making sure your efforts aren’t for naught:

1

Making Sure Your Efforts Aren’t For Naught:

Tools for sustaining School IPM programs

Marc L. Lame, Ph.D.Indiana University, School of Public and Environmental Affairs

2 Dr. Marc Lame, Indiana University

PREFACE: Where Am I Coming From?• As an former CE IPM

Specialist (outstanding in my field?)

• As a current implementer of IPM

• As an ex-environmental Regulator

• As an entomologist

3Dr. Marc Lame, Indiana University

THREE “ADOPTING” AUDIENCES

1. Funders & Political supporters (EPA, USDA…)

2. Traditional Change Agent Community - Extension

3. The School Community

SCHOOL INTEGRATED PEST MANAGEMENT AT US EPA

International IPM Symposium Awards Ceremony; Sherry Glick, Award of Recognition for School IPM

Kathy Seikel Jim Boland Frank Ellis

Don Baumgartner

Darlene Dinkins

Keith Matthews

Mike McDavit

Lee Tanner

Ralph Wright

Steve Bradbury

Jim Jones

Kathleen Knox

Kristi Kubista Brian Davidson

Sherry Glick Janet Andersen

Deborah Hartman Mary Grisier

Jaslyn Dobrahner

Steve Owens Bill Currie

Raderrio Wilkins

5

Pest Control In The School Environment: Adopting Integrated Pest Management – 1992(3)

Ralph Wright & Bill Currie EPA 735-F-93-012 (controversial)

Information For School Districts

OVER 19 YEARS, 18 STATES AND 7 EPA REGIONS:

• 71% Reduction in pesticide applications

• 78% Reduction in pest complaints

7

Change Agent:“…is an individual who influences clients’ innovation-decision in a direction deemed desirable by a change agency.”

(Rogers, 1983)


THE CHANGE AGENT – SEQUENCE OF ROLES1. Develop a need for change2. Establish an information exchange

relationship3. Diagnose problems4. Create an intent to change in the client5. Translate an intent into action6. Stabilize adoption and prevent

discontinuance7. Achieve a terminal relationship(Rogers, 1983)


CHANGE AGENT SUCCESS FACTORS1. Effort2. Client orientation3. Compatibility with clients’

needs4. Change agent empathy(Rogers, 1983)

IMPLEMENTATION CONFIRMATIONAWARENESS PERSUASION DECISION

Adoption

Rejection

THE INNOVATION/DECISION PROCESS MODEL (ROGERS 1983)


MODELS OF COMMUNICATION FLOWSHypodermic Needle Model -“Mass media had direct, immediate, and powerful effects on mass audience.” • “Injecting” information directly into the social

system ex. CES Fact Sheets, Web Sites? Webinars? Propaganda, Madison Avenue advertising

• Ignored the role of opinion leaders.

Two Step Flow – • Step one – transfer of INFORMATION from

media to opinion leaders• Step two – spread of interpersonal

INFLUENCE from opinion leaders to their followers

• Horizontal diffusion - a combination of opinion leaders and peers

12

Dr. Marc Lame, Indiana University

Critical Mass In Diffusion: The Point After Which Further Diffusion Becomes Self-sustaining

•Occurs at the point at which enough individuals in a system have adopted an innovation so that the innovation’s further rate of adoption becomes self-sustaining

•Threshold occurs at the individual level of analysis , whereas the critical mass operates a the system level

13


Strategies For Reaching Critical Mass?

1. Targeting highly respected individuals in a system’s hierarchy for initial adoption

2. Individual perceptions of the innovation can be shaped, …inevitable, desirable or that critical mass has already occurred…everyone else is doing it

3. Introduce the innovation to more innovative individual

4. Incentives…

Dr. Marc L. Lame, IU-School of Public and Environmental Affairs 14

Reasons For Successful SIPM Implementation

• Administrative commitment based on “it’s the right thing to do”

• Designated authority to IPM coordinator

• Empower the school community through education

• Technical confidence provided by training AND outreach resources

• Confirmation to the community that right decision was made ($$, pests, risk reduction)

• More confirmation through recognition (PR/awards)

DISCONTINUANCE• “…is a decision to reject an innovation after it has previously been adopted.”

(Rogers, 1983)• Normally occurs in the

implementation phase – need to have a real implementation program!

Dr. Marc L. Lame, IU-School of Public and Environmental Affairs 16

REASONS FOR FAILED IMPLEMENTATION • “Uneducated”

mandates (more on their plates – money, logic, motivation)

• Not understanding the technical situation

• Not understanding the economic situation

• Not understanding the audiences

• Over reliance on written material

• Too much paper work

• Those (internal or external) responsible for changing behavior have no authority

• • ….educational

competence• ….Motivation

17


8 Tools Change Agents Should Use For Sustaining School IPM Programs:1. A message of Demand Side IPM2. Environmental Health & Safety

Committees (EHS)3. Pest Presses4. PMP Partner with job specs5. Area-wide Coalitions6. Recognition Program7. Willingness to GET DIRTY!8. Non-pesticide-centric Legislation

18

Three overarching principles can be identified: (1)pesticide exposures are common and cause both

acute and chronic effects;

(2) pediatricians need to be knowledgeable in pesticide identification, counseling, and management; and

(3) governmental actions to improve pesticide safety are needed.

Why should they Demand IPM? POLICY STATEMENT:

Pesticide Exposure in Children PEDIATRICS Volume 130, Number 6, December 2012 (33 referenced papers)

19

The Best Way To Protect Our School Community From These Risks Is By Implementing IPM -

But, They Gotta

want it more

than we do!

20Dr. Marc Lame, Indiana

University

A MESSAGE OF DEMAND SIDE IPM

monitoring, prevention, treatment(identification, biology, technology)

SAFEENVIRONMENT

Cultural

Exclusion

Chemical

EDUCATION:

Sanitation

Mechanical

= =

Fact: the vast majority of pest management activities are conducted by food service, administrative and building maintenance professionals….NOT pesticide applicators


IMPLEMENTERS MUST DEMONSTRATE IPM IS COMPATIBLE WITH THE DISTRICT’S CURRENT OPERATIONS• Doing what you do now---just think pests!!!

Security = monitoringEnergy conservation = exclusionSanitation = nothing to eatClutter control = no place to live

Food Water Shelter

22

Recognizing IPM As A Pollution Prevention Innovation:

Source Reduction For Pesticides Is Preventing Pests From Triggering Pesticide Applications

F Don’t attract PestsF Keep them outF Get rid of them, if you are sure

you have them with the safest,

most effective method(s)

23

Reasons for Environmental Health & Safety Committees (EHS) -

Are to utilize the experience, expertise and influence of leaders in your school community to provide advice, political support and continuity to the corporation’s environmental program staff.


THE PEST PRESS – Best If Hard Copy – They Have To Search For It!

• Over time defines IPM and what it means to the school community

• addresses the pest of the month, why it is attracted to our school, how to prevent it from infesting our school, and control upon infestation

• the status of your IPM program, • recognize folks that are helping make it work and • short “bug facts” on simple biology insects in

general • The key to this newsletter seems to be that

whatever information on pest management is given, it relates to what is going on in the readers home.

25

PMP Partner With Job Specs Partner: an entity

who wants to work with you to reach SHARED goals

Accountability• Shared responsibility• QA/QC• Communication

required

Co-production• Resource leverage• Empowerment• Partnership• Leadership

Area-wide Coalitions – Two step flowing

27

Recognition Programs - To Confirm To The Adopting Unit That They Made The Right Decision – Reaching Critical Mass!

WILLINGNESS TO GET DIRTY – Credible Hand Holding!


Non-pesticide-centric Legislation

– Rules that address conducive conditions– Regulated by Health Departments?

Dr. Marc Lame, Indiana University 30

WHERE DO WE GO FROM HERE?

OCSPP OCHPIEO

NPMA

State HDs

Ag IPMers to help impl.

“ONE EPA FOR KIDS” STRUCTURAL MODEL - LOGIC = AGENCY INFRASTRUCTURE DEVELOPMENT FOR IMPLEMENTATION AND CHILD INSTITUTION INFRASTRUCTURE DEVELOPMENT FOR “CASCADING” ADOPTION OF POLLUTION PREVENTION INNOVATIONS

Regional School

IPM

Regional Tribal

Programs

Regional Children’s

Health Protection

objective 1Train regional IPM

(curriculum=group meet +One-on-one)

CDC

NEHA

CascadingMedia

Reduction(pesticide

s,other Toxics,IAQ,

Obesity?)

Serial Audiences

(schools,Child care,housing,

residential)

GOAL = verifiable IPM in US schools (serially child care, housing, etc) children’s env. Health protection + cost effective mgt. for institutions

Measurements = adoption of tfs, i-pestmanager, ipm coordinator/planOutcomes = risk reduction + cost reduction

Objective 2 = develop “team one epa for kids” in each regionObjective 3 = develop Change Agent Core

Objective 4 = strategic implementation of IPM to the audience

Questions And Comments

32


The End

making sure your efforts aren’t for naught:

Documents

marc lame

school of public

school environment

school districts ipmiaq

indiana universitythree

indiana universitypreface

change agency

role of opinion leaders