UNSPSC 50412203: Organic ishikura bunching onions

The variety of organic bunching onions known as organic ishikura bunching onions

UNSPSC 50412203 Organic ishikura bunching onions is a Commodity code that does not reflect the actual work state and local governments are buying under this classification; the recent opportunities dataset shows no solicitations for organic ishikura bunching onions specifically, and instead reveals that the code has been applied to broad school nutrition procurement for fresh produce, vegetables, eggs, and related food service items. State and local procurement activity in this taxonomy encompasses produce supply contracts for child nutrition programs, institutional food service, and farm-to-school initiatives, with school districts and county boards of education as the primary issuing bodies. The work involves sourcing, warehousing, and delivering fresh fruits, vegetables, eggs, and prepared produce items to multiple school sites on recurring schedules (typically weekly or twice-weekly), with vendors required to maintain HACCP plans, food safety certifications, temperature-controlled transportation, and compliance with USDA Buy American provisions and child nutrition reimbursement standards. Vendors typically bear all packing, freight, and delivery costs, and contracts run annual fiscal-year cycles (July through June) with renewal options. School districts dominate the issuing bodies, with recent activity from Northside Independent School District (San Antonio, Texas), Hillsborough County Public Schools (Tampa, Florida), Bulloch County School District (Georgia), Rockwood R-VI School District (Missouri), Liberty County Board of Education (Georgia), Muscogee County School District (Georgia), Savannah-Chatham County Public School System (Georgia), Glynn County Board of Education (Georgia), McAllen Independent School District (Texas), Austin Independent School District (Texas), Douglas County School System (Georgia), and Early County Board of Education (Georgia), with some regional cooperative purchasing vehicles like the GEC Buying Cooperative serving multi-district consortiums.

The code sees the highest recent activity concentration in Georgia, with solicitations from Savannah-Chatham County Public Schools (RFP, due April 23, 2026), Glynn County Board of Education (IFB 27-02, due April 14, 2026), Muscogee County School District (ITB 26-017, due April 27, 2026), Liberty County Board of Education (IFB, due April 29, 2026), Bulloch County School District (RFP, due May 4, 2026), Early County Board of Education (RFP, due June 8, 2026), and Douglas County School System through the GEC Buying Cooperative (RFP, due March 4, 2026 with estimated annual spend of $4.4 million for Area One and $1.1 million for Area Two). Texas activity is also substantial, including Northside Independent School District (RFP 2026-048, due May 7, 2026, serving 127 campuses), McAllen Independent School District (RFP 2026-1029, due March 6, 2026 extended by addendum, serving 31 campuses across 20,000 students), and Austin Independent School District (RFP 26RFP034, due March 11, 2026, with addendum issued February 17, 2026). Secondary activity appears in Florida (Hillsborough County Public Schools, RFP due March 11, 2026, estimated annual budget $600,000 for USDA Fresh Fruit and Vegetable Program with 18 elementary schools expanding to 20), Missouri (Rockwood R-VI School District, IFB due April 29, 2026, serving approximately 19,000 students), and broader state-level procurement in Georgia (State of Georgia IFB Fresh Produce IFB #4 2027-2026, due May 27, 2026, and State of Georgia food, supplies, and kitchen products RFP, due June 22, 2026). Contract structure typically features annual fixed or cost-plus pricing with price redetermination provisions, line-item award authority allowing multiple vendors per procurement, and compliance requirements including debarment certification, E-Verify verification, general liability insurance ($1 million to $2 million typical minimums), HACCP certification, and Buy American attestation; no set-asides for disadvantaged enterprises, small businesses, or minority-owned vendors are identified across the dataset.