Agency presents early FY25 analysis showing Working Lands grants boost business outcomes while demand far outstrips funding

Elizabeth, a presenter from the Working Lands grant team at the Vermont Agency of Agriculture, told the Agriculture, Food Resiliency, & Forestry committee that the agency has completed an initial analysis of FY2025 business grantees and overhauled its program roadmap to measure a broader set of outcomes.

The update, “hot off the press,” drew on final reports from 14 of 17 business enhancement grantees, Elizabeth said, and separated operational metrics (who received funds and how much) from nine performance outcome areas tied to the program statute. The operational snapshot reported about 1,524 acres stewarded and roughly $12,200,000 in annual sales among the listed grantees; those businesses reported 146 employees as a baseline figure.

On outcomes, the agency reported that 57% of grantees improved their overall outlook for the business and 86% were satisfied or very satisfied with their outlook after the grant. On income, 57% of business grantees reported increases in gross or net income attributable to their grant-funded projects (reported increases ranged from about 10% to 74%, with grantees indicating the increases were related to grant work).

Labor and efficiency metrics drew particular attention. Elizabeth said the cohort reported eight jobs added that were tied to grant-funded work and that 79% of grantees improved labor efficiency during the grant period; the agency captured efficiency as hours saved or similar measures. “We do not expect businesses to show impacts in every area,” Elizabeth said, explaining why the program measures a diversity of outcomes rather than a single metric.

Production and land outcomes: 71% of grantees increased production (the most common reported increase was 10–24%; 40% reported at least a 25% rise), and 21% brought new acres into production — a reported 20 acres total — which grantees attributed to the grant activities.

On workforce and workplace improvements, the agency reported that 79% of projects improved workplace safety or conditions tied to grant work, 21% implemented workforce development activities (about two‑thirds of those efforts were described as due to the grants), and 50% reported wage increases (most of those increases were reported as grant‑related).

Elizabeth stressed the program’s payment flexibility: grantees generally receive 40% of their grant budget upon signing a grant agreement to avoid forcing businesses into short‑term loans, and in a small number of large‑expense cases the agency can pay up to 90% at signing if vendor quotes justify the advance.

The committee also reviewed program demand and a funding shortfall. The agency reported approximately $1,000,000 was available for FY26 but applicants requested about $6,000,000; of those applications, roughly $4,500,000 in high‑scoring requests (score 75+) could have been funded if more money were available. Committee members asked whether the agency could compare return‑on‑investment metrics across other state programs; presenters said that longitudinal ROI comparisons would be valuable but noted limited capacity and suggested coordination with the Chief Performance Office.

The briefing included a short discussion of philanthropic donations; Elizabeth said Vermont Ski and WhistlePig have donated to the Working Lands Enterprise Initiative in the past and that the agency is exploring how philanthropic support might be structured without competing with existing nonprofit fundraising.

The presenters said the analysis is preliminary (three FY25 grantees had outstanding final reports) and that the agency expects to return with full data in the next briefing. The committee thanked presenters and invited follow‑up work, including possible comparative ROI analysis and longer‑term tracking of grant impacts.

Next steps: full FY25 data will be available upon receipt of the remaining final reports; the agency and committee discussed options for longer‑term outcome tracking and cross‑agency comparisons to frame funding decisions.

Quotes (selected): “Hot off the press,” Elizabeth said of the updated FY25 reporting and initial analysis. “Our typical payment plan is that grantees would receive 40% of their grant budget upon signing the grant agreement,” Elizabeth said; she added that the agency can, in rare cases, pay up to 90% when necessary to execute large purchases.

Ending: The agency will finalize the remaining FY25 reports and said it will return to the committee with a fuller dataset and possible next steps for evaluation and funding discussions.