Using the Framework

3.9 Reciprocal relationships between equity-deserving (e.g., women, racialized groups, indigenous communities, LGBTQ2SI+, low-income) and dominant groups (e.g., white, cis, hetero, white-collar workers/managerial class) are established.

Activity

Outputs

Reflection and verification

3.6 Fair, adequate and equitable pay in food-related jobs (i.e., across genders and races, providing at minimum a living wage).

3.12 Humans have an ethical (versus exploitative and harmful) relationship with the animals, plants and land needed for food (e.g., animal welfare, reduced food waste, agroecological practices, increased biodiversity and ecosystem health)

3.11 Reciprocal relationships between different food actors (e.g., farmers, processors, distributors, food access organizations, funders) are established.

3.4 Increased resilience in local food systems to ensure they can withstand natural disasters, economic shocks, and supply chain disruptions.

3.10 Equity-deserving food actors have opportunities to provide feedback on partnership relations.

3.8 Increased access to food system jobs/business opportunities and infrastructure (e.g., farmland, processing facilities, distribution chains, etc.) for equity-deserving groups and rural/remote communities.

2.6 Reduced barriers and increased safety to participate in food systems planning (e.g., offer stipends, childcare, transportation, translation, etc).

2.5 Equity-deserving communities are leading or meaningfully engaged throughout the planning, implementation and evaluation of policies & programs.

3.5 Increased food literacy so people can participate in their food system in whatever way they choose (e.g., gardening, preserving classes, nutrition, cooking, cultural and traditional food practices, etc.).

3.3 Greater Indigenous food sovereignty/ food sovereignty (i.e., more local control over distribution, supply and production).

3.2 Processes are established to identify individuals or groups experiencing/ at risk of food insecurity.

3.1 Increased food security for equity-deserving groups (access to nutritious, culturally preferred, affordable food).

2.2 Increased knowledge and understanding of local food system governance, processes and tools.

1.6 The impact on future generations (of humans and other species) is intentionally incorporated into food systems planning (e.g., considering social, economic and environmental impacts).

1.5 Equity-deserving communities are recognised as experiencing hope, joy, resiliency and vibrancy in the past, present and future, rather than simply being framed as oppressed.

1.4 Historic and ongoing injustices (e.g., colonial legacies, intergenerational poverty, racism) are incorporated into how food system problems are framed, root causes are understood, and solutions are developed.

1.3 Processes are established to allow for differing or conflicting visions to resolve or coexist.

Gap Analysis

1.2 Differing interpretations of problems and solutions are acknowledged and incorporated in food work.

2.4 Reduced systemic power imbalances in governance (e.g., moving from top down, prescriptive, opaque approaches to more transparent, flexible and non-hierarchical approaches).

2.3 Food-system grants/funding sources support community-determined priorities, are flexible, and have accessible, low-barrier application and reporting processes.

2.1 Increased capacity of equity-deserving groups to address their own challenges and achieve their own objectives (e.g. organizational development, self-determination, resources, business development, food sovereignty).

Page 2

1.1 Multiple goals, outcomes and principles are represented in visions of the food system.

3.7 Increased employee support (e.g. health insurance, training, adequate staffing) and safety from pollution, hazards, weather, and other adverse conditions in workspaces.

JEDI Outcomes

The Framework can be used to assess whether an activity/ intervention is contributing to JEDI (justice, equity, decolonization, inclusion) outcomes that signify progress towards a more just food system. Click on numbers 1-4 below and follow the steps to evaluate an activity. Download this worksheet to record your answers.

Click and drag relevant outcomes below. Headings can be moved for extra space.

Access to food

Minimal Contribution:

Moderate Contribution:

Substantial contribution:

Framework Use 1: Evaluate an Activity

Respectful relations

Labour justice

Capacity to participate

Considering past, present and future

Impacts

Embracing difference

JEDI Outcomes

Distributive Justice

Procedural Justice

Recognitional Justice

Just processes

JEDI Outcomes

Click and drag relevant outcomes below. Headings can be moved for extra space.

3.9 Reciprocal relationships between equity-deserving (e.g., women, racialized groups, indigenous communities, LGBTQ2SI+, low-income) and dominant groups (e.g., white, cis, hetero, white-collar workers/managerial class) are established.

3.6 Fair, adequate and equitable pay in food-related jobs (i.e., across genders and races, providing at minimum a living wage).

3.12 Humans have an ethical (versus exploitative and harmful) relationship with the animals, plants and land needed for food (e.g., animal welfare, reduced food waste, agroecological practices, increased biodiversity and ecosystem health)

3.11 Reciprocal relationships between different food actors (e.g., farmers, processors, distributors, food access organizations, funders) are established.

3.4 Increased resilience in local food systems to ensure they can withstand natural disasters, economic shocks, and supply chain disruptions.

3.10 Equity-deserving food actors have opportunities to provide feedback on partnership relations.

3.8 Increased access to food system jobs/business opportunities and infrastructure (e.g., farmland, processing facilities, distribution chains, etc.) for equity-deserving groups and rural/remote communities.

2.6 Reduced barriers and increased safety to participate in food systems planning (e.g., offer stipends, childcare, transportation, translation, etc).

2.5 Equity-deserving communities are leading or meaningfully engaged throughout the planning, implementation and evaluation of policies & programs.

3.5 Increased food literacy so people can participate in their food system in whatever way they choose (e.g., gardening, preserving classes, nutrition, cooking, cultural and traditional food practices, etc.).

3.3 Greater Indigenous food sovereignty/ food sovereignty (i.e., more local control over distribution, supply and production).

3.2 Processes are established to identify individuals or groups experiencing/ at risk of food insecurity.

3.1 Increased food security for equity-deserving groups (access to nutritious, culturally preferred, affordable food).

2.2 Increased knowledge and understanding of local food system governance, processes and tools.

1.6 The impact on future generations (of humans and other species) is intentionally incorporated into food systems planning (e.g., considering social, economic and environmental impacts).

1.5 Equity-deserving communities are recognised as experiencing hope, joy, resiliency and vibrancy in the past, present and future, rather than simply being framed as oppressed.

1.4 Historic and ongoing injustices (e.g., colonial legacies, intergenerational poverty, racism) are incorporated into how food system problems are framed, root causes are understood, and solutions are developed.

1.3 Processes are established to allow for differing or conflicting visions to resolve or coexist.

1.2 Differing interpretations of problems and solutions are acknowledged and incorporated in food work.

2.4 Reduced systemic power imbalances in governance (e.g., moving from top down, prescriptive, opaque approaches to more transparent, flexible and non-hierarchical approaches).

2.3 Food-system grants/funding sources support community-determined priorities, are flexible, and have accessible, low-barrier application and reporting processes.

2.1 Increased capacity of equity-deserving groups to address their own challenges and achieve their own objectives (e.g. organizational development, self-determination, resources, business development, food sovereignty).

Page 3

Access to food

1.1 Multiple goals, outcomes and principles are represented in visions of the food system.

Respectful relations

3.7 Increased employee support (e.g. health insurance, training, adequate staffing) and safety from pollution, hazards, weather, and other adverse conditions in workspaces.

Labour justice

Capacity to participate

Considering past, present and future

Impacts

Embracing difference

Distributive Justice

Procedural Justice

Recognitional Justice

Just processes

Procedural Justice

Minimal Contribution:

Moderate Contribution:

Substantial contribution:

The Framework can be used as an organizational audit tool to identify the aspects of a just food system that your organization supports and bring awareness to the gaps where further work can be done. Click on numbers 1-4 below and follow the steps to perform an audit. Download this worksheet to record your answers.

Framework Use 2: Organizational Audit

JEDI Outcomes

Provide Examples

GapAnalysis

Reflection & Verification

JEDI Outcomes

Click and drag relevant outcomes below. Headings can be moved for extra space.

3.9 Reciprocal relationships between equity-deserving (e.g., women, racialized groups, indigenous communities, LGBTQ2SI+, low-income) and dominant groups (e.g., white, cis, hetero, white-collar workers/managerial class) are established.

3.6 Fair, adequate and equitable pay in food-related jobs (i.e., across genders and races, providing at minimum a living wage).

3.12 Humans have an ethical (versus exploitative and harmful) relationship with the animals, plants and land needed for food (e.g., animal welfare, reduced food waste, agroecological practices, increased biodiversity and ecosystem health)

3.11 Reciprocal relationships between different food actors (e.g., farmers, processors, distributors, food access organizations, funders) are established.

3.4 Increased resilience in local food systems to ensure they can withstand natural disasters, economic shocks, and supply chain disruptions.

3.10 Equity-deserving food actors have opportunities to provide feedback on partnership relations.

3.8 Increased access to food system jobs/business opportunities and infrastructure (e.g., farmland, processing facilities, distribution chains, etc.) for equity-deserving groups and rural/remote communities.

2.6 Reduced barriers and increased safety to participate in food systems planning (e.g., offer stipends, childcare, transportation, translation, etc).

2.5 Equity-deserving communities are leading or meaningfully engaged throughout the planning, implementation and evaluation of policies & programs.

3.5 Increased food literacy so people can participate in their food system in whatever way they choose (e.g., gardening, preserving classes, nutrition, cooking, cultural and traditional food practices, etc.).

3.3 Greater Indigenous food sovereignty/ food sovereignty (i.e., more local control over distribution, supply and production).

3.2 Processes are established to identify individuals or groups experiencing/ at risk of food insecurity.

3.1 Increased food security for equity-deserving groups (access to nutritious, culturally preferred, affordable food).

2.2 Increased knowledge and understanding of local food system governance, processes and tools.

1.6 The impact on future generations (of humans and other species) is intentionally incorporated into food systems planning (e.g., considering social, economic and environmental impacts).

Access to food

1.5 Equity-deserving communities are recognised as experiencing hope, joy, resiliency and vibrancy in the past, present and future, rather than simply being framed as oppressed.

Respectful relations

1.4 Historic and ongoing injustices (e.g., colonial legacies, intergenerational poverty, racism) are incorporated into how food system problems are framed, root causes are understood, and solutions are developed.

Labour justice

Capacity to participate

1.3 Processes are established to allow for differing or conflicting visions to resolve or coexist.

1.2 Differing interpretations of problems and solutions are acknowledged and incorporated in food work.

2.4 Reduced systemic power imbalances in governance (e.g., moving from top down, prescriptive, opaque approaches to more transparent, flexible and non-hierarchical approaches).

Considering past, present and future

Impacts

2.3 Food-system grants/funding sources support community-determined priorities, are flexible, and have accessible, low-barrier application and reporting processes.

2.1 Increased capacity of equity-deserving groups to address their own challenges and achieve their own objectives (e.g. organizational development, self-determination, resources, business development, food sovereignty).

Embracing difference

Distributive Justice

Procedural Justice

Recognitional Justice

1.1 Multiple goals, outcomes and principles are represented in visions of the food system.

3.7 Increased employee support (e.g. health insurance, training, adequate staffing) and safety from pollution, hazards, weather, and other adverse conditions in workspaces.

Just processes

Minimally supported:

Moderately supported:

Substantially supported:

The Framework can be used to measure community progress towards a just food system. Food actors can come together to collectively identify the aspects of a just food system present in their community and the gaps where further work can be done. This can support food system planning, prioritization and resource allocation. Click on numbers 1-4 below and follow the steps. Record your answers on this worksheet.

Framework Use 3: Community Assessment

Procedural Justice

GapAnalysis

JEDI Outcomes

Provide Examples

Indicators

JEDI Outcomes

Click and drag relevant outcomes below. Headings can be moved for extra space.

3.9 Reciprocal relationships between equity-deserving (e.g., women, racialized groups, indigenous communities, LGBTQ2SI+, low-income) and dominant groups (e.g., white, cis, hetero, white-collar workers/managerial class) are established.

3.6 Fair, adequate and equitable pay in food-related jobs (i.e., across genders and races, providing at minimum a living wage).

3.12 Humans have an ethical (versus exploitative and harmful) relationship with the animals, plants and land needed for food (e.g., animal welfare, reduced food waste, agroecological practices, increased biodiversity and ecosystem health)

3.11 Reciprocal relationships between different food actors (e.g., farmers, processors, distributors, food access organizations, funders) are established.

3.4 Increased resilience in local food systems to ensure they can withstand natural disasters, economic shocks, and supply chain disruptions.

3.10 Equity-deserving food actors have opportunities to provide feedback on partnership relations.

3.8 Increased access to food system jobs/business opportunities and infrastructure (e.g., farmland, processing facilities, distribution chains, etc.) for equity-deserving groups and rural/remote communities.

2.6 Reduced barriers and increased safety to participate in food systems planning (e.g., offer stipends, childcare, transportation, translation, etc).

2.5 Equity-deserving communities are leading or meaningfully engaged throughout the planning, implementation and evaluation of policies & programs.

3.5 Increased food literacy so people can participate in their food system in whatever way they choose (e.g., gardening, preserving classes, nutrition, cooking, cultural and traditional food practices, etc.).

3.3 Greater Indigenous food sovereignty/ food sovereignty (i.e., more local control over distribution, supply and production).

3.2 Processes are established to identify individuals or groups experiencing/ at risk of food insecurity.

3.1 Increased food security for equity-deserving groups (access to nutritious, culturally preferred, affordable food).

2.2 Increased knowledge and understanding of local food system governance, processes and tools.

1.6 The impact on future generations (of humans and other species) is intentionally incorporated into food systems planning (e.g., considering social, economic and environmental impacts).

1.5 Equity-deserving communities are recognised as experiencing hope, joy, resiliency and vibrancy in the past, present and future, rather than simply being framed as oppressed.

1.4 Historic and ongoing injustices (e.g., colonial legacies, intergenerational poverty, racism) are incorporated into how food system problems are framed, root causes are understood, and solutions are developed.

1.3 Processes are established to allow for differing or conflicting visions to resolve or coexist.

1.2 Differing interpretations of problems and solutions are acknowledged and incorporated in food work.

2.4 Reduced systemic power imbalances in governance (e.g., moving from top down, prescriptive, opaque approaches to more transparent, flexible and non-hierarchical approaches).

2.3 Food-system grants/funding sources support community-determined priorities, are flexible, and have accessible, low-barrier application and reporting processes.

2.1 Increased capacity of equity-deserving groups to address their own challenges and achieve their own objectives (e.g. organizational development, self-determination, resources, business development, food sovereignty).

Access to food

Respectful relations

Labour justice

Capacity to participate

Considering past, present and future

Impacts

1.1 Multiple goals, outcomes and principles are represented in visions of the food system.

Embracing difference

Distributive Justice

3.7 Increased employee support (e.g. health insurance, training, adequate staffing) and safety from pollution, hazards, weather, and other adverse conditions in workspaces.

Procedural Justice

Recognitional Justice

Just processes

Minimally supported:

Moderately supported:

Substantially supported:

The Framework can be used to measure community progress towards a just food system. Food actors can come together to collectively identify the aspects of a just food system present in their community and the gaps where further work can be done. This can support food system planning, prioritization and resource allocation. Click on numbers 1-4 below and follow the steps. Record your answers on this worksheet.

Framework Use 3: Community Assessment

Procedural Justice

GapAnalysis

JEDI Outcomes

Provide Examples

Indicators

Record your answers on page 8 of the worksheet.

The indicators you choose will depend on what data sources are available to you and what you have the resources and capacity to measure. Please note, some JEDI outcomes are qualitative in nature and can be more difficult to develop indicators for/measure. This next step may require further investment in the evaluation/data collection capacity of your community.

As a next step, if you would like to verify and more concretely measure and track progress towards any JEDI outcomes that are of particular interest to your community, we encourage you to explore developing your own shared indicators/metrics and collecting data on these.

Using the Framework to assess community progress towards a just food system relies on the assumption that the example initiatives you identified in Step 2 actually support the JEDI outcomes in your community a meaningful way.

Step 4 (Optional): Indicators for Verification

Record your answers on pages 1-4 of the worksheet.

*Prior to completing the community assessment, we encourage each participating organization to conduct their own organizational audit. This will better inform your answers and help you to collectively identify JEDI strengths and gaps in your community.

Step 1: Identifying JEDI Outcomes

*If you run out of room to place the outcomes, you can move the category headings to make more space.

• Review the list of JEDI outcomes and identify the outcomes you believe are supported in your community (i.e., through various food programs, projects, practices, policies or organizations).
• Rate the extent of this support - is the outcome minimally, moderately or substantially supported in your community?
• Click and drag these outcomes into the box below, arranging them within their respective categories (minimal, moderate, or substantial support).

One you have finished Step 2, review the outcomes selected and reflect, discuss and determine:

Using the Framework relies on the assumption that your organization's activities/outputs actually contribute to your selected outcomes in a meaningful way. Step 3 involves exploring how you might verify these linkages to reduce bias.

Record your answers on pages 6-7 of the worksheet.

• In cases where your organization only minimally contributes to an outcome, what steps can you take (if any) to further support that outcome?

• Where possible, how can you measure or verify that your organization/ the example initiatives you provided actually contribute to each of the outcomes? (Please note, some outcomes are qualitative in nature and thus more difficult to measure)

Step 3: Reflection and Verification

The Framework can be used to assess whether an activity/intervention is contributing to JEDI (justice, equity, decolonization, inclusion) outcomes that signify progress towards a more just food system:

1. Write down an activity/intervention (e.g., a program, project, policy, etc.) you would like to evaluate.
2. Write down the outputs (the immediate tangible or intangible results) of this activity/intervention.
3. Select the outcomes from the list that your activity and its outputs contribute to and drag them into the box.

4. Once complete, review the outcomes you have selected and reflect, discuss and determine:

• How can I measure or verify that my activity/its outputs actually contributes to each of these outcomes?
• To what extent does my activity contribute to each of the outcomes selected? Slightly, considerably or highly?
• Where slight, what can we do to contribute to it at a greater extent?

5. Review the outcomes left behind (that your activity does not contribute to) and reflect/discuss: - Are any of these outcomes relevant to / within the scope of my organization and this activity? - If yes, what barriers have prevented us from taking action thus far? (e.g., financial, human, resources, lack of knowledge, etc.) - How can we overcome these barriers and what can we do, change or add to contribute to these JEDI outcomes?

How to Evaluate an Activity

• Where possible, how can you measure or verify that your activity / its outputs contribute to each of the outcomes? (Please note, some outcomes are qualitative in nature and may be more difficult to measure).

• In cases where your activity only minimally contributed to an outcome, what steps can you take (if any) to further support that outcome?

Record your answers on pages 6-7 of the worksheet.

Using the Framework relies on the assumption that your activity outputs actually contribute to your selected outcomes in a meaningful way. Step 4 involves exploring how you might verify these linkages to reduce bias. One you have finished Step 3, review the outcomes selected and reflect, discuss and determine:

Step 4: Reflection and Verification

Record your answers on page 5 of the worksheet.

How is your community supporting these JEDI outcomes? Provide a few examples of initiatives (e.g., food programs, practices, policies, projects or organizations) that contribute to your selected outcomes.

Step 2: Provide Examples

Record your answer on page 1 of the worksheet.

Briefly describe a food activity/ intervention (e.g., a policy, program, project, etc.) that you would like to evaluate using the Framework.

Step 1: Determine your activity

Record your answers on pages 1 -4 of the worksheet.

Step 1: Identifying JEDI Outcomes

*If you run out of room to place the outcomes, you can move the category headings around to make more space.

• Review the list of JEDI outcomes and identify the outcomes that your organization supports through its programs, projects, practices, or policies.
• Rate the extent of this contribution - does it contribute to the outcome minimally, moderately or substantially?
• Click and drag these outcomes into the box below, arranging them within their respective categories (minimal, moderate, or substantial contribution).

Record your answer on page 1 of the worksheet.

Step 2: Identify Outputs

Write down the outputs (the immediate tangible or intangible results) of your activity/intervention.

Record your answers on pages 7-8 of the worksheet.

• How can you overcome these barriers and what can be done to contribute to these JEDI outcomes?

• Are any of these outcomes relevant to / within the scope of your organization and the activity?
• If yes, what barriers have prevented you from taking action thus far? (e.g., financial, human, resources, knowledge gap, etc.)

...

Review the outcomes that you did not select because they are not affected by your activity. Reflect and discuss:

Step 5: Gap Analysis + Reflection

The Framework can be used to assess whether an activity/intervention is contributing to JEDI (justice, equity, decolonization, inclusion) outcomes that signify progress towards a more just food system:

1. Write down an activity/intervention (e.g., a program, project, policy, etc.) you would like to evaluate.
2. Write down the outputs (the immediate tangible or intangible results) of this activity/intervention.
3. Select the outcomes from the list that your activity and its outputs contribute to and drag them into the box.

4. Once complete, review the outcomes you have selected and reflect, discuss and determine:

• How can I measure or verify that my activity/its outputs actually contributes to each of these outcomes?
• To what extent does my activity contribute to each of the outcomes selected? Slightly, considerably or highly?
• Where slight, what can we do to contribute to it at a greater extent?

5. Review the outcomes left behind (that your activity does not contribute to) and reflect/discuss: - Are any of these outcomes relevant to / within the scope of my organization and this activity? - If yes, what barriers have prevented us from taking action thus far? (e.g., financial, human, resources, lack of knowledge, etc.) - How can we overcome these barriers and what can we do, change or add to contribute to these JEDI outcomes?

How to Evaluate an Activity

Record your answers on pages 6-7 of the worksheet.

• For outcomes that are outside your scope, who in your community is responsible for them? Where possible, how could you connect or collaborate with them to gain a fuller picture of how JEDI is supported in your food system and how to collectively make progress toward a more just future?

• How might you overcome these barriers and what steps can you take to ensure these JEDI outcomes are further supported in your community?

• What barriers have prevented your community or your organizations (for outcomes that are within your scope) from taking action to support these outcomes? (e.g., limited financial or human resources, knowledge gap, etc.)

...

Review the outcomes that are not supported or are only minimally supported within your community. Reflect and discuss:

Step 3: Gap Analysis and Reflection

Record your answers on page 5 of the worksheet.

How is your organization is supporting these JEDI outcomes? Provide examples of initiatives (e.g., programs, practices, policies or projects) and their outputs (immediate tangible or intangible results) that contribute to each of your selected outcomes.

Step 2: Provide examples

Record your answers on pages 8-9 of the worksheet.

• How might you overcome these barriers and what steps can you take to contribute to these JEDI outcomes?

• Are any of these outcomes relevant to / within the scope of your organization?
• If yes, what barriers have prevented you from taking action thus far? (e.g., limited financial or human resources, lack of knowledge, etc.)

...

Review the outcomes that you did not select because they are not supported by your organization. Reflect and discuss:

Step 4: Gap Analysis and Reflection

• Rate the extent of this contribution - does it contribute to the outcome minimally, moderately or substantially? Click and drag these outcomes into the box below, placing them in their respective categories.

Record your answers on pages 2-5 of the worksheet.

Step 3: Identifying JEDI Outcomes

* if you run out of room to place the outcomes, you can move the category headings around to make more space.

• Review the list of JEDI outcomes and identify the outcomes that your activity and its outputs contribute to.

Record your answers on page 8 of the worksheet.

The indicators you choose will depend on what data sources are available to you and what you have the resources and capacity to measure. Please note, some JEDI outcomes are qualitative in nature and can be more difficult to develop indicators for/measure. This next step may require further investment in the evaluation/data collection capacity of your community.

As a next step, if you would like to verify and more concretely measure and track progress towards any JEDI outcomes that are of particular interest to your community, we encourage you to explore developing your own shared indicators/metrics and collecting data on these.

Using the Framework to assess community progress towards a just food system relies on the assumption that the example initiatives you identified in Step 2 actually support the JEDI outcomes in your community a meaningful way.

Step 4 (Optional): Indicators for Verification

Record your answers on pages 1-4 of the worksheet.

*Prior to completing the community assessment, we encourage each participating organization to conduct their own organizational audit. This will better inform your answers and help you to collectively identify JEDI strengths and gaps in your community.

Step 1: Identifying JEDI Outcomes

*If you run out of room to place the outcomes, you can move the category headings to make more space.

• Review the list of JEDI outcomes and identify the outcomes you believe are supported in your community (i.e., through various food programs, projects, practices, policies or organizations).
• Rate the extent of this support - is the outcome minimally, moderately or substantially supported in your community?
• Click and drag these outcomes into the box below, arranging them within their respective categories (minimal, moderate, or substantial support).

Record your answers on page 5 of the worksheet.

How is your community supporting these JEDI outcomes? Provide a few examples of initiatives (e.g., food programs, practices, policies, projects or organizations) that contribute to your selected outcomes.

Step 2: Provide Examples

The Framework can be used to assess whether an activity/intervention is contributing to JEDI (justice, equity, decolonization, inclusion) outcomes that signify progress towards a more just food system:

1. Write down an activity/intervention (e.g., a program, project, policy, etc.) you would like to evaluate.
2. Write down the outputs (the immediate tangible or intangible results) of this activity/intervention.
3. Select the outcomes from the list that your activity and its outputs contribute to and drag them into the box.

4. Once complete, review the outcomes you have selected and reflect, discuss and determine:

• How can I measure or verify that my activity/its outputs actually contributes to each of these outcomes?
• To what extent does my activity contribute to each of the outcomes selected? Slightly, considerably or highly?
• Where slight, what can we do to contribute to it at a greater extent?

5. Review the outcomes left behind (that your activity does not contribute to) and reflect/discuss: - Are any of these outcomes relevant to / within the scope of my organization and this activity? - If yes, what barriers have prevented us from taking action thus far? (e.g., financial, human, resources, lack of knowledge, etc.) - How can we overcome these barriers and what can we do, change or add to contribute to these JEDI outcomes?

How to Evaluate an Activity

Record your answers on pages 6-7 of the worksheet.

• For outcomes that are outside your scope, who in your community is responsible for them? Where possible, how could you connect or collaborate with them to gain a fuller picture of how JEDI is supported in your food system and how to collectively make progress toward a more just future?

• How might you overcome these barriers and what steps can you take to ensure these JEDI outcomes are further supported in your community?

• What barriers have prevented your community or your organizations (for outcomes that are within your scope) from taking action to support these outcomes? (e.g., limited financial or human resources, knowledge gap, etc.)

...

Review the outcomes that are not supported or are only minimally supported within your community. Reflect and discuss:

Step 3: Gap Analysis and Reflection