UNSPSC 50401602: Franklin asparagus

The variety of asparagus known as franklin asparagus

UNSPSC 50401602 Franklin asparagus, a Commodity code, does not align with the state and local procurement activity captured in the recent opportunities block. The source contains no solicitations for Franklin asparagus or asparagus as a distinct product line; instead, the opportunities center on comprehensive fresh produce procurements that include asparagus within broader vegetable assortments, along with cafeteria food products, prepared entrees, and USDA commodity items for school nutrition programs, institutional food service, and child nutrition initiatives.

School districts and county school systems across Georgia, Texas, Florida, Missouri, and Connecticut dominate the issuing-body mix, with secondary procurement activity from state agencies (Texas Department of Criminal Justice, State of Georgia), Head Start organizations, city departments, and transit or senior services. Recent representative solicitations include the Madison Metropolitan School District Fresh Fruit & Vegetable Snacks RFB (due July 29, 2026) seeking ready-to-eat produce within 400 miles of Madison with 5,900 weekly servings; the Glynn County Board of Education fresh produce IFB (sealed bids due April 14, 2026) covering 60 produce line items across 16 school locations; the Douglas County School System RFP through the GEC Buying Cooperative (proposals due March 4, 2026) with approximately $5.5 million estimated annual spending across 30 school districts in two geographic areas; and the Austin Independent School District RFP 26RFP034 (due March 11, 2026) for fresh produce and beverages with emphasis on Good Food Purchasing Program compliance and local sourcing. Geographic concentration appears heaviest in Georgia (Glynn, Liberty, Dougherty, Bryan, Bulloch, Henry, Savannah-Chatham, Douglas, Early, and Bartow County school systems) and Texas (TDCJ, NISD San Antonio, McAllen ISD, Hillsborough County Tampa), with additional activity in Wisconsin, Missouri, Connecticut, and Florida. The code's nominal scope does not reflect actual state and local purchasing patterns in the available records.