This blog is the first in a four-part series that summarizes the program evaluation results and offers program-specific findings and recommendations for the SWEEP, AMMP, and HSP programs. The evaluation highlights the importance of these initiatives in promoting climate-resilient agricultural practices and suggests opportunities for improvement.
Recently, the California Department of Food and Agriculture (CDFA) Office of Environmental Farming and Innovation (OEFI) shared the results of a program evaluation of the Climate Smart Agriculture (CSA) programs led by Dr. Nicholas Babin of Cal Poly State University, San Luis Obispo. The evaluation covered four key programs: the Healthy Soils Program (HSP), the State Water Efficiency & Enhancement Program (SWEEP), the Alternative Manure Management Program (AMMP), and the Dairy Digester Research and Development Program (DDRDP). The goal of the evaluation was to understand grant recipient experiences, successes, and challenges, and to find opportunities for program improvement. This is the first third-party evaluation of these programs.
Methods
Cal Poly surveyed all CSA program participants who received grants between 2014 and 2020 and conducted interviews with 53 program stakeholders, such as CDFA program staff, technical assistance (TA) providers, and advocates. Their survey response rate for each program ranged from 22% to 40%.¹ Their report, accompanied by a CDFA cover letter, includes recommendations, program-wide findings, and program-specific findings.
Key Findings
Overall, their findings suggest that the Climate Smart Agriculture programs are successfully supporting growers in adopting and expanding climate-smart farming practices and that growers are gaining new skills and are sharing their experiences with others. Their results underscore the critical importance of technical assistance providers in helping growers develop, implement, and report on projects. Across the programs, survey respondents generally reported satisfaction with the program experience, though some challenges were identified around application complexity and time windows. Many of their findings align with feedback CalCAN has heard and collected from stakeholders through the years.
Adoption of Climate-Smart Practices
The majority of recipients who responded plan to continue using their funded practices beyond the grant term. Notably, respondents reported they intend to continue using 75% of funded practices. The vast majority of respondents said they gained new knowledge and experience managing for multiple benefits, and almost three-quarters of respondents implemented additional conservation practices not funded through their original contract. Additionally, over half of the respondents felt that their project had a significant impact on the adoption of climate-smart practices by other growers, suggesting that the program has effects beyond what is directly funded. Lastly, nearly three-quarters of respondents felt that their farm was more resilient after their project, emphasizing that the program is an important tool for supporting on-farm resilience to economic, climate, and other shocks.
Technical Assistance
Of the respondents who utilized technical assistance, the majority felt it was very or extremely important to their project. In particular, socially disadvantaged farmer and rancher (SDFR) respondents highly valued technical assistance, with a high proportion of SDFRs reporting that TA was extremely important. HSP and SWEEP participants utilized technical assistance at higher rates than AMMP participants.
Interactions with CDFA
The majority of respondents also reported satisfaction with timely invoices and the knowledge and professionalism of CDFA staff. About 30% of respondents found the application windows too short and the application process difficult to understand. CDFA has been working to improve their application process with changes made in recent solicitations, but are constrained by variability in one-time program funding from year to year.
Recommendations
The program evaluation includes several recommendations for CDFA and the state, many of which reflect priorities for which CalCAN has advocated. Many of those recommendations pertain to specific programs and will be covered in more detail in upcoming blogs focused on SWEEP, AMMP, and HSP. We discuss some of the key recommendations that pertain to all programs below.
Increase and Stabilize Funding
The program evaluation’s first recommendation is to increase and stabilize funding for the Climate Smart Agriculture programs, which would help to address the administrative challenges around unpredictable one-time funding and provide consistency for program applicants. CalCAN also sees this need, which will help OEFI staff plan around predictable timelines, enabling them to open solicitations around consistent timelines each year and to address program administration needs.
Enhance Technical Assitance Flexibility
The program evaluation also recommends increasing the flexibility of the TA program. CDFA has already taken steps in this direction, for example, in the most recent solicitation for the TA program, they expanded the types of activities that can be reimbursed. AB 2734 (Connolly), sponsored by CalCAN coalition member California Certified Organic Farmers and supported by CalCAN, would help codify some of these changes.
Improve Application Process
The evaluation also recommends lengthening the application window and using a competitive process to help small and medium farms access the program. Consistent and stable funding would help OEFI to accomplish this by allowing them to plan around predictable funding appropriations and share information early in advance with stakeholders. The CDFA has taken several steps already to streamline its application processes, including introducing a new simplified tool to generate application materials for HSP and AMMP.
Looking Ahead
In the upcoming parts of this blog series, we will dive deeper into the program-specific findings and recommendations for SWEEP, AMMP, and HSP. Stay tuned for more detailed insights and how these programs can continue to evolve to better support and promote climate-resilient agricultural practices.
