School and childcare facility air quality decision-makers' perspectives on using low-cost sensors for wildfire smoke response

BackgroundDuring wildfire smoke episodes, school and childcare facility staff and those who support them rely upon air quality data to inform activity decisions. Where ambient regulatory monitor data is sparse, low-cost sensors can help inform local outdoor activity decisions, and provide indoor air quality data. However, there is no established protocol for air quality decision-makers to use sensor data for schools and childcare facilities. To develop practical, effective toolkits to guide the use of sensors in school and childcare settings, it is essential to understand the perspectives of the potential end-users of such toolkit materials.MethodsWe conducted 15 semi-structured interviews with school, childcare, local health jurisdiction, air quality, and school district personnel regarding sensor use for wildfire smoke response. Interviews included sharing PM2.5 data collected at schools during wildfire smoke. Interviews were transcribed and transcripts were coded using a codebook developed both a priori and amended as additional themes emerged.ResultsThree major themes were identified by organizing complementary codes together: (1) Low-cost sensors are useful despite data quality limitations, (2) Low-cost sensor data can inform decision-making to protect children in school and childcare settings, and (3) There are feasibility and public perception-related barriers to using low-cost sensors.ConclusionsInterview responses provided practical implications for toolkit development, including demonstrating a need for toolkits that allow a variety of sensor preferences. In addition, participants expected to have a wide range of available time for monitoring, budget for sensors, and decision-making types. Finally, interview responses revealed a need for toolkits to address sensor uses outside of activity decisions, especially assessment of ventilation and filtration.

Automated summary

The study found that low-cost sensors are useful despite data quality limitations, and can inform decision-making to protect children in school and childcare settings. However, there are feasibility and public perception-related barriers to using low-cost sensors. Overall, the responses provided practical implications for toolkit development, including the need for a variety of sensor preferences, available time for monitoring, budget for sensors, and types of decision-making.