TECHNICALLY SPEAKING: Documentation: Who Needs It?

Question: Who needs documentation? Answer: Everyone!

Whenever I have been involved in discussions with pest management professionals about record keeping, I have found that many do not want to keep records at all and others want to dispose of them as soon as state regulations permit. Storage space is not the issue. There seems to be some degree of paranoia regarding documentation and an overwhelming desire to get rid of the files as soon as possible.

Companies are only hurt if they fail to keep records or if they do a poor job recording information. Good documentation solves far more problems than it will ever cause. In my opinion, records should be kept as long as reasonably possible, and in some cases, forever.

DOCUMENTATION TIPS. There are several fundamental principles of good documentation, which must be met if the records are to be of any value:

• Documentation must be accurate, e.g., time of service, target pest(s), services provided and products applied (final concentration and amount).

• Written documentation must be legible and coherent. Technicians need to take the time to write legibly so that the customer and company personnel can read what they wrote.

• Documentation should be signed or otherwise annotated by the preparer so that anyone else referring to the document knows who wrote it. Some documentation should be signed by the customer, e.g., service tickets and estimates.

• Paperwork should be filed systematically so that records can be readily obtained.

JUST THE FACTS. Service records are probably one of the most important documents a company can maintain. While there have been significant changes in industry practices regarding pesticide application and the products we use, there are still claims of human and pet pesticide exposures.

On the rare occasion when our company has been confronted with this type of claim it is comforting for me to reach for our service tickets, which provide specific information on the time of application, method of treatment, pesticide used, final concentration, amount applied and site of application.

Frequently, when a claimant is aware that the situation is so accurately documented, the problem disappears. If this is not the case, good documentation facilitates communication with the service technician and the customer regarding the service and the cause for concern.

I have known of other misapplication claims where documentation has saved a company a lot of aggravation and expense in defending itself against litigation. For example, a fish kill near a golf course was initially blamed on the golf course groundskeepers. Fortunately, their application records and pesticide purchases for the past two years indicated that they had neither used nor purchased any of the products responsible for the kill.

One of the most frequently encountered claims by customers is that the technician did not provide the service or was never at the account. This problem is easily resolved if there is a customer signature on the service ticket.

If the technician goes to the account and service is not rendered it is important that the reason for not servicing the account is documented on the service ticket, e.g., manager/engineer not available, no answer (door, telephone or pager), key/code did not work or customer was not prepared for the service. Whatever the problem, non-service issues should not be allowed to persist (my rule of thumb: a stop should not be missed more than once). We are being paid for a service and it is difficult to justify billing a customer for service not rendered.

AREAS FOR IMPROVEMENT. In my opinion, the poorest record keeping and documentation occurs in two areas: post-construction termite treatments and wood destroying insect (WDI) inspections. This situation dumbfounds me because these are the two pest management services that are most likely to result in litigation.

Whenever a company provides post-construction termite treatments (traditional and/or baiting) the documentation should be comprehensive. A narrative report should be prepared, which describes termite species, signs of infestation, areas of infestation and damage, conditions conducive to infestation and corrective actions the property owner should take. A detailed diagram, which graphically complements the written report, should be prepared.

A written treatment plan should be prepared (this may be the contract for service) detailing the materials to be used, method of application and conditions that may not permit a complete treatment. This should be signed by the customer.

Once liquid treatments have been made, they should be documented to reflect the conditions at the time of the application. Any changes from the original treatment plan should be recorded, as well as the product applied, final concentration and total amount of product used.

Likewise, baiting system installations should be documented to indicate the placement of above-ground bait stations and in-ground monitors/bait stations. If stations cannot be installed per the proposal then the reason for the variance should be recorded.

WDI reports are frequently inadequately documented. The most common area of the form that is inadequately or inaccurately reported is inaccessible areas. In litigation, I have seen both extremes: inspectors reporting inaccessible conditions that did not exist (immediately bringing into question the accuracy of their report); or not recording inaccessible areas indicating the inspector had access to most areas of the structure when it was obvious they did not. In either situation the result may cost the company.

CONCLUSION. In our industry, accurate records are essential. Companies who accurately document their services should not have any reservations about keeping these records indefinitely. To this end it is important that companies take the time to train their technicians to properly fill out service tickets and write legibly. Good records and good companies are synonymous.

The author is technical director of American Pest Management, Takoma Park, Md. He can be reached at 301/891-2600 or via e-mail at rkramer@pctonline.com.