PRESS PREVIEW - PLEASE DO NOT SHARE

The School Water Crisis Efforts To Reduce Lead Contamination In School Drinking Water Get A Failing Grade We investigated efforts nationwide by state regulators dealing with lead contamination in drinking water in schools and daycare centers. Each state was given a grade based on critical factors, such as the number of schools tested, the testing program’s rigor and the remediation measures taken.

FIND YOUR STATE FIND YOUR STATE

Key Findings 21 States have made little to no progress towards preventing lead exposure in school drinking water.

16 States have passed legislation addressing lead in schools. Top Achievers Washington D.C.

California

Rhode Island

Oregon

New Jersey

Project Findings: Preliminary Release SimpleLab set out to track the status of lead water testing in schools across all fifty states. Our goal: Provide you with an easy way to see and understand the risks of exposure in your area. What did we learn? In short, good information about your school’s lead risk is often too hard to find. A litany of policy contradictions, testing requirements and data gaps with respect to lead in school water cast doubt upon the overall integrity of our schools’ environmental health infrastructure. Main Findings on Lead In School Water There are no Federal regulations requiring schools to test water for lead. This recent EPA announcement could change that. Read more About half of US states have proposed or passed legislation related to water-borne lead, fewer than half have actually funded such legislation. Read more Most lead contamination in school drinking water happens at the faucet fixture or other on-premise plumbing, not from the distribution system or water utility. Read more Children are, by far, most susceptible to the dangers of lead-contaminated drinking water. Their exposure risk comes not just from home and school, but also from daycare facilities. Read more

State List State Grade Regulator Lead Action

Level Legislation

Status Testing Status No states match your search ' ' Alabama F Yes 20 PPB No Progress 45% - 50% Alaska F - No Progress < 5% Arizona C+ Yes 15 PPB No Progress > 50% Arkansas F - No Progress < 5% California B+ Yes 15 PPB Passed > 50% Colorado C Yes 15 PPB Passed < 5% Connecticut F - Pending < 5% Delaware F - No Progress < 5% Florida F - No Progress 40% - 45% Georgia F - Pending 30% - 35% Hawaii F - No Progress < 5% Idaho F Yes - No Progress < 5% Illinois C Yes 5 PPB Passed 15% - 20% Indiana C+ Yes 15 PPB Pending 45% - 50% Iowa F - No Progress < 5% Kansas F - No Progress < 5% Kentucky F - No Progress 10% - 15% Louisiana F Yes 15 PPB Passed < 5% Maine D- Yes - Passed 30% - 35% Maryland C+ Yes 20 PPB Passed 35% - 40% Massachusetts C Yes 15 PPB Pending 40% - 45% Michigan D- Yes 5 PPB No Progress < 5% Minnesota F Yes 20 PPB Pending < 5% Mississippi F - No Progress < 5% Missouri F - No Progress < 5% Montana F - Pending 10% - 15% Nebraska F - No Progress < 5% Nevada F 20 PPB No Progress 45% - 50% New Hampshire B Yes 15 PPB Passed > 50% New Jersey B Yes 15 PPB Passed > 50% New Mexico F Yes 15 PPB No Progress 5% - 10% New York B- Yes 15 PPB Passed > 50% North Carolina F - No Progress < 5% North Dakota F Yes - No Progress < 5% Ohio D Yes 15 PPB No Progress 15% - 20% Oklahoma F - No Progress < 5% Oregon B Yes 15 PPB Passed > 50% Pennsylvania D Yes 15 PPB Passed < 5% Rhode Island B Yes 15 PPB Passed > 50% South Carolina F - No Progress < 5% South Dakota F - No Progress < 5% Tennessee F Yes 20 PPB Passed 5% - 10% Texas F Yes - Pending 10% - 15% Utah C Yes 15 PPB Pending > 50% Vermont B- Yes 4 PPB Passed 5% - 10% Virginia F Yes - Passed < 5% Washington D- Yes 10 PPB Pending 5% - 10% Washington D.C. A- Yes 5 PPB Passed > 50% West Virginia F - No Progress < 5% Wisconsin F - No Progress 5% - 10% Wyoming F - No Progress < 5% SHARE THIS REPORT

Project Summary We sought to understand the variety of approaches states are or aren't taking to address the potential of lead in school drinking water. We learned that a majority of states are doing very little to nothing at all. Only a few states have a comprehensive strategy for addressing lead in school drinking water and communicating that to the public. The most common shortcomings include: Lack of transparency in the available data from schools that have been tested

Unclear status of state regulations governing lead in school drinking water

Even with legislation passed, many states have struggled with implementation and roll-out, primarily due to poor communication and lack of funding.

Very little uniformity between states due to poor leadership at the federal level. Variations in lead in school action plans include: Lead Action Level - The level of lead in drinking water above which action is required Sampling methods and frequency-of-testing Provision of basic information to the public about lead in school drinking water Availability of funding for school testing and remediation Transparency and clarity of collected data Inclusion of daycares, private schools



No Curve On This Exam Thirty-one states scored F in our evaluation of their lead testing programs. Most simply have no policy at all. For states with lead testing programs, many still fall short of an A grade because their laws are not funded or lack rigor. For example, a testing program that includes only 1 faucet per school is not sufficient. 21 states have made little to no progress towards preventing lead exposure in school drinking water AK AR CT DE FL GA HI IA KS KY MS MO NE NC ND OK SC SD WV WY WI How did we evaluate "progress"? These were states that scored lower than 15% based upon our rubric. Typically this was a result of the state making little or no progress with regards to transparency (accessibility of information), action (what legislative steps are being taken), and progress (how many schools have been tested) with regards to evaluating lead in school drinking water. 30 states have supported pilot studies or sampling programs to test for lead in school drinking water. AL AZ CA CO ID IL IN LA ME MD MA MI MN MT* NV NH NJ NM NY OH OR PA RI TN TX* UT VT VA WA DC Of the 30 states that have conducted pilot studies or sampling programs, 20 states have organized their data so that it is possible to understand the prevalence of lead in school drinking water across the state. AL AZ CA CO IN LA MD MA MT* NH NJ NY OH OR PA RI TX* UT VT WA 16 states have passed legislation with regards to lead in schools, whereas 9 states currently have pending legislation: Passed: CA CO IL LA ME MD NH NJ NY OR PA RI TN VT VA DC Pending: CT GA IN MA MN MT TX UT WA

Methods & Scoring Rubric After the tragedy in Flint, MI there are still thousands of school districts nationwide without effective lead testing or prevention measures. Using EPA and PIRG documentation as a baseline, we scored every US state based on critical variables of what we consider good progress towards mitigating lead exposure in schools. These critical variables were broken down into the categories of transparency, action and progress. Beginning with the rubric established by PIRG, we expanded it to evaluate all 50 states because PIRG’s own evaluation didn’t yet represent the full country. During that process we decided to add additional metrics to our scoring rubric in light of the things we learned. Transparency Transparency was evaluated based on whether the state had a webpage, contact information, publicly-provided sampling results, a summary concerning the prevalence of lead in schools, and clear next steps. Webpage: Does the state have a school lead water testing webpage?

What to do: If you were a school and you wanted to do lead testing, does the state make it easy for you to figure out what to do?

Contact Info: Is contact information for a state’s lead in school program official(s) readily discoverable online?

Results: Does the state provide easy to find and easy to navigate results for lead testing?

Summary: Does the state provide a clear summary of testing and legislation status? Action Action was evaluated based on how strict the state's lead action level is, as well as on the status of lead legislation for schools. Lead Action Level: What is the State’s Lead Action Level? 1 - < 5 ppb = 1.0 5 - < 10 ppb = 0.8 10 - < 15 ppb = 0.6 15 - < 20 ppb = 0.4 20 ppb = 0.2 > 20 ppb or None = 0

Legislation: What is the current status of state legislation? Progress Progress was evaluated based on whether there has been a state-led sampling program and how many schools have been tested. Sampling: Is or was there a lead testing program for schools?

Progress: How many schools (and daycares) have been tested relative to the number of public schools in the state? Scoring Using these variables above we calculated a numerical score for every state’s lead in schools testing and treatment program: Each state was then assigned a letter grade based on their SimpleLab School Lead Score as a percentage: A+: > 97.5%

A: 92.5% - 97.5%

A-: 90.0% - 92.5%

B+: 87.5% - 90.0%

B: 82.5% - 87.5%

B-: 80.0% - 82.5%

C+: 77.5% - 80.0%

C: 72.5% - 77.5%

C-: 70.0% - 72.5%

D+: 67.5% - 70.0%

D: 62.5% - 67.5%

D-: 60.0% - 62.5%

F: < 60.0% Read More