IPM in Schools

1
IPM in Schools
National School IPM Steering Committee
2
History

• 1992-2011 More than 50 studies, surveys report
  unmanaged pest problems, improper pesticide use.
• School IPM 2015, Green and Gouge 2009.
• Inadequate legislative mandates in most states.
• In nearly half of 14,000 school districts in the
  US, anyone may apply a pesticide without any
  training or license.
• Low public awareness, appreciation.
• Less than 19 of households have heard of IPM
  (1989, 1995, 2006)
• Asthma is the number one cause of school absences
• Asthma causes more than 12.8 million missed
  school days per year, affecting 6 of children
  nationally and up to 28 in urban centers,
  National Institute of Health 2002, American Lung
  Association 2005.

3
School IPM 2015

• SCHOOL IPM 2015 A Strategic Plan for IPM in
  Schools in the US was developed to leverage
  funding support, then evolved into a guide to
  facilitate full implementation of verifiable
  high-level IPM in all public K-12 schools by
  2015.
• IPM reduced pest complaints and pesticide use by
  70 to 90 with no increase in long-term cost
  (Gouge et al., 2006).
• Start up funds from USDA, and EPA have been used
  to engage communities, identify priority issues,
  create IPM awareness, train staff, facilitate the
  implementation of IPM and evaluate impacts.
• We know how to do IPM in schools! We need
• Improved coordination across US
• Expanded network of implementers and support

4
Metrics since 2006
Number students and staff impacted by
demonstrations 611,499
Number impacted by coalitions 1,510,359
Average pesticide use reduction 69
Average pest complaint reduction 31
Over 75 meetings workshops More than 25
publications
Funding leveraged USD 3,301,763
Demonstration schools use proven approaches, such
as assessments, workshops, targeted newsletters
and pest monitoring to successfully demonstrate
IPM in their region and state. Self-expanding
coalitions use professionals already trained and
working in demonstration schools to recruit and
mentor professionals from other school systems in
their states.
5
Successful Models

• Examples from Washington State
• Demonstration projects
• Vancouver, Bellevue, South Kitsap and North
  Thurston School Districts
• IPM STAR Certification
• Coalition
• The Urban Pesticide Education Strategy Team
  (UPEST), formerly known as the Urban Pesticide
  Initiative, was formed in 1991 by EPA Region 10,
  state agencies and Washington State University
  Extension to jointly address urban pesticide
  issues.
• UPEST serves 1 million K-12 students in
  Washington.

6
Legislation by EPA Region
7
Legislation by EPA Region
8
Coordination National Steering Committee and

• Northeastern Working Group, 37 members
• www.nepmc.org/work_school.cfm led by
• Lynn Braband, Cornell University
• Kathleen Murray, Maine Dept. of Agriculture

• Western Working Group, 80 members
• http//cals.arizona.edu/apmc/westernschoolIPM.html
  led by
• Carrie Foss, Washington State University
• Dawn Gouge, University of Arizona
• Tim Stock, Oregon State University

• Southern Working Group, 48 members
• www.sripmc.org/schoolIPM/ led by
• Fudd Graham, Auburn University
• Janet Hurley, Texas AgriLife Extension

• This National School IPM Working Group includes
  over 221 professionals from across the country
  including
• Government officials.
• University scientists and Extension educators.
• Industry experts.
• Representatives from non-governmental
  organizations.
• National SIPM Working Group Priorities

• North Central Working Group, 56 members
• www.ipminstitute.org/NC_IPMIS_Working_Group/main.h
  tm led by
• Thomas Green, IPM Institute of North America
• Bob Stoddard, Envirosafe

9
School IPM Priorities

• Two sets of priorities
• Regional (four regions)
• National
• The national priorities were identified and
  ranked with input from 22 stakeholders active on
  the national level.
• These priorities are likely to be used by readers
  to assess or document worthiness of a specific
  project for funding or implementation
• Priorities are ranked according to the number of
  votes received during the ranking process

10
Regional Priorities
North Central Working Group http//www.ipminstitut
e.org/NC_IPMIS_Working_Group/NCWG20School20IPM2
0Priorities_total20tally_FINAL_122006.pdf North
eastern Working Group http//www.northeastipm.org/
work_schoolpriority.cfm Southern Working Group
(to be updated spring of 2012) http//www.sripmc.o
rg/schoolIPM/docs/Final_Priorities_document.pdf W
estern Working Group http//cals.arizona.edu/apmc/
docs/WesternRegionalSchoolIPMPriorities2011.pdf
11
National Management Priorities

1. Establish appropriately trained IPM coordinators
   in school systems to oversee day-to-day
   implementation of IPM policies and programs.
2. Partner with pest management professionals and
   organizations to create and implement effective,
   economical IPM service relationships.
3. Increase funding for management, coordination,
   education, research and implementation.
4. Identify, educate and activate appropriate
   school-related organizations to embed IPM into
   the organizational culture, including ongoing
   continuing education opportunities for members.
5. Create job-specific IPM guidelines for roles
   within schools, e.g., athletic field managers,
   custodians, maintenance staff, principals, etc.

12
National Educational Priorities

1. Provide education for custodial, maintenance,
   kitchen and grounds staff, physicians and school
   nurses.
2. Provide training for IPM coordinators to improve
   effectiveness in their role.
3. Provide education and advanced certification for
   pest management professionals, specifically
   addressing high-level IPM practices for school
   environments.
4. Develop Best Management Practices for schools to
   use with vendors of pest management services,
   design and construction, food and drink products,
   etc.
5. Educate policy makers, e.g., city councils and
   legislatures on need and benefits using case
   studies detailing success stories.

13
National Research Priorities

1. Economics of IPM (implementation and education)
   vs. conventional pest management.
2. IPM impacts on academic performance, e.g.,
   asthma, absenteeism, grades.
3. Evaluation of health hazards of pests and
   pesticides.
4. Development of tools and measures for IPM and
   continuous improvement.
5. Impact of building design and maintenance on pest
   management.

14
National Regulatory Priorities

1. Create and mandate minimum standards for school
   IPM at federal level, including applicator
   licensing and written IPM program, for example,
   through new legislation.
2. Increase funding for the enforcement of existing
   regulations including compliance by commercial
   pest management professionals and other
   businesses providing services to schools, and for
   evaluating pesticide-use records submitted to
   state-lead agencies in states with mandated
   reporting for compliance.
3. Create pesticide education program at national
   level to target schools, i.e. school boards,
   superintendents, facilities managers, etc.
4. Provide IPM input, including verifiable standards
   and methods of funding, into existing legislation
   related to schools.
5. Mandate high-level IPM training/licensing for
   pest management professionals.

15
Current Projects

• 2010 PRIA 2 Grant Objectives
• 50 reduction in asthma incidence and severity
  and 70 average reduction in pest complaints and
  pesticide risk for over 300 participating school
  districts
• Effective coalition partnerships in 15 states
  with high asthma rates.
• An effective coalition model including a written
  business case, operating protocol, memorandum of
  understanding and model funding proposal an
  on-line performance measure reporting system
  statistical analysis of performance and
  indicators of success and participating school
  district membership in PESP.
• An effective outreach and media campaign
  including pest press newsletters, presentations
  to multi-state or national audiences
  publications in national webinars
• Leverage funding of 200 of the EPA PRIA 2
  investment attributable to national working group
  actions.

16
School IPM Grants2008-2011

• US EPA Regions 1 - 3
• Educating the Next Generation of IPM Users
  Supporting and Promoting IPM Education in
  Schools, Kathy Murray (Region 1)
• Vermont School Coalition, Carol Westinghouse
  (Region 1)
• Northeast School IPM Implementation Working
  Group, Lynn Braband and Kathy Murray (Regions
  1-3)
• US EPA Region 4
• Update of Priorities of the Southern Region
  School IPM Working Group A New Beginning, Fudd
  Graham
• School IPM in Alabama, Henry Fadamiro and Fudd
  Graham
• Marketing IPM as Green School Technology for
  Southern Schools, Faith Oi, Janet Hurley, Fudd
  Graham, Rebecca Baldwin and Mike Merchant
• US EPA Region 5
• North Central Regional Working for IPM in
  Schools, Tom Green and Bob Stoddard (Regions 5
  and 7)
• Consultation Services Mini-Grant Project that
  will provide Pest Press documents for North
  Central Regional School Districts to support
  their IPM efforts, Allen Wilson
• Indiana Department of Human Services Asthma,
  Marc Lame
• US EPA Region 6
• Smith-Lever 3(d) Extension Integrated Pest
  Management, New Mexico State University
• School IPM Cost calculator expansion and
  marketing, Janet Hurley, Mike Merchant, Blake
  Bennett
• Leveraging Resources through the Southern
  Regional School IPM Working Group in Support of
  Children's Environmental Health, Dennis Ring,
  Dale Pollet, Fudd Graham and Janet Hurley
• Hosting an Integrated Pest Management Coordinator
  Statewide Symposium, Janet Hurley, Mike Merchant
  and Don Renchie

17
School IPM Grants2008-2011

• US EPA Region 7
• Nebraska EIPM CS Coordinator Project Proposal
  IPM in Schools Component, Clyde Ogg
• Show-Me School IPM Expanding Beyond the
  Demonstration Phase in MO Schools, Anastasia
  Becker
• US EPA Region 8
• IPM in Colorado Schools, Deborah Young
• Smith-Lever 3(d) Extension Integrated Pest
  Management, Utah State University, University of
  Wyoming and University of Idaho
• Implementation of IPM in Public Schools in
  Colorado, Assefa Gebre-Amlak
• Discretionary cooperative agreement, Montana
  Department of Ag, Dan Sullivan
• School IPM, Idaho State Department of
  Agriculture, Robert Hayes
• US EPA Region 9
• Western Region School IPM Implementation
  Assessment Working Group, Carrie Foss, Dawn Gouge
  and Tim Stock
• Arizona Tribal School IPM Change Agent Practicum,
  Susan Ratcliffe
• School Integrated Pest Management A Change Agent
  Practicum, Dawn Gouge
• US EPA Region 10
• Advancing School IPM in Oregon, Tim Stock
• School IPM Implementation, Carrie Foss
• Smith-Lever 3(d) Extension Integrated Pest
  Management, Oregon State University
• National
• High-level IPM in all US Schools by 2015, Tom
  Green

18
PENDING US EPA School IPM Grants

• The Midwest United States Consortium
  Expanding Verifiable Integrated Pest Management
  in Public Schools Jodi Perras
• The Rocky Mountain Consortium - Expanding
  Verifiable Integrated Pest Management in Public
  Schools Deborah Young and Ryan Davis
• Expanding School IPM in Wisconsin Using the
  Cooperative Extension Services Agency (CESA)
  Model - Jessica Schroeder
• Implementing a Verifiable School IPM Program in
  the Orleans Parish School System, a collaborative
  Partnership City of New Orleans Mosquito and
  Termite Board in collaboration with Tulane
  University, the LA Department of Public Health,
  LA Dept. of Ag and Forestry, with assistance from
  Texas AgriLife Extension Claudia Riegel
• The Pacific Northwest School IPM Consortium
  Expanding Verifiable Integrated Pest Management
  in Public Schools Carrie Foss and Tim Stock
• A School IPM Consortium Reaching One Million
  Children Faith Oi

19
Tools

• Established

• Emerging

• State-level legislation
• State-lead individual, sole responsibility is
  school IPM
• State/federal grants
• Schoolbugs listserv
• Train the trainer
• Fact sheets, manuals
• Pest Presses, timely IPM bulletins
• Monroe, Texas models, IPM STAR
• School district IPM policies, plans, contracts
  for services
• IPM curricula
• Regional working groups

• Regional school district coalitions
• Texas IPM Affiliates for Public Schools
• Professional org for school district IPM
  coordinators
• Green Shield Certified
• Business Case for School IPM
• Reducing Your Childs Asthma using IPM
• IPM Voice, www.ipmvoice.org

www.ipminstitute.org/school_ipm_2015/resources.htm

20
Opportunities to Engage

• Ways to get involved now
• Subscribe to the monthly School IPM 2015
  Newsletter to learn how to reduce pesticide use
  and pest complaints by more than 70 with no long
  term increase in costs. Signing up is easy.
  Email your name and contact information to
• newsletter_at_schoolipm2015.com
• Join the national Schoolbugs email listserv.

• Ways to facilitate school IPM efforts (for little
  or no cost)
• Join the mailing list of your regional school
  IPM working group
• Provide regional school IPM working groups with
  a monthly conference call line
• Partner with regional working groups on program
  planning, including ranking priorities
• As appropriate, provide letters of support for
  state, regional national SIPM projects
• Report internal accomplishments and success to
  your regional school IPM working group and
  national steering committee representatives
• Report and promote work group impacts within EPA
  and other agencies
• Recruit IPM practitioners onto state and federal
  committees and work groups
• Efficient movement of funds and in-kind
  contributions through state lead agency partners

21
Next Steps

• Submit revised School IPM 2015 to USDA
• Implement new EPA SIPM grants
• Case study article on state legislation, model
  legislation.
• Mid-term evaluation of progress towards goal of
  high-level IPM in all US public schools by 2015.
  Includes on-line survey of all school districts.
• Hold SIPM sessions at the 7th International IPM
  Symposium.
• Partner with you!

Every child has the right to realize their
highest potential
22
Thank you to our funders
More than 18 school IPM projects nationwide are
currently supported by US EPA, US EPA
Regions USDA NIFA Regional IPM Centers USDA
Smith-Lever Grant Center for Disease Control and
Prevention National Environmental Health
Association
CDC