Metrics Summary, December 9, 2010 Kelly Humphry
This is a (DRAFT) summary of the metrics/reporting requirements for the following:
PRIA 2008 – required by grant
PRIA 2010 – required by grant
PESP Gold Level participation – 300 schools = PRIA 2010 deliverable (specific metrics are negotiable)
School IPM 2015 – potential metrics for measuring school IPM implementation nationally
IPM STAR – voluntary certification for schools achieving high level IPM implementation
2008 Report Card Survey – annual state survey given to IPM leaders to assess the status of IPM
Tim Stock’s School Survey – successful online survey designed for school districts in the Western Region
The PRIA 2010 grant requires us to establish a comprehensive set of online metrics and an online
reporting method that school districts will use to report their coalition and demonstration performance
measures. PRIA 2010 also requires PESP Gold Level participation metrics from 300 schools, comparative
analysis for each state through the use of report card surveys, asthma incidence and pesticide use
metrics in schools, and quarterly tracking for our outreach efforts (webinars, presentations, trainings,
publications, conferences, newsletters, website hits, expanded membership, “Ask the Expert” usage,
and listserv postings). This additional reporting will be the responsibility of state IPM professional leads,
working group members, the national coordinator, and coalition leaders. The national coordinator will
collect these metrics and compile them for grant reporting and to assess how our School IPM 2015
strategy is progressing towards IPM implementation in all schools by 2015.
It is important that we do not replicate reporting burdens for the same people/entities. It is also
important that we encourage regular reporting from all parties by designing easy to use online forms
and surveys.
The metrics listed above can be generally organized into the following four categories. There is some
overlap in the metrics, but there should be no overlap in reporting by any one entity.
*Metrics for demonstrations and coalitions are similar and could potentially be collected using one
document (online or PDF form). The user would choose which type of project they are reporting on and
only fill out that part of the form.
 Annual Report Card: This survey was developed in 2008 with input from PMSP meeting participants
and others.
Purpose: To document annual performance measures by state for progress towards the 2015
goal. A PRIA 2010 objective states that the report card should also collect information for
comparative analysis for each state addressing laws, regulations, support and activities.
Who reports: Completed by key IPM professionals in each state (Extension, state lead agency,
NGO’s). A joint report after dialogue with knowledgeable colleagues is ideal.
Submitted to: IPM Institute - national coordinator. National coordinator will then summarize
report card results on an annual basis.
Due: October 1. Results summarized by December 31.
Action Item: This survey will be revised prior to recirculation in 2011. National steering
committee - please review during first quarter of year 2011 and return to national coordinator
by March 31, 2011 with comments. See current version attached.
 *Metrics/Performance Measures for school demonstrations: These metrics are required for our
PRIA 2008 and 2010 grants as well as for the initial and final assessments in the schools to prove IPM
implementation success. This information overlaps with the School IPM 2015 strategy’s “potential


metrics” and can be used for satisfying (some) criteria for IPM STAR and for PESP Gold Level
participation.
Purpose: Must first establish a baseline assessment of pest problems, asthma incidence, and
pesticide use/current treatment and training; then follow up with regular documentation of IPM
program performance in these areas.
Who reports: School Districts. More specifically – IPM coordinator with assistance from facility
manager or the point person for pest management decisions in the school.
Submitted to: National coordinator for quarterly or yearly grant reports.
Due: Quarterly or yearly?
Action Item: Finalize list of metrics needed, and finalize best method for reporting: survey,
online form, PDF form solicited and sent via email or mail. See attached draft for list of
potential performance measures.
*Metrics/Performance Measures for coalitions: These metrics are required by our PRIA 2010 grant
and build upon successful completed demonstrations in the region. An MOU is required at the
beginning of coalition formation and baseline metrics are required when the coalition starts a new
school demonstration. Metrics overlap with demonstration reporting requirements above.
Purpose: Must first establish a baseline assessment of pest problems, asthma incidence, and
pesticide use/current treatment and training; then follow up with regular documentation of IPM
program performance in these areas.
Who Reports: Coalition leaders
Submitted to: National coordinator for quarterly or yearly grant reports.
Due: Quarterly or yearly?
Action Item: Finalize list of metrics needed, and finalize best method for reporting: survey,
online form, PDF form solicited and sent via email or mail. See attached draft for list of
potential performance measures.
Metrics for grant reports and for benchmarking PMSP strategy objectives: These metrics are
usually reported via updates during working group conference calls, listservs, on websites, and via
formal and informal communications between key regional and national IPM professionals working
on the School IPM 2015 strategy and grant management. I would like to create a simple PDF
document for quarterly tracking of our outreach efforts (webinars, presentations, trainings,
publications, conferences, newsletters, website hits, expanded memberships, “Ask the Expert”
usage, and listserv postings).
Purpose: To document outreach efforts for PRIA 2010 grant objectives and reports and to
measure our progress towards our School 2015 goal.
Who reports: State IPM leaders, coalition leaders, working group members, national steering
committee members.
Submitted to: National coordinator
Due: Quarterly
Action Item: National coordinator will create PDF form that can be filled out online or sent via
email and returned.
School IPM Demonstration & Coalition Performance Measures
Regional Working Groups metrics needed for the PRIA 2008 and 2010 grants (DRAFT)
For each demonstration site, please report the following:
- Numbers of participating school systems and students, staff impacted.
- Before and after overall pesticide use (quantity and number of times used) and pest complaints
in participating school systems.
- Estimated number of students with asthma
- Asthma attacks in schools resulting in asthma related absences in staff and students
- Allergens present in school
- Acreage of landscaped area, square footage of building
- Before and after pest-management-related costs.
- Number of pest problems solved without a pesticide application.
- Before and after pesticide inventory and product-use lists (this includes biopesticides, reducedrisk and conventional pesticides as well as non-chemical products and practices such as
monitoring traps, door sweeps, rodent proofing, etc.).
- Number of workshops and meetings, and attendees.
- Participant evaluations of workshops and meetings.
- Numbers of school systems with:
o Written IPM policies and plans
o Trained IPM coordinators
o IPM or other safety related committees formally charged with IPM.
- Qualifications required for individuals applying pesticides in schools.
- Numbers of staff trained in IPM.
- Numbers of schools including IPM education in students’ curricula.
- Numbers of schools using pest management professional service providers with advanced
optional qualifications, e.g., Quality Pro Schools, Green Shield Certified.
- Number of PESP and/or IPM STAR certified school systems.
- For Gold Level PESP participation: Has participated in PESP events (number of events; e.g.
meetings, workshops).
- Internal and external promotion of PESP in school district.
- Is your demonstration externally funded?
For each coalition site, please report the following:
- Numbers of participating school systems and students, staff impacted.
- (Optional) Before and after overall pesticide use and pest complaints in participating school
systems.
- Estimated number of students with asthma
- Asthma attacks in schools resulting in asthma related absences in staff and students
- Allergens present in school
- Acreage of landscaped area, square footage of building
- (Optional) Before and after pest-management-related costs.
- (Optional) Number of pest problems solved without a pesticide application.
- Before and after pesticide inventory and product-use lists (this includes biopesticides, reducedrisk and conventional pesticides as well as non-chemical products and practices such as
monitoring traps, door sweeps, rodent proofing, etc.). Include quantity and number of times
used.
-
-
Number of workshops and meetings, and attendees.
Participant evaluations of workshops and meetings.
Numbers of school systems with:
o Written IPM policies and plans
o Trained IPM coordinators
o IPM or other safety related committees formally charged with IPM.
Qualifications required for individuals applying pesticides in schools.
Numbers of staff trained in IPM.
Numbers of schools including IPM education in students’ curricula.
Numbers of schools using pest management professional service providers with advanced
optional qualifications, e.g., Quality Pro Schools, Green Shield Certified.
Number of PESP and/or IPM STAR certified school systems.
For Gold Level PESP participation: Has participated in PESP events (number of events; e.g.
meetings, workshops).
Internal and external promotion of PESP in school district.
Is your coalition externally funded?