UNSPSC 50596706: Dried Non GMO japanese yams

The variety of Non GMO yams known as Non GMO japanese yams 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 50596706 Dried Non GMO japanese yams is a Commodity code that nominally describes a single agricultural product line, but the recent state and local solicitations tagged under this code do not reflect dried yams or yam-specific procurement. Instead, the recent opportunities show broad food-service and grocery contracting across school nutrition programs, senior meal services, and institutional food supply. The actual work being solicited includes comprehensive grocery and fresh produce sourcing for school lunch programs, state-supported living facilities, senior congregate and home-delivered meal services, and child nutrition summer programs. Issuing bodies span school districts (Bridgeport Board of Education, Hancock County Board of Education, Pascagoula-Gautier School District), county governments and social services (Hillsborough County Board of County Commissioners in Florida, Texas Health and Human Services Commission), and state procurement (Georgia). These jurisdictions solicit food contracts repeatedly, and the scope typically includes 200+ line items spanning fresh produce, frozen goods, dairy, proteins, condiments, and packaged items rather than specialty dried vegetables. Contracts carry federal nutrition mandates (National School Lunch Program compliance, Healthy Hunger-Free Kids Act standards, Buy American domestic content requirements of 51%), require HACCP plans and health inspections, mandate blind taste testing, and impose strict delivery and ordering-system requirements.

Recent opportunities cluster in the South and mid-Atlantic regions, with visible activity in Connecticut (Bridgeport RFB for grocery items, due June 30, 2026), Texas (HHS El Paso State Supported Living Center IFB, due July 13, 2026 with a prior contract value of $1.5 million), Georgia (state-level food supplies RFB, due June 22, 2026), Florida (Hillsborough County ITB for senior meal preparation and delivery services, estimated $17.8 million over three years, due June 25, 2026), Mississippi (Pascagoula-Gautier School District child nutrition summer program IFB, due April 29, 2026), and Georgia again (Hancock County fresh produce IFB for school year 2026-27, due June 26, 2026). The code shows no relevant recent activity aligned to dried yams specifically; the mismatch suggests either a taxonomy miscoding or that the code is being used as a catch-all for broader food provisioning. Vendors pursuing these opportunities face firm fixed-price requirements, 30- to 45-day payment terms, substantial insurance and compliance obligations, and competitive pressure from established food-service providers already on state caterer lists.