Want more news about agriculture and the environment? Sign up for the Harvest newsletter for our latest reporting, plus behind-the-scenes exclusives.
After the Trump administration canceled an about $7.5 million grant this spring, south Texas nonprofit H.O.P.E. for Small Farm Sustainability has had to stretch dollars and let go of most of its staff.
The organization trains and educates families, small-scale farmers and people interested in farming in the Rio Grande Valley. Its grant was one of 49 cut in March through the USDA’s Increasing Land, Capital and Market Access Program.
But now the nonprofit and several others across the U.S. could be getting their funding back.
A federal judge has made a temporary court order that requires the Trump administration to reinstate nearly half of the awards. Diana Garcia-Padilla, founder and executive director of H.O.P.E. for Small Farm Sustainability, received a reinstatement letter on July 2.
“They tell me I'm tight with money, right? But we're very good with money because we know it's government money because we know it's important that we do a good job so that we can continue to be funded,” Garcia-Padilla said.
The $300 million USDA program was designed to fund locally-led projects that help historically underserved farmers and ranchers, including Black, Indigenous and immigrant farmers, along with U.S. veterans and first-time producers. That includes projects that would have reached farmers in most states across the Midwest and Great Plains.
Garcia-Padilla said the reinstated money will allow her nonprofit to run its apprenticeship program, which provides a plot of land and mentorship to new farmers. Already, the organization has re-hired a position and restarted conversations about purchasing land in nearby small towns. But the temporary decision means there’s still uncertainty.
“At the same time, it's dangerous because we're spending money that if we don't get [it] back, we don't have anything,” Garcia-Padilla said. “So it's like a lottery for me.”
‘Righting a wrong’
Twenty-four of the organizations who had their funding cut joined a lawsuit against the USDA in May saying their grants were unlawfully terminated.
While the case continues, D.C. District Court Judge Beryl Howell — the judge overseeing the lawsuit — granted a preliminary injunction and ordered the department to restart the grants by July 3.
“For the foregoing reasons, plaintiffs have established entitlement to amend the complaint, and Land Access Program Plaintiffs have demonstrated that the terminations of their individual grants were likely contrary to statute, that they will suffer irreparable harm in the absence of relief, and that the balance of equities and public interest favor preliminary injunctive relief,” Howell wrote in her memorandum opinion.
Amanda Koehler is the manager of the Land, Capital and Market Access Network, a group of the program’s awardees and sub-awardees. She said the court order means about $127 million in grant funding is restored as grantees wait for a final court decision.
“It feels very validating to win this preliminary injunction,” Koehler said. “We believe that these grants were terminated unlawfully for political reasons around specifically the Trump Administration's continued focus to dismantle anything that they believe has to do with diversity, equity and inclusion.”
In termination letters sent to grantees in March, USDA officials wrote the awards “involved discriminatory preferences based on Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI) and wasteful spending that did little to further agricultural land purchases.”
Organizations were at different stages of the grant process when the grant was cut, leaving them and their work in limbo.
A USDA spokesperson said in an email to Harvest Public Media that the department will not comment on pending litigation.
The lawsuit only applies to the case’s 24 plaintiffs. But Koehler said she is hoping the decision will reach all of the cut projects.
“In an ideal world, the final ruling in this case would restore all of the grants, whether or not the grantee joined the lawsuit.,” Koehler said. “Ultimately, that choice will be up to the judge.”
Nonprofit Cultivate Kansas City is part of the lawsuit. Executive Director Brien Darby said the organization was in the middle of a $2.5 million grant for a project to help Kansas City growers access land and capital. This includes connecting farmers who are selling land to people who need it and a bridge loan program for government grants. The court order will allow the group to continue that work.
“It's exciting, but it's righting a wrong, it's not really a step forward. And it's temporary,” Darby said. “So we have a small window to try to work through the remainder of our deliverables, because we still don't have the guarantee that it won't be canceled again should the court ultimately not rule in favor of the plaintiffs.”
Cultivate Kansas City plans to be cautious with the grant. For instance, buying land – which was part of the original plan of the grant – could be tricky, Darby said.
“We don't want to be working through due diligence on a piece of land and then have the rug pulled out from under us again,” Darby said. “So we are trying to move quickly, but there will be a point where we're monitoring the court case to see if it truly makes sense to continue moving forward.”
With the other 25 projects gone, Darby said it is a loss for underserved farmers. She said the grants and planned projects were helping people start farming – which is a difficult and expensive business to get into.
As the average age of U.S. farmers continues to climb, she worries about the future of the nation’s food production.
“A lot of the work I feel like we're doing is reducing or removing unintentional barriers,” Darby said. “I think that work’s super important so that we do have people who are willing to continue to grow food going into the future.”
This story was produced in partnership with Harvest Public Media, a collaboration of public media newsrooms in the Midwest and Great Plains. It reports on food systems, agriculture and rural issues.
