At Weequahic High School in Newark, N.J., fountains have been disconnected from the school’s water system. Fraser Allan Best, News21
By Elissa Nuñez and Amy Molloy | News21
WASHINGTON, D.C. – When Ceon Dubose Palmore got thirsty at school, an administrator had to escort the 15-year-old past trash-bag-covered fountains to a faucet two floors down.
[one_half][box type=”shadow this-matters”]The San Ysidro School District is spending $24 million to replace drinking fountains, sinks pipes and faucets at three schools after elevated lead levels were found in the drinking water. Most states, including California, don’t require schools test to make sure their drinking water is lead free.[/box][/one_half]
Like many schools across the country, her Washington, D.C., middle school discovered lead in its drinking water, making most fountains unsafe to drink. It took months to install filters sporadically around the school.
Ceon rarely asked to get a drink from the working fountains since teachers didn’t want kids disrupting class time.
“It made it a lot harder for kids,” Ceon said. “I also think it impacted me a lot because I have problems with hydration and stuff, so if I couldn’t drink water, it would distract me for the day. It would get me in a lot of trouble.”
While schools often struggle with the aftermath of finding lead in their drinking water, education advocates and health professionals agree that there’s an even costlier scenario: not knowing at all.
A News21 analysis showed 44 states don’t require schools to check for lead, and the federal government doesn’t require it either. Thousands of schools scrambled to test after learning that lead had seeped into the public water supply and created a public health crisis in Flint, Michigan, but lead experts say the majority of schools across the country still don’t know what’s in their water.
John Rumpler, senior attorney at Boston-based advocacy group Environment America, said Flint may have brought attention to the lead issue, but it didn’t necessarily hit home.
[one_half][feature_box style=”16″ title=”About%20’Troubled%20Water’” font_color=”#971C1F” alignment=”left” padding-top=”0″]This report, called “Troubled Water” is part of a project on drinking water contamination in the United States. It was produced by the Carnegie-Knight News21 program.inewsource publishes News21’s yearly projects.[/feature_box][/one_half]
“Most people thought this must be a problem somewhere else, in communities like Flint, but not necessarily where I get my water and certainly not where my kid goes to school,” he said. “It’s really important to educate the public about how widespread this problem is and how there’s likely a threat to their own children’s drinking water right where they live, whether it’s an urban community, a rural community or a suburban community.”
The responsibility to test overwhelmingly falls on cash-strapped school districts, which often don’t have the funds or incentive to make lead testing and remediation top priorities. In California, lawmakers trying to approve statewide mandatory lead testing have been met with strong opposition from some school districts that fear dealing with positive tests would cripple their bank balance.
“There is an aversion to both the monetary cost of fixing the problem and also to the public relations cost of fixing the problem,” said Yanna Lambrinidou, a Virginia Tech researcher who has long studied lead in schools’ drinking water. “The idea that schools would have to disclose to parents that there’s lead flowing out of drinking water taps and have to deal with the alarm and outrage that naturally would come from that, and then the issues of distrust, and then parents and communities wanting to get more involved – all of these things are … a headache.”
A widespread but unknown threat
For centuries, workers used lead for plumbing because the metal was malleable enough to mold into pipes, yet hard enough to resist corroding and leaking over time. Once scientists and environmental experts discovered that lead leached from pipes transporting water, Congress banned the use of lead pipes in a 1986 amendment to the Safe Drinking Water Act.
However, Congress did not require schools to replace lead pipes, which means lots of school buildings still receive water from these fixtures. This is especially true in older, poorer neighborhoods, where replacing lead service lines means changing a city’s entire water infrastructure.
Although schools constructed before 1986 are most at risk of contamination, even newer buildings face a lead threat because the amendment still allowed pipes to contain small traces of lead. Congress had defined “lead-free” as no more than 8 percent lead in pipes, but it didn’t narrow the definition again until 2014.
“Unless your school was built in the last three years, or unless all the plumbing was replaced in the last three years, there’s some risk that lead is getting into your children’s water,” Rumpler said.
For example, the Los Angeles Unified School District installed brass fixtures to replace old lead ones at 131 of its schools in the past decade. The new fixtures still contain traces of allowable lead that taint schools’ water supplies beyond the EPA’s safe limit, according to a report by Environment America. District officials said they’re trying to replace them.
There’s no database that tracks how many schools voluntarily test, but thousands that have tested found lead in their pipes, according to results released by school districts nationwide in the past year. Eighty-three percent of 1,281 New York City public schools tested higher than the maximum level allowed by the EPA, while about half of Newark, New Jersey, public schools found lead in their water.
Lead can cause significant damage to children
Lead, a powerful neurotoxin, is particularly harmful to children whose developing bodies absorb more of the contaminant than adults do. Numerous studies indicate that children exposed to high lead levels are more likely to perform worse academically and enter the criminal justice system. But even at low levels, exposure to lead over long periods of time can cause significant damage.
Bruce Lanphear, a professor of health sciences at Simon Fraser University, has long studied the effect of low-level lead exposure in children. He said long-term effects of lead exposure include lowered IQ scores, antisocial behavior, attention deficit hyperactivity disorder and other learning disabilities.
Although studies have drawn strong conclusions about the effects of lead in children, science can’t always make immediate connections between exposure and potential damage.
When schools test high for lead, they often provide blood testing to children. However, because lead flows from blood into bones and joints within several weeks, blood tests don’t always detect the damage – especially since officials often conduct tests months after children have been exposed.
A child who drinks lead-tainted water might not show elevated blood lead levels a month or two later, but the harm persists in his or her body, according to a report by Environment America.
“You can have a kid that looks great and still has lead in their body,” said Dr. Morri E. Markowitz, pediatrician and director of the lead poisoning clinic at Montefiore Children’s Hospital in New York City. “Potentially, they’ve lost some IQ, but you can’t tell.”
Although lead testing might not be a top priority for many schools, environmental experts warn that widespread exposure can have serious implications for entire towns and cities. Mustafa Ali, a founder of the EPA’s environmental justice program, said lead exposure can impose a “lifetime burden” on children of color and their communities not only from a public health perspective, but also economically and educationally.
“In many instances, especially in our vulnerable communities, students already have all kinds of burdens that they’re dealing with, and then to add this additional burden from these toxic exposures is just crazy,” Ali said.
States, federal government reluctant to address issue
Although the EPA recommends schools and child care facilities test for lead, the federal agency is only responsible for ensuring public water systems are lead-free before the water reaches schools’ pipes.
The result: Schools and child care facilities on public water systems are under no federal requirement to test their taps for lead. That means nearly 100,000 schools and half a million child care facilities aren’t regulated under the Safe Drinking Water Act, according to EPA data.
“We have ended up with a regulation that has given us the false sense of security that somebody out there is actually protecting us from lead in drinking water without having the small-print information that not only is that regulation absurdly inadequate, but it also doesn’t cover schools at all,” Lambrinidou said of the Safe Drinking Water Act.
Only six states – Illinois, Maryland, Minnesota, New Jersey, New York and Virginia – require schools to test for lead, according to a News21 analysis.
Water quality advocates say states may be reluctant to introduce mandatory testing because they feel they shouldn’t have to bear the financial burden of responsibility.
“It’s a game of passing the buck,” said Robert Bowcock, a water consultant to environmental advocate Erin Brockovich. “Schools want the districts to pay, districts want the state to pay, who in turn want someone else to pay.”
It’s unlikely federal legislation will change any time soon. Two Democratic senators – Tammy Duckworth of Illinois and Cory Booker of New Jersey – reintroduced legislation in June that would require schools nationwide to test for lead and would provide grants for schools to replace their outdated pipes. However, the Republican-controlled Congress has resisted efforts so far. Some Republican senators believe it sucks too much money from the federal budget.
“Over 100 years, we’ve put this dangerous neurotoxicant into our public water delivery systems and now someone’s going to have to pay to get it out, and nobody really wants to do it,” Rumpler said.
Schools ‘afraid’ to test for lead
Although most states don’t require testing, some have introduced state-funded initiatives providing schools with free lead tests this year. The response has been mixed.
In California, the State Water Board released data showing that as of July, only 11 percent of the 13,000 K-12 schools signed up for free testing after it was made available at the beginning of the year.
School officials know a positive lead test could result in weeks of construction work and a hefty bill – should they decide to address the issue properly.
Students at a school in San Ysidro, a low-income area of San Diego near the Mexican border, will start three weeks later than planned this fall. The district is replacing drinking fountains, sinks, pipes and faucets at three schools after discovering elevated lead levels. It will cost $24 million.
“We had a bond that was passed by the local community and everything has been done within the confines of that,” said Julio Fonseca, superintendent of the San Ysidro School District. “It’s just a shame we allowed it to get to this point.”
San Ysidro School District Superintendent Julio Fonseca attends a school board meeting on July 9, 2015. Megan Wood, inewsource
When California lawmakers introduced the proposal to mandate lead testing, they made adjustments after strong opposition from school districts. The latest bill, AB 746, would require schools to test and shut off the water if the tests find elevated lead levels. However, the schools wouldn’t have to replace the fixtures and faucets, a concession meant to reduce the opposition, said the bill’s author, Assemblywoman Lorena Gonzalez Fletcher, a Democrat whose district includes San Ysidro.
“Mandatory testing is the first thing we need to address,” she said. “Just because it’s expensive to remediate, are we not going to let ourselves find out there’s lead in our schools?”
Gonzalez Fletcher said that while the bill does not provide any long-term solutions, it’s an important first step. “One of the reasons we introduced this bill is because we know schools are afraid to know the extent of the problem – and that’s not good enough,” she said.
When Arizona launched a statewide lead-screening program in January, it began as a sample of “high-risk” areas based on age of building, ZIP code and the number of young children served. The program became so popular, however, that every public school – more than 11,000 – has volunteered to test.
The Arizona Department of Environmental Quality provides schools with free toolkits that include instructions, collection containers and prepaid shipping boxes to mail to local laboratories.
“What we wanted to do was help schools and screen their water for them rather than putting some kind of burden on them where they would have to pay for the costs,” ADEQ director Misael Cabrera said.
Cabrera said 96 percent of the schools have passed the screening. Arizona doesn’t require schools to replace pipes if they test positive for lead. It doesn’t have a program to help schools financially if they do find lead, and it’s unclear how these schools will respond.
School response to lead exposure varies
When 30 public schools in Newark, New Jersey, found lead in their water in March 2016, Superintendent Christopher Cerf released the district’s annual lead testing results to the public. The district cut off every water source, called parents and local organizations to solicit bottled water donations, and vowed to install filters on its fountains.
But it’s been a long process. One school, Weequahic High School, still has old filters. It has relied on water coolers for more than a year.
The lead problems at some of the schools date to the 1990s, when the school district first tested its faucets.
“I was not surprised as someone who was there when it was a problem 27 years ago,” said Kim Gaddy, a parent at Newark Public Schools. “I was more angry and disappointed that not only they didn’t catch it, but I also got comfortable thinking they were going to resolve or rectify the situation.”
Community organizer Maria Lopez Nuñez, who works with the Ironbound Community Corp. in Newark, said she isn’t shocked by the slow remediation process either, given Newark’s demographic makeup.
“I’m sure if this happened in one of our richer suburbs, it would be an issue that would be immediately remediated, or the people there would have the resources to start the remediation process themselves,” Lopez Nuñez said.
The district has spent close to $1.5 million on testing and remediation to contain its most recent lead crisis, said school business administrator Valerie Wilson. But lead, a persistent contaminant in Newark’s century-old schools, will likely remain a part of its legacy.
“We have determined what we want to do in terms of remediation to what I call an intermediate point where we’re not necessarily all the way there, but we can contain and ensure that all the time children have safe water, which is what’s most important to us,” Wilson said.
Schools that can’t afford to replace lead plumbing and fixtures have to resort to replacing fountains with coolers dispensing bottled water.
In Camden, New Jersey, the school district shut off its fountains in 2002 after the city found high levels of lead in its water. It spends about $100,000 every year on water coolers to supply clean drinking water to students.
“This is an issue that’s been going on in this city since the ’70s when we realized as a society that lead was unsafe,” said Maita Soukup, a spokeswoman for Camden City School District. “It’s not a new issue. Our school district’s approach is over 15 years old. I think everyone is happy that the district invests in the water coolers. That means we don’t have to be overly worried.”
Custodian Jason Ferguson monitors the levels of lead in the water at Thomas H. Dudley Family School in Camden, N.J. Fraser Allan Best, News21
In diverse school districts like Washington, D.C.’s, the response has been disparate between neighboring schools. When parents at a well-funded public school, Capitol Hill Montessori, learned from an education blogger in March 2016 that their school tested high for lead six months prior, they quickly met with school administrators and City Council members to find out why they weren’t notified and how the district planned on remediating the problem.
Soon, the scope of the problem grew. D.C. public schools retested all its schools’ faucets for lead because of an “increase in attention around the issue,” said Michelle Lerner, a spokeswoman for D.C. public schools. The majority tested high.
At Capitol Hill Montessori, parents said contractors installed new filters at all drinking water sources just weeks later. Teachers and parents donated bottled water to the school so that it’s available in every classroom.
Parents at the school said their advocacy initiated the citywide response of testing and installing filters, but some education activists say it took a well-funded school to draw attention to an established lead problem in D.C. public schools.
“It depends on who is actually whistleblower to make a story a story,” said LaTricea Adams, founder and president of Black Millennials for Flint. “It wasn’t until a more affluent and less black and brown school made this call to action that we actually started to see D.C. respond.”
For other schools across the District, the response hasn’t been as quick. In Sousa Middle School, contractors installed filters at some drinking water sources last year, while other fountains are still shut off. Students had limited access to clean drinking water because their schools didn’t provide them with bottled or filtered water.
Samantha Davis, founder and executive director of the Black Swan Academy in Washington, D.C., said this disparate response stems from lack of outreach to schools she works with in the District’s poorest neighborhoods. Davis said parents at these schools are less likely to worry about water quality given the pile of other issues they must handle.
“We would’ve loved to see students being supplied with bottled water,” Davis said. “We would’ve loved to see some community forums held to educate the families and community members about the impact of lead exposure, and those were steps that weren’t taken that I think should have been, and can still be taken.”
Parents express concerns over lack of transparency, action
In a working-class area of Washington, D.C., J.O. Wilson Elementary tested high for lead in January after initial tests found lead, so contractors installed filters at the school. The school alerted parents 10 days after the city received sampling results, and it took nine days to shut off lead-tainted faucets, according to a City Council report.
After more than a year of flawed testing and faulty filters citywide, parents pushed the D.C. Council to introduce legislation requiring public schools to test water sources for lead, install filters and publish their annual lead testing results. The measure passed in July.
“The push at D.C. Council from constituents and concerned parents is probably the only reason that this gained traction, and there’s movement in terms of improving the legislation and improving the approach,” said Charles Swartz, a parent at Payne Elementary School in D.C.
And sometimes, parents simply want to know whether their children can drink the water at school.
A battery plant explosion in Maywood, a Los Angeles neighborhood, just over a year ago released high amounts of lead and magnesium into the community. Locals said the soil in their homes and schools tested positive for lead contamination, but the water hasn’t been tested at all. Tap water in the area varies from a cloudy, white color to a muddy brown.
As a precaution, Lily Hernandez, a mother whose 6-year-old daughter attends Fishburn Elementary School, donates cases of water to the school monthly.
“I feel safer because I’m supplying the water,” she said. “Trying to get something done is an ongoing battle. The parents are concerned, but our voices are often ignored.”
inewsource is a nonprofit, nonpartisan newsroom dedicated to improving lives in the San Diego region and beyond through impactful, data-based investigative and accountability journalism.
Our Vision
Betrayals of the public trust are revealed and rectified, wrongdoing is deterred, and inequities are illuminated thanks to inewsource’s deep, dogged, fact-based reporting.
Our Values
Truth: Above all else, we value the importance of a free and credible press. Truth is the cornerstone of democracy and the core value for inewsource.
Transparency: We build trust with our readers by adhering to the highest standards and ethics, and to reporting with facts, precision and context.
Collaboration: Our newsroom prioritizes collaboration over competition. We regularly partner with media outlets on reporting projects and to share content.
Community: Our reporting serves the San Diego region, and we strive to build relationships with our audience by getting out into the community to listen and engage.
Ethics Policy
inewsource will conduct its business with the highest standards of decency, fairness and accuracy. These standards shall apply equally to inewsource employees, freelancers and all others engaged in gathering information on behalf of inewsource. All receive a copy of these ethical standards.
In the course of our reporting, we will consistently:
● Identify our organization and ourselves fully and avoid false representations of any kind to any source.
● Obtain consent from all parties before electronically recording any interview or conversation except in extraordinary cases authorized by the Managing Editor and Editor. If a source refuses to be taped, that must be honored; no recordings are to be made without consent.
● Respect the individual’s right to privacy. inewsource will never manipulate or barter private, personal, health, financial or other extraneous information in the course of preparing its reports.
● Any source we describe or write about in any significant manner must be contacted. The employee should document all efforts to contact the source, and if unsuccessful, should summarize these efforts at contact in the body of his/her writing.
In addition, inewsource follows the Code of Ethics of the Society of Professional Journalists. The latest version, revised in 2014, can be found here.
Our organization retains full authority over editorial content to protect the best journalistic and business interests of our organization. We will maintain a firewall between news coverage decisions and sources of all revenue. Acceptance of financial support does not constitute implied or actual endorsement of donors or their products, services or opinions.
We accept gifts, grants and sponsorships from individuals and organizations for the general support of our activities, but our news judgments are made independently and not on the basis of donor support. Our organization also may consider donations to support the coverage of particular topics, but our organization maintains editorial control of the coverage. We will cede no right of review or influence of editorial content, nor of unauthorized distribution of editorial content.
Our organization will make public all donors who give a total of $1,000 or more. We will accept anonymous donations for general support only if it is clear that sufficient safeguards have been put into place that the expenditure of that donation is made independently by our organization and in compliance with INN’s Membership Standards.
Diversity
Diverse Voices
Inclusiveness is at the heart of thinking and acting as journalists, and it supports the educational mandate of inewsource. Race, class, generation, gender, sexual orientation, ability, and geography all affect point of view. inewsource believes that reflecting societal differences in reporting leads to better, more nuanced stories and a better-informed community.
inewsource is committed to employment equity and diversity.
Diverse Staffing Report
Below is a breakdown of staffing data at inewsource. We determine the composition of our staff by asking them to self-identify. It is based on a newsroom of 11 and a total staff of 15 as of August 2020. Percentages are based on 15 total survey responses. The numbers include full-time and part-time staff, full-time fellows and full-time and part-time interns.
All Staff Percentages are based on 15 total survey responses. The numbers include full-time and part-time staff, full-time fellows and full-time and part-time interns.
Newsroom Percentages are based on 15 completed survey responses to this question.
Business Percentages are based on 15 completed survey responses to this question.
Gender Identity
Gender Identity
Gender Identity
Women
80%
Women
82%
Women
75%
Men
20%
Men
18%
Men
25%
Sexual Orientation
Sexual Orientation
Sexual Orientation
Straight
87%
Straight
82%
Straight
100%
LGBTQ-identifying
7%
LGBTQ-identifying
7%
Not specified
7%
Not specified
7%
Speak a language beyond English at home
33%
Speak a language beyond English at home
18%
Speak a language beyond English at home
75%
Race/Ethnicity
Race/Ethnicity
Race/Ethnicity
White
67%
White
73%
White
50%
Hispanic or Latinx
20%
Two or more races
18%
Hispanic or Latinx
50%
Two or more races
13%
Hispanic or Latinx
9%
Age
Age
Age
20-29
40%
20-29
45%
20-29
25%
30-39
47%
30-39
45%
30-39
50%
60 or older
13%
60 or older
9%
60 or older
25%
* The percentages in the charts have been rounded and may not add up to 100.
Ownership Structure, Funding and Grants
inewsource is a nonprofit organization, whose legal name is Investigative Newsource. It does business as inewsource. The business was incorporated on Aug. 4, 2009 in the state of California. Tax-exempt status as a 501c3 was granted by the IRS on Sept. 15, 2010. inewsource is funded primarily by individual contributions and foundation grants. We are guided by a board of directors.
Editorial independence: Journalists employed by inewsource take no editorial direction from donors whose contributions may support the organization. inewsource will not hesitate to report on its donors when events warrant. Our Editorial Independence Policy details the firewall between journalism and revenue.
To be transparent with the public, inewsourcelists its donors on its website. In cases where a donor is the subject of an inewsource story, additional disclosure will be made.
Financial Documents
We do our due diligence to earn your trust in our reporting, as well as in our governance and financial sustainability. All of our financial documents are made available to view so that our supporters can trust we are sound stewards of your philanthropy. Review our IRS Form 990s, audited financial statements and annual reports:
Transparency is one of our core values. Today, there is a need to build trust with our audience because new media and ways of communicating spread lies and slanted news faster than “real” news. At the same time, this era of new technologies makes it easier than ever for news organizations to be transparent. People don’t just have to believe us, they can investigate our investigations with our source materials.
Transparency is key to building credibility.
inewsource reporters have primary responsibility for reporting, writing, and fact-checking their stories. But before a story is published, the reporter reviews all facts and sources with an editor or another reporter. Facts must be traced to a primary source.
In addition, we “transparify” certain investigative stories. This process involves publishing a version of the web story with hyperlinks to all the story’s facts. This is proof that all facts have been documented with primary evidence. We do this to build trust with our readers and to be as transparent as we hope the public figures and institutions that we hold accountable will be.
Unnamed Sources
Not all sources are created equal. Some sources cannot speak authoritatively, provide proper analysis or speak specifically to every inquiry placed before them. To maintain the integrity of our reporting, inewsource reporters must select sources who can speak with validity to the topic at hand, and avoid presenting unqualified or underqualified sources as experts.
If an interviewed source has a conflict of interest, or whose qualifications may be tangential or limited, reporters will note that within the context of the story.
It is incumbent upon reporters to fully background their sources to uncover conflicts of interest or slant prior to using them in a story.
Unless discussed prior to an interview, all subjects talking to inewsource journalists are on the record. Specifically, the source is identified by name and title, and their exact or paraphrased words are attributed to them for publication. If journalists speak with sources who are not politicians, public figures or those not commonly interviewed by journalists, staff should explain clearly that information discussed will be on the record and for publication.
There are times, however, when information may be critical for a story but cannot be found or verified by other means. For example, a source may be able to confirm specific information about a series of events they may have witnessed, but have legitimate concerns about using their name or title. The repercussions to the source could be legal, job-related retribution or personal safety. The source and journalist must discuss these potential dangers and terms of use should be agreed upon by both parties.
If inewsource publishes information from an anonymous source, inewsource will explain to readers, in as much detail as possible, why we agreed to anonymity.
Corrections and Clarifications
inewsource strives for accuracy in everything we do, which is why we are committed to fact checking our content. But sometimes we make errors. When that happens, we correct them. We also clarify stories when something we’ve written is confusing or could be misinterpreted.
We endeavor to always be transparent about our commitment to correcting errors and clarifying misperceptions. When staffers see, hear or read about a possible issue with the accuracy of any inewsource content, they are expected to bring it to the attention of an editor and the web producer so it can be evaluated to determine how to proceed.
Including the web producer is key because inewsource is a multimedia news organization and shares its content with multiple partners on multiple platforms. The web producer must alert these partners about corrections and clarifications.
Corrections and clarifications should be included at the bottom of stories and dated.
Actionable Feedback and Newsroom Contacts
Our audiences know the region we cover and have a stake in maintaining and improving the quality of life in San Diego and Imperial counties. We know your knowledge and insights can help shape what we cover and how we cover it. We invite your comments and complaints on news stories, suggestions for issues to cover or sources to consult. We rely on you to tell us when we get it right and when we need to keep pushing.
Your comments, questions and suggestions can be sent to the team as a whole at contact@inewsource.org or you can contact a specific member of our staff.
Lorie Hearn is the chief executive officer, editor and founder of inewsource. She founded inewsource in the summer of 2009, following a successful reporting and editing career in newspapers. She retired from The San Diego Union-Tribune, where she had been a reporter, Metro Editor and finally the senior editor for Metro and Watchdog Journalism. In addition to department oversight, Hearn personally managed a four-person watchdog team, composed of two data specialists and two investigative reporters. Hearn was a Nieman Foundation fellow at Harvard University in 1994-95. She focused on juvenile justice and drug control policy, a natural course to follow her years as a courts and legal affairs reporter at the San Diego Union and then the Union-Tribune.
Hearn became Metro Editor in 1999 and oversaw regional and city news coverage, which included the city of San Diego’s financial debacle and near bankruptcy. Reporters and editors on Metro during her tenure were part of the Pulitzer Prize-winning stories that exposed Congressman Randy “Duke” Cunningham and led to his imprisonment.
Hearn began her journalism career as a reporter for the Bucks County Courier Times, a small daily outside of Philadelphia, shortly after graduating from the University of Delaware. During the decades following, she moved through countless beats at five newspapers on both coasts.
High-profile coverage included the historic state Supreme Court election in 1986, when three sitting justices were ousted from the bench, and the 1992 execution of Robert Alton Harris. That gas chamber execution was the first time the death penalty was carried out in California in 25 years.
In her nine years as Metro Editor at the Union-Tribune, Hearn made watchdog reporting a priority. Her reporters produced award-winning investigations covering large and small local governments. The depth and breadth of their public service work was most evident in coverage of the wildfires of 2003 and then 2007, when more than half a million people were evacuated from their homes.
Laura Wingard is the managing editor at inewsource. She has been an editor in San Diego since 2002, working at The San Diego Union-Tribune, KPBS and now inewsource. At the Union-Tribune, she served in a variety of roles including as enterprise editor, government editor, public safety and legal affairs editor, and metro editor. She directed the newspaper’s award-winning coverage of the October 2007 wildfires and the 2010 disappearance of Poway teenager Chelsea King. She also oversaw reporting on San Diego’s pension crisis.
For two years, Wingard was news and digital editor at KPBS, overseeing a team of four multimedia reporters and two web producers. She also was the KPBS liaison with inewsource and collaborated with inewsource chief executive officer and editor Lorie Hearn on investigative work by both news organizations.
Wingard also worked at the Las Vegas Review-Journal as the city editor and as an award-winning reporter covering the environment and politics. She also was the assistant managing editor for metro at The Press-Enterprise in Riverside. She earned her bachelor’s degree at California State University, Fullerton, with a double major in communications/journalism and political science.
Brad Racino is the assistant editor and a senior reporter at inewsource. He has produced investigations for print, radio and TV on topics including political corruption, transportation, health, maritime, education and nonprofits.
His cross-platform reporting for inewsource has earned more than 50 awards since 2012, including back-to-back national medals from Investigative Reporters and Editors, two national Edward R. Murrow awards, a Meyer “Mike” Berger award from New York City’s Columbia Journalism School, the Sol Price Award for Responsible Journalism, San Diego SPJ’s First Amendment Award, and a national Emmy nomination.
In 2017, Racino was selected by the Institute for Nonprofit News as one of 10 “Emerging Leaders” in U.S. nonprofit journalism.
Racino has worked as a reporter and database analyst for News21; as a photographer, videographer and reporter for the Columbia Missourian; as a project coordinator for the National Freedom of Information Coalition and as a videographer and editor for Verizon Fios1 TV in New York. He received his master’s degree in journalism from the University of Missouri in 2012.
Byline Policy
Most of our articles carry a byline to identify the author. In some cases, inewsource will use a brand byline such as “Staff” or “inewsource” for internal or editorial information about the newsroom. In these instances, inewsource‘s Editor and Managing Editor are responsible for content that uses a brand byline.
The Trust Project
inewsource is proud to be a member of The Trust Project and support efforts to increase transparency in journalism by displaying the 8 Trust Indicators on our stories. We launched the Trust Indicators on Sep. 16, 2020.
Privacy Policy
inewsource has prepared this Privacy Policy to explain how we collect, use, protect, and share information when you use our inewsource.org website (the “Site“) or when you use any of our services (the “Services“).
By using the Site or Services you consent to this Privacy Policy.
Log Data
Like many site operators, we collect information that your browser sends whenever you visit our site (“Log Data”).
This Log Data may include information such as your computer’s Internet Protocol (“IP”) address, browser type, browser version, the pages of our site that you visit, the time and date of your visit, the time spent on those pages and other statistics.
Cookies
Cookies are files with small amount of data, which may include an anonymous unique identifier. Cookies are sent to your browser from a web site and stored on your computer or mobile device.
Like many sites, we use “cookies” to collect information. You can instruct your browser to refuse all cookies or to indicate when a cookie is being sent. However, if you do not accept cookies, you may not be able to use some portions of our site.
Certain pages on our site may set other third party cookies. For example, we may embed content, such as videos, from another site that sets a cookie. While we try to minimize these third party cookies, we can’t always control what cookies this third party content sets.
Additionally, we may use third party services — such as those that provide social media conveniences, measure traffic, send newsletters and facilitate donations — that may place cookies on your computer. We don’t have any way of knowing how such services handle the resulting data internally. inewsource makes no claim, nor takes liability for the insecure submission of information via these applications.
Here are the services whose cookies you can find on inewsource.org:
Sharing buttons for Facebook and Twitter. These use the standard scripts provided by each company.
Google Analytics, which we use to measure site traffic. Google Analytics gathers certain non-personally identifying information over time, such as your IP address, browser type, internet service provider, referring and exit pages, time stamp, and similar data. We also use Facebook Pixel to measure, optimize and build audiences for advertising campaigns served on Facebook. In particular it enables us to see how our users move between devices when accessing our website and Facebook, to ensure that our Facebook advertising is seen by our users most likely to be interested in such advertising by analyzing which content a user has viewed and interacted with on our website.
Stripe, which allows us to accept donations through our website.
Salesforce to manage newsletter subscriber, donor, and other identifiable user data.
Mailchimp, to manage newsletter distributions. We collect your email address if you choose to subscribe to one of our email newsletters or email news alerts. Other optional information that you enter when subscribing – such as your first and last names or city are simply so that we can deliver more personalized email newsletters. We DO NOT sell, rent or market your information to any other parties. We retain your information only as long as necessary to provide your service. When we send emails, it collects some data about which users open the emails and which links are clicked. We use this information to optimize our email newsletters and, as aggregate information, to explain what percentage of our users open and interact with our newsletters.
Personal Data
We only collect personally identifiable information such as your name and email address when you sign up for a newsletter, donate to our organization, or otherwise submit it to us voluntarily. We do not share your personal data with any third parties other than some common service providers, whose products use your information to help us improve our site, deliver newsletters, or allow us to offer donation opportunities.
inewsource limits access to all user data for the purposes of newsletter, fundraising, and customer service only. User data is not sold to or otherwise shared with anyone not working with or for the inewsource.
You may unsubscribe or opt-out of our email and mail communications at any time by hitting the “unsubscribe” button in any email you receive from inewsource, or by emailing us at contact@inewsource.org or calling us at 619-594-5100.
Donor Information
The identities of all donors will be listed on our website. inewsource does not share, trade, sell, or otherwise release donors’ personal information to any third parties.
Refunds
If you encounter errors when donating on the website, please contact us at members@inewsource.org. For example, if you submit a donation for an incorrect amount or make a duplicate transaction please email us immediately so we can reverse the charges.
Cancellation of Recurring Donations
You can cancel your monthly recurring donations free of charge by notifying us at members@inewsource.org.
Links to Other Websites
Our site may contain links to documents, resources or other websites that we think may be of interest to you. We have no control over these other sites or their content. You should be aware when you leave our site for another, and remember that other sites are governed by their own user agreements and privacy policies, which should be available to you to read.
Disclaimers and Limitation of Liability
Although we take reasonable steps to prevent the introduction of viruses, worms, “Trojan Horses” or other destructive materials to our site, we do not guarantee or warrant that our site or materials that may be downloaded from our site are free from such destructive features. We are not liable for any damages or harm attributable to such features. We are not liable for any claim, loss or injust based on errors, omissions, interruptions or other inaccuracies on our site, nor for any claim, loss or injust that results from your use of this site or your breach of any provision of this User Agreement.
Contact Us
If there are any questions regarding this privacy policy, please contact us at contact@inewsource.org or call us at 619-594-5100.
This report is part of a project produced by the Carnegie-Knight News21 initiative, a national investigative reporting project by top college journalism students and recent graduates from across the country and headquartered at the Walter Cronkite School of Journalism and Mass Communication at Arizona...
More by News21