Coaching

Effective coaches can come from a variety of backgrounds and take on various forms (e.g., Institute hosting organization staff, state extension offices, local- and state-level farm to school coordinators, and alumni from other schools or districts), providing a degree of flexibility to meet your unique context and available resources. The following examples draw from the experiences and practices of teams from around the country, providing valuable insights into how coaching has been implemented and tailored to meet local contexts.

1. Institute Hosts as Coaches

This approach is attractive for teams that may have financial and/or capacity limitations (e.g., a lack of partners).

Example from the Field: Organizers of the Mississippi Farm to School Institute have simultaneously served as coaches for school teams at the Institute. Their experience with the schools involved prior to the Institute established a foundation for their coaching relationships, allowing them to build on previous connections and extend support. The leadership team believes in the significance of coaches investing in the work and staying connected with teams even after the Institute ends. According to the Mississippi Farm to School Early Childhood Education Coordinator, “We wanted people who were invested in the work enough to be able to make those phone calls and send those emails after the Institute was over.”

Pros & Cons: 

• Pros: Using Institute organizers as coaches allows teams to be efficient with their resources and leverage the experience that Institute organizers bring to the table (e.g., familiarity with instructional material, relationships with other providers and resources). It also provides Institute organizers with real-world experience and feedback in regard to what they are asking of other potential coaches.

• Cons: It’s more likely that the coach will not be from the same community or region as the school they are supporting, so they will be less familiar with the local context and resources. In addition, coaching can be too much of a time commitment for an Institute leader to take on, especially if there are a lot of teams to support.

2. Professional Learning for Coaches

Coaches come with varying degrees of experience and skill in the position. Offering professional learning opportunities in areas such as facilitation techniques and transformational coaching skills encourages coaches to be more invested in and excited about working with teams. This, in turn, will translate to more knowledgeable and confident teams.

Example from the Field: Georgia Organics, the host organization for the Georgia Farm to School Institute, didn’t have any coaches on staff, nor anyone with coaching experience. So, they decided to attend a couple of coaching workshops, including Emory University’s Fundamentals of Coaching, and then convened several meetings centered on how to coach individual teams, relying on peers to provide each other with feedback on coaching. These workshops and meetings changed the way Georgia Organics worked with teams during the Institute.

Pros & Cons:

• Pros: Investing in professional learning for coaches leads to enhanced coaching skills and increased confidence and consistency in one’s coaching practice. It also equips coaches with the latest tools and techniques that they can add to their coaching “toolbox”.

• Cons: Professional learning requires time and financial investments on behalf of the Institute and its coaches.

3. Building Coaching Capacity

Your Institute offers a valuable learning experience for anyone who attends, including potential coaches. People who are interested in serving as coaches in their state or region can be invited to attend to build their coaching capacity and become familiar with the Institute model.

Example from the Field: The Massachusetts Farm to School Institute added a coach observer program to support its goal of building a diverse pipeline of coaches in the state. Recruitment efforts primarily target people of color and younger individuals who are relatively new to food systems and farm to school work. Typically, two to three people attend the Massachusetts Institute as coach observers, and each person is paired with a particular school or coach to follow throughout the Institute.

Pros & Cons:

• Pros: A coach observer program offers an opportunity to build coaching capacity in a state or region, leading to greater diversity in available coaches.

• Cons: Launching and maintaining a coach observer program requires a time commitment and additional programmatic and coordination efforts on the part of a farm to school program team.

4. Culturally Relevant Coaching

In situations where a team may have more specific needs, such as a team from a tribal school, a two-coach team can provide additional resources and perspectives.

Example from the Field: At the Montana Farm to School Institute, one attending team represented a school with a 50% native student population. The team had goals related to native food sovereignty. Institute organizers sought out a potential coach with experience with tribal school communities; however, this person couldn’t commit to being a full-time coach. To ensure the team could learn and benefit from this person’s experience, organizers made accommodations so the team could have two coaches.

Pros & Cons:

• Pros: Bringing in another coach(es), especially one with expertise in culturally relevant practices, can be extremely beneficial. It can lessen the pressure on a single coach to fulfill all roles, especially at the retreat, and allow one to more actively facilitate while the other observes and reflects.

• Cons: Additional coaches mean additional costs. Coaches also need to work well together and be clear with their teams about each other’s roles and responsibilities so as not to create confusion among team members.