense of many programs popular among farmers, which are detailed below. In addition, the bill includes harmful policy riders that would prevent implementation of rules designed to promote fair competition for livestock farmers under the Packers and Stockyards Act, as well as any similar rulemaking effort (Section 758). However, the bill includes report language on staffing levels at Farm Service Agency (FSA), Rural Development (RD), and Agriculture Research Service (ARS), noting the need for significant and rapid onboarding of employees to these agencies.

The remainder of this blog post provides a deeper analysis of the FY27 House Agriculture Appropriations bill. 

Conservation, Energy, and Environment

One of the most staggering funding cuts in the bill comes for Conservation Operations (Con Ops). The House funds Conservation Operations at $800 million, roughly $50 million below its current funding level. Included in the $800 million is $636.243 million for Conservation Technical Assistance (CTA), a $61.38 million cut, and zero dollars for the Grazing Lands Conservation Initiative (GLCI), an $8 million cut. This is the largest cut to CTA proposed by the House in recent years, and shows cuts above and beyond reductions in Conservation Operations directed at CTA. As in past years, the House continues to attempt to zero out funding for GLCI, despite the growing popularity of grass-based systems among new farmers and ranchers. This all comes after FY26 appropriations levels cemented one of the largest cuts to Con Ops and CTA in the last decade.

Producers across the country depend heavily on the availability of on-the-ground technical assistance to implement effective conservation practices. CTA facilitates the administration of USDA conservation programs by supporting local staff, conservation planning, and the extension of specialized technical assistance to producers. Conservation Operations funding also protects agricultural land and wetlands, supports NRCS soil surveys, snow surveys, water supply forecasting, and plant materials centers. These provide important information and tools to help producers monitor and manage their land more effectively.

Cuts to CTA are especially notable this year, as the Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS), the primary agency within USDA that delivers on-the-ground conservation assistance to farmers, ranchers, and landowners, is facing record-low staffing levels. CTA funds are flexible in that they allow NRCS to support both its own staff and TA providers at third-party organizations. This is perhaps one of the most important accounts fully funded in order to ensure producers can access conservation programs going forward.

Sustainable and Organic Research

The FY27 House bill also failed to adequately fund sustainable and organic research. The Sustainable Agriculture Research and Education Program (SARE) received $40 million in the House proposal, $8 million below its current funding level, and well below the $60 million that NSAC and over 100 farmers, food, and farm organizations requested. SARE provides farmers and researchers with vital opportunities to better understand agricultural systems, increase profitability, and build on farm resilience. According to SARE’s 2025-2026 Biannual Report From the Field, less than half of eligible Farmer Rancher Grant proposals were able to receive funding from 2024-2025, highlighting the significant lack of funding for farmer-led research. The proposed cut will exacerbate this problem, boxing even more farmers out of the most successful farmer-led USDA research program.

Meanwhile, within organic-focused research, the Organic Agriculture Research and Extension Initiative (OREI) did not receive any discretionary funding on top of its mandatory authorization level of $50 million, continuing a trend seen in recent years. The Organic Transitions Program (ORG) received level funding of $7.5 million, a disappointment in light of repeated calls for increased funding to keep pace with organic market demand. The Agriculture and Food Research Initiative (AFRI) also received level funding of $435 million.

However, the Committee report – which offers guidance to USDA but does not constitute a requirement that the Department has to follow – includes language highlighting the need for more organic research across USDA’s Research, Education, and Economics (REE) Mission Area. Specifically, it addresses:

• “Organic Agriculture Impact Study.—The Committee recognizes that organic producers would greatly benefit from an economic impact study on the effect of organic agriculture on local economies. The Committee directs the Economic Research Service (ERS), in coordination with the Organic Production and Market Data Initiative (ODI), to analyze how organic agriculture affects the labor market, environmental quality, land ownership, social dynamics, and vitality of local economies.”
• Organic Agriculture Research.—The Committee provides no less than the fiscal year 2026 level for organic agriculture research, particularly across the Northern Plains, to address critical producer-identified constraints such as weed management and soil fertility, and to support coordinated research on crops, livestock integration, soil health, and nutrient efficiency to meet demand for organic foods.

Organic groups have long highlighted the need for more resources at USDA directed at Organic, and NSAC is pleased to see the inclusion of this report language in the bill.

Elsewhere within the purview of the USDA-REE Mission Area, the bill does not provide any additional discretionary funding for the Farming Opportunities Training and Outreach Grant Program (FOTO), which includes both the Beginning Farmer and Rancher Development Program (BFRDP) and Outreach and Assistance for Socially Disadvantaged Farmers and Ranchers (2501). While FOTO receives $50 million in mandatory funding that is unaffected by annual appropriations, the program received additional discretionary appropriations each year between FY20 and FY23, which National Sustainable Agriculture Coalition (NSAC) members strongly supported to meet the high demand for the program. BFRDP is the only federal program seeking to explicitly train the next generation of farmers, and 2501 has served as the only farm bill program dedicated to addressing the needs of minority farmers.  

Finally, the bill includes some important report language on Regional Cultivar Development Research, the Long Term Agroecosystem Research Network (LTAR), and ARS staffing that NSAC is pleased to see included.

• “The Committee recognizes that matching crop varieties with weather zones increases production and reduces costs and recognizes that farmers need access to seeds and animal breeds adapted to their farming systems, soils and weather.”
• “Long-Term Agroecosystem Research (LTAR) Network.—The Committee is aware of the LTAR network’s work to support sustainable intensification of agricultural production but is concerned about the lack of geographic diversity and the absence of specialty crop work in the program. The Committee provides an increase of $500,000 to include more geographic and crop diversification in the selection of LTAR sites.”
• “The Committee directs USDA to work expeditiously to fill vacancies for ARS scientists and support staff and to brief the Committee on these efforts within 90 days of enactment of this Act.”

NSAC is pleased to see the House recognize the importance of regional breeding programs and the LTAR Network, as well as highlighting the need for better staffing at ARS.

Local and Regional Food Systems

While the number of farms in the US has steadily declined since 2012, according to the 2022 Census of Agriculture, an inverse effect is being seen with the proportion of farms reporting local and regional sales and the revenue generated from these sales. Unfortunately, despite the clear economic opportunity local and regional markets offer farmers and rural communities, the House bill underdelivers on investments in programs that support local and regional farm economies. 

The Local Agriculture Market Program (LAMP) includes the Value-Added Producer Grant Program (VAPG) and the Farmers Market and Local Food Promotion Program (FMLFPP). Combined, these programs support farmers tapping into new markets or diversifying farm revenue, support updates and expansion of farmers markets, and support the establishment of new or scaled local supply chains.

The House bill provides level discretionary funding for FMLFPP at $7.4 million, which brings its total program investment close to $31 million, coupled with its annual mandatory funding. However, the bill makes another cut in direct funding for farmers by only funding VAPG at $6.5 million. This cut is significant considering the dramatic cuts already made to VAPG in previous fiscal years. Since FY24, VAPG has seen consistent cuts, with FY27 representing a record low from its formerly funded level of $13 million. The House bill proposes discretionary program funding that would be half of what it was just 4 years ago. 

The bill makes further cuts to programs that support new local market opportunities by reducing funding for the Office of Urban Agriculture and Innovative Production (OUAIP). While OUAIP is relatively new, it has demonstrated the capacity to manage multiple grant programs, a national advisory committee, and coordinate resources across USDA. Since it first received funding in FY2020, it has invested over $78 million in 349 grants and cooperative agreements to support the unique needs of agricultural production and community food security in urban, suburban, and rural communities. 

Currently funded at $5 million, the bill proposes only $2 million for OUAIP in FY27, taken out of the aforementioned Conservation Operations account, meaning the bill not only cuts overall funding for OUAIP and Conservation Operations, but further cuts Conservation Operations by using their already limited funding to fund OUAIP. OUAIP has seen significant funding cuts in recent years, dropping from $8.5 million to $7 million in FY24 and from $7.5 million to $5 million in FY26. Despite these cuts, the program remains incredibly popular, resulting in many eligible projects going unfunded. In fact, since its origination, the Office has considered over 2,500 eligible applicants and funded roughly 345 projects, or ~14% of requests.

In addition, for the second year, the House bill proposes a 50% matching requirement for OUAIP grantees. This steep matching requirement would considerably limit even further the types of organizations able to apply for grants, therefore limiting the efforts of farmers, gardeners, citizens, schools, cities, tribes, and other stakeholders trying to address food access, increase food production, provide training and education, and support beginning farmer infrastructure needs. 

The final cut to local and regional food economies impacts not only farmers, but also low-income mothers and their children to readily access fresh, nutritious foods from their local farmers markets. Prior to FY2024, the Farmers Market Nutrition Program for participants in the Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants, and Children (WIC) was well funded at $26 million annually. Unfortunately, since then, the program has not received more than $10 million annually. These cuts have led states, including Colorado and Alabama, to opt out of the program due to insufficient funding.

NSAC recommends that the Senate address these significant cuts by returning these impactful and popular local food program funding to its historical levels, and to do so without new matching requirements and without diverting funding from other accounts.

What’s Next

Given that the House Appropriations Committee was able to pass the FY27 Agriculture Appropriations bill nearly two months earlier than they did last year, all eyes now turn toward the Senate. As of posting, the Senate Agriculture Appropriations Subcommittee has yet to release a FY27 USDA funding proposal, though one is expected in the coming weeks. In the past several years, the Senate has skipped a subcommittee markup, moving instead straight to a full Committee markup. 

Once the Senate Appropriations Committee passes its FY27 Agriculture bill, the next step will be floor consideration of both bills in each respective chamber. Congress has not passed an Appropriations Bill by the end of the fiscal year, September 30, in recent memory. A continuing resolution – which would continue government funding at FY26 levels and prevent another government shutdown– seems likely, though not certain, before the September 30, 2026, deadline.

For detailed information about appropriations, visit NSAC’s Agriculture Appropriations Chart. 

The post Inside the House’s FY27 Agriculture Spending Bill appeared first on National Sustainable Agriculture Coalition.

Contact: Laura Zaks

National Sustainable Agriculture Coalition

press@sustainableagriculture.net

Tel. 347.563.6408

Release: Senate Bill Aims to Strengthen USDA Support for Urban and Innovative Farmers

Washington, DC, May 4, 2026 – Late last week, Senators John Fetterman (D-PA), Elissa Slotkin (D-MI), Adam Schiff (D-CA), Tina Smith (D-MN), Cory Booker (D-NJ), Michael Bennet (D-CO), Martin Heinrich (D-NM), and John Hickenlooper (D-CO) introduced the Supporting Urban and Innovative Farming Act S.4470. This bill provides programmatic improvements and resources for the Office of Urban Agriculture and Innovative Production to address the growing program demand and equip the US Department of Agriculture (USDA) Centers with tools to support the unique needs of urban and innovative operations. Specifically, it would promote the delivery of conservation planning and business technical assistance, enable subawards in existing grants to deliver more resources to farmers, and direct a national data collection initiative to accurately quantify the prevalence of innovative production. 

“In just a few years, the Office of Urban Agriculture and Innovative Production has proven the effectiveness of pairing grants with hands-on technical assistance from trusted regional partners. We’ve seen new partnerships form and hundreds of projects launched that support incubator farms, training, and youth development initiatives nationwide. The Supporting Urban and Innovative Farming Act would provide a permanent pathway to replicate this approach while providing the necessary funding to fully implement it,” commented Hannah Quigley, NSAC Policy Specialist. 

“Investing in cooperative agreements between USDA and community technical assistance providers is not only effective for amplifying USDA resources; it is critical in a time where USDA staffing levels are at their lowest and needs among farmers are still high,” added Quigley.

The Supporting Urban and Innovative Farming Act would enable the Office of Urban Agriculture and Innovative Production to: 

• Address the unique conservation and business-planning needs of urban and small-scale farmers;
• Enter into formal partnerships with community organizations and technical assistance providers that can more readily reach farmers; 
• Enable subawards so that farmer training and education can be paired with a modest influx of capital to have a great on-farm impact; and
• Secure reliable, mandatory funding to continue its essential operations. 

The bill will also ensure sufficient research and evaluation so that farmers continue to have access to innovative and efficient production techniques that protect natural resources and are represented in the agricultural census. 

“For decades, CAFF has stood alongside family farmers wherever they grow — including in California’s cities. The Supporting Urban and Innovative Farming Act of 2025 gives urban and innovative producers the institutional support they deserve: help navigating regulations, access to competitive grants, and recognition within federal agriculture programs. This is the kind of investment that keeps farming alive and thriving while decreasing food miles for consumers,” stated Keely Cervantes, Policy & Organizing Manager, Community Alliance with Family Farmers (CAFF), an NSAC Member. 

“Through the production of fresh, healthy, culturally appropriate food, urban farms are actively fighting against food apartheid in their communities. But growing food is just one component of their significance; urban farms serve as important job training sites for the next generation of growers, provide stormwater infiltration, cool entire neighborhoods from the urban heat island effect, sequester carbon, divert waste from landfills, create spaces where kids can breathe easier, and where the supply chain is a walk around the block. The investment in urban agriculture proposed in the Supporting Urban and Innovative Farming Act of 2026 acknowledges and celebrates the critical role urban farms play in our food systems,” said Hannah Kinney Smith, Executive Director of Pasa Sustainable Agriculture, an NSAC Member.

### 

About the National Sustainable Agriculture Coalition (NSAC)The National Sustainable Agriculture Coalition is a grassroots alliance that advocates for federal policy reform supporting the long-term social, economic, and environmental sustainability of agriculture, natural resources, and rural communities. Learn more: https://sustainableagriculture.net/

The post Release: Senate Bill Aims to Strengthen USDA Support for Urban and Innovative Farmers appeared first on National Sustainable Agriculture Coalition.

Contact: Laura Zaks

National Sustainable Agriculture Coalition

press@sustainableagriculture.net

Tel. 347.563.6408

Comment: NSAC Responds to House Farm Bill Passage

Washington, DC, April 30, 2026 – Today, the US House of Representatives approved the Farm, Food, and National Security Act of 2026 (HR 7567), 224-200. In response, the National Sustainable Agriculture Coalition (NSAC) released the following comment, attributable to Mike Lavender, NSAC Policy Director.

“NSAC appreciates the House of Representatives’ persistent pursuit of a new bill; a new farm bill, already more than two and a half years delayed, is desperately needed. NSAC thanks Members on both sides of the aisle who fought to make this a better bill for all farmers and stakeholders, including those who supported the removal of a provision that would have limited existing state and local authority to regulate pesticides. Yet, for the countless farmers struggling to make ends meet, the House bill offers only scattered policy improvements, many without the resources to fuel them. Slashes to popular conservation funding, the absence of guaranteed investments in domestic markets for farmers, and a status quo farm safety net are shortcomings that – unless corrected by the Senate – will have a pronounced impact, particularly for small and midsized operations, and beginning, young, and other underserved farmers and ranchers. We now look forward to a robust bipartisan process in the Senate.”

###

About the National Sustainable Agriculture Coalition (NSAC)The National Sustainable Agriculture Coalition is a grassroots alliance that advocates for federal policy reform supporting the long-term social, economic, and environmental sustainability of agriculture, natural resources, and rural communities. Learn more: https://sustainableagriculture.net/

The post Comment: NSAC Responds to House Farm Bill Passage appeared first on National Sustainable Agriculture Coalition.

Contact: Laura Zaks

National Sustainable Agriculture Coalition

press@sustainableagriculture.net

Tel. 347.563.6408

Release: More than 300 Farm Groups Urge Congress to Reject House Farm Bill

Washington, DC, April 24, 2026 – Today, the National Sustainable Agriculture Coalition (NSAC), along with hundreds of farmer‑serving, farmworker, farms, and other stakeholders engaged in the future of American agriculture and food, urged House leaders to reject the Farm, Food, and National Security Act of 2026 (H.R. 7567) and return to the table to craft a farm bill that truly serves all farmers and communities.

“The farm bill can and should be a vehicle for the stability and prosperity of all of American agriculture. This letter from hundreds of farmers and the organizations that serve them shows that the House farm bill has fallen well short of that mark. Amidst rising farm bankruptcies and unprecedented economic and policy instability, the House bill chooses more of the same, neglecting the kinds of investments and policies that our farmers not only deserve but desperately need. We encourage the House of Representatives to deliver a bill that brings stability and growth for all farmers by rejecting H.R. 7567 in pursuit of a better alternative,” said Mike Lavender, NSAC Policy Director.

With farm bill reauthorization already more than two and a half years overdue, the letter stressed that urgency cannot be an excuse for bad policy. “Congress must reject H.R. 7567 and deliver a bipartisan farm bill that strengthens the safety net, invests in local and regional markets, protects workers, and advances a just, climate‑resilient food system for all,” the letter states.

Find the letter here. 

###

About the National Sustainable Agriculture Coalition (NSAC)The National Sustainable Agriculture Coalition is a grassroots alliance that advocates for federal policy reform supporting the long-term social, economic, and environmental sustainability of agriculture, natural resources, and rural communities. Learn more: https://sustainableagriculture.net/

The post Release: More than 300 Farm Groups Urge Congress to Reject House Farm Bill appeared first on National Sustainable Agriculture Coalition.

Contact: Laura Zaks

National Sustainable Agriculture Coalition

press@sustainableagriculture.net

Tel. 347.563.6408

Release: Transparency and Oversight Needed to Ensure New USDA Reorganization Avoids Disrupted Services for Farmers, Processors, and the Public

Washington, DC, April 23, 2026 – Today, the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) announced the reorganization of the Research, Education, and Extension (REE) and Food Safety mission areas. This reorganization will move over 200 technical and administrative staff from the Food Safety and Inspection Service (FSIS) out of the National Capital Region (NCR), relocate staff from the Economic Research Service (ERS), National Institute of Food and Agriculture (NIFA), and the National Agriculture Statistics Service (NASS) staff to St. Louis or Kansas City, and close one of USDA’s historic research centers, the Beltsville Agricultural Research Center (BARC). 

While the National Sustainable Agriculture Coalition (NSAC) supports USDA’s stated goals of enhancing effectiveness, accountability, and service delivery, USDA’s reorganization plans lack transparency and have disregarded input from farmers and the general public. Previous reorganizations have led to loss of staff and knowledge, and with REE and FSIS already struggling with staffing, the advancement of USDA’s reorganization plan risks undermining their core functions.  

“The 2019 relocation of ERS and NIFA drained talent and crippled productivity, conditions now at risk of being repeated. The further relocation of ERS, NIFA, and NASS staff will likely bring about service disruptions and a greater loss of institutional knowledge. In addition, despite the significant public feedback to the contrary, the reorganization would close the Beltsville Agricultural Research Center, disrupting decades of invaluable agricultural research,” said Nick Rossi, NSAC Policy Specialist.

“The relocation of FSIS personnel was entirely absent from the USDA Reorganization plan in 2025. Without stakeholder input and proper forewarning, this abrupt relocation could lead to service disruptions for inspection personnel, undermining initiatives to support small and very small processors. We look forward to further public documentation explaining how this move will support these processors,” said Connor Kippe, NSAC Policy Specialist.

In September 2025, NSAC submitted feedback to USDA during a public comment period regarding the Reorganization Plan.

###

About the National Sustainable Agriculture Coalition (NSAC)The National Sustainable Agriculture Coalition is a grassroots alliance that advocates for federal policy reform supporting the long-term social, economic, and environmental sustainability of agriculture, natural resources, and rural communities. Learn more: https://sustainableagriculture.net/

The post Release: Transparency and Oversight Needed to Ensure New USDA Reorganization Avoids Disrupted Services for Farmers, Processors, and the Public appeared first on National Sustainable Agriculture Coalition.

In 2010, the Food Safety Modernization Act (FSMA) was signed into law, initiating a shift in the US food safety landscape. FSMA spurred an array of regulations intended to reduce contamination, mitigate foodborne illness, and make it easier to halt and track foodborne illness or chemical contamination. The National Sustainable Agriculture Coalition (NSAC) engaged heavily in this rulemaking process in support of scale-appropriate regulation, guidelines for diversified farm and food operations, and further training resources to make sure that smaller food businesses, farms, and those using sustainable agriculture practices would not be disproportionately burdened by these new requirements. 

In the decade and a half since FSMA became the law of the land, the Food and Drug Administration has finalized some of the required regulations; however, many of these new regulations have been mired by delays. Some of these delays have been necessary, prompted by significant stakeholder engagement and proper timelines, a function of the participatory rulemaking process. Other delays, however, have been driven by rescinded and reproposed rules. For example, the Agricultural Water Standard was found to be overly cumbersome for many types of farm and food businesses, while not proving a meaningful reduction in foodborne illness, and was not finalized as part of the initial Produce Safety Rule. It was only recently finalized, and the plan for enforcement was initiated in 2023, with compliance dates for the smallest farms into 2027. 

With the implementation of these rules staggered over time, farmers and food businesses have found themselves in an increasingly complicated regulatory environment that often only utilizes exemption as the main way to ensure scale-appropriate regulations. This blog post examines some of FSMA’s overlapping requirements, as well as the remaining FSMA regulations that have still not been finalized. While this Government Accountability Office (GAO) report covers all of FSMA, this post covers only those portions of greatest concern to small, diversified farms and food businesses. 

Those statutory requirements contained within FSMA of greatest concern to sustainable agriculture practitioners, and focused on in this blog post, are :

• Section 103: Hazard analysis and risk-based preventive controls
•  Section 105: Standards for produce safety 
• Section 204: Enhancing tracking and tracing of food and recordkeeping 

As these rules derived from this statue have come to overlay each other, and often have different exemptions depending on product, size of organization, and legal structure of the entity (non-profit, farm, packer, retail food) it has become increasingly complex to navigate, especially for those diversified, small to medium sized farms that are key in the development of more sustainable agriculture across the US. These rules have also caused and continue to cause a variety of financial burdens for farms that are smaller and more diversified. Much of this work has been done without the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) being able to showcase reduced foodborne illness attributable to the rules themselves as well.  

Until this moment, a midmortem of the rollout of the entirety of FSMA (though there have been reviews of subsets of the law) has not been conducted by a government entity, only partially by outside stakeholders. 

This recent GAO report provides an overview of what parts of FSMA are completed, partially completed, and not completed, as well as offers more general recommendations.  Most of the requirements identified in FSMA (41 out of 46) have been completed, showing clear FDA progress towards full implementation, though the report also notes many of the stakeholders felt the delay in doing so resulted in confused and unclear incentives for investments in food safety technologies. 

The report makes a variety of recommendations for FDA going forward, across all of the statutes of FSMA. 3 of the 7 recommendations are most relevant to a sustainable food safety audience:

GAO: The Commissioner of FDA should ensure that the Human Foods Program establishes milestones and timelines for updating the agency’s good agricultural practices for fruits and vegetables and publishes them as required by FSMA’s section 105. (Recommendation 5) 

• NSAC’s perspective: If the FDA is to approach reevaluating the Good Agricultural Practices, it should do so in coordination with the Agricultural Marketing Service (AMS) and the National Institute of Food and Agriculture (NIFA) at the US Department of Agriculture (USDA), pre- and post the development, given their historic and current involvement with farmers and food safety practitioners.

The FDA Commissioner should ensure that the Human Foods Program develops a plan with milestones and timelines for establishing a product tracing system to enhance FDA’s existing foodborne outbreak response processes, and that it establishes the system as required by FSMA’s section 204. (Recommendation 6)

• NSAC’s perspective: While NSAC supports the finalization of the Food Traceability Rule, referred to here, there is still work to be done to provide adequate resources and training to small farms and food businesses. 

The Commissioner of FDA should ensure the Human Foods Program and the Center for Veterinary Medicine develop and implement a performance management process to assess the results of FDA’s rules and their contribution to the prevention of foodborne illness. This process should include setting goals to identify results to achieve, collecting information to measure performance, and using that information to assess results and inform decisions for each rule. (Recommendation 7)

• NSAC’s perspective: While some attempts have been made to track the overall impact of FSMA, further data is needed on almost all of the rules that directly connect specific interventions within rules to food safety outcomes. Any further tweaking of the rules into the future will require further documentation to showcase the potential food safety outcomes in the context of other forms of analysis, such as costs to producers.

NSAC has been deeply involved in both formal and informal processes to shape these statutes and rules, and is glad to see FDA has made progress towards the finalization of all the rules.  The development of the performance management data analysis should have come on consequentially with the rules. This GAO report is a welcome and more comprehensive addition to the different analyses of FSMA over the years. 

However, there have been mitigating factors for the food research, investigation, and enforcement section of the FDA, including a lack of funding commensurate with its responsibilities and a complete reorganization into the Human Food Program. Developing methods to analyze both the efforts already made and the remaining rules yet to be fully implemented will improve transparency for farmers and food businesses. It will bring clarity to many on how their efforts and investments have contributed to a safer food system.

It may also help create further rationale for increases in food safety training funding or more precise targeting of food safety programs. Programs such as the Food Safety Outreach Program at USDA or some of the objectives of the Cooperative Agreement Program for State Implementation at FDA provide portions of this funding and have experienced declining real funding over time. If the FDA invests further in the proposed management system, it may reveal further instances where funding for training might best be allocated and help close the gap between the goals of FSMA and the reality, in an equitable way for all farms and food businesses. 

The post GAO Reports on the Mixed Success of Food Safety Rules appeared first on National Sustainable Agriculture Coalition.

Contact: Laura Zaks

National Sustainable Agriculture Coalition

press@sustainableagriculture.net

Tel. 347.563.6408

Release: Hundreds Call for Strong Investments in Farmer-Led Research, Urban Agriculture, and Conservation in FY2027 Appropriations

Washington, DC, April 16, 2026 – Yesterday, the National Sustainable Agriculture Coalition (NSAC), alongside hundreds of organizations, delivered letters calling for strong investments in Fiscal Year (FY) 2027 Agriculture Appropriations legislation. The letters, which focused on the Sustainable Agriculture Research and Education (SARE), the Office of Urban Agriculture and Innovative Production (OUAIP), and Conservation Operations and Conservation Technical Assistance, arrive as Congressional Appropriators are drafting spending legislation, and several weeks after the Administration released its own FY2027 budget proposal.

The Sustainable Agriculture Research and Education (SARE) program is the only regionally based, farmer driven, and outcome-oriented competitive research program that involves farmers and ranchers directly as the primary investigators in research and education projects. SARE provides grants directly to producers, which removes the financial risk of testing new ideas for making their operations more economically viable, productive, and sustainable. To meet the current demand for farmer driven research, stakeholders are requesting full funding for SARE at its authorized level of $60 million.

“Farmers and ranchers are at the center of everything SARE does, from important leadership positions at the national level, to participating in the regional grant review process, to designing and implementing projects for on-farm research. This farmer led model that SARE champions ensures that funding continues to go to America’s most innovative farmers and ranchers,” said Nick Rossi, NSAC Policy Specialist. “Despite nearly 40 years of helping farmers develop and adopt cutting edge practices and systems, SARE has yet to receive its fully authorized funding, and every year more than half of eligible farmer/rancher grants go unfunded.”

The Office of Urban Agriculture and Innovative Production (OUAIP) offers programs and services that support the unique needs of agricultural production in urban, suburban, and indoor settings, ensuring business success and an ample supply of nutritious foods in their communities. OUAIP grants, cooperative agreements, and programming have reached 43 states and Puerto Rico, despite being significantly underfunded. This year, stakeholders are requesting funding at the authorized level of $25 million.

“The combined effect of US Department of Agriculture (USDA) staff losses and cuts to nutrition programs makes OUAIP awards and timely implementation even more essential for organizations and local stakeholders to fill the gaps left in communities. Previous awards have funded incubator farms and community garden infrastructure, as well as producer training and youth education; all of which have been difficult for producers to access in traditional USDA service centers,” commented Hannah Quigley, NSAC Policy Specialist. 

Conservation Operations and Conservation Technical Assistance (CTA) funds facilitate the administration of USDA conservation programs by supporting our conservation workforce, conservation planning, and the extension of specialized technical assistance to producers. According to USDA, CTA funds supported over 4,400 full time NRCS positions in every state in the nation in 2025, as well as TA providers at third-party organizations. This year, NSAC partnered with the National Associations of Conservation Districts, as well as a long list of stakeholders, in requesting $1.05 billion for Conservation Operations.

“Producers across the country depend on the availability of on-the-ground technical assistance to implement effective conservation practices. These funds support conservation professionals providing detailed, unbiased agronomic advice to producers in every state, most often at the county level. It’s no surprise to see such strong support from organizations and producers alike for these investments at a time when producer access to TA is so dramatically reduced,” said Jesse Womack, NSAC Policy Specialist.

### 

About the National Sustainable Agriculture Coalition (NSAC)The National Sustainable Agriculture Coalition is a grassroots alliance that advocates for federal policy reform supporting the long-term social, economic, and environmental sustainability of agriculture, natural resources, and rural communities. Learn more: https://sustainableagriculture.net/

The post Release: Hundreds Call for Strong Investments in Farmer-Led Research, Urban Agriculture, and Conservation in FY2027 Appropriations appeared first on National Sustainable Agriculture Coalition.