Schools across America have been scrambling this month to make decisions about whether to bring students back to the classroom for the fall. Instructional models range from full-time in-person instruction to hybrid in-person/online to online only.
If you are an administrator, educator, school board member, teacher, or parent, you’ve been talking (and hearing) a lot about risk mitigation options that include social distancing, mask wearing, lower density spaces, plexiglass partitions, and deep cleaning.
But there’s one highly effective mitigation factor – indoor air quality – that often is missed or minimized in these conversations. Why? Maybe because it’s invisible.
The risk factors we see are the obvious ones – door handles, keyboards, desks, smartphones, other people. Every time we leave our homes, we make decisions about what to touch (or not), or how close to stand to each person we see. We tend to forget the risk factors we don’t see, like the air around us.
But neglecting indoor air quality, especially in schools, is a potentially fatal mistake.
Indoor air quality influences the health, comfort, and productivity of every individual in a school building. It is one of the most important and often-overlooked factors in mitigating COVID-19 risk. And it also happens to be extensively researched and linked to lowered risk levels for disease transmission and improved health, wellness, and cognitive performance. Consider:
Lower ventilation rates have been linked to more missed school days caused by respiratory infections.[i]
Students’ attention processes are significantly slower in classrooms with high CO2 levels and low ventilation rates. Researchers observed a 5% decrement in “power of attention” in poorly ventilated classrooms. Students have been observed to experience greater fatigue, impaired attention span, and loss of concentration.[ii]
In a study of 100 U.S. elementary classrooms, positive associations were observed between ventilation rates and performance on standardized tests in math and reading, with researchers estimating that for each single unit increase in ventilation rate (1-L/s/p) student scores rose an average of 2.9% and 2.7% in math and reading, respectively.[iii]
By the time a student graduates from high school, she or he has spent 15,600 hours inside a school, an amount of time second only to that spent at home.[iv] Yet many schools are under ventilated, and more than 25 million children – nearly 50% of America’s students – attend schools that have not yet adopted an Internal Environmental Quality (IEQ) management plan, a strategy used to identify and remediate poor air quality in schools.[v]
It’s time for schools and communities to get smart on the issue of indoor air quality in schools, to seek out the invisible and see that any re-opening plan must include the answers to the following questions.
1. How well is our school’s ventilation system currently performing and what is the level of indoor air quality (IAQ) now?
Like any public building, schools are required by law to bring in fresh air from the outside. This performance standard is set by The American Society of Heating, Refrigerating and Air-Conditioning Engineers (ASHRAE).
The ASHRAE minimum requirement is 15 cfm (cubic feet per minute) per person and .12 cfm per square foot. If you don’t know whether your school is meeting these requirements, you should request that your HVAC system be retro-commissioned. Retro-commissioning is a process that evaluates your building’s HVAC system to see if it is operating correctly and to the specifications of its original design. This will tell you how your system is performing currently and if not, how to address it by adjusting parameters such as ventilation rates, temperature and humidity set points, and training staff on major systems and procedures. Check with your building facility manager about contacting a retro-commissioning agent or a mechanical contractor to have this work performed.
Even if your building meets the ASHRAE standard for ventilation, keep in mind that these levels are a minimum and were developed for non-pandemic conditions. To mitigate risk during a pandemic, you want to decrease airborne pollutants and pathogens, so it is necessary to go above and beyond these standards and bring in more fresh air while improving air filtration. There are several techniques that can be used, many of which are simple and inexpensive. A helpful summary can be found at Harvard’s Schools for Health.
Bottom line: You can’t improve what you don’t measure. Measuring the performance of the system will identify areas that need improvement.
2. How will indoor air quality (IAQ) be monitored and managed going forward?
Once the building’s HVAC performance is tested and steps taken to improve ventilation and filtration, it’s critical to monitor indoor air quality. Sudden spikes in carbon dioxide, temperature and humidity or volatile organic compounds can happen without warning but can be easy to remedy when caught early. Technology has come a long way and there are affordable cloud-based systems that allow schools to maintain a real-time awareness and hands-on management of their indoor air quality. From simple, low-cost single-room monitors and sensors to an accredited air quality program such as RESET, monitoring can and should be a part of every back-to-school plan.
The sobering reality is that 90% of schools are underventilated and do not meet minimum acceptable standards.[vi] By implementing even a simple system, teachers, administration and facilities managers can be empowered to actively manage and improve their HVAC system by making their own onsite adjustments or reaching out to mechanical contractors to remediate more complex issues.
Bottom line: Real time monitoring is critical to ensuring good indoor air quality in the short - and long-term. For more information, see the EPA’s Indoor Air Quality Tools for Schools Reference Guide
3. What does frequent “deep cleaning” mean for IAQ and health?
Deep cleaning of public and shared spaces has garnered a lot of attention and shockingly few questions. Caustic cleaning chemicals can irritate and even harm sensitive lungs, which is of special concern for children (and teachers) who suffer from asthma or allergies. Schools need to be careful that they are not solving one problem (killing viruses and germs) only to create another (chemical exposure). Well-intentioned leadership may not realize that by ramping up cleaning frequency they can introduce significant additional toxic loads to the indoor air. This means that they cannot continue to ventilate their buildings the ‘old way’ or they risk significantly worsening indoor air quality. In spaces that are being frequently cleaned with chemical substances, it’s absolutely essential to monitor total volatile organic compounds (TVOC) to ensure good indoor air quality is maintained between deep cleanings. Additionally, schools should not shut off their HVAC system during non-operating hours if they want to manage indoor air pollution that can be created by cleaning products. Otherwise, asthma attacks and lung irritation will increase susceptibility to respiratory infections, along with longer-term toxic exposure concerns.
What should you look for? Chemicals of concern for respiratory effects are corrosive chemicals such as strong acids and bases (including ammonia and hypochlorite) and quaternary ammonium compounds (QACs).
In the United States there are more than 80,000 chemicals used in commerce. Only 300 have been evaluated for health and safety. Since 1976, the EPA has banned 4 new toxic chemicals out of a total of more than 80,000. It is unknown how many more have serious and significant effects on health.[vii]
Bottom line: Because your school is planning to increase cleanings and add or change chemical cleaners, do your due diligence and increase air ventilation and filtration – along with real time monitoring – to be sure to offset any negative impact on air quality.
4. How can monitoring indoor air quality become an experiential, meaningful learning opportunity for students?
Here’s the good news. Rarely has there ever been such a ready-made, real-life opportunity to teach and engage students about environmental science, chemistry, and biology as it relates to air quality, health, and wellness.
Using age-appropriate levels and curricula, students could be involved in the process of choosing, installing, monitoring, and analyzing sensor and system data for their schools. With in-classroom monitors, they would see in real-time, every day, the indoor air quality they are personally experiencing and the specific metrics that inform it. They could learn about what factors go into the air quality rating - outdoor air with its own varying quality mixed with indoor air and its unique hazards. Classroom discussions inspired by these readings could cover a broad range of STEM and social science fields and could be tailored to almost any subject area, including chemistry, physics, coding, health science, and more.
By coordinating curricula with necessary physical plant activities, educators have a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity to bring the subject alive for students in a real and personal way. The horizon-broadening opportunities persist even beyond the limits of the current pandemic.
Bottom line: Your school can advocate for indoor air quality improvement measures by simultaneously making them tools for learning. The initiative becomes a win-win investment that pays off in both health and wellness and improved learning and student engagement on timely environmental science issues. While the pandemic is the current focus and reasoning for the investment, it catalyzes a timely and necessary focus with tremendous value beyond the current situation.
5. Are there funds available to help improve indoor air quality in schools?
Funding is an area that is ripe for research and advocacy. The case for improving indoor air quality in schools is compelling. Not only does it mitigate risk in a time of pandemic, but it improves the physical health and cognitive function of every student and adult in the school building. School administrators and boards could make a compelling case for NGO and/or government funding via grants, loans, or legislation. The solid foundation of research linking indoor air quality’s impact on disease transmission, cognitive performance, and overall health -- can validate the investment for funders.
Consider looking for funding:
Regionally, from foundations such as the Heinz Endowments or the Mellon Foundation, whose compatible programs might fund indoor air quality improvements for Schools.
From universities, which could administer and conduct ongoing research with the data.
From groups of Building Scientists, Engineers, Architects, Industrial Hygienists, and other professional disciplines, who could come together to publish and share data with health implications
From City and Municipal governments with sustainability programs, which would be a natural fit to set baselines for public policy.
For professional development for teachers, such as micro-credentials in creating and implementing curricula related to air quality.
Bottom line: The case for improving indoor air quality in schools is so compelling that funds should be earmarked for investment and infrastructure. Do you know of any current funding sources already? Or do you want to start a movement?
Conclusion
Many school students (and most American adults) spend 90% of their time indoors. Nothing impacts their bodies and minds more than the built environments in which they spend most of their time. The “health” of our indoor spaces is proven to have as much or more impact on our own health and wellness as diet, exercise, or sleep.
We live in an era of Fitbit-driven, 24/7 awareness of our own bodies’ health metrics. Today’s technology can give us that same level of access, awareness, and control over the environment in which we put our bodies - inside buildings.
If we think monitoring our own health is important enough to wear a Fitbit, shouldn’t we start monitoring the environments that have such significant impact on our children’s health?
As a parent who has the privilege and responsibility of caring for my children, I know I have the opportunity -and the obligation - to do what I can to ensure that my community’s school buildings are taking care of children, too. Addressing and improving indoor air quality in schools means all children (and the adults teaching them) will be safer, healthier, and perform better. I hope these questions will inspire discussion and further research in your own communities. Comment or contact me to continue the conversation.
[i] Toyinbo, O., Shaughnessy, R., Turunen, M., Putus, T., Metsämuuronen, J., Kurnitski, J., & Haverinen-Shaughnessy, U. (2016b). Building characteristics, indoor environmental quality, and mathematics achievement in Finnish elementary schools. Building and Environment.
[ii]Coley, D. A., Greeves, R., & Saxby, B. K. (2007). The effect of low ventilation rates on the cognitive function of a primary school class. International Journal of Ventilation, 6(2), 107-112.
[iii]Haverinen-Shaughnessy, U., Moschandreas, D. J., & Shaughnessy, R. J. (2011). Association between substandard classroom ventilation rates and students’ academic achievement. Indoor Air, 21(2), 121-131
[iv] Schools for Health Foundations for Student Success at https://schools.forhealth.org/
[v] U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA, 2014). “EPA Releases Guidance to Improve Schools’ Air Quality and Energy Efficiency”. Press Release. October 17, 2014. Accessed 4 April 2016 . https://yosemite.epa.gov/opa/admpress.nsf/6424ac1caa800aab85257359003f5337/f53011817db9d82a85257d74005fd3a4!OpenDocument
[vi] https://www.hup.harvard.edu/catalog.php?isbn=9780674237971 Healthy Buildings: How Indoor Spaces Driver Performance and Productivity Chapter 4, Putting the Building to Work for You, page 62.
[vii] https://www.hup.harvard.edu/catalog.php?isbn=9780674237971 Healthy Buildings: How Indoor Spaces Driver Performance and Productivity Chapter 7, Our Global Chemical Experiment, page 123.