Strategies To Increase Ohio Schools' Compliance to the 'Pesticide Use In Schools' Mandate And School IPM Standards

Barbara Bloetscher; Jennifer Andon, David J. Shetlar, Joanne Kick-Raack, Dept. Entomology, The Ohio State University

Average Seminar Attendees by Title

30%

1%

4% 3% 3%59%

Maint. Director

Cust/grounds

BOH/Nurse

PMP

Govt

Admin

Introduction

In the fall of 2009, the Ohio Department of Agriculture (ODA) approved two rules relating to pesticide use in schools as a result of the recall of Jarod’s Law, which was written by the Ohio Department of Health to make the school environment safer for children. OAC 901-5-11-15 (Rule 15) regulates the use of pesticides while school is in session. It also mandates that each school district appoint a contact person to maintain application records, and each school must have a notification policy to notify parents and staff (who requested to be notified) before an inspection or application is made. The second rule, OAC 901-5-11-14 (Rule 14) IPM Standard was established as a consumer protection standard to prevent false claims of using IPM.

Materials and Methods

The ODA had sent three letters to the schools informing them of the rules, however the letters did not initiate a response. OSU Extension Entomology cooperated with ODA to obtain a grant through the EPA Region 5 to notify the schools about the rules and encourage them to use IPM. A team consisting of Joanne, David Shetlar, Barbara and Jennifer was formed to hold seminars around Ohio and explain the rules as well as IPM practices. Allen Wilson of Safe Zone IPM Consultation Services was also enlisted to talk about a successful School IPM Program in Westerville City Schools (Central Ohio).

After a meeting with stakeholders comprised of representatives from the Ohio School Board Assoc. ODA, Ohio EPA, Ohio Dept of Health, school administrators, facility managers, and pest management companies, a plan was designed to contact the schools. An IPM website (http://bugs.osu.edu/schoolipm) with links and information was created as well as a brochure which summarized Rule 15.

Due to a low response at our initial seminar held in Dayton (25), a list of superintendents was obtained from the Ohio Board of Education’s website. An updated letter from ODA informing the schools of the rules was enclosed in an ODA envelope with the OSU School IPM brochure. This resulted in a tremendous number of phone calls and emails. Schools were informed of upcoming seminars, the most central of which was in Columbus Ohio.

Seventy-five people registered for the Columbus seminar and the following seminars held in Sidney (26-rural) and Toledo (42-urban) were also successful. After the initial deluge of calls, we contacted each school district individually regarding the rule and upcoming seminars.

Another tactic which we found to be successful was to send an email to the superintendents, principals, and facility manager in each district notifying them of upcoming seminars. We also had assistance in promoting the seminars from Ohio School Board Association, Buckeye Association of School Administrators (BASA), Ohio Department of Education and Ohio State Extension. A pre-test and post-test was given to attendees at the last four seminars to determine their knowledge of the two rules. Several key questions on the rules were commonly missed by the majority of the attendees in the pre-test.

Abstract

The Ohio State University, Extension Entomology was awarded an EPA grant to notify schools about two new rules that were passed in 2009 regarding pesticide use in schools and integrated pest management (IPM). The grant had two goals: to help the schools comply with Rule 15 “Pesticide Use in Schools” and to encourage schools to implement an IPM program.

The OSU Team, consisting of Joanne Kick-Raack (Pesticide Safety Education Program), Dr. David Shetlar, OSU Extension Landscape Entomologist, Barbara Bloetscher and Jennifer Andon soon discovered that informing the many levels of administration, custodians, building superintendents and other affiliated school groups about the rule was difficult enough; encouraging them to implement IPM was even more challenging as IPM is not mandated in Ohio! Eight seminars were held around Ohio to apprise the schools of these rules and explain how to implement IPM techniques to manage common pests in schools.

To reach the appropriate personnel in Ohio schools, we learned that multiple tactics are necessary including calling the schools and sending emails to school personnel, adding seminar dates to school board websites and enlisting the Board of Education to send publicity statements to principals and superintendents. Of the 1035 school districts in Ohio, 265 people attended our seminars, representing 177 school districts. Most were unaware of the rules that were passed two years prior. Schools from 67 of the 88 counties in Ohio attended the seminars.

Summary

From June 2010 to September 2011, 177 Ohio school districts were represented at our seminars with a total of 265 attendees. Schools from 67 of the 88 counties in Ohio attended the seminars.

Based on our evaluation of the pre-test and post-test, most were unaware of the rules that were passed two years prior. The question that was missed the most on the Pre-test was if the IPM Standard was mandatory in Ohio. The overall average score increased from 74% correct on the Pre-test to 87% on the Post-test.

Of the various methods attempted to contact schools, the combination of the ODA letter with the OSU brochure resulted in the highest number of responses. We found that holding the seminars during the early summer when the school employees were still available resulted in the highest attendance.

Several schools expressed an interest in pursuing School IPM using the IPM Standard which will be the thrust of our ongoing work.

Figure 1- Map of Ohio showing locations of seminars (*) and counties represented (red). Four locations were rural and four were in urban areas.

Figure 2- Chart showing the percentage of each job title of attendees at the seminars.