Sharing Excess: Fighting Food Waste, One Avocado at a Time Custom Case Solution & Analysis

Evidence Brief: Sharing Excess Operations and Data

1. Financial Metrics

• Cost per meal produced: approximately 0.10 dollars.
• Total food rescued: over 10 million pounds since inception.
• Revenue sources: primarily grants, individual donations, and foundation support.
• Waste reduction savings: vendors at the Philadelphia Wholesale Produce Market (PWPM) avoid significant disposal fees by donating surplus.

2. Operational Facts

• Primary Hub: Philadelphia Wholesale Produce Market (PWPM), the largest fully enclosed refrigerated wholesale produce terminal in the world.
• Operating Schedule: 7 days a week, matching surplus food to community organizations in real time.
• Technology: Proprietary app used to track donations, logistics, and impact metrics.
• Staffing: Heavy reliance on a lean core team, student interns, and a network of volunteers for last mile delivery.
• Geography: Centered in Philadelphia with emerging pilots in other urban centers.

3. Stakeholder Positions

• Evan Ehlers (Founder): Focused on rapid scaling and the vision of eliminating food waste through technology and logistics.
• Victoria Wilson (COO): Focused on operational stability and the feasibility of national expansion.
• PWPM Vendors: Motivated by tax incentives and the elimination of organic waste disposal costs.
• Community Partners: Over 100 food pantries and community fridges that rely on Sharing Excess for fresh, perishable inventory.

4. Information Gaps

• Detailed breakdown of technology development costs versus logistics labor costs.
• Specific retention rates for volunteer drivers over a 12 month period.
• Comparative analysis of waste disposal fees in target expansion cities like New York or Chicago.
• Long term capital expenditure requirements for potential warehouse or fleet ownership.

Strategic Analysis: Scaling the Mission

1. Core Strategic Question

• How can Sharing Excess transition from a localized Philadelphia success to a national solution without incurring unsustainable capital costs or compromising food safety?
• Should the organization prioritize physical expansion into new wholesale markets or pivot to a technology licensing model?

2. Structural Analysis

The Jobs-to-be-Done framework reveals that for wholesale vendors, the job is not just charity; it is efficient inventory clearance and cost avoidance. For pantries, the job is securing high quality perishable goods that traditional food banks often fail to deliver due to slow supply chains. The current Value Chain relies on the unique density of the PWPM. Scaling requires replicating this density or providing the tools for others to manage it.

3. Strategic Options

• Option 1: Physical Market Expansion. Directly manage operations in five new major wholesale markets. This offers high control over food quality but requires significant hiring and local fundraising.
• Option 2: Technology-as-a-Service (TaaS). License the proprietary app to existing food banks and rescue organizations. This minimizes overhead but risks brand dilution and inconsistent execution by third parties.
• Option 3: The Franchise Model. Provide a toolkit including the app, brand, and operational SOPs to local chapters. This balances local ownership with central standards.

4. Preliminary Recommendation

Sharing Excess should pursue Option 3. Pure technology licensing fails because the software alone does not solve the physical logistics of the wholesale market floor. Direct expansion is too slow. A structured franchise model allows the organization to utilize local knowledge while maintaining a unified data platform for national donors.

Implementation Roadmap: Transitioning to the Franchise Model

1. Critical Path

• Months 1 to 3: Document every step of the PWPM operation into a repeatable playbook.
• Months 2 to 4: Upgrade the app to support multi-tenancy and regional administrative roles.
• Months 5 to 6: Launch a pilot franchise in a secondary market with a similar wholesale structure, such as Hunts Point in New York.
• Months 7 to 9: Evaluate pilot metrics and refine the support structure for local directors.

2. Key Constraints

• Cold Chain Integrity: Ensuring that perishable items remain safe during the handoff between volunteers and pantries.
• Wholesale Market Access: Securing trust and physical access permissions from market boards in new cities.
• Funding Divergence: Local chapters may compete with the national office for the same foundation grants.

3. Risk-Adjusted Implementation Strategy

The strategy assumes that wholesale markets in other cities operate with the same openness as Philadelphia. To mitigate the risk of market rejection, the organization will appoint a local Market Liaison for each new city who has pre-existing relationships with vendors. Contingency plans include a fallback to a pure technology support role if physical operations in a specific city prove too complex within the first six months.

Executive Review and BLUF

1. BLUF

Sharing Excess must evolve into a platform for food rescue rather than a logistics provider. The Philadelphia model succeeds due to the high density of the PWPM and low-cost student labor. These conditions are not universal. To scale, the organization should productize its operational knowledge and technology into a franchise package. This allows local leaders to handle the unique politics of their wholesale markets while Sharing Excess maintains the data and brand. Focus on the Hunts Point Market in New York as the first test case. If the model cannot survive the complexity of New York within nine months, the organization must pivot to a pure software play to avoid bankruptcy.

2. Dangerous Assumption

The most dangerous assumption is that the volunteer-led last mile delivery model is infinitely scalable. As the organization grows, the liability and reliability of uncompensated labor will likely force a transition to paid drivers, which would increase the cost per meal by at least 300 percent, potentially alienating donors who value the current efficiency metrics.

3. Unaddressed Risks

• Regulatory Crackdown: Increased scrutiny on food safety for redirected perishables could lead to a single illness shutting down national operations. Probability: Medium. Consequence: Fatal.
• Vendor Consolidation: If major wholesalers implement their own internal waste reduction software, the supply of free surplus food will diminish rapidly. Probability: High. Consequence: Material.

4. Unconsidered Alternative

The analysis overlooked a B2B consulting path. Instead of managing food, Sharing Excess could consult for major retailers on waste reduction, using their data to charge fees to corporations. This would create a sustainable revenue stream that does not depend on the volatility of grants or the availability of volunteers.

5. Verdict

APPROVED FOR LEADERSHIP REVIEW