UNSPSC 50535326: Dried non GMO flavorcrest peaches

The variety of non GMO peaches known as non GMO flavorcrest peaches that have been dried for preservation. This means that they are produced without the use of methods that genetically modify organisms by means that are not possible under natural conditions. Such methods include cell fusion, microencapsulation and macro-encapsulation, and recombinant DNA technology (including gene deletion, gene doubling, introducing a foreign gene, and changing the positions of genes when achieved by recombinant DNA technology).

Traditional methods of breeding, conjugation, fermentation, hybridization, in vitro fertilization, or tissue culture are considered to be non-GMO.

UNSPSC 50535326 Dried non-GMO Flavorcrest peaches is a Commodity code that nominally names a single dried-fruit product line, but state and local procurement activity under this code does not center on dried peaches—the recent opportunities show no solicitations specifically for that item. Instead, the code appears in broader food-service solicitations where produce and peach products would be embedded as line items within comprehensive grocery, fresh-produce, or meal-supply contracts. School districts dominate the recent opportunities, with solicitations from Hancock County Board of Education (Georgia), Bulloch County Board of Education (Georgia), Savannah-Chatham County Public School System (Georgia), Fairfax County Public Schools (Virginia), Meriden Public Schools (Connecticut), and Douglas County School System (Georgia). State agencies also appear—the State of Georgia, Texas Health and Human Services Commission, and City of Bridgeport Department of Public Purchases on behalf of Bridgeport Board of Education. Counties and municipalities round out the mix: Hillsborough County Board of County Commissioners (Florida) and City of Dallas (Texas). The actual purchasing under this code spans grocery delivery, fresh-produce supply, comprehensive food-service distribution, senior meal preparation, and school nutrition contracts where peaches and dried fruits would be minor components of much larger product portfolios.

School nutrition procurement dominates the geographic activity, with substantial recent opportunities in Georgia, Virginia, Connecticut, Florida, Texas, and Mississippi. Recent representative solicitations include Hancock County Board of Education's fresh-produce IFB (due June 26, 2026) covering over 200 produce line items; Bridgeport Board of Education's grocery-items IFB (due June 30, 2026) spanning over 1,100 line items with Buy American and nutrition-standards compliance; Douglas County School System's food-supply-and-distribution RFP (due February 18, 2026) with estimated annual expenditure of $9 million; and Meriden Public Schools' RFP for commercial groceries and USDA Foods (due February 25, 2026) with anticipated contract value of approximately $3.1 million. Non-school opportunities include Texas Health and Human Services Commission's food-and-consumable-products IFB for the El Paso State Supported Living Center (due July 13, 2026), Hillsborough County's senior-meal-preparation ITB (due June 25, 2026) valued at approximately $17.8 million over three years, and City of Dallas's boxed-and-bulk-meal catering RFCSP (due March 27, 2026). The code shows consistent activity across multiple states with no single geographic concentration, though Georgia school districts account for the largest share of recent postings.