Advocates urge overhaul of San Francisco jail food contract ahead of May RFP

Shakira Simley, executive director of the Booker T. Washington Community Service Center, told the San Francisco Sheriff’s Department Oversight Board that the city should use the upcoming request for proposals for jail food to secure fresher, culturally appropriate and locally sourced meals for people incarcerated in San Francisco.

Simley said the coalition she represents—FACS (Food and Agriculture Coalition Toward Sovereignty), a 30-member group of community-based organizations—wants the city to require vendors to subcontract with smaller local producers, create regular feedback loops with incarcerated people and families, and add explicit RFP language requiring nutrition, cultural competency and unannounced inspections. “Food is a basic human right, and folks, everyone, no matter where you are or who you are, should have access to good, fresh, clean, just food,” Simley said.

The coalition flagged the jail food contract currently held by Aramark, which Simley described as a roughly $26,000,000 contract that will be rebid. The Sheriff’s Office told the presenters that the procurement timeline includes a May 19 RFP release and that the final contract will come before the San Francisco Board of Supervisors in October.

Why it matters: Advocates said meal quality affects health outcomes—especially for people with diabetes and other diet-related conditions—cultural and religious needs, and the dignity of people while incarcerated. They also argued that keeping spending local could strengthen resilience in supply chains and return economic value to San Francisco producers and BIPOC-led food businesses.

Coalition recommendations presented to the board included: holding town halls that include incarcerated people and families to collect lived experience; requiring vendors to diversify by subcontracting with local, culturally competent producers; adding clear complaint and transparency mechanisms; including sheriff staff and families in feedback; and embedding good-food purchasing language directly in the RFP. Simley asked the board to elevate those requests to the inspector general’s office to influence RFP language before the May 19 release.

Board members who spoke praised the proposal and described practical concerns that align with the coalition’s recommendations. Member Palmer said the coalition’s demonstration of fresh produce shows “living food creates healthy living human beings.” Member Ortiz suggested the coalition coordinate with case managers or pretrial staff to capture feedback directly from incarcerated people; Simley said she would pursue that. Member Carryon asked whether the problem is a weak standard or weak implementation; Simley answered that San Francisco already adopted a citywide good food purchasing policy but that implementation falls short because vendor selection and contracting limit options.

Presenters and several board members noted operational constraints: the Sheriff’s Office said it has a nutritionist on staff and is hiring another nutrition professional, but officials described the RFP process as burdensome and said only a small number of large vendors tend to meet current contracting requirements. Simley and others urged using RFP language to require vendor partnerships with local suppliers rather than rely entirely on a single multinational contractor.

The board did not take formal action on the item; members and the presenter agreed to follow up. Simley said the coalition will meet with Sheriff’s Office staff and work with the inspector general’s office and community partners to shape RFP language before the May 19 release.

Ending: Board members asked staff to help coordinate follow-up contacts; Simley said she would connect with Marshall Klein (Sheriff’s Office coordination) and the inspector general’s office to press the recommended changes and to collect survey and lived-experience input over the summer ahead of the October Board of Supervisors review.