2025 National Lead and Healthy Housing Conference · Kansas City
Three-Tier Lead Screening Pipeline
Two studies from the 2025 National Lead Conference outline a data-driven framework that makes large-scale housing lead screening feasible at ~$20/home.
Download 3-page analysis PDFThe decision flow
Rank every property with free public data, screen the flagged ones with a $20 kit, confirm positives with a formal LIRA, then abate only the confirmed hazards.
Tier 1
Lead Risk Index
$0 / property
Parcel-level risk score from exterior housing condition + construction year. Ranks every address in a city. No entry required.
Wilson, Allenbrand et al. (UMKC / ERPP-2311)
Tier 2
Kit Screen
$20 / home
Resident collects dust, soil, and paint samples in a foil kit. Lab analysis. 74% agreement with LIRA in 107 Indiana homes. WIC distribution channel pilot.
Beidinger-Burnett et al. (Notre Dame / IEAM 2024)
Tier 3
LIRA
$850–2,050 / unit
Lead Inspection and Risk Assessment by certified professional. HUD-required before grant-funded abatement. Runs only on kit-positive homes in this pipeline.
HUD OLHCHH standard · EPA Lead RIA 2011
Tier 4
Abatement
$10–15K / unit
Full lead hazard control: encapsulation, paint removal, dust clearance testing. Average cost per EPA Lead RIA 2011. Only for LIRA-confirmed units.
EPA Lead RIA 2011 · HUD OLHCHH grantee data
Why wide scatter is acceptable at $20
Even at a 3% lead detection rate, kit screening is 1.3x–3.1x cheaper per confirmed case than going straight to LIRA.
| Detection rate | $20 kit (single-use) | ~$2 kit (reuse) | LIRA direct | Kit vs. LIRA savings |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 3% | $667 | $67 | $850–2,050 | 1.3x–3.1x cheaper |
| 5% | $400 | $40 | $850–2,050 | 2.1x–5.1x cheaper |
| 7% | $286 | $29 | $850–2,050 | 3.0x–7.2x cheaper |
| 12% | $167 | $17 | $850–2,050 | 5.1x–12.3x cheaper |
| 20% | $100 | $10 | $850–2,050 | 8.5x–20.5x cheaper |
| 50% | $40 | $4 | $850–2,050 | 21x–51x cheaper |
Study 1: ND LIT Kit, Notre Dame field pilot
Beidinger-Burnett et al. (2024) · Integrated Environmental Assessment and Management · DOI: 10.1002/ieam.4934
What they proposed
A $20 mail-in kit residents use at home (dust, paint, soil). Distributed through WIC clinics in St. Joseph and Marion Counties. Analyzed via ICP-MS. Proposed as a scalable pre-LIRA screen.
What actually happened
329 kits completed. 107 homes validated head-to-head with LIRA. 74% overall agreement. 19.6% false-negative rate. Paint performed worst (63%). Dust and soil drove accuracy. Kit is not a clearance test.
Bottom line: 74% agreement is acceptable for a pre-screen. Kit correctly identified lead in 55 of 76 lead-positive homes. WIC is a high-ROI distribution channel. False negatives cluster in paint samples.
Study 2: UMKC Lead Risk Index
Wilson, Allenbrand et al. (2024) · ERPP-2311 · Center for Economic Information, UMKC · HUD FY2020 Lead Technical Studies Grant
What they proposed
A parcel-level Lead Risk Index from two inputs: exterior housing condition + construction year. Lasso regression against 6,589 pediatric blood lead observations. No home entry, no lab work.
What it delivers
Pre-1952 housing in "dilapidated" condition shows BLL risk 5–8x higher than CDC 3.5 ug/dL reference. Parcel-level LRI is 3–5x more precise than Census tract averages.
Bottom line: LRI costs $0 and runs on available city data. Every parcel gets a risk score before anyone spends a dollar on kits or inspections. Even undirected kit deployment at $20 beats going straight to LIRA.
How the two studies fit together
LRI ranks every parcel at $0. The kit tests any flagged home at $20. LIRA confirms positives at $850+. Abatement fixes confirmed hazards at $10–15K. Three filters, each smaller than the last.
LRI optimization pushes detection rates higher, but is not required for positive ROI. At 5% detection the kit pipeline is 2–5x cheaper per confirmed case than direct LIRA.
For HUD grantees: rank all addresses before spending any budget. Deploy kits to top-ranked homes. Run LIRA only where kit is positive. Abate where LIRA confirms. Three tiers, one coherent pipeline.
Known gap: the 19.6% kit false-negative rate means some homes with real lead will pass the screen. Fix is in published roadmap (IEAM 2024): more paint sample locations, refined dust wipe protocol per NIOSH 9100.
Full analysis with charts, confusion matrix, precision comparison, and cost curves
Lead Screening Pipeline Analysis (3 pages, PDF)
Download PDFBoth studies presented at the 2025 National Lead and Healthy Housing Conference · Kansas City, MO · August 4–8, 2025