About this scenario
This is a hypothetical, composite example. The network of plots, the numbers and the households are invented for illustration. The figures are chosen to be easy to follow and have been checked by hand, but they are not measurements from any real project and should not be read as typical results. Yields and needs vary widely.
The setup
Imagine a neighborhood coalition that coordinates five small growing sites: three community garden lots, a school garden and a church yard. Together, the group sets aside part of each site for donation, called the “share beds.” The total area of the share beds is 1,500 square feet.
The coalition wants to know three things: how much produce the share beds might yield, how it could reach households, and how far it goes.
A rough estimate of the harvest
For planning purposes, suppose the group assumes a conservative yield of 0.5 pounds of vegetables per square foot over a season. This is an assumption chosen for the example, and real yields depend on crops, soil, weather and skill.
The calculation: 1,500 square feet x 0.5 pounds per square foot = 750 pounds for the season.
Spread over a 20-week harvest period, that is 750 divided by 20 = 37.5 pounds per week on average. Harvests are not even, since summer weeks yield much more than early or late weeks, so the group plans for peaks and gaps.
Two ways to distribute
The group considers two main channels.
A weekly produce share. Suppose the coalition offers 25 households a small weekly bag, with sliding-scale pricing and free options. If the full average weekly harvest of 37.5 pounds went to the shares, each of the 25 households would receive 37.5 divided by 25 = 1.5 pounds per week. That is a modest amount: enough to add some vegetables to meals, but not enough to feed a household.
A pantry partnership. Alternatively, the group might deliver the same 37.5 pounds weekly to a food pantry that serves a larger number of people. If the pantry serves 150 households in a week, then 37.5 divided by 150 = 0.25 pounds each, a quarter-pound. The reach is wider, and each portion is smaller. In practice, a pantry would likely give the fresh produce to people who choose it, so some households would take more, and others none.
The group may choose a mix, such as sending part to shares and part to the pantry.
What the numbers tell the group
The example illustrates a pattern. Small plots can produce real, welcome food, but the quantity is small relative to total household need. A family’s overall food needs run to many pounds per week, so 1.5 pounds is a supplement. The value is greater in freshness and variety than in volume.
The group also recognizes that numbers on paper omit losses: some produce is damaged, some is not collected, some goes unused because recipients do not know how to prepare it. They plan for a loss allowance rather than assume every pound reaches a plate.
Logistics that matter
Beyond the arithmetic, several practical issues shape whether the produce actually reaches people.
- Harvest timing. Picking the morning of distribution keeps produce fresh. Sites agree on a harvest schedule.
- Cleaning and handling. Volunteers wash and sort produce following local food safety guidance, which varies by place. They also keep records of what was grown where.
- Transport. A volunteer driver collects from all five sites; bikes and carts work for short distances.
- Pick-up locations. A distribution table at a place residents already visit, such as a community center or market, is more convenient than a special trip.
- Choice and dignity. People choose from what is available instead of receiving a preset bag.
- Crop selection. The group asks recipients which vegetables they use, favoring those, and adds recipe cards.
- Cold storage. Without refrigeration, delivery days must be close to harvest days.
- Soil safety. Because some sites are on former lots, the group has tested the soil and uses raised beds where needed, which is part of building trust.
The coalition also thinks about where the distribution table should stand. A spot beside public markets or a community center, which people already visit, would need no special trip, and the pantry’s own grocery sourcing may already shape what its clients want. Project cash flow is a worry too, because the stipend for a delivery coordinator depends on a grant that may not be renewed.
Limits and what to watch
In this scenario, the coalition notes several limits. Supply is seasonal. Volunteer time is a constraint. The number of households benefiting is small compared with the neighborhood’s need. And the group notes that the surrounding conditions of food insecurity, such as income and housing costs, are beyond what any garden can fix.
They set modest goals: measure pounds harvested and households served each season, ask recipients for feedback and adjust crops and distribution. They treat the effort as a way to add fresh, local produce for some households and to link neighbors, and they look to other partners for broader help.
Real programs differ, and any similar effort would have its own yields, costs and results. The value of working through a hypothetical like this lies in setting realistic expectations before the first seed is planted.