Our ‘Beyond Compliance’ Program Keeps KBM Facility Solutions Employees Safe

[linkedin_share style=”right” float=”left”]

[fbshare type=”icon_link” float=”left”]

[twitter style=”horizontal” float=”left”]

 

by Nick Pangaro, KBM Facility Solutions 

Every employer has a duty to their employees to have them return home in the same condition as to which they reported to work. OSHA laws have been created to help companies do just that. Requirements of OSHA include companies having a written program, a document describing who is responsible for training employees on MSDS, documenting and tracking chemical inventory, having the MSDS available for employees to review in less than 10 minutes and an employee’s Right To Know Training.

KBMs use of  ManageMen’s (OS1)® cleaning process and its MSDS “Beyond Compliance” segment does just what is says; it goes beyond compliance and OSHA’s requirements. We start off with a Safety Yellow mounted wall box with binder. There is no mistaking where our MSDS materials and information are kept. Within the Binder can be found those items required by the OSHA standard, KBM’s written program, Employee’s Right To Know, MSDS, an inventory of hazardous chemicals and documents who is responsible for training.

We go beyond compliance with the additional items contained within the Beyond Compliance Binder. Items include:

  • A seven step introduction guiding the use of the binder and its contents.
  • A summary of the OSHA standard.
  • The MSDS are color coded to match the corresponding chemical and secondary use bottle. The daily use chemicals also have had the MSDS reformatted for an ease of use/read.
  • A glossary of terms found in MSDS is included in the binder.
  • We use silk screened secondary use bottles to avoid any labeling issues and the print color corresponds with the color of the chemical.
  • A ‘verification of training’ recognition pin and ID card is rewarded to each employee having successfully completed the MSDS program.
  • MSDS are all alphabetically organized within the binder.
  • Training log indicating employees having successfully completed the ManageMen (OS1) Beyond Compliance training.

The ‘Beyond Compliance’ Program helps ensure that KBM goes beyond being compliant, it highlights our commitment to PEOPLE ensuring our employees are safe. The program also allows us to provide our customers ease of mind when performing internal audits, safety inspections or an OSHA audit as they are current and immediately available for review.

[box type=”note” style=”rounded” border=”full”]

MSDS to SDS

Change is coming; a decision to modify the HCS (Hazard Communication Standard) to align with the GHS (Globally Harmonized System of Classification and Labeling of Chemicals) has been adopted by OSHA to improve safety and health of workers through more effective communications on chemical hazards.

Employers will be required to have employees trained on the new label elements and safety data sheet (SDS) format by December 1, 2013. For more information and phase in dates go to:

http://www.osha.gov/dsg/hazcom/hazcom-faq.html

[/box]

‘Science As It Relates to (OS1)’ by Dr. Michael Berry

[fbshare type=”button”]

[linkedin_share style=”none”]

[twitter style=”horizontal” float=”left”]

Dr. Berry delivering his presentation at the 2006 (OS1) Users Symposium in Midway, UT.

 

 

Over years of professional practice, teaching and scientific research Dr. Michael Berry is a true pioneer in identifying the foundational principles of what cleaning really means. His book, Protecting the Built Environment: Cleaning for Health, was ahead its time. Unfortunately those in the industry that should have taken hold of Berry’s principles have continued business-as-usual.

Most cleaners and janitorial operations are still cleaning the way they did 80 years ago. They are driven by equipment manufacturers and chemical companies that dictate the direction of the industry. There is no evidence based research. There is no common language or standards. The only focus of cleaning is appearance based with no thought about contaminants and indoor environmental problems.

Below is a link to the complete transcript of the presentation that  was delivered by  Michael Berry, PhD, at the 2006 Simon Institute Symposium.   In this presentation, Berry discusses the value of cleaning science; the effect of sick and mismanaged buildings; remediating the Frank Porter Graham building with a deep cleaning protocol and the findings from his 2006 publicly funded study of traditional housekeeping vs. the (OS1) cleaning process.  That study evaluated traditional housekeeping methods vs. a high performance cleaning program over the span of three months at The University of North Carolina.  It is also important to note that Berry also discusses key components of a high performance cleaning program in this presentation.

To read full transcript, please click here

Cleaning for Health at The University of Texas at Austin

A control cabinet at The University of Texas of Austin holds approximately three months of chemicals used to clean the buildings on campus.

[linkedin_share style=”none”][fbshare type=”button”][twitter style=”horizontal” float=”left”]

 

 

By Bobby Moddrell – Custodial Services Division
The University of Texas at Austin

 

For the past decade, the Custodial Services Division of The University of Texas at Austin has maintained over 12 million square feet of the campus using our (OS1) process. (OS1) promotes the standardization of the custodial operation through the use of environmentally friendly products, ergonomic tools, worker safety, strategically assigned workloads for each Full Time Equivalent Employee (FTE), and a robust training program. With this process, Custodial Services has maintained a consistent cleaning program across campus despite the size of the operation and the varying demands of each building.

The (OS1) process has also ushered in a sustainable approach to cleaning, that is easily reflected in our chemical program, water usage, paper and plastic products inventory, team cleaning system and indoor air quality. Prior to (OS1), UT Austin’s Custodial Services’ chemical program consisted of over 200 different chemicals which is fairly standard for most cleaning operations of this size. Since the implementation of (OS1), that number has been reduced almost 88%, a grand total of 25 chemicals. This reduction is due in large part to PortionPac, a company that provides environmentally responsible chemical concentrates which are packaged in individual pacs that are pre-measured for a specific container. By using one pac per bucket, bottle or tank of water [known in (OS1) as “the rule of one“], we realize a safer, more accurate use of chemicals, thus eliminating unnecessary waste and environmental pollution. Of our four daily use chemicals, three are Green Seal Certified and the daily germicide used to reduce pathogenic microorganisms is approved by the Environmental Protection Agency.

Subscribing to the (OS1) process has also decreased Custodial Services’ annual water usage by roughly 70%. While the effective measurement and use of chemicals contributes to this figure, it is the use of two-sided mop buckets and microfiber cloths that has had the greatest impact on water usage. Traditional mop buckets hold five gallons of water, but the two-side restroom and utility buckets used in our program hold 1.25 and 2 gallons of water respectively. Additionally, a two-sided mop bucket system keeps clean solution and contaminated water separate, thus ensuring the longevity of the cleaning solution and reducing cross contamination. The coordinated use of microfiber flat mops also helps conserve water.

Traditional string mops transfer more water than necessary to hard floor surfaces, making it difficult to clean and absorb the dirtied water effectively. Moreover, the fibers of a traditional string mop are incapable of trapping the microorganisms targeted in common cleaning procedures. Microfiber mops, however, absorb up to six times their own weight in liquid pick up and retention and their unique fibers have been shown to reduce bacteria up to 96%. The use of two-side mop buckets and microfiber mops have been instrumental in our decreased water usage. The switch alone has brought our estimated water usage from 863,340 gallons annually to 262,302 gallons for a savings of 601,038 gallons of water each year.

Custodial Services’ commitment to sustainability is reflected in the choice of paper and plastic products used across campus. Both our toilet paper and hand towels contain high percentages of recycled fiber and post-consumer content. Custodial Services has also made the switch to a more sustainable trash liner. These new liners are made from linear low density polyethylene (LLDPE) and meet the EPA’s Comprehensive Procurement guidelines. This means the liners’ post-consumer content can range from 10%-100%. All liners contain 100% post-consumer recycled resin. The liners have reduced our annual liner waste to landfills by an estimated 36%. Our previous liners contributed 220,459 pounds of waste annually, but the new liners will only contribute an estimated 141,847 pounds for a reduction of 78,612 pounds per year.

Through the daily maintenance of campus buildings, Custodial Services is doing its part to sustain the built environment. This effort not only prolongs the life of buildings and materials therein, but also improves the quality of life inside these buildings by all occupants. The Environmental Protect Agency (EPA) posits that individuals spend nearly 90% of their time indoors, whether at work, home or in transit. As such, it has become increasingly important to maintain an indoor environment free of pollutants. A recent study measured the indoor air quality of a building maintained with an average upright vacuum and found the level of pollutants equal to roughly twenty times what the EPA allows Americans to pollute from their cars. This is not surprising considering cloth filter bags on traditional upright vacuums only remove 30% of pollutants from the air. In an effort to improve indoor air quality, Custodial Services elected to use Super CoachVac backpack vacuums manufactured by ProTeam. These vacuums provide four-level filtration, removing 99.9% of lung-damaging particles.

Additionally, these vacuums help protect carpet, extending the life of carpet and reducing the need for replacement. It is this high level of carpet care and air purification that has earned the Pro Team Vacuum the Carpet Research Institute’s (CRI) green label certification.

Now Available: (OS1) Career Map

[linkedin_share style=”none”]

[fbshare type=”button”]

[twitter style=”horizontal” float=”left”]

 

 

During Class 65 of Janitor University in Salt Lake City, the new (OS1) Career Map was introduced. The map details the educational odyssey for a cleaning worker. Specifically, this new visual aid details the road of becoming a cleaning professional.

It highlights career learning milestones such as: (OS1) Boot Camp, Certification, Floor/Carpet Certification, Janitor University, Workloading, Benchmarking, Awards and Recognition.

The Career Map is now available for purchase in the ManageMen online store.

While others outsource, UT-Austin Investing in Custodial Training

Custodians listen to Luis Alvarado, an (OS1) Certified Coach, as he instructs them on safe cleaning techniques during their three-week custodial training program. Photo by Melissa Macaya.

[linkedin_share style=”none”]

[fbshare type=”button”]

[twitter style=”horizontal” float=”left”]

 

 

By Melissa Macaya
For Reporting Texas

While many educational institutions across Texas have outsourced their custodial services as a result of drastic budget cuts, UT-Austin continues to hire and train its own custodial staff under their state-funded program called (OS1). The university only outsources about 10 percent of its custodial services for specialized cases…

[button link=”http://reportingtexas.com/while-others-outsource-ut-austin-investing-in-custodial-training/” color=”silver” window=”yes”]Read Full Article [/button]

 

Achieving Green Cleaning

Article from the March 2012 Issue of The Cleaning Gazette

There is a conflict in the professional cleaning industry. The green cleaning movement has pushed for cleaning products and practices that are free of toxins, poisons, endocrine disrupters and known carcinogens. Yet, recent outbreaks of infectious diseases and drug-resistant bacteria demand that pathogens be eliminated from the indoor built environment utilizing “kill” agents (read poisons).

In (OS1), we meet both requirements by utilizing an engineered cleaning process and a scientifically validated process for reducing pathogenic microorganisms. (OS1) strikes the right balance between being environmentally sustainable and controlling pathogenic microorganisms.

Benchmarking Best Practices

For twenty years, we have educated organizations about cleaning processes and products that ensure their worker’s health and safety. Aerosols and volatile organic compounds (VOCs) were first reduced, then eliminated from the (OS1) program. They were replaced by Green Seal Certified chemicals that also provided a source reduction of landfill waste. Mixing chemicals was eliminated. All daily-use (OS1) cleaning chemicals come in pre measured packs so the worker just adds water. This eliminates the danger of chemical overexposure. Although to (OS1) users it is just common sense and education, this is an uncommon practice in the jan/san industry. In addition to safer chemical formulations and packaging, our (OS1) trained Coaches teach their employees chemistry basics including the pH scale, the “4 S’s of cleaning” and cleaning physics. They also train their employees on the correct application of cleaning tools and time. New, neutral pH disinfectants were introduced by PortionPac that effectively kill pathogens, but are safer on surfaces.

John Walker, President of ManageMen says:

“It’s all about knowing the surface and using the right chemical solvent on the soil that is present at the right time. Do it right the first time and you won’t damage surfaces and you won’t have to do it over.”

Disinfection requires not only the right solution, but friction as well, according the the Centers for Disease Control (CDC). The tool of choice to provide that friction is the (OS1) specified Unger microfiber cloth. Microfiber razor-scrapes the surface. It actually cuts the bacteria away from the surface. The use of color-coded microfiber cloths helps prevent cross-contamination and communicates to the cleaning team who is following instructions. Microfiber is also easier to launder because the weave is so tight, pathogens are washed off the surface quite simply.

Maintaining Indoor Air Quality

Even with the presence of toxic cleaning chemicals reduced, indoor air quality can suffer without proper cleaning techniques and subsequently affect the health of cleaning workers and building occupants. It’s vital that contaminants in the air are captured at their source, before they enter our breathing zones. High efficiency vacuum filters and HEPA filters remove those invisible particulates that carry bacteria and mold spores.

Filters on vacuums clog frequently. When filters are dirty, clogged, and not changed often enough, they lose efficiency. Air quality is almost entirely a function of a custodian’s cleaning or polluting functions indoors, according to Dr. Berry’s UNC study. It is fundamental that the practices of indoor environmental management include tracking vacuum filter changes and cleaning.
Catch Dirt at the Door

“Something as simple as floor mats can also make a huge difference”, according to Dr. Michael Berry in the University of North Carolina -Chapel Hill, publicly funded study comparing “Traditional Housekeeping” with the (OS1) cleaning process in 2006.

In (OS1), we specify that the building must have at least a 15-20 foot walk-off mat. That’s at least five steps on a mat to clean your shoes. If you don’t use mats, dirt tracks into the building. Mats are designed to scrape soil from shoes, and carpets have a tendency to hide the dirt. We want to scrape and remove, not conceal dirt.

Cleaning Professionalism

The establishment of professionalism among (OS1) cleaning workers follows their training and certification. They are the true environmentalists of the indoor environment. (OS1) Users must establish themselves as the  “EnvironMentors” to the  building occupants in the indoor environments that we all share.

(OS1) Programs Earn ISO 9001 and ISO 14001

Due to its advancements in quality assurance and sustainability standards, ManageMen (OS1) and two of its flagship programs earned ISO 9001 certification for Quality Management Systems and ISO 14001 certification for Environmental Management Systems. The Boeing Company certified ManageMen’s (OS1) program ISO 9001. This was the first time a cleaning process was certified as a component of the aerospace manufacturing process. Sandia National Labs div. Lockheed Martin achieved ISO 14001 certification for their (OS1) cleaning program in Albuquerque, NM.

With these certifications,  (OS1) programs at Boeing facilities and Sandia National Labs have become the first U.S. In-house cleaning organizations to certify their entire system—more than 1,000 facilities in several states—achieving one of the largest ever volume certifications of commercial buildings. “ManageMen has built both quality and sustainability into our overall (OS1) performance standards and operational procedures,” said Renae Walker, CEO of ManageMen, Inc. “While our commitment has continuously been recognized by our users, team members and business owners, obtaining ISO 9001 and 14001 certifications in two separate companies further validates that commitment and recognizes the company’s drive to meet globally recognized standards.”

ISO 9001 and ISO 14001 are international standards that provide a set of standardized requirements for quality and environmental management systems, respectively. Companies gain certification by implementing policies, procedures and systems that follow and meet ISO standards, which are assessed by a third-party certification body. As part of the ManageMen engineered quality process, (OS1) inspectors annually perform a series of audits and will continue ongoing assessments to monitor compliance.

Since its founding, ManageMen has made quality assurance and customer service core to its engineered cleaning system, both of which are key differentiators for the company’s performance advantage. In addition to third party certifications, the company implements a wide range of quality control tracking programs to maintain the integrity of its process and to ensure an appropriately consistent experience across all (OS1) programs in the U.S.

As a partner and service provider to numerous global companies, ManageMen will now be able to provide these stakeholders with the assurance that it has the systems in place to ensure their properties are meeting the high level of standards that only an ISO 9001 and ISO 14001 certification can provide.

About ISO

ISO is the world’s largest developer and publisher of international standards. ISO is a network of the national standards institutes of some 163 countries. More than 100 of ISO’s members are from developing countries. ISO has more than 18 600 International Standards in its currents portfolio and ISO’s work program ranges from standards for traditional activities, such as agriculture and construction, through mechanical engineering, manufacturing and distribution, to transport, medical devices, the environment, safety, information and communication technologies, and to standards for good practices and for services.


Cleaning Science

[fbshare type=”button”]

[linkedin_share style=”none”]

[twitter style=”horizontal” float=”left”]

 

From the February 2012 issue of The Cleaning Gazette

What is mankind’s greatest invention? Is it our built environment?

Man’s oldest invention and one that every human enjoys to some extent is the protective built environment. Humans liberate themselves from the unfavorable effects of the natural environment by an ability to construct and maintain a protective environment. We maintain shelter against enemies including weather, extreme climate, storms, predators, disease, and exposure by the habitats we build, maintain, and clean.

The primary human habitat is a built environment and a sub-compartment of the natural environment. This built environment is the environment most humans occupy more than 90 percent of their time. It dominates the quality of human life and health. It is the environment over which we have the most control. The most important control is primarily through the process of cleaning.

Cleaning is a Science

To understand the important role of cleaning and the contributions it makes to human existence, we need to know three things:

  •  What is cleaning?
  • How does it it work?
  • Why it is important?

Cleaning science includes several subjects . They must be properly understood if we are to understand the field of cleaning and its impact on health? To properly discuss “cleaning,” we must emphasize the objectives and reasons for cleaning. We must also understand and emphasize their importance and value. The science of cleaning includes the following topics:

[ordered_list style=”decimal”]

1. Effective Cleaning Reduces Risk.Cleaning creates a healthy condition by reducing exposure and risk. It enables sanitation, it breaks the chain of infection and prevents illness. In addition to human health, cleaning protects valuable materials and equipment and maintains the value of property. Cleaning is insurance that prevents crisis and reduces the full range of costs related to property and real estate. Cleaning also manages waste and contributes to environmental protection and sustainability.

 

2. Chemistry of Cleaning. Many aspects of cleaning are based on chemical action. Knowing how chemicals work is fundamental to cleaning. The effect they have on various forms of matter, their protective or risk-reduction benefits , the toxic, unwanted, or unintended effects on humans or the natural environment are all important parts of cleaning science.

 

3. Cleaning in Special Environments. Cleaning is the organized process of removing or repositioning unwanted matter so human activities can take place in a particular built environment. Different environments require different cleaning processes.

 

4. Measuring Cleaning Effectiveness.Cleaning is measured in terms of the quantity of unwanted matter removed. Dr. Berry’s 2006 study at the University of North Carolina showed that effective cleaning when consistently implemented is cost effective and can lead to measurable environmental improvements as measured by reductions in particles, volatile organic compounds (VOCs), and biological pollutants. The assessment of cleaning effectiveness can be accomplished through process audits, environmental sampling and measurement of dusts, fungi, bacteria, and indoor-air particulate matter. Sampling and measurement answers the question, “What happens when you clean?”

 

5. Determining Cleaning Data. In recent years, there have emerged comprehensive programs for efficacy testing of cleaning processes, products and technologies. Too frequently, limited or unsubstantiated claims are made with regard to the attributes of specific cleaning products. In the absence of process or systems testing, these claims cannot be validated. Without testing, tracking effectiveness, outside auditing of environmental sustainability, human activities may be polluting the built environment rather than cleaning it.

 

6. The Professional Language of Cleaning. Every profession and science has a unique vocabulary. A language, a set of definitions, concepts, and terms. For cleaning to truly become a professional, science-based industry recognized by government, health organizations, and other critical constituents, the language of cleaning science must be organized in a systematic manner. This includes seeing cleaning terminology in its proper hierarchy; agreeing on terms; and thereafter publishing and accepting those terms as norms. Antiquated cleaning and maintenance terms should be reviewed, assessed, rejuvenated, or rejected and replaced.

 

7. Cleaning Management. Effective cleaning starts with educated management competency, professionalism, and technical leadership. A well-managed and effective cleaning program includes the following quality-management components: process identification, evaluation, and continuous improvement; management by fact and knowledge for improvement; structured problem solving; effective communication at all levels; valuing human resources; benchmarking and performance measurement; and quality tools and technology. The effectiveness of the cleaning program resides in a well-defined and comprehensive cleaning objective; planned, scheduled, systematic cleaning workloading; the use of specialized, benchmarked cleaning equipment and technology that is tested and evaluated for effectiveness, best practices and safety. Most importantly there needs to be a focused and specialized basic and inservice training provided to the cleaners.

[/ordered_list]
Cleaning for health first, to be an achievable goal, demands that our industry have a firm foundation in science. It is only through this process—of benchmarking, auditing, disciplined research, critical peer review, and open presentation—that the cleaning industry will receive the recognition it deserves as a science-based profession that is not only focused upon, but able to provide, a healthy indoor environment.

Clean and Green: The University of Texas at Austin’s Sustainable Cleaning Process

[fbshare type=”button” float=”left”]

[twitter style=”horizontal” float=”left”]

[linkedin_share style=”none” float=”left”]

 

 

Presented by Robert Moddrell and Corey Wright, The University of Texas at Austin.

For the last decade, UT Austin’s Custodial Services has maintained over 12.5 million square feet of the UT campus using a high-performance cleaning process called (OS1). Developed by ManageMen, (OS1) promotes the standardization of the custodial operation through the use of environmentally friendly products and ergonomic tools. With this process, Custodial Services has maintained a consistent cleaning program across campus despite the size of our operation and varying demands of each building. Moreover, this process has ushered in a sustainable approach to cleaning that is easily reflected in our chemical program, water usage, paper and plastic products inventory, team cleaning system, and indoor air quality.

Are Dirty Schools Making Kids Sick?

[fbshare type=”button”]

[twitter style=”horizontal” float=”left”]

[linkedin_share style=”none”]

 

Two seemingly unrelated events were the subject of news stories in the early weeks of 2012. The first occurred on January 12, when the Vermont Senate gave final approval to Senate bill #92, a bill that requires public schools and “approved independent schools” to ensure that only environmentally preferable cleaning products are used to clean the schools. The bill will now make its way to the Governor’s desk for his signature which will transform the bill into law. Vermont’s state owned and leased buildings have already transitioned to “green” cleaning products as a result of the Clean State Program created by an executive order signed by Governor Douglas in 2004.

Banning Germ Killers in Schools

But the perhaps, unintended consequence of this legislation action goes further. It bans disinfectants and sanitizers in public schools. Is this really the lengths Vermont want to go to be “green”? If so it joins the states like California, Connecticut, Colorado, Hawaii, Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Maryland, Michigan, Minnesota, Missouri, Neveda, New Jersey, New York, Oregon, Pennsylvania and Washington. It is relevant to note that this legislation has been driven not by the medical community and public health experts but by state procurement officers and purchasing agents in league with the janitorial supply industry.

The Vermont bill allows for the use of disinfectants only when:

  1. Blood, body fluids or fecal soiling is present on any surface; (ignoring that most diseases are spread by invisible germs called pathogenic microorganisms and not visible accumulations listed in the Vermont legislation).
  2.  The State makes a case specific determination that failure to use a disinfectant would create a risk to public health and safety (like MRSA, Avian Flu, SARS, Whooping cough, measles, and the common cold).

Two days later, on Saturday January 14, Dr. Sanjay Gupta CNN Chief Medical Correspondent, aired a report in his series on Toxic America about the sorry, environmental health of schools in the United States. More schools than ever are making kids and school staff sick. While it’s tough to estimate how many toxic schools are in America, most research shows that at least a third or more of U.S. Schools have issues like mold, dust and other indoor air problems serious enough to cause respiratory illnesses like asthma in students and staff. Healthy Schools Network reports that as many as 55 million U.S. children may be attending public and private K-12 schools where poor air quality, hazardous chemicals and other unhealthy conditions can make everyone sick.

The U.S. EPA estimates that at least half of all schools in this country have indoor air quality problems caused by toxic chemical and pesticide use, chemical spills, mold infestations, asbestos, radon, lead in paint and drinking water, heavy metals and persistent toxics, such as mercury, CCA and PCBs.

Other highlights of Dr. Gupta’s story included:

  • A story about a woman who claims school air sickened her son for 53 days last school year
  • New York study finds correlation between building maintenance and illness
  • Studies estimate one-third of U.S. schools have mold, dust and other indoor air problems
  • Connecticut school so plagued with mold officials decided to tear it down

Now the Rest of the Story

Missing from both the Vermont and Dr. Gupta’s story was the recognition of the importance of cleaning and sanitation. There was no recognition that a proven process of cleaning and disinfections leads to improved health, comfort and educational performance.

In 2007, Michael Berry, PhD, wrote a booklet Healthy Schools are Clean, Dry and Productive. Largely ignored, this essay provides leadership for both the “school is making my kids sick” and the “green cleaning” groups. Berry points out that the “importance of a healthy school environment in enhancing the learning process is described in many studies. There is a direct connection between environmental quality, comfort, health and well-being, positive attitudes and behavior, and higher levels of education performance. The quality of the school environment shapes attitudes of students, teachers and staff. Attitudes affect teaching and learning behavior. Behavior affects performance. Educational performance determines future outcomes of individuals and society as a whole.”

Berry wrote:

We need to recognize that the main causes of environmentally related illness in schools are water, food sources for the various bio-pollutants, non-existent or ineffective cleaning, and poor ventilation. We should guard against becoming myopic when it comes to assessing environmental risk in school environments. Too often, we spend a large amount of time looking at air quality alone, especially in recent times with regard to mold. This narrow focus is necessary but by no means sufficient to protect the health of our children and their teachers and the quality of our school environments.

Should the states be banning disinfectants and sanitizers?

To protect health in schools, we need to take a close look at total exposure, and not solely focus on the air route of exposure. Bacteria that come from direct contact with other humans and surfaces cause over 80% of environmentally related illness. The main routes of exposure are dermal and ingestion, not air. Even air poses its most serious threats by delivering bacteria and viruses to sensitive receptors. Sufficiently concentrated airborne mold spore and other airborne allergens, such as cockroach antigen, frequently trigger allergic reactions in sensitized individuals, particularly asthmatics.

Disinfectant and sanitizers are by definition toxic. We use them to “kill” pathogens before they make humans sick. The purchasing agents and cleaning chemical supply marketing organizations who promote the complete ban on poisons and toxins in schools don’t understand what Paracelsus, the father of toxicology, declared in the 14th century “The dose makes the poison.” Using sanitizers are fundamental to food preparation, dishwashing and serving meals. Disinfection of potential cross-contamination points in lavatories, and other common touch points in schools are basic to proper cleaning and school hygiene.

Trainers should expect and be prepared to discuss the risk/benefit analysis of proper cleaning and sanitation. (OS1) has an unequalled dedication to environmental issues. But it also values the benefits associated with properly killing pathogenic microorganisms in the public facilities entrusted to us. The State of Vermont and Dr. Gupta should know about the following scientific studies on the importance of cleaning:

  • Frank Porter Graham Study
  • Alexander Krilov Study

They should also be promoting the benefits and the reported results by workers and patrons in (OS1) facilities like Dixon Middle School and University of Michigan. In 2012, the (OS1) user group will be focusing on three areas to “Protect Yourself” in facilities. They are:

  1. The reduction of asthma-type symptoms due to the performance level of (OS1) that provides negligible dust following the UNC cleaning protocol.
  2. Focus on proper use and application of germicidal chemicals.
  3. The opportunity to dramatically reduce humidity in schools by strategically using portable air drying equipment.

These three strategies are a messaging opportunity for the (OS1) trainers, (OS1) support manufacturers (particularly ProTeam, PortionPac & Dri-Eaz) and the Simon Institute.