I’m sure many of us on the receiving end of an email with the subject line “Termination of the North Central RFBC” were not at all surprised to find that in mid-July, after months of no real clear communication from the federal government, our work as technical assistance providers, evaluators, project coordinators, technical advisors, and more, the North Central Regional Food Business Center was officially terminated.
Back in February 2025, we had already stopped work, unsure of what to expect when invoices weren’t getting paid from other Centers across the nation.
In short (and in my own interpretation and terms), the North Central Regional Food Business Center, or RFBC, for short, was essentially a virtual technical assistance center that spanned three states – North Dakota, South Dakota, and Minnesota – to help small and mid-sized food and farm businesses have a winning chance at getting their business started, improving its existing design, or making critical investments in its infrastructure to expand and serve more people.
These businesses, for the most part, had smaller markets. These weren’t your export commodity crop type growers. They were the ones selling carrots to your local school system and tribal nations working to get traditional products (like wild rice) on to local grocery store shelves.
The people behind these businesses are some of the hardest working individuals I’ve ever known, and their work ethic is one of the things that motivates and inspires me to continue to pursue my dreams of having a farm of my own.
I served as Evaluator for the state of Minnesota through the RFBC. That meant that I worked with a team of evaluators from the other states as well as our supervisory team from a regional development commission to think towards the end of this 5-year grant program – what’s the impact that we want this to have and how will we measure it? We designed surveys and collected information about what folks were doing – and how many dollars they were helping move to invest in these businesses.
We had to work with USDA requirements for reporting, but we also pushed back and were vocal about eliminating bureaucratic red tape that might prevent these smaller organizations and time-strapped individuals from participating. I learned a ton from our counterparts across the country – how story plays into the meaning of food, the relationship building piece that holds all of this together.
And while I’m disheartened by not being able to continue this work with such driven and motivated, passionate individuals across the Upper Midwest, I know that what we accomplished in the year and a half we worked together provided a strong foundation and model for the kind of collaboration that should be happening, naturally, every day.
Near the end of my time filling my duties of this role, I had the great pleasure to set up several 1:1s with many of our technical assistance providers from across the state. I wanted to understand, outside of what might be discussed in a survey, what’s the real story? Was this Center actually making a difference? What were some of the needs being uncovered? What was still going unaddressed?
While I don’t have a clear answer of what comes next, I do know that these insights are worth sharing. And I wouldn’t be surprised if others find the same themes and patterns in their own regional food systems work.
If this information sparks something in you, or you are looking to bring someone on to your team for a project that requires this kind of analysis, please don’t hesitate to reach out. I would love to hear from you!
Key Themes Emerging from TA Provider Conversations
1. There’s a hunger for regional connection, but real barriers exist.
- Many individuals are focused only on their immediate projects, not broader regional collaboration.
- Territoriality (local vs. regional) is a major dynamic to acknowledge.
- Leadership capacity varies greatly; some key figures are open to regional work, others resist.
- A regional Food Forum and strategic planning revisits (e.g., Duluth Food Web) aim to counteract silos but face challenges.
- There’s duplication of efforts across organizations — a mapping of duplication points could be transformational.
2. Access to information and resources needs to be reimagined.
- Current information is scattered, overwhelming, and often irrelevant to local conditions (e.g., USDA resources not climate-specific).
- There’s a call for bite-sized, filtered, region-specific resources, such as one-pagers or short videos.
- Concerns exist about federal control over information; state or local repositories may be more trusted.
- Ideas include: centralizing information via U of M Extension or other trusted state/local entities.
3. There’s important, nuanced work happening with Tribal communities.
- Trust-building with Tribal Nations is complex and slow; it can’t be rushed by funding timelines.
- Work includes projects like wild rice processing facilities and EDA grants with Fond du Lac, Leech Lake, and others.
- Strategic planning efforts with Tribal agricultural divisions are underway but require nuanced, long-term engagement.
4. There’s momentum around food aggregation, value-added processing, and infrastructure.
- Projects like Hutchinson’s smokehouse and localized flexible packaging facilities are examples of major wins.
- Cold storage needs (both fixed and mobile) were repeatedly mentioned as critical infrastructure gaps.
- Farm-to-school efforts are growing but require strategic outreach to school boards, parents, and superintendents.
5. Building a sustainable farming ecosystem is the bigger vision.
- It’s not just about grants and businesses: it’s about creating conditions where local farming can thrive:
- Strong community connections (geographically close and values-aligned)
- Financial sustainability
- Emotional, mental, and physical wellness support
- Peer-to-peer accountability and networking opportunities
- Strong community connections (geographically close and values-aligned)
- West Central MN and other regions are seeing producer shortages, partly because new farmers lack this supportive ecosystem.
- Investment strategies should focus not only on funding individuals but on building ecosystems.
6. Specific TA Challenges and Reflections
- Subawarding complexities (e.g., double-dipping risks) are real and burdensome for small TA organizations.
- Grant writing success rates are low even with strong writers — eligibility and technical barriers are significant.
- Some areas (e.g., Somali, Congolese, Kurdish communities) have distinct land access and mental health needs tied to farming and gardening.
A core takeaway that I’ve had from this experience is the understanding that what allows an entrepreneur to be successful is not the fancy business plan or the line of credit, even. It’s the ecosystem of support that they can tap into at any given time to keep things moving forward. I know this from firsthand experience, having participated in more entrepreneurship and online courses focused on business development than I’d like to admit. It’s amazing when you can post to a Slack channel and get tons of referrals and insights.
My recommendation to you is that if you’re reading this and you’re wondering where your next step is taking you in your entrepreneurial journey, don’t stay in your own silo. Show up at something social – whether in digital space or IRL.
I guarantee you the opportunity to share your story, or listen to someone else’s, will spur ideas that you likely wouldn’t have gotten otherwise.
And if you’re looking to bounce your ideas off of someone who’s been there – feel free to reach out to see if working with me through coaching is a good fit for you.
