NEHA October 2022 Journal of Environmental Health

October 2022 • Journal of Environmental Health 27 which is defined as a household income at 30% of the federal poverty level. The median household income was $34,997.56, and most households had 1–3 residents; there were no pregnant individuals included in our study. Properties were primarily owner-occupied (83.7%) and built between 1950 and 1969 (87.1%), with the average year of construction being 1961. The median area of the included homes was 1,320 ft2. Lead Hazards The frequency of houses with lead dust hazards on windowsills and on floors is shown in Table 2. In the 43 homes that were assessed, windowsill lead dust hazards were more common than floor lead dust hazards. Overall, 38 total windowsill lead dust hazards were identified compared with 14 total floor lead dust hazards. Notably, there were two homes that each had 4 windowsill lead dust hazards and there was another home that had 5 floor lead dust hazards. There were no soil hazards identified. A variety of housing components in participant homes were found to have leadbased paint hazards (Table 3). In total, 859 lead-based paint hazards were identified; the majority of units had at least one identified lead-based paint hazard in each of the component categories. Nearly 63% of units had ≥1 lead-based paint hazard on a wall, ceiling, or floor component, and 40 of 43 units (93%) had a miscellaneous component with a leadbased paint hazard. Overall, we identified 198 wall, ceiling, or floor component lead-based paint hazards, ranging from 0 to 55 hazards in each unit. The number of homes with no hazard in a given component category skewed the results so much that average results were not meaningful. Healthy Homes Hazards Over 6,500 instances of healthy homes hazards (categorized as concern or take action) by location in the unit were identified in the 39 units with healthy homes visual assessments (Table 4). Domestic hygiene issues (n = 1,030) and structural problems (n = 1,412) were the most commonly identified healthy homes hazards across all locations of the units. Falls on level surfaces were also prevalent in these units, with 655 identified trip-and-fall hazards. By location, bedrooms (n = 1,984) and other rooms (n = 1,805) had the highest hazard counts. The highest single hazard count was for structural issues in bedrooms (n = 386). Discussion As the first Lead Hazard Control and Healthy Homes Grant-funded program in the City of Las Vegas, study findings from the program oœer valuable and novel information about in-home health hazards in Southern Nevada. Hazards including leadOccupant and Housing Characteristics of Participants of the Las Vegas Lead Hazard Control and Healthy Homes Program (N = 43) Occupant Characteristic # (%) Female head of household Yes 32 (74.4) No 11 (25.6) Race of primary participant White 15 (34.9) African American 17 (39.5) Other 3 (7.0) Did not answer 8 (18.6) Ethnicity of primary participant Hispanic or Latino 22 (51.2) Not Hispanic or Latino 21 (48.8) Household income * 30% of the federal poverty level (extremely low) 12 (27.9) 50% of the federal poverty level (very low) 7 (16.3) 80% of the federal poverty level (low) 24 (55.8) Housing Characteristic # (%) ZIP Code 89101 6 (14.0) 89106 11 (25.6) 89107 16 (37.2) 89108 6 (14.0) Other 4 (9.2) Unit type Rental 7 (16.3) Owner-occupied 36 (83.7) Decade of construction 1940–1949 2 (4.7) 1950–1959 10 (23.3) 1960–1969 27 (62.8) 1970–1979 4 (9.3) Household size 1–3 23 (53.5) ≥4 20 (46.5) * Based on requirements of the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development. TABLE 1