When it comes to carbon monoxide (CO) safety in schools, most action happens after someone is harmed. Too often, it takes hospitalizations—or worse—for inspections, policies, or funding to follow. That’s why Kentucky’s recent announcement outlining a 2026 statewide carbon monoxide safety initiative deserves national attention.

Carbon monoxide in college housing has injured and killed students across the U.S.—often in dorms, fraternity houses, and off-campus apartments where detection and training are inconsistent. Drawing from national incident data and real campus tragedies, this article explores why CO safety varies by state, why building codes treat student spaces differently, and why many students are being told to protect themselves with personal CO alarms.

Carbon monoxide (CO) detection rules are inconsistent across schools, daycares, churches, camps, and athletic facilities. Buildings aren’t regulated by who uses them — they’re regulated by how the code classifies them. And that classification, called an occupancy type, determines whether CO detection is required, optional, or never mentioned at all. The problem? Most parents, teachers, and even administrators have no idea which occupancy type their building falls under.

Explore how CO Safe Schools strengthened its national database of school carbon monoxide incidents—and why better data improves public health, safety, and prevention.

It's time to set the record straight: Carbon monoxide is not a “gas leak.” It is a toxic gas exposure. And using the wrong language confuses the public, delays understanding, and prevents families from knowing what actually happened, or how to protect their children in the future. This imprecise reporting isn’t a small issue. It undermines awareness, downplays risk, and allows preventable CO incidents to keep happening.

If you’re responsible for a school, childcare center, campus facility, or any public building, you may have been told some version of: “Don’t worry; we have CO detectors installed.” But here’s the problem: Most buildings rely on carbon monoxide devices that weren’t designed for educational or multi-room environments. And many assume all CO detection devices work the same; they don’t.

For decades, carbon monoxide (CO) safety education has relied on a familiar visual: a chart linking parts per million (PPM) to predicted health effects. It’s neat, it’s easy to reference, and it’s dangerously incomplete. Because carbon monoxide exposure doesn’t follow charts. It follows conditions: who you are, where you are, and how long you’re there. That’s why it’s time for a new way to understand CO’s impact: a model that puts people, not numbers, at the center.