Get the Lead Out!Paint Retailers Survey

A collaborative project between GVSU/KCON

and Calvin College Department of Nursing

Principal Investigators

Jean Martin,

GVSU Kirkhof College of Nursing

Bethany Gordon,

Calvin College Department of Nursing

Purpose of the study

Assess knowledge of paint retailers regarding lead safe work practices (LSWP)

Evaluate inventory of products and display of information for LSWP

Groundwork for future engagement of retail industry.

Significance of the study

Elevated blood lead levels are a significant risk for many children in Kent County.

The primary cause of lead poisoning in the United States is known to be the deteriorating lead-based paint and lead dust found in pre-1978 housing and in industrialized areas.

Significance of the study

Distressed housing increases the risk of childhood lead poisoning. Likewise, repair without using LSWP can increase the risk.

Employing specific simple skills (LSWP) can ensure that lead dust levels in the household environment do not become unsafe.

Significance of the study

Paint retailers have a unique and significant opportunity to educate both professionals and consumers about childhood lead poisoning and LSWP.

LSWP can add to the retailer’s profits while simultaneously providing a public service.

Methods

Sample– Convenience sample– 40 retailers serving high risk

neighborhoods

Methods

Data collection procedure– Approval to conduct study

Contacting paint retailers– Telephone script

Scheduling data collectionCollecting data– Script – Survey

Methods

Instrument: Paint Retailers Survey– Interview– 23 items

• Products and information• Lead safe work practices supplies• Staff training• Customer

Methods

Data analysis– Level of retailers’ knowledge regarding lead

safe work practices (LSWP)– Inventory of products for LSWP– Display of information on LSWP

Reporting of data– Aggregate data only– No comparisons by neighborhood or type of

store

Methods

Risks– Social harm– Economic harm

Benefits– Increased awareness of paint lead risks to children– Increased knowledge of LSWP– Safer environment for children

Protection of Human Subjects

Human subjects review (IRB) approvalConsent form to be read by participantContents– Who

• GVSU• Calvin • GTLO collaborative

– Purpose of study – Participants

• 40 retailers will be asked to participate• Participation is voluntary

Protection of Human Subjects

Consent form contents– What is being agreed to

• Respond to questions related to LSWP• Inventory of products and display information

– What I will get out of participating• Movie pass• Name entered into drawing

Protection of Human Subjects

Consent form contentsI understand that– This is a research study– My privacy and confidentiality will be protected (data

storage)– No names on survey– No names used in reports– Participation is voluntary– Can withdraw at any time– Contacts for more information

Obtain signature of participant

Participants

40 retailers invited to participate• 3 declined to participate (7.5%)• 3 completed survey but did not sign consent form so

surveys were not used (7.5%)• 1 signed the consent but did not complete the survey

(2.5%)• 1 unable to contact (2.5%)

32 surveys included in analysis (80.0%)

Instrument

8 items related to productsSample item “EPA Blue Book Protect Your Family from Lead in Your Home”Response options– Not available– Available upon request– Available among merchandise– Available at service counter– Available at checkout– Offered at checkout– Provided to every customer at checkout

Instrument

3 items related to LSWP suppliesSample item “6ml plastic sheeting”Response options– Store does not carry– Displayed elsewhere in store– Displayed in paint aisle/department– Displayed in paint aisle/department with

LSWP sign

Instrument

6 items related to staff/staff training

Sample items – How many employees have completed 8-

hour HUD/EPA Lead Safety for Remodeling, Repair and Painting?

– Do employees have access to a sample copy of EPA Blue Book Protect Your Family from Lead in Your Home?

Instrument

6 items related to customer educationSample item– Does the staff ask shoppers if they live in pre-1978

housing?

Response options– Never– Occasionally (<50% of the time)– Usually (>50% of time)– Always

Instrument

Retailers were asked if the information was available in Spanish

Surveyors observed if products and supplies were displayed

Responses at a higher level than the ‘best practice’ response were counted as correct

Retailer Response: Products

Not AvailBy

request In storeService counter

Check-out

Offered at checkout

Every customer

EPA blue book

17 5 7 2 0 0 1

Green field guide

29 2 1 0 0 0 0

Community resources

23 4 1 2 1 0 0

LSWP training

31 0 0 1 0 0 0

HEPA rental 28 3 1 0 0 0 0

LeadCheck swab

17 4 11 0 0 0 0

‘‘best best practice’practice’

Retailer Response: Supplies

Store does not carry

Displayed elsewhere

Displayed in paint

aisle

Displayed w/LSWP

sign

4ml plastic

5 10 16 0

6ml plastic

11 9 11 0

Spray bottles

2 22 7 0

‘‘best best practice’practice’

Retailer Responses

Product information: best practices– 34.4% (11) had LeadCheck swabs or similar

product available among merchandise– 12.5% (4) had pamphlets other than EPA Blue Book

or EPA/HUD/CDC Green Field guide available– 53.1% (17) had no product information available

Supplies– 62.5% (20) stocked 6ml plastic (11 in paint aisle)– 90.7% (29) stocked spray bottles (7 in paint aisle)

Retailer Responses

Staff training– 59.4% (19) had no staff trained in LSWP (8-

hour HUD/EPA Lead Safety for Remodeling, Repair and Painting; NPCA online training; or another Lead Safety training)

Staff access to LSWP information– 40.6% (13) have access to EPA Blue Book

Protect Your Family from Lead in Your Home– 7.5% (3) have access to EPA/HUD/CDC Green

Field Guide Lead Paint Safety

Retailer Responses

Customer Education– 65.6% (21) never ask if shoppers live in pre-1978

housing [34% ask occasionally]– 71.0% (23) never ask if there is a child under age

six in the home– 59.4% (19) never tell customers to work wet– 53.1% (17) never tell customers the importance

of LSWP when working with pre-1978 windows

Summary of Responses

1 retailer had 9 ‘best practice’ responses

1 retailer had 8 ‘best practice’ responses

1 retailer had 4 ‘best practice’ responses

5 retailers had 3 ‘best practice’ responses

6 retailers had 2 ‘best practice’ responses

5 retailers had 1 ‘best practice’ response

13 retailers - no ‘best practice’ response (40.6%)

Next Steps & Future Direction

Disseminate information

Develop educational programs on LSWP for retailers and customers

Build sustainable collaborations and projects

Eliminate childhood lead poisoning

Paul HaanProject Coordinator

Healthy Homes Coalition of West Michiganwww.healthyhomescoalition.org

email: paul@healthyhomescoaltion.orgphone: 616.734.9443

Questions & Answers