Agency of Agriculture awards $2.1 million in FY24 ag development grants after more than $44 million requested

The Agency of Agriculture told a legislative committee it awarded $2,100,000 in fiscal year 2024 Ag Development Grants to 25 projects across the meat, maple and produce sectors after receiving more than $44,000,000 in requests from over 500 applications.

The grants were a one‑time appropriation established to support infrastructure investments — such as washpack systems, storage, evaporators and processing equipment — that agency staff said are needed as producers expand into new markets. Abigail “Abby” Willard, director of the Agency of Agriculture’s Agriculture Development Division, described the FY24 round as a pilot and said the agency wrestled with heavy demand and limited funds.

“Most of the produce applications were from diversified operations,” Willard said. “We had over 330 applications from within the maple community, requesting over 17 and a half million. We funded the 25% as statutorily expected with 12 projects.”

Why it matters: committee members were told the awards covered only a small fraction of reported need, highlighting both unmet demand within Vermont’s growing non‑dairy sectors and a possible role for additional state or federal funding. The agency said the FY24 appropriation was $2,300,000; it retained $200,000 for staff capacity and paid $2,100,000 in grants.

Agency officials described how the money was distributed across sectors. The maple RFA (request for applications) drew the largest response: roughly 330 applications seeking about $17.5 million; 12 maple projects received awards, reflecting a statutory requirement that 25% of the appropriation be dedicated to maple. Produce applicants submitted about 76 applications and the agency funded seven produce projects. The agency separated meat producers and processors in its internal review and ultimately funded six meat projects.

Madison Berry, grant manager in the Agriculture Development Division, said the program included at least one startup recipient: “We have at least one startup organization within the maple program… Honeydew LLC, and they are a co‑op maple organization. We primarily funded them as a startup because we were interested in seeing their co‑op model move forward.”

The agency described its review process as multi‑stage. Each application received three independent reviews from a pool of reviewers drawn from the agency and partner organizations; reviewers completed conflict‑of‑interest assessments. Reviewers scored applications against a rubric that included alignment with funding priorities, project plan quality, efficient use of funds, technical expertise and long‑term impact. For maple, the division said it used roughly 64 reviewers and held in‑person discussions on higher‑scoring applications. Applications that scored roughly 78 or above represented about $21,800,000 in unmet need across maple and produce, the agency reported.

Award administration was described as a reimbursement model with contract milestones: recipients typically receive 10% up front, an interim payment (about 40%) after progress reporting, and a final payment when objectives, receipts and a final report are submitted. Agency staff estimated project timelines of about 18 to 24 months; maple projects were expected to be completed after the next sugaring season.

Willard and Berry said the agency deliberately waived a mandatory match requirement for the FY24 round to lower barriers for small businesses; applicants nonetheless reported providing more than $30,000,000 in match or other project funding because projects exceeded the grant cap. Willard said the program was intended to seed multi‑year investment in diversified agriculture, though FY25 and the governor’s FY26 recommendation did not include new funding for this specific grant program.

Agency officials also discussed federal funding opportunities and limits. They said Vermont has accessed federal programs such as the Northeast Dairy Business Innovation Center, the Specialty Crop Block Grant, and USDA’s Resilient Food System Infrastructure grants, but noted many federal grant rules do not align with the smaller scale of Vermont operations. The agency said it provides technical assistance to help applicants pursue federal funds but that some federal programs are difficult for Vermont‑scale operations to compete for.

Committee members asked how the agency would change future rounds. Willard said the agency would consider separate, targeted RFAs for meat producers, meat processors and produce (rather than grouping meat and produce together), and would clarify eligibility to focus more on innovation, diversification or expansion rather than routine cost‑of‑doing‑business upgrades.

The briefing closed with committee members planning to raise the demand for additional funding with the federal delegation and with a note that the Agency’s baseline Working Lands Program continues to support meat, produce and maple projects in smaller amounts.