Saving Dollars and Making Sense:
Keeping Bugs	Out
School officials, teachers and parents alike want a healthy school environment. Schools face many
challenges, but keeping kids healthy while looking for opportunities to save money is a priority for
everyone. In school settings, children face risks arising from pests and exposure to pesticides. They may
contract diseases vectored by biting insects; suffer asthma attacks from allergens or triggers from cockroach and
rodent infestations; and be unnecessarily exposed to pests and pesticides in schools.
Because protecting children's health is a top priority, EPA recommends schools use Integrated Pest Management
(IPM) - a Smart, Sensible, and Sustainable approach to pest control. Smart because IPM creates a safer and
healthier learning environment by managing pests and reducing children's exposure to pests and pesticides.
Sensible since practical strategies are used to reduce sources of food, water, and shelter for pests in school
buildings and grounds. Sustainable because the emphasis is on prevention that makes it an economically
advantageous approach.
Montgomery County (Maryland) Public Schools" adopted an IPM program in 1985 and reduced
pesticide applications from 5,000 to 600 over a 3 year period (Forbes 1991).
Kyrene (Arizona) School District reduced pesticide applications from 12 to 1 per year in three
schools by adopting IPM (Gouge el til. 2006).
Initially implemented in ten school districts, the Monroe Model for school IPM dramatically
reduced pesticide applications with eight of ten school districts showing a >50% reduction in
pesticide applications and five of eight districts above an 80% reduction (Gouge el at. 2006).
i Money Savings
An IPM approach can provide pest control with no long-term increase in costs (Gouge et cil.,
2006).
Montgomery County (Maryland) Public Schools initial investment of $9,300 in an IPM program
which included monitoring practices, supplies and training for staff members saved the district
$17,100 per year (Forbes 1991).
Installing door sweeps and ensuring that windows and doors close tightly excludes pests and
improves energy efficiency.
The Monroe County (Indiana) Community School Corporation realized a $6,000 annual savings by
hiring an IPM coordinator to provide their pest management services (Safer Pest Control Project
1998).
In New York, Susquehanna Valley Central School District saved $1,000 per year using IPM while
continuing to maintain attractive facilities (Safer Pest Control Project 1998).
Anne Arundel County (Maryland) School District reduced its annual pest control costs from
$46,000 to $14,000 (Washington State Department of Ecology 1999).
The Union County (North Carolina) School District saved $18,000 in fire ant treatments alone
with the implementation of an IPM program in 2002 (North Carolina Public School Maintenance
Association 2011).
United States
Environmental Protection
Agency
Fewer Pests
Benefits of IPM
Auburn (Alabama) City Schools reduced pest complaints by 90% using IPM (Gouge et cd. 2006).
I Fewer Pesticide Applications

-------
Improved Environmental Health
IPM can eliminate asthma triggers from cockroaches and other sources for the estimated 13
percent of U.S. children that have asthma.
Asthma accounts for more than 12 missed school days a year, making it the leading cause of
school absenteeism. In the Northeast Independent School District in Texas, a 1% increase
in average daily attendance is worth $3.4 million to the school district. The district's asthma
reduction program, that includes IPM, has earned the district millions of dollars each year (Rhodes
2011).
To learn more about school IPM and the benefits of IPM, visit: www.epa.gov/pestwise/ipminschools. A more
extensive examination of the benefits of IPM to schools can be found in The Business Case for Integrated Pest
Management in Schools: Cutting Costs and Increasing Benefits (Chambers etal. 2011).
References
Chambers, K, T. Green, D. Gouge, J. Hurley, T. Stock, Z. Bruns, M. Shour, C. Foss, F. Graham, K. Murray, L.
Braband, S. Glick, and M. Anderson. 2011. The Business Case for Integrated Pest Management in Schools:
Cutting Costs and Increasing Benefits. The IPM Institute of North America, Inc. 8 pp. www.ipminstitute .org/
school_ipm_2015/ipm_business_case.pdf.
Forbes, W. 1991. From Spray Tanks to Caulk Guns: Successful School IPM in Montgomery County, MD. J.
Pesticide Reform 10(4): 9-11.
Gouge, DPI., M. L. Lame and J. L. Snyder. 2006. Use of an implementation model and diffusion process for
establishing Integrated Pest Management in Arizona schools. American Entomologist 2006: 190-196.
North Carolina Public School Maintenance Association. 2011. School IPM: Good community support means
er pest problems. The Maintenance Beacon. 48(7): 2-3.
Rhodes, D. 2011. Implementing Tailored Environmental Interventions - Maximizing Effectiveness of your
Community Asthma Care System. National Asthma Forum. Washington, DC. Presented on 9 June 2011.
Safer Pest Control Project. 1998. Cost of IPM in Schools. Chicago, IL. 4 pp
Washington State Department of Ecology. 1999. Calculating the True
No. 99-433. www.ecy.wa.gov/pubs/99433.pdf.
Costs of Pest Control. Publication

-------