Environmental Health Surveillance Report:

Pesticides and Schools

Overview

Background

Project description

Data and analysis

Communication and dissemination

Timeline/Next steps

Question/Discussion

Background

Background

CDC requires descriptive analyses of tracking data to assess spatial and temporal trends examine state and local environmental health

issues inform public health activities and policy

CEHTP proposed annual State of Environmental Health report

Decision to focus on single topic

4

Project Description

Project Description6

Assess poundage and types of agricultural pesticides applied near schools implications for pesticide buffers near schools demonstrate linkage utilizing portal data

Increase resolution using school boundaries, not geocoded points

Release in coordination with partner groups near back-to-school time

Partners

Californians for Pesticide Reform Pesticide Action Network Center for Environmental Health

7

Data and Analysis

County selection9

Top quartile of counties by total agricultural pesticides applied for 2010 Top 15 counties 85% of total

agricultural pesticides applied statewide (using chemical pounds)

CountyLbs chemical applied

Rank

FRESNO 27,777,500 1KERN 21,454,117 2TULARE 8,867,756 3SAN JOAQUIN 8,687,822 4MADERA 8,582,823 5MONTEREY 8,203,711 6MERCED 7,180,641 7VENTURA 6,495,235 8KINGS 6,105,752 9STANISLAUS 5,072,403 10IMPERIAL 4,163,596 11SANTA BARBARA 4,109,958 12SACRAMENTO 3,291,915 13SAN LUIS OBISPO 2,570,651 14YOLO 2,496,139 15

School boundaries10

Using boundaries increases accuracy & resolution of where kids learn and play Geocoded points are occasionally erroneous Parcel boundaries incorporate buildings, playgrounds,

and fields

1.2 miles

Geocoded point

Demographic data11

Report demographic data for top exposed schools & perform disparity analysis Department of Education has data on ethnicity by

school Data on free/reduced price lunch eligibility as a

proxy for income

Compare to county and statewide school profiles for ethnicity and lunch eligibility

Pesticide groupings

Pesticides grouped based on type of pesticides

6 categories/groupings Prop 65 “Known to Cause Reproductive Toxicity” US EPA B2 Carcinogens OR on the State’s Prop

65 “Known to Cause Cancer” Cholinesterase Inhibiting Pesticides Toxic Air Contaminants Fumigants Emerging pesticides of concern

12

Data Linkage

Buffer schools at ¼, ½, & 1 mile

Using pesticide tool, link 2010 agricultural applications by chemical poundage to school buffers

For each pesticide grouping, report on top schools By pounds applied By county

13

Communication and Dissemination

Report

Organize by pesticide group Background on pesticide group Top 5 counties with highest percentage of schools exposed Top 10-20 schools by poundage for those counties Compare students populations from exposed/non-exposed

schools Highlights

Time trends by month Crops Specific location or region Specific schools

Links to Methods description on CEHTP website Information about pesticides, prevention, initiatives on partner

websites

15

Dissemination

Online report, limited printed copies

Executive summary, press releases in Spanish

Work with CDPH Office of Public Affairs

Partner activities Press releases Integration into ongoing activities Outreach to communities

16

Timeline/Next Steps

Timeline

March: data cleaning and analysis

April: complete analysis

May: interpret results, develop first draft of report

June: complete final report draft

July: report approved, plan dissemination strategy

August: dissemination

18

Potential future projects

Web-based query Search by school, district, county

Complete school boundary layer for entire State Would be time intensive, but very powerful

data set

No funding for these projects

19

Questions and Discussion

Discussion Questions 21

What are policy implications for this work?

Are there ways to report the data to increase its utility?

Do you have other ideas for topical environmental health surveillance reports?