Study: PA schools plagued by widespread lead, mold, radon and other environmental hazards

School safety – specifically, the state of environmental health in and around district buildings – is sure to be even more top of mind as many students start the school year next week, thanks to a new report that finds that environmental hazards, from widespread lead exposure in water and paint to the high prevalence of mold and radon, are impacting schools and students around the commonwealth. 

The Pittsburgh-based organization Women for a Healthy Environment, a nonprofit that addresses environmental exposures that impact public health, released its 2025 State of Environmental Health in Pennsylvania Schools Report on Wednesday, outlining the health and safety hazards – and potential fixes – for schools around the commonwealth. 

“The findings today that we’re sharing are not abstract statistics. They certainly represent the daily reality for more than 1.7 million children who spend over 1,000 hours each year in school buildings across the commonwealth,” Michelle Naccarati-Chapkis, executive director of WHE, said Wednesday during a press briefing. “We know that every child deserves an environment free of environmental hazards – one that promotes clean air, clean water and no exposure to any harmful chemicals, regardless of the ZIP code, regardless of the income.”

Looking at a variety of environmental factors from air quality, including the prevalence of asthma, to water quality and the presence of radon, lead, mold and more, the report revealed that while many schools are improving, environmental hazards continue to bedevil schools across the state.  

A random statewide sample of Pennsylvania schools found that during the four-year period between July 2018 and June 2022, 75% of schools that tested for radon found levels that exceeded the federal action level, 52.3% of schools that tested for lead in drinking water exceeded action level, and that 61.5% of schools had mold presence high enough to be recommended for remediation. 

The study, which divided the state’s 500 school districts into six regions, sampled roughly 10% of schools in each region, including rural, suburban and urban facilities. 

“The findings in this report represent a public health crisis hiding right in plain sight,” Dr. Deborah Gentile, medical director at Community Partners in Asthma Care, said Wednesday during the briefing. “Pennsylvania schoolchildren face an average asthma rate of 13.9% – that’s nearly double the national average. In some school districts, it’s reaching as high as 32.6% – that’s 1 in every 3 children.”

The report states that most Pennsylvania schools were built before 1978, before the ban on indoor lead paint and other toxic materials took effect. Lead paint is still routinely used for building exteriors, and deteriorating paint leeches lead into the surrounding soil. 

LeShawna Coleman, chief of staff at the Philadelphia Federation of Teachers 3, told City & State that the average Philadelphia school building is nearly 75 years old.  

“Almost all of our buildings have asbestos – and the district is having a really hard time keeping up with that,” Coleman said in an interview. She recalled an incident in 2018 when a 6-year-old was hospitalized with severe lead poisoning after eating paint chips falling from the classroom ceiling. “At the end of the day, yes, schools are educational institutions … but our first job is safety. We have to keep children safe.”

And while some districts tested only one school building or a handful of classrooms, the report found that remediation was noted for only 29.2% of school districts with mold, 11.3% of school districts with lead in the drinking water and just 5% of school districts with radon. 

The report found that most schools in Southwestern Pennsylvania had a lower rate of environmental testing and compliance with recommended best practices, largely due to limited funding and spending priorities. 

State Sen. Devlin Robinson, a Republican representing part of Allegheny County who promoted his bills seeking to invest in and require radon testing and lead testing in drinking water, said the report “shines a light on dangerous conditions” in many schools. 

“I hope this report is a wake-up call for the General Assembly to take action for our children, educators and school staff to remain safe and healthy,” Robinson said during the briefing, noting that every issue at the state level “comes down to money and how we are going to pay” for needed changes. 

Speaking to City & State, education advocates said more must be done to address facility issues and the root causes of the environmental hazards. 

Laura Boyce, the Pennsylvania executive director at Teach Plus, told City & State that school closures due to heat, asbestos and other environmental risks in areas such as Philadelphia and Scranton are “unfortunately not uncommon.” 

“You have students (whose) heads are down on the desk. They don’t feel good, particularly kids with asthma,” Boyce said in an interview. “It starts to become a real health concern, and it’s just not at all an ideal environment for teaching and learning.”

Coleman said the School District of Philadelphia has a deferred maintenance cost of about $7 billion, in addition to inconsistent environmental testing and remediation. 

“Obviously, we would like facilities upgraded, but we have to prioritize safety,” she said. “Safety is primarily the asbestos (remediation) and secondarily, I would say lead (remediation).”

While the report offers a preliminary picture of schools’ testing results and remediation needs, the extent to which these problems exist hasn’t been fully explored. 

“There are also just a lot of schools and districts that don't even have the resources to do a facilities assessment and even have a real sense of what the cost would be to do some of these facilities upgrades – and whether it would make more sense to be building new buildings versus retrofitting,” said Boyce. “The state has put in very small amounts towards facility funding in the last few state budgets, but there hasn’t been substantial state funding for facilities in many years.”

The report calls for greater investment in safer schools and construction, including improved indoor air quality, as well as green cleaning. 

“The only thing that is missing is the prioritization and the political will to make that happen,” Naccarati-Chapkis said. “We’re not striving for perfect, but we’re striving to create those healthy environments. We have the knowledge, we’ve got the tools – and we’ve got the obligation now to move forward with that.”

Regardless of the funds available in this year’s to-be-determined state budget, the report makes it clear that large investments are needed over a multi-year span to address the level of environmental hazards many schools – and students – are experiencing. 

“Our state policy makers have made it very clear that they’re concerned with student outcomes … but the research is very clear that when you’re in facilities that are impacting student health, that also has an impact on student performance,” Boyce added. “We can’t have them sitting, sweltering in school buildings that are, in some cases, literally poisoning them with radon, lead, asbestos and other things that are going to make it impossible for them to learn – and could really impact their long-term health.”