1 / 34

Eco2Go Program at OSU

Eco2Go Program at OSU. Expansion Feasibility Study by Tracy Beckmann, Dietetic Intern February 7, 2013. What is Eco2Go at OSU?. Reusable to-go container program Program offers Sustainable dining option Increases student satisfaction Potential to reduce disposables cost.

lola
Download Presentation

Eco2Go Program at OSU

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Eco2Go Program at OSU Expansion Feasibility Study by Tracy Beckmann, Dietetic Intern February 7, 2013

  2. What is Eco2Go at OSU? • Reusable to-go container program • Program offers • Sustainable dining option • Increases student satisfaction • Potential to reduce disposables cost

  3. How does it work?

  4. If token or container is lost… • Must “buy-back” into program

  5. How is the program doing? • Launched in fall 2012, Southside (Arnold) • 46 student “buy-ins” • Student Satisfaction Survey

  6. Southside dining hall • Site chosen due to central cashiers and continuous coverage • Marché style model is conducive to utilizing to-go containers • This set-up required minimal preparation to implement pilot program

  7. Pilot program goals • sell 40-50 containers within first 2 terms of program start • Increase student dining hall satisfaction • Decrease disposable “to-go” container expense • Determine pilot program sustainability

  8. Goals: participation • What we’ve learned • By end of 1st term • 46 containers sold • 516 discounts given • This is approx. 2.5% of Southside diners • Goal met

  9. Goal: Student satisfaction • Student Satisfaction data collected January 28-31, 2013at Southside • Surveyfocused on participants • feedback from non-participants also tracked • 10 question survey, email list • Each participant given thank-you gift

  10. Satisfaction Survey Results • 24% responded • Questioned about • “buy-in” cost • durability/size of container • ease of use: token exchange process • meal discount • number of uses • overall satisfaction with program • best things about it, what needs work

  11. Satisfaction Survey Results • “buy-in” cost, durability and size • among participants, NO ONE stated “too expensive” • 73% “fine” • 27% “very economical” • among non-participants, 17% stated “too expensive” • stated if price were $4-$5 they’d participate • ease of use • container/token exchange process • 91% agree it is a smooth process • remembering container/token • 91% “never” had trouble remembering token/container • meal discount • 91% think it is a good incentive

  12. Results, cont’d • Number of uses • 64% use container 6+ times/week • 27% use it 2-5 times/week • Overall satisfaction • all were satisfied: • 82% “very” • 18% “somewhat” • Best things • Reduces trash/plastic • Pays for itself • Needs work • Doesn’t work at all restaurants • Exchange process (some servers not familiar) • Sometimes bottom clasp breaks

  13. Results, cont’d • Conclusions: • participants utilize program because it aligns with their values • has increased student satisfaction among this specific population • difficulties able to be addressed as program continues for minimal cost • Increased server training • Continued improvement of container R&D • Expansion of program to other dining halls •  Goal met

  14. Goals: disposable expense • Per data tracking program • 516 Eco2Go uses fall term • = 516 disposables saved (about 2 cases) • At $0.23ea, cost savings was $119 •  Goal met

  15. Goal: pilot program sustainability • Costs incurred(fall term): • 180 containers purchased by OSU at $4.25ea = $765 • 516 discounts given: $103 in student savings • Dishwashing costs: approx. $0.08 per container = $41 • Total cost: approx. $900 • Note: Marketing and container return receptacle for pilot program paid for by Campus Recycling and Student Sustainability

  16. Pilot sustainability, cont’d • Current revenue/cost savings: • 46 participants paid $7 ea = $322 • 516 uses = 516 disposables saved ($0.23ea) = $119 • Campus Recycling and Campus Sustainability currently subsidizing program up to $200/mo = $459 (3 months/fall term) • Total cost savings: approx. $900 • Pilot program sustainable with subsidizing • Number of disposables saved can fluctuate depending how often participant utilizes container •  Goal met??

  17. Pilot sustainability, cont’d • Without subsidizing, pilot program is $459 short of being self-sustaining • Would require 130 student “buy-ins” • This is about 7.5% of Southside dining population

  18. Ways to increase participation • Increase marketing of Eco2Go • De-incentivize plastic/compostable “to-go” containers • Remove barriers to “buy-in” • Expand program to other dining halls

  19. Marketing strategies • Goal: increase “buy-in” • Continued partnership with Campus Recycling and Student Sustainability • UHDS promotions: • tabling • social media • a few containers given as prizes/awards to  awareness

  20. Marketing strategies • Example of similar program: • Reusable coffee cups • quite well-known • fairly mainstream • acceptable alternative to disposable cups

  21. De-incentivise plastic • Disposables cost • OSU cost is $0.23 per container • By offering disposables at no charge, we’re encouraging use • Implement $0.05 charge per disposable to encourage participation in program (consistent w/Corvallis-wide plastic bag fee) • This won’t cover cost, but will result in some students choosing Eco2Go or dining hall plates as alternatives • Personal observation at Southside • In a1 hour time period (lunch): • 157 diners • 82 used plates = 52% • 72 used plastic “to-go” containers = 46% • Over $16 lost to disposables • Several were thrown away in dining hall

  22. Something to consider: • disposable“to-go” containers make up the largest component of our trash (per OSU Campus Operations)

  23. Barriers to “buy-in” • Initial cost: • Offer reduced cost of container each term • $7 in fall • $6 in winter • $5 in spring • Requires cash • Allow purchase with Dining Plan (currently cannot use meal plan to purchase) • Expand program • Pilot program is limited in scope

  24. Expansion of Eco2Go • Request made (unsolicited) by several non-participants during student survey • Logical next-step of program • Increased participation • May aid in cost effectiveness

  25. Feasibility of expansion • Increased participation • Students living in non-Southside res halls say container not cost-effective for them • Add program to McNary and Marketplace West • Southside participation: 46 participants = 2.5% • Projected: • McNary: 2.5% = add’l 50 participants • Marketplace West: 2.5% = add’l 60 participants

  26. Expansion logistics: • Container/token exchange • Ozzi • $6,500 + shipping • Data line installation • $0.18 token cost • University of CO at Boulder was able to negotiate a free machine as part of a trial run in 2011 (Information obtained from April Strictland’s presentation/interview with Allison Lilly, University of Maryland, 2012)

  27. Expansion logistics, cont’d: • Simpler/less expensive to utilize locations with central cashier: • Clubhouse Café • Boardwalk Cafe • Fairly continuous coverage • Complies with Public Health Codes • Not accepting dirty dishes where food is prepared

  28. Expansion Costs • Containers • Need 50 more to have adequate surplus on hand: $250 • Marketing costs - variable • Dishwashing costs • Should be similar to Southside (approx. $0.08 per container; same as for plate) = $100/term • Need return receptacle for McNary • perhaps Campus Recycling would donate 1 more? • Grant money? (cost may be $100-$150; one-time cost) • Meal discounts – variable, estimate: $325 • Labor – costs not significantly increased

  29. Cost of expansion, cont’d • Total cost: approx. $825

  30. Potential help: • Applied for $5000 grant (Chris Anderson) • To be applied towards future container purchases • Replace broken containers • Purchase containers more suitable for pizza, soup • Ensure ample container surplus • Allows OSU to reduce student purchase price • Perhaps help with other expansion costs?

  31. Final thoughts • Offer ways to increase student dining satisfaction • Foster relationships with Campus Recycling and Student Sustainability • Increase opportunities to • Teach sustainability • Reduce waste • Decrease operational costs • Thoughtful expansion of Eco2Go may help us reach these goals

  32. Thank You • Questions?

  33. References • Anderson, Chris; Catering Manager, Oregon State University, personal interview Feb. 4, 2013. Chris.Anderson@oregonstate.edu • Sanders, Tara; Registered Dietitian, Oregon State University, personal interviews Jan-Feb 2013. Tara.Sanders@oregonstate.edu • Strictland, April; Dietetic Intern 2011-2012, Oregon State University. Reusable Takeout Containers Feasibility Study, March 1, 2012. • Student Satisfaction Survey, conducted at Southside (Arnold) Dining Hall Jan. 29-31, 2013, informal research project

More Related