UNSPSC 50333426: Dried organic dauphine grapes

The variety of organic table grapes known as organic dauphine grapes that have been dried for preservation.

UNSPSC 50333426 Dried organic dauphine grapes is a Commodity code that sees minimal recent state and local procurement activity aligned with its nominal scope. The recent opportunities posted under this code do not reflect procurement of dried organic dauphine grapes specifically; instead, the tagged solicitations cover broad fresh produce, food supply, and dried fruit categories that encompass the code's stated product only incidentally if at all. School districts, county boards of education, and correctional facilities are the primary issuing bodies in the recent record, but their solicitations target generic fresh produce lines (apples, berries, vegetables, citrus), prepared entrees, dairy, proteins, and miscellaneous dried fruits and nuts rather than a specialized dried grape product. The code shows no evidence of being actively used by state or local buyers to procure dried organic dauphine grapes as a distinct line item.

Recent opportunities tagged under this code span multiple states including Georgia (Hancock County Schools, Liberty County Board of Education, Douglas County School System, Savannah-Chatham County Public Schools), Missouri (Rockwood R-VI School District), Virginia (Fairfax County Public Schools), Connecticut (City of Bridgeport), Texas (Texas Department of Criminal Justice), and California (County of Santa Clara). Among these, only the Santa Clara County Sheriff's Department procurement (ITB-PRC-FY26-0617, due February 5, 2026) mentions dried fruits at all—requesting dried raisins, cranberries, tropical fruit mix, walnuts, and pecans for a correctional facility—but not dried grapes. The preponderance of recent activity involves school nutrition programs soliciting fresh and frozen produce, proteins, and staple groceries through IFBs and RFPs with response windows in spring 2026, none specifically naming dried organic dauphine grapes. The code assignment appears to be a tagging mismatch rather than evidence of active procurement demand for this commodity.