Cargando…

Participatory testing and reporting in an environmental-justice community of Worcester, Massachusetts: a pilot project

BACKGROUND: Despite indoor home environments being where people spend most time, involving residents in testing those environments has been very limited, especially in marginalized communities. We piloted participatory testing and reporting that combined relatively simple tests with actionable repor...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Downs, Timothy J, Ross, Laurie, Mucciarone, Danielle, Calvache, Maria-Camila, Taylor, Octavia, Goble, Robert
Formato: Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2010
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2914716/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20604953
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1476-069X-9-34
_version_ 1782184783559786496
author Downs, Timothy J
Ross, Laurie
Mucciarone, Danielle
Calvache, Maria-Camila
Taylor, Octavia
Goble, Robert
author_facet Downs, Timothy J
Ross, Laurie
Mucciarone, Danielle
Calvache, Maria-Camila
Taylor, Octavia
Goble, Robert
author_sort Downs, Timothy J
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Despite indoor home environments being where people spend most time, involving residents in testing those environments has been very limited, especially in marginalized communities. We piloted participatory testing and reporting that combined relatively simple tests with actionable reporting to empower residents in Main South/Piedmont neighborhoods of Worcester, Massachusetts. We answered: 1) How do we design and implement the approach for neighborhood and household environments using participatory methods? 2) What do pilot tests reveal? 3) How does our experience inform testing practice? METHODS: The approach was designed and implemented with community partners using community-based participatory research. Residents and researchers tested fourteen homes for: lead in dust indoors, soil outdoors, paint indoors and drinking water; radon in basement air; PM2.5 in indoor air; mold spores in indoor/outdoor air; and drinking water quality. Monitoring of neighborhood particulates by residents and researchers used real-time data to stimulate dialogue. RESULTS: Given the newness of our partnership and unforeseen conflicts, we achieved moderate-high success overall based on process and outcome criteria: methods, test results, reporting, lessons learned. The conflict burden we experienced may be attributable less to generic university-community differences in interests/culture, and more to territoriality and interpersonal issues. Lead-in-paint touch-swab results were poor proxies for lead-in-dust. Of eight units tested in summer, three had very high lead-in-dust (>1000 μg/ft(2)), six exceeded at least one USEPA standard for lead-in-dust and/or soil. Tap water tests showed no significant exposures. Monitoring of neighborhood particulates raised awareness of environmental health risks, especially asthma. CONCLUSIONS: Timely reporting back home-toxics' results to residents is ethical but it must be empowering. Future work should fund the active participation of a few motivated residents as representatives of the target population. Although difficult and demanding in time and effort, the approach can educate residents and inform exposure assessment. It should be considered as a core ingredient of comprehensive household toxics' testing, and has potential to improve participant retention and the overall positive impact of long-term environmental health research efforts.
format Text
id pubmed-2914716
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2010
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-29147162010-08-04 Participatory testing and reporting in an environmental-justice community of Worcester, Massachusetts: a pilot project Downs, Timothy J Ross, Laurie Mucciarone, Danielle Calvache, Maria-Camila Taylor, Octavia Goble, Robert Environ Health Research BACKGROUND: Despite indoor home environments being where people spend most time, involving residents in testing those environments has been very limited, especially in marginalized communities. We piloted participatory testing and reporting that combined relatively simple tests with actionable reporting to empower residents in Main South/Piedmont neighborhoods of Worcester, Massachusetts. We answered: 1) How do we design and implement the approach for neighborhood and household environments using participatory methods? 2) What do pilot tests reveal? 3) How does our experience inform testing practice? METHODS: The approach was designed and implemented with community partners using community-based participatory research. Residents and researchers tested fourteen homes for: lead in dust indoors, soil outdoors, paint indoors and drinking water; radon in basement air; PM2.5 in indoor air; mold spores in indoor/outdoor air; and drinking water quality. Monitoring of neighborhood particulates by residents and researchers used real-time data to stimulate dialogue. RESULTS: Given the newness of our partnership and unforeseen conflicts, we achieved moderate-high success overall based on process and outcome criteria: methods, test results, reporting, lessons learned. The conflict burden we experienced may be attributable less to generic university-community differences in interests/culture, and more to territoriality and interpersonal issues. Lead-in-paint touch-swab results were poor proxies for lead-in-dust. Of eight units tested in summer, three had very high lead-in-dust (>1000 μg/ft(2)), six exceeded at least one USEPA standard for lead-in-dust and/or soil. Tap water tests showed no significant exposures. Monitoring of neighborhood particulates raised awareness of environmental health risks, especially asthma. CONCLUSIONS: Timely reporting back home-toxics' results to residents is ethical but it must be empowering. Future work should fund the active participation of a few motivated residents as representatives of the target population. Although difficult and demanding in time and effort, the approach can educate residents and inform exposure assessment. It should be considered as a core ingredient of comprehensive household toxics' testing, and has potential to improve participant retention and the overall positive impact of long-term environmental health research efforts. BioMed Central 2010-07-06 /pmc/articles/PMC2914716/ /pubmed/20604953 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1476-069X-9-34 Text en Copyright ©2010 Downs et al; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0 This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Research
Downs, Timothy J
Ross, Laurie
Mucciarone, Danielle
Calvache, Maria-Camila
Taylor, Octavia
Goble, Robert
Participatory testing and reporting in an environmental-justice community of Worcester, Massachusetts: a pilot project
title Participatory testing and reporting in an environmental-justice community of Worcester, Massachusetts: a pilot project
title_full Participatory testing and reporting in an environmental-justice community of Worcester, Massachusetts: a pilot project
title_fullStr Participatory testing and reporting in an environmental-justice community of Worcester, Massachusetts: a pilot project
title_full_unstemmed Participatory testing and reporting in an environmental-justice community of Worcester, Massachusetts: a pilot project
title_short Participatory testing and reporting in an environmental-justice community of Worcester, Massachusetts: a pilot project
title_sort participatory testing and reporting in an environmental-justice community of worcester, massachusetts: a pilot project
topic Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2914716/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20604953
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1476-069X-9-34
work_keys_str_mv AT downstimothyj participatorytestingandreportinginanenvironmentaljusticecommunityofworcestermassachusettsapilotproject
AT rosslaurie participatorytestingandreportinginanenvironmentaljusticecommunityofworcestermassachusettsapilotproject
AT mucciaronedanielle participatorytestingandreportinginanenvironmentaljusticecommunityofworcestermassachusettsapilotproject
AT calvachemariacamila participatorytestingandreportinginanenvironmentaljusticecommunityofworcestermassachusettsapilotproject
AT tayloroctavia participatorytestingandreportinginanenvironmentaljusticecommunityofworcestermassachusettsapilotproject
AT goblerobert participatorytestingandreportinginanenvironmentaljusticecommunityofworcestermassachusettsapilotproject