The NICH Team

Attending: Gail, Pam, Debbie, Rick, Clint, Casey, Shannon, Ellen, Julie

---

1) Quick Grant Update (E. Bauske):

Relevancy review panel members have been contacted. Ellen was looking for the names of folks from the Land Grant Council, and for the affiliation of someone sent from Suzi. Clint will send Ellen names, and will follow up on the affiliation sent from Suzi.
a. To Do for All: check website for names, spelling, affiliations for your associates, committee members ~ and send corrections to Ellen.

2) Ellen provided an update on the Southern Extension Coordinating Committee:

Under the auspices of the Southern Association of Agricultural Experiment Station Directors.  In Consumer Hort, we traditionally have little to do with the Experiment Station.  For the past few years, consumer hort has had a SERA (Southern Extension Research Activity  ~ and SERA is what ‘gave birth’ to NICH.  It was an early attempt at collaboration in consumer horticulture.  Every year, we were required to renew our SERA.  Two years ago, they asked us to form a coordinating committee.  Sheri Dorn, Natalie Bumgarner and Ellen Bauske decided to make the efforts of the coordinating committee parallel to NICH.  One benefit is that folks can request funds for travel to one meeting per year from their Experiment Station.
a. Rick asked if the Coordinating Committee could be a baseline for populating the NICH Land Grant Council. Rick and Ellen to follow up, later.

3) Victory!: review of tangible results of NICH activities, outreach and communication

a. Digger Article: NICH article in the Digger is online at http://www.diggermagazine.com/helping-horticulture-find-its-niche/
b. Can the article be posted on the NICH website? Here is the note from OAN, regarding reprinting the Digger article.

Hi Gail,

Absolutely, go right ahead. Our standard policy is reprints are OK, but we ask that the other magazines give credit to all the authors and include a statement indicating that the article originally appeared in the (month and year here) issue of Digger, published by the Oregon Association of Nurseries.

Best regards,
Curt

c. Presentations

i. Clint recently gave a presentation to Duman, where a lot of big growers were in attendance. Katie and Suzi gave a similar presentation that same week, in Boston. Both presentations had slides about NICH and about Seed Your Future. Garden Media Group will take the three slides related to national initiatives (including NICH and Seed Your future), and will be making them available to our group. Clint also talked to someone from MANTS ~ who agreed to do handouts or to distribute slides through their online communication systems. Tom Underwood and Margaret Pooler will also be at MANTS. Clint, Tom and Margaret should talk in advance of MANTS to coordinate efforts on slides and one-pager distribution.

ii. Ellen will send out an email to the NICH listserv, letting them know that resources (Digger article, NICH slides) are available.

iii. Remember that there is an area on the Box site for outreach. Make sure that outreach materials live there, so that group members can grab and use materials as needed, and to be as uniform as possible.

1. Box Site, Outreach Documents Subfolder: Contact Gail for access

2. NICH Box Site: Contact Gail for access

4) Brief Reports from Committees:

a. Environmental (J. Weisenhorn): will be going through resources (starting with the ones posted on the Box site), and the goals posted on September 20th ~ cross referencing resources to goals, and then will work through their own library systems to identify additional resources. Committee meets ~1X per month. Water, nutrient management, and pollinators are preliminary items that may rise to the top as focal areas.

i. Casey pointed out that the Million Pollinator Garden Challenge might be relevant to the environmental committee’s work.

ii. Clint noted that Greenscape Gardens might be a good economic/environmental model for independent garden centers, and a good resource for the environmental committee.

b. Economic Committee (Hamrick): working on infographics and on having good committee participation. They have four economists on the committee. What the committee will come up with will be top-notch, but it is not instantaneous. Upcoming committee call will focus on supplementing information in recent Hall article with information on public gardens and property values. Second infographic will focus on passive catalytic benefits (those actions that help the economy). Working with Marvin and Penny on this second infographics, and in the process, recognized the importance of internal stakeholders within NICH ~ those working in consumer horticulture, rather than the end user
Charlie Hall has two graduate students ~ one working on environmental benefits and economic benefits of Consumer Horticulture. This work will be forthcoming over the coming year. Second graduate student will update Dix and Hall article on health and environmental benefits of consumer horticulture. Time frame for this second graduate student ~ her work will likely be finished in the summer
The economic committee decided that they would like to have annual updates (one-pager?, infographic?) to industry, based upon current research.
Question ~ where can their background data or papers ‘live’, in case someone wants to fact check the stats on the infographics? Can they have space on the NICH website? Having information posted on our website, in addition to the Charlie Hall website, might better help inform stakeholders and industry folks about the benefits of consumer horticulture.
Committee will be having monthly conference calls. They have resources housed on the NICH Box site, which all are welcome to access (Subfolder: Contact Gail for access).
c. Social Committee (Bennett): had conference call early in December. They’re going to begin literature review on social and community benefits of consumer hort. They’re working on a matrix of criteria they’re going to use, and are also looking for resources outside of peer-reviewed literature. Their committee is full at 15 folks. Will send email to folks who are interested, to let them know that they would like to bring them in for task-specific items and projects.

5) Revisit NICH Organizational Structure and Legal Formation: tabled until Tom Underwood can attend

6) Role of NICH councils (Sclar): a few thoughts when considering populating councils and the work that councils do

a. Councils work in a 2-way capacity ~ council membership should represent broad breadth of NICH, and making sure that you have broad representation will help to best inform work of the committee; committees communicate back their work, as well as proposed dissemination of that work, to the councils

i. In short: council members help to advise the work of committees, and council members will help to disseminate work of committees

b. If you have a surplus of committee members, think about how they might be able to function within the structure of a council
c. Debbie mentioned that it might be good to have council members sit in on committee conference calls in the future ~ to provide that feedback, and to strategize dissemination

7) Upcoming Deadlines and Action Items (Floor)

a. NO DECEMBER 27th CONFERENCE CALL! | Next conference call will be January 10, 2017.

Attending: Rick Durham, Tom Underwood, Debbie Hamrick, Margaret Pooler, Pam Bennett, Suzi McCoy, Clint Albin, Ellen Bauske, Shannon Spurlock, Julie Weisenhorn, Casey Sclar

---

1. Grant Report

   • It was submitted on the 11.14.16. Abstract and listed of letter writers will be posted.

2. Committee Reports. Debbie, Pam and Julie met via conference call Nov. 7. Discussed individual committee work/focuses and building efficiencies across the three committees.

   • Economic (Debbie reported). Group meet every two weeks. {Planning work for 2017). They are planning work for 2017 and focusing on a project with will have a quick output that will inform future work. There will be an update of Hall’s article on Economic, Environmental, and Health/Well-Being Benefits Associated with Green Industry Products and Services: A Review
     • http://aggie-horticulture.tamu.edu/faculty/hall/publications/JEH%2029(2)%2096-103.pdf
     • Focusing on project with will have a quick output and inform future work.
   • Community Report (Pam reported). Have meet, discussed lit review. Met with economic and environment committees to talk about dividing literature reviews; since there is overlap, Debbie said she needs to check with Charlie Hall’s grad student to see when her work will be done and let Pam know. They meet monthly, first Monday at 2:00 to accommodate all members.
   • Environmental Report (Julie reported). Committee has met and they are looking at goals, reviewing the literature and searching out one or two things to focus on. Planning lit review to support priority project.
   • Marketing Committee is officially recognized. We not have four committees and three councils.
   • Councils are in the process of gathering members.

3. Short term goal of Economic Committee: Seeking a method to present information about the significance of Consumer Hort to internal and external stake holders. Proposed creation of an info graphic.

   • Reasoning: This is an opportunity to present us so that those that are in positions of power in influence can see how important we are they will want to support us.
   • Clint asked: Why are we left out, overlooked?
   • Answer: Historical reasons. Not on the radar screen. Just don’t think of the plant side till the very end. Only interface with plant material through a contractor (third party).
   • Project that will show some success. Like a starter home, not where you end up but a great place to start. The info graphic will be based on what we have collected. Direct and indirect benefits “Catalytic Benefits.”
   • Who will help? Pro-bono graphics work. Suzi may be able to do something very simple. We need graphic expertise to really do it well. Tom U. may have the talent in the organization. Suzi outline the benefits of one number. Can this all be boiled down into one number? Jobs, tourism, production, health all in one number? Maybe.
   • Maybe someone can donate the skill for the info graphic. Also need help to vet the graphic and get buy in.
   • Clint suggested pitching this as story for the trade press, help industry – how the graphic was created. Communication committee can take this the magazines. If the magazines write the story, it will be stronger than a press release.
   • Graphic must be Pragmatic and Centrist. Opportunity to present this info to garden center meeting in January – Clint will lead. Very good support for this project from the committee. General consensus is “GO, GO, GO, GO!
   • 
   • Example: CH catalyzes benefits back to Place – improved landscape, more expensive property, improved tax basis, creative people want to live there.

4. Update on-pager. Get committee on it. Rick and Margaret are co-chairs fix that. Add Marketing Committee to that section. Suzi is the chair. Update Councils.

---

Debbie’s Notes on Info graphic:

Direct and indirect industry benefits

Plant production and all of the pre-production and post-production economic activity associated with the plant’s development, production, sale and use by the buyer/consumer; Plants in the landscape: Public gardens and arboreta; Serviced managed landscapes; Urban agriculture/community gardens

Catalytic benefits

Place

• Higher property tax revenues
• Greater sales prices for properties
• Higher incomes because of landscape (Toronto/10 more trees per block=$10,000)
• Greater retail sales
• Communities that attract the creative class of workers
• Creation of place-based functional landscapes (Atlanta’s 4th Ward Park) that attracts investment
• Creation of welcoming spaces that foster community and social connection and interaction
• Less crime
• Place and provenance identity and creation
• Aesthetics
• Greater tourism

Health

• Greater population general health through proximity and accessibility to green space
• Reduced healthcare costs because of higher air quality
• Access to healthy local foods
• Improved worker productivity
• Improved psychological health and wellbeing for individuals and communities
• Improved cardiac health
• Increased physical activity through gardening and being in natural/horticultural spaces
• Faster recovery
• Reduced death in heat waves
• Less aggression and more focus in children/adolescents
• Enhanced sports field safety

Environmental/Ecosystems services

• Stormwater management through plant interception; infiltration; transpiration; retention resulting in less volume of runoff that contains less pollution
• Less flooding of built infrastructure
• Soil erosion control
• Groundwater recharge
• Sewage treatment
• Food production in urban spaces proximate to population centers—urban agriculture and community gardens/agriculture
• Wildlife habitat
• Pollinator habitat
• Higher air quality: Particulate matter and oxygen generation
• Temperature moderation through shade, transpiration and blocking winds
• UV radiation interception resulting in built surfaces with longer life
• Less urban glare and reflection
• Urban Heat Island moderation
• Reduced noise levels
• Increased biodiversity
• Carbon sequestration
• Reduced pollution

Attending: Pam Bennett, Debbie Hamrick, Clint Albin, Rick Durham, Casey Sclar, Suzi McCoy, Julie Weisenhorn, Shannon, Ellen, Tom Underwood, Penny, Margaret

---

1. SCRI pre-proposal update

   • Status of pre-proposal: need list of committee members from the community committee and the environmental committee. We already have committee members from the economic committee.
     • Gail has sent out to NICH Executive Committee, this morning. Will send to David Close, after conference call.
     • Feedback ~ economic ## from Bruce Butterfield’s research are based on DIY gardener, and not services for hire. Casey will send Charlie Hall’s graphic for ## for the pre-proposal (must ask if we can utilize in full proposal).
     • Debbie will send HortTech 2015 citation to Ellen and Gail for ## for pre-proposal.
   • Status of letters of support (deadline to Ellen is November 5th)
     • Received: we have 10 letters, thus far: Ball Hort (Marvin), Garden Media Group (Dubow), McCorkle Nursery, NC Farm Bureau, Peachtree Farms, Pruning Guru, Slow Flowers (Prinzing), Tedeschi (not on letterhead), Georgia Agribusiness Council, Vertical Gardens
     • In Process: North Creek (needs to be signed), APLD (Dan Maffei, needs to be signed), Landscape Arboretum in Minnesota, up to four from Clint (Garden Center Group, Master Nursery Group, GrowIt), up to three from Julie (two from MNLA, Minn State Hort Society), Gail asked for letters from three (Timber Press, OLCA, OAN), asks have been made from Davey Tree Care, Georgia Arborists, Tom U. will ask Ed Snodgrass, Suzi will reach out to Monrovia
     • Needs: turf, non-profits (American Hort), tree care, geographic parity (PNW, CA lacking)
     • Proposal will be submitted November 14th, must be submitted to UGA grants office on November 7th, may be able to add letters up to November 12th
   • Status of industry relevance reviewers: letters for reviewers have been sent out from Tom B. (Shannon received one)
     • Last count from Tom B. was ~24 relevancy reviewers from our group
     • Debbie is a relevancy reviewer for NIFA. Review process is confidential. Can’t talk about reviews. Trainings address conflict of interest, and avoiding COI.
     • If you’re connected to this proposal, you will not be involved in the review of this proposal.

2. Expectations for and Role of NICH Committees

   • Community Committee talked about ‘low hanging fruit’ that could be accomplished within the next year, such as review of impact of hort on community health for HortTech; children’s garden initiative
     • Review for HortTech aligns with identifying research that has been done and identifying research gaps that exist
     • Community (Pam), Environmental (Julie), Economic (Debbie) committee chairs to conference call and discuss projects / approach, to be aware of what each committee is working on and avoid duplication of effort
   • Should committees work on creating and working on goals? Or should they wait until pre-proposal / proposal lends clarity or wait until next face
   • What is optimal committee size? Current size is about 15-16 people, which makes it a bit difficult to get real work done.
     • Can have a core group of people on each committee (~8-12), and then a larger group that is aware/involved, but not necessarily doing the core work of determining priorities and committee direction
   • Tom U. sent a great list of names of folks (involved in youth gardening) who should be aware of the work that NICH is doing. Maybe they shouldn’t be or don’t have time to be committee members, but they should be aware of what NICH is doing ~ or could be on subcommittees.
   • Google Docs spreadsheet ~ has not been kept up to date ~ but NICH E-committee should update, as they can [link redacted]
     • Contact Gail for link
   • Clint points out that trade press is ready and waiting for a press release from our group, directing folks back to the web site
     • One point for a press release would be if/when we receive the strategic planning grant (~March 2017?)
     • Suzi and Clint will get together to put together a press release with original NICH group: Ellen, Casey, Tom U., Rick, Lucy Bradley, Tom B. (addressing how this has worked in other industries)
       • Rick will email archived interview between Lucy and Tom B. to Suzi
       • Mary Wagner, who was with Wine and Table Grapes, is now with Starbucks

3. Denver workshop action item ~ Formalization/legal status of NICH [Tabled until next meeting]

   • Dialog regarding potential challenges and opportunities

Attending: Ellen, Debbie Hamrick, Penny, Margaret, Tom U., Clint, Pam, Gail, Julie, Suzi, Rick, Casey, Shannon

---

1. Discuss role of NICH councils to overall NICH strategic efforts (Rick & Margaret)

a. Rick and Margaret are co-chairing government/university council

b. What should they be asking potential council members for, and what is the role of the councils? Should it be to make sure that the goals of NICH reflect what folks are seeing in their own university or government lab?

c. Shannon and Tom (co-chairs of the non-profit council) have discussed this and came up with 4 points

i. Asking folks to sign on and show support for NICH ~ so that we can say we have xx number of people that have signed on to NICH.

ii. Asking folks to serve in an advisory capacity

iii. Asking folks to contribute to the awareness of NICH, to help build our constituency

iv. Developing a pool of volunteers that can be called upon, as specific needs arise within the council (such as serving on a relevancy review panel)

d. Clint (industry council chair) ~

i. has been doing outreach to make them aware that NICH exists

ii. it is for consumers, so that it is non-competitive within industry

iii. we’re not asking for $$, we’re asking for time

iv. asking them to get the word out to get the widest # of people on the relevancy panel, where we’re asking for ~16 hours over a relatively short time span (between December 15th and January 14th)

e. Overall goals include:

i. building awareness,

ii. building support (such as folks who are willing to let us use their name as supporters, on grant proposals or other items)

iii. developing potential volunteers (such as on the relevancy review panel)

iv. expressing their needs and/or giving feedback on NICH efforts as a way to advise/guide NICH work importance of listening to stakeholders

f. Question on advocacy ~ what is the role of NICH members / stakeholders on advocacy?

i. Different branches of this group might advocate, in ways that don’t put the rest of the group at risk

ii. Academic/government sectors can not advocate ~ but can reach out and build awareness of NICH, build support for NICH (such as list of stakeholders who support grant proposals)

iii. At this point, we are not anticipating that any particular NICH group, committee or council will be involved in lobbying. May be easier to work with another group that already has a well-established presence in DC ~ let them do the advocacy work. This is the importance of getting industry members involved ~ who have needs that can be represented by these larger and longer established organizations.

g. When we have more specific ideas, which may come in the next two quarters, it may be easier for industry stakeholders to sign on to NICH (Clint).

h. Economic Committee (Debbie) ~ the committee is working on deliverables (e.g. infographic) to show collective economic impact of the industry. They are working to get this done by the end of the year.

i. Work flow between economic committee and industry council could include, for example, if the economic committee needs stats or figures that industry council reps could provide

2. Need current NICH committee and council members and their affiliations on our website (in advance of SCRI proposal) ~ Ellen

a. In the pre-proposal (to be submitted November 15th), we refer folks to the website, and want it to be as populated as possible, in advance of proposal review.

b. To Do for Committee and Council Chairs: Please send current list of NICH committee and council members, together with affiliations, to Ellen. Contact information not needed. Logos can be added, if they would like and if it is reasonable to do so.

c. Should there be a critical number of committee or council members per group before they are posted? Casey suggested 5+ people.

i. Chairs can work on recruitment over the next two weeks, in advance of Nov. 15th.

ii. Asking folks to be on an advisory council (or to serve in an advisory capacity on a committee) is an easier way to get folks on the list. From that list, a smaller subset can / will be more active volunteers.

3) SCRI pre-proposal update (Ellen and Gail):

a. Box File with Pre-Proposal Files: https://app.box.com/s/dkvhcwinl2ox0v08fxkafnfoyqr3ktby

b. To Do for All: Input on pre-proposal and letters of collaboration are due to Ellen BEFORE November 5th.

c. Pre-proposal draft is in Box. Please take a look, make changes (using track changes) or send suggestions to Ellen.

d. Draft of letter of collaboration is also in Box. Note that letters of support should not be from the same folks who are serving on the relevancy review panel or from the same folks who are listed as a collaborator/PI on the proposal. We thus don’t need letters from us (NICH Exec Committee). And, we don’t need letters from academics. But, folks who write draft letter of support can be from the same company as folks who serve on relevancy review panel. We should be aiming for 20+ letters of support from non-profits and industry. Letters should be on company or organizational letterhead.

i. Letters of support are one example of a relatively easy way for council members to participate in NICH.

e. Who will be asking stakeholders for letters? Our group should reach out to our (non-academic) networks for letters of support.

i. Debbie will ask Anna Ball for a letter. Good opportunity to express how different and complementary we are to Seed Your Future.

ii. If we each get five letters of support, we will have 60 letters of support.

iii. Letters tend to be more meaningful if they come from as high up in the chain, as possible.

f. How many relevancy reviewer names has Tom B. received? ~ two dozen, thus far.

Attending: Margaret, Cyndi, Clint, Casey, Tom U, Rick, Debbie, Ellen, Pam, Shannon, Suzi (others???? ~ I didn’t hear everyone who logged in)

---

1. NIFA Strategic Planning Grant Readiness (Casey)

a. Call for SCRI proposals is out (RFPA, Request for Pre-Applications).

b. 4th quarter high level deadline: get relevancy review nominations to Tom B. by end of October.

c. Grant Preparation Task Force (Gail, Casey)

i. Call for Pre-Proposals Open

1. https://nifa.usda.gov/sites/default/files/rfa/FY%202017%20SCRI%20RFPA.pdf

2. Proposals are due November 15th

ii. Immediate next steps for proposal submission group (Gail and Ellen will conference call about deadlines and approach, this week)

1. Gail will put together a couple of form letters that can be used to solicit stakeholder support, as well as guidelines for soliciting feedback

a. David Close, Casey and Tom U. will be looped in, as well.

2. Tom U. asked if our group is exempt from the matching fund requirement? Ellen noted that we are exempt, since this will probably be going through a land-grant univ.

3. Casey noted that this proposal will be for a planning grant, to further hone our strategic planning process, which could pave the way for a larger grant, which could pave the way for farm bill impact and/or larger grant. Whether or not we get this grant is not a make or break for our group, but it is an important proof of concept.

2. Engagement

a. First Committee Meeting Dates Recap

i. Economic Committee has met (Debbie)

ii. Environmental Committee has met. (Cyndi)Cyndi has notes / minutes to meeting. Gail will post to Box (done)

iii. Social Committee has met (Pam)

iv. Industry Council will meet in next week (Clint)

v. Non-Profit Council will meet in the next 3-4 weeks (Shannon)

vi. Land Grant Research Council will meet in next month (Margaret)

vii. Suzi has been gathering marketing and PR people for the marketing committee

3. High-Level Planning Benchmarks (Suzi): Spreadsheet Available from Gail

a. Need to put together calendar of grant opportunities to fund activities

b. Tom B. noted grant funds would become available in March, we would finish our strategic planning in June of 2017.

c. Focused listening an important activity ~ to bring in folks from all sectors of industry, and to identify research gaps that could be the focus of future grant proposals

i. Debbie and Suzi mentioned that several groups are currently missing from current Farm Bill / SCRI: Urban Foresters Groups, ISA, AHS, Garden Centers of America, etc.

d. Congressional Research Services Report to 2014 Farm Bill outlined and gave great definition to groups that make up Farm Bill Alliance. 80% of monies that go out through this initiative can be categorized as ‘nutrition’. Subgroup 10 is horticulture and organic agriculture ~ there was a preference in distribution of this $$ to create a greater number of organic farmers. Ellen will send this document to Gail for posting / distribution.

e. Ultimate goal is to submit our BIG grant proposal (which Casey likened to ‘recognition in the Farm Bill’). Tandem with this, we will have our long list of supporters
ready to go. (by 4th quarter of 2018, we will)

f. High level timeline should be a living document ~ continually refined, as committees meet,

g. Economic Committee (Debbie) noted that there is a lot of work that has already been done. There is an academic group that meets quarterly to develop economic benchmarks for the industry. Economic committee would need to identify research gaps. What are compelling pieces of information that are needed to move our group forward in a systematic way?

h. Casey / Suzi noted that committee objectives will be revised, as we get more information from focused listening, as committees meet and decide which objectives they can strategically approach

i. Next steps for high level timeline:

i. Ask Tom Bewick: Where do we stand on relevancy reviewers?

ii. Each committee should do focused listening / survey of their stakeholder groups. We need to gather this information, and put it in a format that can be used.

iii. Clint asked if we have a way that folks can sign up as supporters of our group? Can we have a database of supporters?

iv. Margaret noted that it is possible that some could see that consumer horticulture is already well-represented in Farm Bill, but it is not in a single package. There is
nutrition, conservation, organic farming, scri, etc. What is significantly different about NICH’s ask? Do we want our own line item in the Farm Bill? We are in the farm bill, but it is so segmented that it doesn’t make sense to stakeholders. We need to unify our ask.

v. Shannon asked about aligning with other groups who are doing similar work. Suzi noted that it could be aligning with a group that is part of the Farm Bill Alliance. Debbie noted that it could be about aligning with a group that is not part of the Farm Bill Alliance. There needs to be a strategy to work with and not supersede other groups. And, there was a note that several Extension Horticulture groups are going after SNAP-Ed dollars.

vi. Action Item for All: If you haven’t done so, take a look at 1st committee meeting, and how it directly supports or inform the high level timeline. What are our strategic benchmarks, and who is responsible for the strategies.

4. Communication and Recruitment

a. All of our documents are housed on Box. All committee chairs and councils will have their own subfolder. Everyone has editorial access to the entire NICH folder . . . which may cause issues if someone accidentally deletes another group’s work. Gail will think about a way to organize subfolders, and give folks access to different subfolders, to avoid this issue.

b. How will we handle Advocacy? If your employer has limits on what you can do, in the realms of advocacy, please make that clear ~ especially if we have an ‘ask’ that you can not do. And at times, we may ask one council to take lead on an issue, if another council (such as Land-Grant / Federal Government) can not do, because of limits to their position.

5. Review Upcoming Action Steps (Floor) ~ skipped in the interest of time.

6. New Business (Floor) ~ skipped in the interest of time.