Thank you
Premium Sponsors!

For more information about becoming a website sponsor, please click here.

By Lyndon Hawkins

The California Department of Pesticide Regulation wants schools to add two new "R's" to their traditional curriculum ­ "reduced-risk" pest management. DPR is encouraging the use of pest control methods that minimize risks to children and school staff, as well as protecting the environments.

In the 1990's, California's population boom placed tremendous pressure on existing school building facilities. Overcrowding and building maintenance problems, in turn, aggravated pest problems traditionally associated with schools, from cockroaches in the cafeteria to mold in the gym. But in today's school environment, students, their parents and guardians, and school staff are asking tough questions about pesticide safety. Administrators themselves often need an education on their district's approach to pest control and an understanding of pesticide terminology. Where can educators learn the ABC's of pest control and their options to reduce pesticide risks?

DPR Promotes Proactive Pest Control

Since 1980, various projects at the California Environmental Protection Agency's (Cal/EPA) Department of Pesticide Regulation (DPR) have focused on reducing risks associated with pesticide use in the urban community, including parks and schools. Much of this effort is aimed at facilitating integrated pest management (IPM) training for government staff and providing specialized information about pests and pesticides to workers and the general public. More recently, projects have been oriented to funding research and implementation of reduced-risked pest management practices and forming alliances with agriculture and nonagriculture groups, including schools. The purpose of these recent efforts is to facilitate the adoption of IPM strategies.

IPM policies have been established in several California school districts including Cloverdale, Fremont Unified, Fontana Unified, Los Angeles Unified, Pajaro Valley Unified, Placer Hills Union, San Diego Unified, and Templeton. A number of these districts have been recognized by DPR with "IPM Innovator" awards. Innovators have worked hard to reduce risks associated with pesticide use and have done so in creative ways.

DPR surveyed all school districts in 1994 to learn about IPM policies and programs in schools¹. About 10 percent of the respondents (52) had a pest management policy and program; whereas, 124 districts had a pest management program. It is likely that the number of IPM programs have increased since 1994.

Resources

When school staff are called upon to answer questions about pesticide use on their campus, specific information is frequently lacking. The designation and training of an IPM coordinator (someone knowledgeable about pest and pest control) to, in part, be available for discussions with parents to address their concerns about pesticides is necessary. Credibility in the eyes of administrators and the community for the IPM program is also important. The IPM coordinator also would oversee recordkeeping and quality control. For those school districts without a clear policy dealing with pesticides, a typical first response to concerned parents or others in the community might be to ban pesticides from the school campus. Later, after decision-makers have a better understanding about pesticides and IPM, a pesticide ban will likely have to be rewritten. Before taking drastic actions and enacting policy that will be difficult to follow, it is a good idea to look to those school districts that have already adopted an IPM program.

Information can also be obtained from the local county agricultural commissioner and University of California, Cooperative Extension. (Check the local telephone book under government listings.)

Finally, some structural pest control companies promote IPM by providing services including pest identification, pest monitoring, and the use of reduced-risk pest control practices. To ensure that they obtain quality IPM services, school districts should solicit companies based on a Request for Qualifications, select the best companies in the first group to bid on a Request for Proposals, and conduct an oral interview. For example, the Inland Empire Schools Insurance Authority in San Bernardino completed this task for 34 school districts. At their discretion, each district may choose one of two companies to conduct their IPM program. This process saved each district considerable time.

A quality assurance process which focuses on communication is also a key component of the contract with the service provider. Communication of all pest control activities by the company to someone at the site or facility is absolutely necessary. Information is retained at the facility and a copy is forwarded to the IPM program coordinator for review. The review focuses on two key questions: 1) was information properly communicated; and 2) did the company follow school policy and its intent? Clearly, administrators of any school that adopts an IPM program must have staff properly trained to review reports relating to pest control activities.

Successful IPM Programs

To set up a successful IPM program, most school districts have a policy approved by top management that establishes the following elements:

• The designation of someone in the role of IPM coordinator.

• A commitment by management to involve all staff, students, and parents in the program.

• An information and training program provided to everyone based on need.

• A record of all pest management activities, particularly pesticide use, kept at each school site and district headquarters.

• An annual evaluation of program results.

Administrators often ask about the costs associated with an IPM program. This is not easily answered because there is no baseline data for costs associated with a current program. However, if the pest control program is typical, then there may be a savings in costs for contracted services and an increase in costs associated with staff training. By establishing a baseline of costs for the categories listed below, an assessment can be completed and the IPM program tracked.

Costs for any pest management program are associated with five general categories:

1. Contracts for pest control services (typically monthly service) and for emergency or special services (the cost to respond to unusual pest problems such as skunks under a building, a swarm of bees, a black widow spider in a classroom, or bird mites biting students).

2. Cost for training staff to handle pesticides, including disinfectants (can be reported as number of people trained, their job classification, title of training course, and number of hours per year per employee).

3. Pesticide purchases per year (includes chemicals and devices such as disposable traps).

4. Special or periodic IPM projects, including annual or biennial inspections, purchase and/or installation of special pest control equipment (such as certain vacuum cleaners or air curtains), building fumigation, unusual pest problems (such as birds, or skunks), and construction for pest prevention.

5. Management costs as related to committee and management meetings, contract procedures, record keeping, liability insurance, development of training guides and materials, and conflict resolution.

The adoption of an IPM program can reduce costs and improve pest control. The IPM coordinator needs the support of management, staff, and the community. Providing information to constituents is critical to the success of the IPM program, which will hopefully lead to improved credibility and reduced-risk associated with pesticide use.

For further information contact:

Dr. Nan Gorder, Senior Environmental Research Scientist
Department of Pesticide Regulation Environmental Monitoring and Pest Management
830 K Street Sacramento, California 95814-3510
Phone: (916)-324-4100
Email: ngorder@cdpr.ca.gov