OLHCHH - All Competitive NOFOs

U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development
Lead Hazard Control and Healthy Homes
Lead and Healthy Homes Technical Studies (LHHTS) Grant Program
FR-6700-N-15
11/06/2023

Table of Contents
OVERVIEW ................................................................................................................................3
I. FUNDING OPPORTUNITY DESCRIPTION.........................................................................3
A. Program Description ...............................................................................................................3
B. Authority ...............................................................................................................................16
II. AWARD INFORMATION ...................................................................................................16
A. Available Funds ....................................................................................................................16
B. Number of Awards ................................................................................................................16
C. Minimum/Maximum Award Information .............................................................................17
D. Period of Performance...........................................................................................................17
E. Type of Funding Instrument ..................................................................................................18
III. ELIGIBILITY INFORMATION .........................................................................................18
A. Eligible Applicants ................................................................................................................18
B. Ineligible Applicants .............................................................................................................19
C. Cost Sharing or Matching......................................................................................................19
D. Threshold Eligibility Requirements ......................................................................................20
E. Statutory and Regulatory Requirements Affecting Eligibility ..............................................21
F. Program-Specific Requirements ............................................................................................21
G. Criteria for Beneficiaries. ......................................................................................................30
IV. APPLICATION AND SUBMISSION INFORMATION ...................................................30
A. Obtain an Application Package .............................................................................................30
B. Content and Form of Application Submission ......................................................................31
C. System for Award Management (SAM) and Unique Entity Identifier (UEI) ......................34
D. Application Submission Dates and Times ............................................................................35
E. Intergovernmental Review ....................................................................................................38
F. Funding Restrictions ..............................................................................................................38
G. Other Submission Requirements ...........................................................................................40
V. APPLICATION REVIEW INFORMATION .......................................................................41
A. Review Criteria .....................................................................................................................41
B. Review and Selection Process ...............................................................................................50
VI. AWARD ADMINISTRATION INFORMATION ..............................................................51
A. Award Notices .......................................................................................................................51
B. Administrative, National and Departmental Policy Requirements and Terms for HUD
Applicants and Recipients of Financial Assistance Awards ......................................................53
Page 1 of 86

C. Reporting ...............................................................................................................................57
D. Debriefing .............................................................................................................................59
VII. AGENCY CONTACT(S) ...................................................................................................59
VIII. OTHER INFORMATION ................................................................................................59
APPENDIX ................................................................................................................................62

Page 2 of 86

Program Office:
Lead Hazard Control and Healthy Homes
Funding Opportunity Title:
Lead and Healthy Homes Technical Studies (LHHTS) Grant Program
Funding Opportunity Number:
FR-6700-N-15
Assistance Listing Number (formerly CFDA Number):
14.906,14.902
Due Date for Applications:
11/06/2023

OVERVIEW
The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) issues this Notice of Funding
Opportunity (NOFO) to invite applications from eligible applicants for the program and purpose
described within this NOFO. You, as a prospective applicant, should carefully read all
instructions in all sections to avoid sending an incomplete or ineligible application. HUD funding
is highly competitive. Failure to respond accurately to any submission requirement could result
in an incomplete or noncompetitive proposal.
In accordance with Title 24 part 4, subpart B of the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR), during
the selection process (which includes HUD’s NOFO development and publication and concludes
with the award of assistance), HUD is prohibited from disclosing covered selection information.
Examples of impermissible disclosures include: 1) information regarding any applicant’s relative
standing; 2) the amount of assistance requested by any applicant; and 3) any information
contained in the application. Prior to the application deadline, HUD may not disclose the identity
of any applicant or the number of applicants that have applied for assistance.
For further information regarding this NOFO, direct questions regarding the specific
requirements of this NOFO to the agency contact identified in section VII.
Paperwork Reduction Act Statement. In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of
1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501- 3520) (PRA), the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) approved
the information collection requirements in this NOFO. HUD may not conduct or sponsor, and a
person is not required to respond to a collection of information unless the collection displays a
valid OMB control number. This NOFO identifies its applicable OMB control number, unless its
collection of information is excluded from these requirements under 5 CFR part 1320.
OMB Approval Number(s):
2539-0015

I. FUNDING OPPORTUNITY DESCRIPTION
A. Program Description
1. Purpose
Through this NOFO, HUD is funding studies to improve knowledge of housing-related health
and safety hazards and to improve or develop new hazard assessment and control methods, with
Page 3 of 86

a focus on lead and other key residential health and safety hazards. HUD is especially interested
in applications that will advance our knowledge of priority healthy homes issues by addressing
important gaps in science related to the accurate and efficient identification of hazards and the
implementation of cost-effective hazard mitigation. This includes studies using implementation
sciences in identifying specific conditions under which residential environmental hazard
interventions, that have been shown to be effective in specific housing types and residential
settings, can be assessed in other contexts. Key hazards are discussed in Appendix A, Key
Residential Health, and Safety Hazards, of this NOFO. A list of references that serves as the
basis for the information provided in this NOFO is provided as Appendix C, Relevant
Publications, Guidelines and Other Resources. Priority research topics of particular interest to
HUD are identified in section III.F.1.
Both the Lead and Healthy Homes Technical Studies (LHHTS) Programs are important for the
achievement of research goals identified in HUD's Healthy Homes Strategic Plan (available at:
https://www.hud.gov/sites/documents/DOC_13701.PDF),the federal healthy homes strategic
plan, Advancing Healthy Housing : A Strategy for Action (available at:
https://www.hud.gov/sites/documents/STRATPLAN_FINAL_11_13.PDF, and the Federal
Action Plan to Reduce Childhood Lead Exposures and Associated Health Impacts
(https://www.hud.gov/sites/dfiles/HH/documents/fedactionplan_lead_final.pdf).
a. General Goals
(1) Lead Technical Studies (LTS)
The overall goal of the LTS grant program is to gain knowledge to improve the efficacy and
cost-effectiveness of methods for evaluation and control of residential lead-based paint hazards.
Through this Program, HUD is working to fulfill the requirements of sections 1051 and 1052 of
the Residential Lead-Based Paint Hazard Reduction Act of 1992 (Title X) (42 U.S.C. §§ 4854
and 4854a) which directs HUD to conduct research on topics which include the development of
improved methods for evaluating and reducing lead-based paint hazards in housing, among
others. Brief descriptions of active and previously funded LTS projects can be found on HUD's
website at https://www.hud.gov/program_offices/healthy_homes. Where appropriate, you are
encouraged to build your proposed study upon HUD-sponsored work that has been previously
completed, in addition to other relevant research (i.e., reported in the published literature). The
results of the applicable aspects of LTS will be used in part to update HUD's Guidelines for the
Evaluation and Control of Lead-Based Paint Hazards in Housing (Guidelines) and other HUD
policy guidance. For supporting references, including where to find the Guidelines, see: The
HUD Guidelines for the Evaluation and Control of Lead-based Paint in Housing | HUD.gov /
U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) and Appendix C.
The overall objectives include but are not limited to the statutory requirements listed in Section
1052 of Title X:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.

Develop improved methods for evaluating lead-based paint hazards.
Develop improved methods for reducing lead-based paint hazards.
Develop improved methods for measuring lead in paint films, dust, and soil.
Establish performance standards for various detection methods, including spot test kits.
Establish performance standards for lead-based paint hazard reduction methods,
including the use of encapsulants.
6. Establish appropriate cleanup standards.
Page 4 of 86

7. Evaluate the efficacy of interim controls in various situations.
8. Evaluate the relative performance of various abatement techniques.
9. Evaluate the long-term cost-effectiveness of interim control and abatement strategies.
10. Assess the effectiveness of hazard evaluation and reduction activities.
Studies should be related to the above primary objectives. For example, a study using large
databases may be related to the efficacy of interim controls, etc. Another example may be
relating the use of novel methods for lead risk assessment or for dust lead measurements to the
primary objective of developing improved methods for evaluating lead-based paint hazards or for
measuring lead in dust.
(2) Healthy Homes Technical Studies (HHTS)
The overall goal of the HHTS Program is to advance the recognition and control of priority
residential health and safety hazards and more closely examine the link between housing and
health. The overall objectives of the Program include but are not limited to:
(a) Development and evaluation of cost-effective test methods and protocols for the
identification and assessment of housing-related hazards.
(b) Development and assessment of cost-effective methods for reducing or eliminating housingrelated hazards.
(c) Evaluation of the effectiveness of housing interventions and barriers and incentives affecting
future use of the most cost-effective strategies.
(d) Supporting translational and implementation research studies which involve the adaptation
and use of effective healthy homes intervention strategies in different housing types, residential
settings, and populations.
(e) Investigation of the epidemiology of housing-related hazards and illness and injuries
associated with these hazards, with an emphasis on low income, vulnerable populations (e.g.,
children, communities of color, persons with disabilities, senior citizens, etc.).
(f) Analysis of existing data or generation of new data to improve knowledge regarding the
prevalence and severity of specific hazards in various types of housing and by demographic
characteristics of residents, with a focus on low-income housing.
(g) Improved understanding of the relationship between residential exposure and illness or
injury of children or other vulnerable populations. (Note: Applicants that propose this type of
study should discuss how the knowledge that is gained from the study could be used in a
program to reduce these hazards in target communities).
HUD anticipates that the results of program-supported studies will help to develop evidencebased approaches that are cost-effective and efficient and will result in the reduction of health
threats for the maximum number of residents and, in particular, children and other vulnerable
populations (e.g., communities of color, persons with disabilities, the elderly) in low-income
households. Study results are also expected to improve our understanding of how specific aspects
of the indoor environment can affect the health of residents.
Applicants should consider the ability of their proposed study to generate definitive results. Since
the size of the awards under this NOFO may limit the ability of applicants to design and
implement research on health outcomes using the strongest methodology (i.e., a randomized
controlled trial), applicants should consider focusing on important indoor environmental quality
(IEQ) measures instead of health outcomes in studies where this is appropriate, such as when
existing research has demonstrated a significant association between the IEQ measures and
health outcomes. A focus on environmental outcomes is expected to produce results that will
Page 5 of 86

complement the health outcome, typically, the impact of improvements to IEQ on health
outcomes can be inferred where the evidence base is sufficient. HUD is especially interested in
funding practical, applied research, including studies using implementation science, which can
directly inform policies and practices to reduce the prevalence and severity of residential health
and safety hazards and improve the health and well-being of residents. You should be aware of
where your proposed study fits within a translational research framework (i.e., Pettibone et al.,
2018: https://doi.org/10.1289/EHP3657). Implementation research (IR) helps identify the
context (real world environmental and social setting) that impacts the adoption of interventions
within a community to address persistent residential environmental health hazards (Bauer, 2020;
Smith, 2020). Identifying and understanding the specifications of the context within which the
study is being conducted helps provide a better understanding of how and for whom the
interventions work, under what conditions, and the expected outcomes (Smith, 2020). To use IR
studies effectively the researcher needs to identify the interventions of interest, then determine
whether the interventions have shown both effectiveness and efficacy, and if they have, finally
use mixed methods designs (Lane-Fall, 2019). HUD is particularly interested in IR proposals that
involve the identification and study of the context and conditions under which different
interventions are effective, thus making these interventions more acceptable and easily
implementable in low-income and affordable housing environments.
The HHTS Program is a component of HUD’s Healthy Homes Program. A description of the
Healthy Homes Program is available on the HUD website at
https://www.hud.gov/program_offices/healthy_homes/hhi. In addition to deficiencies in basic
housing conditions that may impact health (e.g., structural problems, lack of adequate heating
and cooling, pest infestation, excess moisture), other subtler health hazards may exist in the
residential environment (e.g., asthma triggers, volatile and semi-volatile organic compounds
including pesticide residues, injury hazards, etc.). While some hazards will be found
disproportionately in housing that is substandard, housing-related environmental hazards may
also exist in housing that is otherwise of acceptable quality. Appendix A of this NOFO briefly
describes the key housing-associated health and safety hazards HUD considers targets for
intervention. The hazards and conditions identified in Appendix A are not considered exhaustive,
applicants may submit applications that focus on topics that are not included in Appendix A.
HUD has also developed resource papers on several topics of importance under the Healthy
Homes Program, including mold, environmental aspects of asthma, carbon monoxide, pesticides,
residential assessment and unintentional injuries. These resource papers can be downloaded from
https://www.hud.gov/program_offices/healthy_homes.
b. Community Participation
HUD believes that it is important for researchers to incorporate meaningful community
participation in the development and implementation of studies that are conducted in
communities and/or involve significant interaction with community residents. Community
participation can improve study effectiveness in various ways, including the development of
more appropriate research objectives, improving recruitment and retention of study participants,
improving participants' involvement in, and understanding of a study, improving ongoing
communication between researchers and the affected community, and improving dissemination
of study findings. Community Based Participatory Research (CBPR) offers researchers the
opportunity to use translational science to improve sustainability/long-term success and efficacy
of effective scientific interventions to address residential environmental health issues in diverse
Page 6 of 86

communities. It also helps identify specific conditions and structures within the communities
needed for these effective interventions to work best. HUD encourages applicants to consider
using elements of a CBPR approach, where applicable, in study design and implementation.
(See, e.g., The National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences report titled "Successful
Models of Community-Based Participatory Research" at
https://www.hud.gov/sites/documents/DOC_12485.PDF and the Wallerstein and Duran (2010)
paper titled "Community-based participatory research contributions to intervention research: The
intersection of science and practice to improve health equity"). CBPR is characterized by
substantial community input in all phases of a study (i.e., design, implementation, data
interpretation, conclusions, and communication of results).
2. HUD and Program-Specific Goals and Objectives
This NOFO supports HUD’s Strategic Plan for Fiscal Years (FY) 2022-2026 to accomplish
HUD’s mission and vision. Each of the five goals in the Strategic Plan include what HUD hopes
to accomplish, the strategies to accomplish those objectives, and the indicators of success.
However, of the five goals only those applicable to this NOFO are identified below.
You are expected to align your application to the applicable strategic goals and objectives below.
Use the information in this section to describe in your application the specific goals, objectives,
and measures that your project is expected to help accomplish. If your project is selected for
funding, you are also expected to establish a plan to track progress related to those goals,
objectives, and measures. HUD will monitor compliance with the goals, objectives, and
measures in your project.
Applicable Goals and Objectives from HUD’s Strategic Plan
1. Strategic Goal 1: Support Underserved Communities
Fortify support for underserved communities and support equitable community development for
all people.
2. 1A: Advance Housing Justice
Fortify support for vulnerable populations, underserved communities, and Fair Housing
enforcement.
3. 1B: Reduce Homelessness
Strengthen Federal, State, Tribal, and community implementation of the Housing First approach
to reducing the prevalence of homelessness, with the ultimate goal of ending homelessness.
4. 1C: Invest in the Success of Communities
Promote equitable community development that generates wealth-building for underserved
communities, particularly for communities of color.
5. Strategic Goal 2: Ensure Access to and Increase the Production of Affordable Housing
Ensure housing demand is matched by adequate production of new homes and equitable access
to housing opportunities for all people.
6. 2A: Increase the Supply of Housing
Enhance HUD's programs that increase the production and supply of housing across the country.
7. 2B: Improve Rental Assistance
Improve rental assistance to address the need for affordable housing.
8. Strategic Goal 3: Promote Homeownership
Promote homeownership opportunities, equitable access to credit for purchase and
improvements, and wealth-building in underserved communities.
Page 7 of 86

9. 3A: Advance Sustainable Homeownership
Advance the deployment of tools and capital that put sustainable homeownership within reach.
10. 3A � Major Initiative: Expand Homeownership Opportunities
Promote financing for innovative ownership models to increase the availability of affordable
housing.
11. 3B: Create a More Accessible and Inclusive Housing Finance System
Advance new policy, programs, and modernization initiatives that support a more equitable
housing finance system. Promote the preservation and creation of affordable housing stock.
12. Strategic Goal 4: Advance Sustainable Communities
Advance sustainable communities by strengthening climate resilience and energy efficiency,
promoting environmental justice, and recognizing housing's role as essential to health.
13. 4A: Guide Investment in Climate Resilience
Invest in climate resilience, energy efficiency, and renewable energy across HUD programs.
14. 4B: Strengthen Environmental Justice
Reduce exposure to health risks, environmental hazards, and substandard housing, especially for
low-income households and communities of color.
15. 4C: Integrate Health and Housing
Advance policies that recognize housing's role as essential to health.
Funding Opportunity Goals
•

a. General Goals
(1) Lead Technical Studies (LTS)
The overall goal of the LTS grant program is to gain knowledge to improve the efficacy
and cost-effectiveness of methods for evaluation and control of residential lead-based
paint hazards. Through this Program, HUD is working to fulfill the requirements of
sections 1051 and 1052 of the Residential Lead-Based Paint Hazard Reduction Act of
1992 (Title X) (42 U.S.C. §§ 4854 and 4854a) which directs HUD to conduct research on
topics which include the development of improved methods for evaluating and reducing
lead-based paint hazards in housing, among others. Brief descriptions of active and
previously funded LTS projects can be found on HUD's website at
https://www.hud.gov/program_offices/healthy_homes. Where appropriate, you are
encouraged to build your proposed study upon HUD-sponsored work that has been
previously completed, in addition to other relevant research (i.e., reported in the
published literature). The results of the applicable aspects of LTS will be used in part to
update HUD's Guidelines for the Evaluation and Control of Lead-Based Paint Hazards in
Housing (Guidelines) and other HUD policy guidance. For supporting references,
including where to find the Guidelines, see: The HUD Guidelines for the Evaluation and
Control of Lead-based Paint in Housing | HUD.gov / U.S. Department of Housing and
Urban Development (HUD) and Appendix C.
The overall objectives include but are not limited to the statutory requirements listed in
Section 1052 of Title X:
1. Develop improved methods for evaluating lead-based paint hazards.
2. Develop improved methods for reducing lead-based paint hazards.
Page 8 of 86

3. Develop improved methods for measuring lead in paint films, dust, and soil.
4. Establish performance standards for various detection methods, including spot test kits.
5. Establish performance standards for lead-based paint hazard reduction methods,
including the use of encapsulants.
6. Establish appropriate cleanup standards.
7. Evaluate the efficacy of interim controls in various situations.
8. Evaluate the relative performance of various abatement techniques.
9. Evaluate the long-term cost-effectiveness of interim control and abatement strategies.
10. Assess the effectiveness of hazard evaluation and reduction activities.
Studies should be related to the above primary objectives. For example, a study using
large databases may be related to the efficacy of interim controls, etc. Another example
may be relating the use of novel methods for lead risk assessment or for dust lead
measurements to the primary objective of developing improved methods for evaluating
lead-based paint hazards or for measuring lead in dust.
(2) Healthy Homes Technical Studies (HHTS)
The overall goal of the HHTS Program is to advance the recognition and control of
priority residential health and safety hazards and more closely examine the link between
housing and health. The overall objectives of the Program include but are not limited to:
(a) Development and evaluation of cost-effective test methods and protocols for the
identification and assessment of housing-related hazards.
(b) Development and assessment of cost-effective methods for reducing or eliminating
housing-related hazards.
(c) Evaluation of the effectiveness of housing interventions and barriers and incentives
affecting future use of the most cost-effective strategies.
(d) Supporting translational and implementation research studies which involve the
adaptation and use of effective healthy homes intervention strategies in different housing
types, residential settings, and populations.
(e) Investigation of the epidemiology of housing-related hazards and illness and injuries
associated with these hazards, with an emphasis on low income, vulnerable populations
(e.g., children, communities of color, persons with disabilities, senior citizens, etc.).
(f) Analysis of existing data or generation of new data to improve knowledge regarding
the prevalence and severity of specific hazards in various types of housing and by
demographic characteristics of residents, with a focus on low-income housing.
(g) Improved understanding of the relationship between residential exposure and illness
or injury of children or other vulnerable populations. (Note: Applicants that propose this
type of study should discuss how the knowledge that is gained from the study could be
used in a program to reduce these hazards in target communities).
Page 9 of 86

3. Changes from Previous NOFO
The following is a summary of the major changes in this NOFO relative to the Fiscal Year (FY)
2022 LHHTS NOFO. This is not intended to be an exhaustive list, so applicants should be sure
to read the entire NOFO.
a. Section I.A.4.a., Standard Definitions – These new definitions are added to this year’s NOFO:
Environmental Justice, Equity, Minority-Serving Institutions, Racial Equity, Resilience, and
Underserved Communities. The following definition is removed: DUNS.
b. Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing (AFFH) is removed as a threshold requirement;
however, AFFH remains a program requirement under section IV.G. of the NOFO.
c. Section. III., Eligibility Information. Organizations that received an award under the FY 2021
or FY 2022 Lead and Healthy Homes Technical Studies Grant Program cycle are ineligible
unless applying with a different Principal Investigator (PI).
d. Section III.E., Statutory and Regulatory Requirements Affecting Eligibility – This section in
the NOFO is updated to include applicable eligibility requirements. The NOFO Template
supplemental document is also updated and posted on HUD’s Funding Opportunity webpage.
e. Section IV.B.1., Content and Form of Application Submission – This section in the NOFO is
updated to require form HUD 424-B (Applicant Assurances and Certifications) and Federal
Assistance Assurances.
f. Section. V.B., Review and Selection Process – This section is updated to include a new
requirement to ensure applicants have Experience Promoting Racial Equity.
g. Narratives. These narratives are required and must address the issues described in the
corresponding sections:
•
•
•
•

Advancing Racial Equity (Section III.F);
Affirmative Marketing (Section III.F);
Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing (Section IV.G); and
Experience Promoting Racial Equity (Section V.B).

Applicants will submit these four (4) equity narratives in Appendix B (maximum of 2
pages). Each narrative will be evaluated for sufficiency and will not change the applicant’s score
or rank as compared to other applicants. If a narrative is deemed insufficient, it will be a
“Curable Deficiency” that will be communicated to the applicant for correction with a notice of
deficiency.
h. Section VI.B., Administrative, National and Departmental Policy Requirements and Terms for
HUD Applicants and Recipients of Financial Assistance Awards – This section in the NOFO is
updated to include compliance with: Secretary Fudge's, April 12, 2022, memorandum; equity
requirements; and waste, fraud, and abuse requirements. Additionally, this section clarifies
requirements related to nondiscrimination and equal opportunity. The related NOFO
supplemental document is updated and posted on HUD’s Funding Opportunity webpage.
Furthermore, this section is updated to require program details related to its termination policy.
i. Federal Relay Service – The Federal Relay Service contract expired in February 2022. HUD
no longer uses the service. The NOFO is updated to include the use of Federal Communications
Page 10 of 86

Commission (FCC) relay services for individuals who are deaf or hard of hearing as well as
individuals who have speech or communication disabilities.
j. Under the General Goals for LTS, HUD added the following language: The overall objectives
include but are not limited to the statutory requirements listed in Section 1052 of Title X:
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•

Develop improved methods for evaluating lead-based paint hazards.
Develop improved methods for reducing lead-based paint hazards.
Develop improved methods for measuring lead in paint films, dust, and soil.
Establish performance standards for various detection methods, including spot test kits.
Establish performance standards for lead-based paint hazard reduction methods,
including the use of encapsulants.
Establish appropriate cleanup standards.
Evaluate the efficacy of interim controls in various situations.
Evaluate the relative performance of various abatement techniques.
Evaluate the long-term cost-effectiveness of interim control and abatement strategies.
Assess the effectiveness of hazard evaluation and reduction activities.

k. HUD has modified the list of priority research topics for FY 2022 by including the following
(see section III.F.1).
(2) The World Health Organization (WHO) “Environment, Climate Change and Health”
mentions that housing practices influence climate, which has an intimate relationship
with health. The building sector (residential and commercial) accounted for 19% of
global greenhouse gas emissions and one-third of global black carbon emissions in 2010,
according to the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (2014). The University of
California at Davis Western Cooling Efficiency Center reported that, “Residential energy
use is responsible for about 20% of total greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions in the US.”
As the Federal agency dedicated to creating strong, sustainable, inclusive communities,
and quality affordable homes, HUD is on the front lines of the nation’s efforts to increase
resilience to climate impacts. In response to the policy set forth in Executive Order
14008, HUD Action Plan is organized around three overarching Climate Action Goals for
programs and policies under HUD’s purview: Goal 1: Increase Climate Resilience, Goal
2: Reduce Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Goal 3: Pursue Environmental Justice. To
support HUD’s New Climate Action Plan: https://www.hud.gov/climate, HUD is
interested in research that identifies actions that protect the health and safety of the
families from hazards resulting from natural disasters and help them to mitigate the risks
of such health and safety hazards in housing occurring before anticipated disasters. Also,
HUD is interested in research on the health effects of indoor air quality of switching, in
HUD-supported housing, to low-carbon or zero-carbon sources of energy. (Note:
Applicants that propose this type of study should discuss how the knowledge that is
gained from the study could be used in a program to reduce these hazards in target
communities). The OLHCHH offers a list of activities
(https://www.hud.gov/climate/OLHCHH) that support and implement Climate Action
more broadly.

Page 11 of 86

(4) Indoor air quality is also damaged by poor choice of building materials, structural
risks as well as poor ventilation practices. Poor ventilation practices may promote
excessive exposure to moisture, mold, radon, asbestos, lead, volatile organic compounds
(VOC), and indoor pollutants (see Appendix C for research literature on these subjects).
HUD is interested in innovative methods (not discussed elsewhere in this list of
priorities) to identify the sources and control the hazards in order to improve the indoor
air quality in the residences of the people we serve.
l. HUD has eliminated the Pre-Application Step.
4. Definitions
a. Standard Definitions
Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing (AFFH) means taking meaningful actions, in addition
to combating discrimination to overcome patterns of segregation and foster inclusive
communities free from barriers that restrict access to opportunity based on protected
characteristics. Specifically, affirmatively furthering fair housing means taking meaningful
actions that, taken together, address significant disparities in housing needs and in access to
opportunities, replacing segregated living patterns with truly integrated and balanced living
patterns, transforming racially and ethnically concentrated areas of poverty into areas of
opportunity, and fostering and maintaining compliance with civil rights and fair housing laws.
The duty to affirmatively further fair housing extends to all program participant’s activities and
programs relating to housing and urban development.
Assistance Listing number refers to the unique number assigned to each Federal assistance
program publicly available in the Assistance Listing, which is managed and administered by the
General Services Administration. The Assistance Listing number was formerly known as the
Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance (CFDA) number.
Authorized Organization Representative (AOR) is a person authorized to legally bind your
organization and submit applications via Grants.gov. The AOR is authorized by the E-Business
Point of Contact (E-Biz POC) in the System for Award Management (see E-Biz POC definition).
An AOR may include an Expanded AOR and/or a Standard AOR.
Expanded Authorized Organization Representative is a user in Grants.gov who is
authorized by the E-Biz POC to perform the functions of a Standard AOR, initiate and
submit applications on behalf of your organization, and is allowed to modify organizationlevel settings and certifications in Grants.gov.
Standard Authorized Organization Representative is a user in Grants.gov who is authorized
by the E-Biz POC to initiate and submit applications in Grants.gov. A Grants.gov user with
the Standard AOR role can only submit applications when they are a Participant for that
workspace.
Consolidated Plan is the document submitted to HUD that serves as the comprehensive housing
affordability strategy, community development plan, and submission for funding under any of
the Community Planning and Development formula grant programs (e.g., CDBG, ESG, HOME,
and HOPWA). This Plan is prepared in accordance with the process described in 24 CFR part 91.
This plan is completed by engaging in a participatory process to assess their affordable housing
and community development needs and market conditions, and to make data-driven, place-based
Page 12 of 86

investment decisions with funding from formula grant programs. (See 24 CFR part 91 for HUD’s
requirements regarding the Consolidated Plan and related Action Plan).
Contract means, for the purpose of Federal financial assistance, a legal instrument by which a
recipient or subrecipient purchases property or services needed to carry out the project or
program under a federal award. For additional information on contractor and subrecipient
determinations, see 2 CFR 200.331.
Contractor means an entity that receives a contract as defined above and in 2 CFR 200.1.
Cooperative agreement has the same meaning defined at 2 CFR 200.1.
Deficiency, with respect to the making of an application for funding, is information missing or
omitted within a submitted application. Examples of deficiencies include missing documents,
missing or incomplete information on a form, or some other type of unsatisfied information
requirement. Depending on specific criteria, a deficiency may be either Curable or Non-Curable.
A Curable Deficiency is missing or incomplete application information that may be
corrected by the applicant with timely action. To be curable, the deficiency must:
•
•
•

Not be a threshold requirement, except for documentation of applicant eligibility;
Not influence how an applicant is ranked or scored versus other applicants; and
Be remedied within the time frame specified in the notice of deficiency.

A Non-Curable Deficiency is missing or incomplete application information that cannot be
corrected by an applicant after the submission deadline. A non-curable deficiency is a
deficiency that is a threshold requirement, or a deficiency that, if corrected, would change an
applicant’s score or rank versus other applicants. If an application includes a non-curable
deficiency, the application may receive an ineligible determination, or the non-curable
deficiency may otherwise adversely affect the application’s score and final funding
determination.
E-Business Point of Contact (E-Biz POC) is an organization applicant who is responsible for
the administration and management of grant activities for his or her organization. The E-Biz
POC is likely to be an organization's chief financial officer or authorizing official. The E-Biz
POC authorizes representatives of their organization to apply on behalf of the organization (see
Authorized Organization Representative definition). There can only be one E-Biz POC per
unique entity identifier (see definition of Unique Entity Identifier below).
Eligibility requirements are mandatory requirements for an application to be eligible for
funding.
Environmental Justice means investing in environmental improvements, remedying past
environmental inequities, and otherwise developing, implementing, and enforcing laws and
policies in a manner that advances environmental equity and provides meaningful involvement
for people and communities that have been environmentally underserved or overburdened, such
as Black and Brown communities, indigenous groups, and individuals with disabilities. This
definition does not alter the requirements under HUD’s regulations at 24 CFR 58.5(j) and 24
CFR 50.4(l) implementing Executive Order 12898. E.O. 12898 requires a consideration of how
federally assisted projects may have disproportionately high and adverse human health or
environmental effects on minority and/or low-income populations. For additional information on
Page 13 of 86

environmental review compliance, refer to:
https://www.hud.gov/program_offices/comm_planning/environment_energy/regulations.
Equity has the meaning given to that term in Section 2(a) of Executive Order 13985 and means
the consistent and systematic fair, just, and impartial treatment of all individuals, including
individuals who belong to underserved communities that have been denied such treatment, such
as Black, Latino, and Indigenous and Native American persons, Asian Americans and Pacific
Islanders and other persons of color; members of religious minorities; lesbian, gay, bisexual,
transgender, and queer (LGBTQ+) persons; persons with disabilities; persons who live in rural
areas; and persons otherwise adversely affected by persistent poverty or inequality.
Federal Award, has the meaning, depending on the context, in either paragraphs (1) or (2) of
this definition:
(1)
(a) The Federal financial assistance that a recipient receives directly from a Federal
awarding agency or a subrecipient receives indirectly from a pass-through entity, as
described in 2 CFR 200.101; or
(b) The cost-reimbursement contract under the Federal Acquisition Regulations that a
non- Federal entity receives directly from a federal awarding agency or indirectly from a
pass- through entity, as described in 2 CFR 200.101.
(2) The instrument setting forth the terms and conditions. The instrument is the grant
agreement, cooperative agreement, other agreement for assistance covered in paragraph (2)
of the definitions of Federal financial assistance in 2 CFR 200.1, and this NOFO, or the costreimbursement contract awarded under the Federal Acquisition Regulations.
(3) Federal award does not include other contracts that a Federal agency uses to buy goods or
services from a contractor or a contract to operate Federal Government owned, contractor
operated facilities (GOCOs).
(4) See also definitions of Federal financial assistance, grant agreement, and cooperative
agreement in 2 CFR 200.1.
Federal Financial Assistance has the same meaning defined at 2 CFR 200.1.
Grants.gov is the website serving as the Federal government’s central portal for searching and
applying for Federal financial assistance throughout the Federal government. Registration on
Grants.gov is required for submission of applications to prospective agencies unless otherwise
specified in this NOFO.
Historically Black Colleges and Universities (HBCUs) are any historically Black college or
university that was established prior to 1964, whose principal mission was, and is, the education
of Black Americans, and that is accredited by a nationally recognized accrediting agency or
association determined by the Secretary of Education to be a reliable authority as to the quality
of training offered or is, according to such an agency or association, making reasonable progress
toward accreditation. A list of accredited HBCUs can be found at the U.S. Department of
Education’s website.
Minority-Serving Institutions (MSIs) are

Page 14 of 86

(1) a part B institution (as defined in 20 U.S.C. 1601);
(2) a Hispanic-serving institution (as defined in 20 U.S.C. 1101a(5));
(3) a Tribal College or University (as defined in 20 U.S.C. 1059c);
(4) an Alaska Native-serving institution or a Native Hawaiian-serving institution (as defined in
20 U.S.C. 1059d(b));
(5) a Predominantly Black Institution (as defined in 20 U.S.C. 1059e);
(6) an Asian American and Native American Pacific Islander-serving institution (as defined in 20
U.S.C. 1059g); or
(7) a Native American-serving nontribal institution (as defined in 20 U.S.C. 1059f).
Non-Federal Entity (NFE) means a state, local government, Indian tribe, Institution of Higher
Education (IHE), or non-profit organization that carries out a federal award as a recipient or
subrecipient.
Primary Point of Contact (PPOC) is the person who may be contacted with questions about
the application submitted by the AOR. The PPOC is listed in item 8F on the SF-424.
Racial Equity is the elimination of racial disparities, and is achieved when race can no longer
predict opportunities, distribution of resources, or outcomes – particularly for Black and Brown
persons, which includes Black, Latino, indigenous, Native American, Asian, Pacific Islander,
and other persons of color.
Recipient means an entity, usually but not limited to non-Federal entities, that receives a federal
award directly from HUD. The term recipient does not include subrecipients or individuals that
are beneficiaries of the award.
Resilience is a community’s ability to minimize damage and recover quickly from extreme
events and changing conditions.
Small business is defined as a privately-owned corporation, partnership, or sole proprietorship
that has fewer employees and less annual revenue than regular-sized business. The definition of
“small”—in terms of being able to apply for government support and qualify for preferential tax
policy—varies by country and industry. The U.S. Small Business Administration defines a small
business according to a set of standards based on specific industries. See 13 CFR Part 121.
Subaward means an award provided by a pass-through entity to a subrecipient for the
subrecipient to carry out part of a federal award received by the pass-through entity. It does not
include payments to a contractor or payments to an individual that is a beneficiary of a Federal
program. A subaward may be provided through any form of legal agreement, including an
agreement that the pass-through entity considers a contract.
Subrecipient means an entity, usually but not limited to non-Federal entities, that receives a
subaward from a pass-through entity to carry out part of a federal award but does not include an
individual that is a beneficiary of such award. A subrecipient may also be a recipient of other
federal awards directly from a federal awarding agency.
System for Award Management (SAM) is the Federal Repository into which an entity must
provide information required for the conduct of business as a recipient. Registration with SAM is
Page 15 of 86

required for submission of applications via Grants.gov. You can access the website at
https://www.sam.gov/SAM/. There is no cost to use SAM.
Threshold Requirements are eligibility requirements that must be met for an application to be
reviewed, rated, and ranked. Threshold requirements are not curable, except for documentation
of applicant eligibility, which are listed in Section III.D., Threshold Eligibility Requirements.
Similarly, there are eligibility requirements under Section III.E., Statutory and Regulatory
Requirements Affecting Eligibility.
Underserved Communities has the meaning given to that term in Section 2(b) of Executive
Order 13985 and refers to populations sharing a particular characteristic, as well as geographic
communities, that have been systematically denied a full opportunity to participate in aspects of
economic, social, and civic life, as exemplified by the list in the definition of “equity” above.
Unique Entity Identifier (UEI) means the identifier assigned by SAM to uniquely identify
business entities. As of April 4, 2022, the Federal government has transitioned from the use of
the DUNS Number to the use of UEI, as the primary means of entity identification for Federal
awards government-wide.
b. Program Definitions.
None

B. Authority
The Lead Technical Studies program is authorized under sections 1051 and 1052 of the
Residential Lead-Based Paint Hazard Reduction Act of 1992 (Title X of the Housing and
Community Development Act of 1992, 42 U.S.C. §§ 4854 and 4854a). The Healthy Homes
Technical Studies program is authorized under sections 501 and 502 of the Housing and Urban
Development Act of 1970 (12 U.S.C. §§ 1701z-1 and 1701z-2). Funding is provided by the
Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2023 (Public Law 117-328), approved December 29, 2022.

II. AWARD INFORMATION
A. Available Funds
Funding of approximately $7,000,000 is available through this NOFO. Subject to
appropriations, HUD reserves the right to award fiscal year 2024 funds based on this NOFO
competition.
Additional funds may become available for award under this NOFO consistent with Section
VI.A.2.e., Adjustments to Funding. Use of these funds is subject to statutory constraints. All
awards are subject to the funding restrictions contained in this NOFO.
Of the $7,000,000 available through this NOFO, up to $2,000,000 is available for the LTS grant
program and $5,000,000 is available for the HHTS grant program, from the funding sources
noted in section I.B. Authority.

B. Number of Awards
HUD expects to make approximately 13 awards from the funds available under this NOFO.

Page 16 of 86

For each of the grant programs funded under this announcement, HUD expects to make the
following awards: approximately 4 to 8 awards for the LTS Grant Program and approximately 4
to 5 awards for the HHTS Grant Program. However, the estimated number of awards will depend
on the number of eligible applicants for each grant program, their requested amounts, and other
factors. For information on the methodology used to make award determinations under this
NOFO, please see Section V.B Review and Selection Process below.

C. Minimum/Maximum Award Information
1. Awards will range from $300,000 to a maximum of $800,000 for the LTS Grant Program
and $300,000 to a maximum of $1,000,000 for the HHTS Grant Program.
2. Note for New Applicants. If supported by the majority of the Application Review Panel,
HUD will make an award of up to $800,000 under the LTS Grant Program or up to
$1,000,000 under the HHTS Grant Program for the highest scoring application from a
qualified new applicant, as defined here, on the condition that the application receives a
score of at least 82 points. A new applicant is an organization that has not been
previously funded by the Office of Lead Hazard Control and Healthy Homes
(OLHCHH) under the Technical Studies Grant Program to which they are applying
as the primary grantee. A new applicant may have previously been a sub-grantee under
an award to another organization. If there is not a qualified new applicant for funding,
any remaining funds will be made available to the general pool of qualified LHHTS
Grant Program applicants based on the final overall ranking.
Estimated Total Funding:
$7,000,000
Minimum Award Amount:
$300,000
Per Project Period
Maximum Award Amount:
$1,000,000
Per Project Period

D. Period of Performance
The start date will be determined during the period of negotiations with successful applicants.
The period of performance cannot exceed 36 months from the time of award. The proposed
performance period should include adequate time for such project components as the
Institutional Review Board process (if required), the hiring of new staff, the recruitment of study
participants, and the development of methods (e.g., analytical methods), all of which have been
found to delay projects in the past.
Period of performance extensions for delays due to exceptional conditions beyond the grantee's
control will be considered for approval by HUD in accordance with 2 CFR § 200.308(e)(2), as
applicable, and the OLHCHH Program Guide (https://www.hud.gov/sites/documents/PGI_201303.PDF). If requested, determined to be appropriate, and subsequently approved by OLHCHH,
grantees will be eligible to receive a single extension of up to 12 months in length.
Estimated Project Start Date:
Page 17 of 86

12/07/2023
Estimated Project End Date:
12/07/2026
Length of Project Periods:
36-month project period and budget period
Length of Periods Explanation of Other:
N/A

E. Type of Funding Instrument
Funding Instrument Type:
CA (Cooperative Agreement)
Awards will be made as cooperative agreements. Anticipated substantial involvement by HUD
staff for cooperative agreements may include, but will not be limited to:
1. Review and suggestion of amendments to the study design, including study objectives;
field sampling plan; data collection methods; sample handling and preparation; and
sample and data analysis.
2. Review and provision of technical recommendations in response to quarterly progress
reports (e.g., amendments to study design based on preliminary results).
3. Review and provision of technical recommendations on the journal article(s) and final
study report.
Awardees are expected to make reasonable efforts to incorporate HUD suggestions and
recommendations when provided.

III. ELIGIBILITY INFORMATION
A. Eligible Applicants
00 (State governments)
01 (County governments)
02 (City or township governments)
04 (Special district governments)
05 (Independent school districts)
06 (Public and State controlled institutions of higher education)
07 (Native American tribal governments (Federally recognized))
08 (Public housing authorities/Indian housing authorities)
11 (Native American tribal organizations (other than Federally recognized tribal governments))
12 (Nonprofits having a 501(c)(3) status with the IRS, other than institutions of higher
education)
13 (Nonprofits without 501(c)(3) status with the IRS, other than institutions of higher education)
Page 18 of 86

20 (Private institutions of higher education)
22 (For profit organizations other than small businesses)
23 (Small businesses)
Additional Information on Eligibility
Applications to supplement existing projects are eligible to compete with applications for new
awards.
However, Federal agencies and organizations with the same Principal Investigator (PI) that
received an award under the FY 2021 or FY 2022 Lead and Healthy Homes Technical Studies
Grant Program cycle are ineligible.
Faith-based organizations
(1) Faith-based organizations may apply for this award on the same basis as any other
organization, as set forth at 24 CFR 5.109, and subject to the protections and requirements of 42
U.S.C. 2000bb et seq., HUD will not, in the selection of recipients, discriminate against an
organization based on the organization's religious character, affiliation, or exercise.
(2) A faith-based organization that participates in this program will retain its independence and
may continue to carry out its mission consistent with religious freedom and conscience
protections in Federal law, including the Free Speech and Free Exercise Clauses of the
Constitution, 42 U.S.C. 2000bb et seq., 42 U.S.C. 238n, 42 U.S.C. 18113, 42 U.S.C. 2000e-1(a)
and 2000e-2(e), 42 U.S.C. 12113(d), and the Weldon Amendment, among others. Religious
accommodations may also be sought under many of these religious freedom and conscience
protection laws, particularly under the Religious Freedom Restoration Act.
(3) A faith-based organization may not use direct financial assistance from HUD to support or
engage in any explicitly religious activities except where consistent with the Establishment
Clause and any other applicable requirements. Such an organization also may not, in providing
services funded by HUD, discriminate against a beneficiary or prospective program beneficiary
on the basis of religion, religious belief, a refusal to hold a religious belief, or a refusal to attend
or participate in a religious practice.

B. Ineligible Applicants
1. Individuals
2. Federal agencies
3. Organizations with the same Principal Investigator (PI) that received an award under the
FY 2021 or FY 2022 Lead and Healthy Homes Technical Studies Grant Program cycle.
4. Foreign entities and sole proprietorship organizations are not eligible to compete for or
receive awards made under this announcement.

C. Cost Sharing or Matching
This Program does not require cost sharing or matching, but provides points based on leverage as
described below.

Page 19 of 86

Under the application rating factor 3, applicants that provide evidence of significant resource
leveraging will receive points (see Leveraging Resources under Section V.A.1.b.(3)(e)).

D. Threshold Eligibility Requirements
Applicants who fail to meet any of the following threshold eligibility requirements are deemed
ineligible. Applications from ineligible applicants are not rated or ranked and will not receive
HUD funding.
1. Resolution of Civil Rights Matters
Outstanding civil rights matters must be resolved before the application submission deadline.
Applicants with unresolved civil rights matters at the application deadline are deemed ineligible.
Applications from ineligible applicants are not rated or ranked and will not receive HUD
funding.
a. An applicant is ineligible for funding if the applicant has any of the charges, cause
determinations, lawsuits, or letters of findings referenced in subparagraphs (1) – (5) that are
not resolved to HUD’s satisfaction before or on the application deadline date for this NOFO.
(1) Charges from HUD concerning a systemic violation of the Fair Housing Act or
receipt of a cause determination from a substantially equivalent state or local fair housing
agency concerning a systemic violation of a substantially equivalent state or local fair
housing law proscribing discrimination because of race, color, religion, sex (including
sexual orientation and gender identity), national origin, disability or familial status;
(2) Status as a defendant in a Fair Housing Act lawsuit filed by the United States alleging
a pattern or practice of discrimination or denial of rights to a group of persons raising an
issue of general public importance under 42 U.S.C. 3614(a);
(3) Status as a defendant in any other lawsuit filed or joined by the Department of Justice,
or in which the Department of Justice has intervened, or filed an amicus brief or
statement of interest, alleging a pattern or practice or systemic violation of Title VI of the
Civil Rights Act of 1964, Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, Section 109 of
the Housing and Community Development Act of 1974, the Americans with Disabilities
Act, Violence Against Women Act, or a claim under the False Claims Act related to fair
housing, non-discrimination, or civil rights generally including an alleged failure to
affirmatively further fair housing;
(4) Receipt of a letter of findings identifying systemic non-compliance with Title VI of
the Civil Rights Act of 1964, Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, Section 109
of the Housing and Community Development Act of 1974; Violence Against Women
Act; or the Americans with Disabilities Act; or
(5) Receipt of a cause determination from a substantially equivalent state or local fair
housing agency concerning a systemic violation of provisions of a state or local law
prohibiting discrimination in housing based on sexual orientation, gender identity, or
lawful source of income.
b. HUD will determine if actions to resolve the charge, cause determination, lawsuit, or letter
of findings taken before the application deadline date will resolve the matter. Examples of
actions that may be sufficient to resolve the matter include, but are not limited to:
Page 20 of 86

(1) Current compliance with a voluntary compliance agreement signed by all the parties;
(2) Current compliance with a HUD-approved conciliation agreement signed by all the
parties;
(3) Current compliance with a conciliation agreement signed by all the parties and
approved by the state governmental or local administrative agency with jurisdiction over
the matter;
(4) Current compliance with a consent order or consent decree;
(5) Current compliance with a final judicial ruling or administrative ruling or decision; or
(6) Dismissal of charges.
2. Timely Submission of Applications
Applications submitted after the deadline stated within this NOFO that do not meet the
requirements of the grace period policy are marked late. Late applications are ineligible and are
not considered for funding. See Section IV. D. Application Submission Dates and Times.

E. Statutory and Regulatory Requirements Affecting
Eligibility
Eligibility Requirements for Applicants of HUD’s Financial Assistance Programs
The following requirements affect applicant eligibility. Detailed information on each
requirement is found in the “Eligibility Requirements for Applicants of HUD’s Financial
Assistance Programs” document on HUD’s Funding Opportunities page.
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•

Universal Identifier and System for Award Management (SAM.gov) Requirements
Outstanding Delinquent Federal Debts
Debarments or Suspensions, or both
Mandatory Disclosure Requirement
Pre-selection Review of Performance
Sufficiency of Financial Management System
False Statements
Prohibition Against Lobbying Activities

In addition, each applicant under this NOFO must have the necessary processes and systems in
place to comply with the Award Term in Appendix A of 24 CFR part 170 if the applicant
receives an award, unless an exception applies as provided in 2 CFR170.110.

F. Program-Specific Requirements
1. Priority Research Topics/Study Conducted in Properties Remediated with OLHCHH
Grant
Even though HUD will consider funding applications for technical studies on topics that are
consistent with the overall goals and objectives of the LHHTS Grant Program as described
above, HUD is particularly interested in the following research topic areas listed below.
Applications that clearly include disaster recovery, climate resilience, or strengthen
environmental justice and/or form a partnership with at least one of OLHCHH grantees (see
grantee contact list at https://www.hud.gov/program_offices/healthy_homes/lbp/lhc and
Page 21 of 86

https://www.hud.gov/program_offices/healthy_homes/hhi/hhts) and conduct a significant part of
the proposed study in properties that are or were remediated with an OLHCHH grant, will
receive 3 points under rating factor 2 of the application (see section V.A.1.b(2)). However,
you are not limited to addressing only topic areas listed below in your application. If topics other
than those identified under the priority topics are proposed, it is important that the applicant
describes in sufficient detail how the proposed study is consistent with the overall LHHTS Grant
Program goals and objectives.
Applications for additional work related to ongoing HUD-funded technical studies (i.e., for work
outside the scope of the original agreement) are eligible to compete with applications for awards
in new subjects. These applications will be evaluated in the same manner as applications in new
subjects. Brief descriptions of current and recently completed technical studies grant projects and
grantee contact information can be found on the HUD website at
https://www.hud.gov/program_offices/healthy_homes/hhi/hhts
a. LTS Grant Program
(1) Evaluation of the effectiveness and longevity of specific residential lead hazard control
interventions. The effectiveness of lead hazard control interventions (i.e., interim controls or a
combination of interim controls and abatement) over various time periods following
implementation is a topic that has been primarily covered through HUD’s Evaluation of the
HUD Lead Hazard Control Grant Program (referred to as the National Evaluation)
(https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envres.2004.12.011, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envres.2005.02.002,
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envres.2006.04.007, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envres.2010.11.003), that
assessed the impact of lead hazard control interventions conducted by 14 grantees that were
among the first recipients of HUD lead hazard control grants. Follow-up research on a subset of
the original study participants demonstrated that dust-lead levels generally remained low
(particularly on floors) six years following interventions (Wilson et al., 2006). Although this
research has demonstrated that interim controls can be effective in reducing dust-lead levels over
an extended period, there is still value in conducting research on the efficacy and durability of
specific interventions or combinations of interventions and their impact on occupant’s health.
For example, HUD has supported research that focused on the benefits of window replacement
in reducing window and floor dust-lead approximately 12 years post-intervention (Dixon et al.,
2012). It is notable that these durability results were achieved even though the grant programs do
not require ongoing lead-based paint maintenance after the interventions, in contrast to the
requirement for such maintenance under most housing assistance programs covered by HUD’s
Lead Safe Housing Rule and described in Chapter 6 of the HUD Guidelines
(www.hud.gov/program_offices/healthy_homes/lbp/hudguidelines). Furthermore, because there
is no recognized safe level of lead exposure for children, the ability of interim controls to
maintain low dust-lead levels in treated homes has assumed even greater importance. The lack
of a specific blood-lead threshold for adverse health effects in children is reflected by the action
of the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention in adopting a "reference value" approach
for lead in children's blood based on the blood lead level distribution in U.S. children (currently
set at 3.5 µg/dL (https://www.cdc.gov/nceh/lead/news/cdc-updates-blood-lead-referencevalue.htm). Research supports the need to achieve and maintain low dust-lead levels in order to
keep children’s lead exposure as low as is feasible, so evaluations of the effectiveness of specific
interim controls, combinations of interim controls, and/or ongoing lead-based paint maintenance
Page 22 of 86

activities following well characterized interim controls are of particular interest to HUD with
respect to their ability to sufficiently maintain low dust-lead levels over both the short and long
term (e.g., 3 or more years). HUD is also interested in the ability of specific lead hazard control
treatments to consistently achieve low clearance levels (i.e., at or below the clearance levels of
10 µg/ft2 for floors and 100 µg/ft2 for windowsills) that became effective on March 8, 2021,
through an EPA regulatory action.
(2) The value of lead risk assessments when triggered by children with blood lead levels (BLLs)
at or near CDC’s blood lead reference value of 3.5 µg/dL is not well understood. Some local,
state, and federal laws require that an environmental investigation (i.e., a lead risk assessment) be
conducted in a residence if a child has a BLL at or above the reference value. However, the
frequency at which lead based paint (LBP) hazards are identified in the homes of children with
these BLLs has not been well documented. A study conducted by Cluett et al. (2019) found
relatively small differences in the frequency of LBP hazard detection in the homes of children
with BLLs of 5-9 µg/dL compared to the homes of children with BLLs ≥ 10 µg/dL. The
researchers reported that a slightly higher percentage of homes among the children in the lower
BLL group (23%) had no identified LBP hazards compared to the higher BLL group (15%).
HUD is interested in supporting similar research for children with BLLs near or above the
current CDC blood-lead reference value of 3.5 µg/dL (e.g., BLLs ≥ 3 µg/dL and < 5 µg/dL).
HUD anticipates that this research could likely be conducted in a cost-effective manner using
existing data sets.
(3) Analysis of Available Data and Databases. HUD is interested in supporting research using
existing data to address key scientific issues related to the identification and control of leadbased paint hazards. Research efforts often generate large data sets that are analyzed to address
primary research objectives; however, there is often important information to be gained by
conducting additional analyses of the collected data. Such analyses can generally be conducted at
low-cost relative to the cost of the initial research. Applicants submitting proposals in this area
should explain how the analyses would address one or more important issues and will result in
improvements in lead hazard assessment and control methods. HUD is also interested in the
creative use of existing databases (e.g., Census data, blood-lead screening data, etc.) to improve
the efficacy of lead hazard control programs (e.g., by improved targeting of the highest risk
homes and neighborhoods), assess the effectiveness of enforcement and lead hazard control
activities and regulations, and other uses of these data that further the goal of improving methods
for the identification and control of residential lead-based paint hazards. If using data older than
10 years, the applicant needs to justify why they are using data that old.
(4) Use of novel methods for lead risk assessment. Since 1995 and the first HUD Guidelines, the
practice of lead-based paint risk assessment has remained rather static. Except for the
improvements in XRF instrumentation and technology, little has changed in the performance of a
lead-based paint risk assessment. There remains a need to do a visual assessment of paint
conditions and to obtain dust lead loadings (using dust wipes followed by laboratory analysis)
and soil samples. HUD is interested in the use of novel approaches that could shorten the time
needed to perform risk assessments and new approaches that can prioritize homes that could
likely contain lead-based paint hazards.

Page 23 of 86

(5) Use of novel methods for dust lead measurements for hazard assessment or clearance. Since
1995 and the first HUD Guidelines, the practice of lead dust measurement has consisted of the
use of dust wipes followed by laboratory analysis and has been the standard for the
determination of the lead dust loading on floors, windowsills and window troughs. The dust wipe
materials have significantly improved, as has the laboratory instrumentation to provide more
sensitive analyses to report the lower levels required by the most recent EPA and HUD revised
standards. HUD is interested in new approaches to determine lead loadings in dust samples that
may eliminate the need for the use of dust wipes and the need for follow-up with laboratory
analysis. Such “shortcuts” could shorten the times and expense of risk assessments and the time
necessary to obtain clearance after remediation activities, including shortening the time needed
for relocation of residents until clearance is obtained.
b. HHTS Grant Program
(1) Implementation research on interventions incorporating the eight principles of healthy homes.
HUD is interested in assessing novel or promising methods for implementing integrated housing
health and safety assessments and subsequent interventions (i.e., the healthy homes model) in
high-risk homes. This priority topic addresses the need for the wider adoption of the healthy
homes model (or major aspects of it), especially with respect to its application in neighborhoods
or housing with a high prevalence of substandard housing and/or vulnerable populations. For
example, on the principle of making homes contaminant-free, studying actions that reduce indoor
air quality contaminants, e.g., carbon monoxide, nitrogen dioxide, and formaldehyde, is of
interest. Previous HUD-funded research has documented significant reductions in housingrelated health and safety hazards and conditions. These studies have demonstrated significant
reductions in the total number of hazards, including injury hazards and asthma triggers, when
units were assessed three to six months following intervention (see Appendix C: Reddy et al.,
2017; Dixon et al., 2009; Klitzman et al., 2005).
(2) The World Health Organization (WHO) “Environment, Climate Change and Health”
mentions that housing practices influence climate, which has an intimate relationship with health.
The building sector (residential and commercial) accounted for 19% of global greenhouse gas
emissions and one-third of global black carbon emissions in 2010, according to the
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (2014). The University of California at Davis
Western Cooling Efficiency Center reported that, “Residential energy use is responsible for
about 20% of total greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions in the US.”
As the Federal agency dedicated to creating strong, sustainable, inclusive communities, and
quality affordable homes, HUD is on the front lines of the nation’s efforts to increase resilience
to climate impacts. In response to the policy set forth in Executive Order 14008, HUD Action
Plan is organized around three overarching Climate Action Goals for programs and policies
under HUD’s purview: Goal 1: Increase Climate Resilience, Goal 2: Reduce Greenhouse Gas
Emissions and Goal 3: Pursue Environmental Justice. To support HUD’s New Climate Action
Plan: https://www.hud.gov/climate, HUD is interested in research that identifies actions that
protect the health and safety of the families from hazards resulting from natural disasters and
help them to mitigate the risks of such health and safety hazards in housing occurring before
such anticipated disasters.
Also, HUD is interested in research on the health effects on indoor air quality of switching, in
HUD-supported housing, to low-carbon or zero-carbon sources of energy. (Note: Applicants that
Page 24 of 86

propose this type of study should discuss how the knowledge that is gained from the study could
be used in a program to reduce these hazards in target communities). The OLHCHH offers a list
of activities (https://www.hud.gov/climate/OLHCHH) that support and implement Climate
Action more broadly.
(3) Developing easily replicable, cost-effective methods for identifying, preventing, and
controlling mold and excess moisture in various types of residential buildings, with a focus on
affordable housing. Specific needs include better tools for the identification of hidden mold and
moisture problems and the assessment of improved surveillance and maintenance protocols for
existing residential buildings (e.g., training of maintenance workers and supervisors on use of
structured surveillance and response protocols).
(4) Indoor air quality is also damaged by poor choice of building materials, structural risks as
well as poor ventilation practices. Poor ventilation practices may promote excessive exposure to
moisture, mold, radon, asbestos, lead, volatile organic compounds (VOC), and indoor pollutants
(see Appendix C for research literature on these subjects). HUD is interested in innovative
methods (not discussed elsewhere in this list of priorities) to identify the sources and control the
hazards in order to improve the indoor air quality in the residences of the people we serve.
(5) Physical Injury Prevention Measures: HUD is interested in research on the combined efficacy
of evidence-based injury intervention packages for preventing injury in high-risk populations,
particularly children, persons with disabilities, and seniors in low-income households. HUD is
further interested in demonstrating the feasibility and cost-effectiveness of incorporating
evidence-based physical injury prevention measures into residential programs (such as packages
of interventions that can be used in the OLHCHH’s Older Adult Home Modification grant
program), including housing for seniors and green renovation and rehabilitation programs, as
well as ongoing maintenance.
(6) Mitigation of Residential Asthma Triggers: In 2014, three Institutes within the National
Institutes of Health held a workshop on the state of the science on the indoor environment and
asthma (Gold et al., 2017). Research needs identified by participants included well-designed
(and, if feasible, blinded and controlled) trials to test the conditions under which free-standing air
filtration systems, structural interventions, and other emerging building-level interventions
reduce indoor pollutants, allergens, and other contaminants. The authors noted that this is a
precondition to assessing whether exposure reduction improves respiratory health. An additional
area of research need of relevance for this NOFO is the testing of low-cost interventions easily
transferable from home to home or interventions that can be applied to any home without the
need for structural changes, with these targeting highly mobile populations or populations with
little control over the structure of their homes.
In a more recent systematic review of the research on indoor allergen control, Leas et al. (2018)
concluded that the strength of evidence for the effectiveness of both single and multicomponent
interventions was not strong. Common weaknesses of the reviewed studies included infrequent
use of validated measures of asthma control, inconsistent assessment of asthma severity, and
infrequent reporting of standardized measures of asthma exacerbations, healthcare use, and
quality of life. The authors concluded that additional evaluation was needed for the following
single interventions: HEPA vacuum cleaning; carpet removal; pet cleaning/removal, and mold
removal. Although the authors concluded that multicomponent interventions that include HEPA
vacuums or pest control reduce asthma exacerbations and improve quality of life, they indicate a
Page 25 of 86

need to evaluate these interventions more efficiently such as by testing standardized bundles of
interventions. If you are proposing research on home asthma interventions, you must
describe how your study design addresses the weaknesses identified in the systematic
review and why it would be expected to produce definitive findings or information that
would be important in the design of a larger, more definitive study. HUD will not fund
additional studies within this focus area unless there are one or more compelling and novel
aspects of the study design and the common weaknesses identified in the systematic review
are clearly addressed.
(7) Studies in Native American tribal communities: Studies that address important healthy homes
issues in Federally recognized, Native American communities. Applicants in this area are
encouraged to explore potential opportunities to partner with communities that have received a
grant through HUD’s “Healthy Homes Production Grant Program for Tribal Housing” (CFDA
number: 14.913). A recent HHTS Program cooperative agreement supported important research
in tribal housing in rural Alaska (see Appendix C: Singleton et al. 2017 and 2018). HUD’s Office
of Policy Development and Research published a report on the “Housing Needs of American
Indians and Alaska Natives in Tribal Areas” in 2017
(https://www.huduser.gov/portal/publications/HNAIHousingNeeds.html).
2. HUD will not fund applications that involve laboratory testing on living organisms except
for laboratory testing on animals that are residential pests (e.g., cockroaches, bed bugs, mice,
etc.) that is a component of a more comprehensive study to improve IPM methods. Applicants
should be aware that under the technical studies grant programs, HUD is interested in funding
applied research that is closely related to improving our ability to identify and sustainably
implement interventions to control key residential hazards. Applications that have a more basic
research focus may not be well suited for funding through these programs.
3. General Information
You may address one, or more than one, of the above technical studies topic areas within your
proposal, or submit separate applications for different topic areas. You must, however, submit
your application under the LTS program or the HHTS program; your application cannot be
reviewed under both programs. In proposing to conduct a study on a particular topic, applicants
should consider:
a. The “fit” of the proposed hazard assessment and/or control methods within the overall goal of
addressing “priority” health and safety hazards in a cost-effective manner;
b. The expected efficacy and cost-effectiveness of the proposed methods for hazard control and
risk reduction. Questions to consider include the degree to which interventions would be
accepted by occupants and by housing owners and managers, ease and cost of implementation,
the length of time the intervention would stay effective, and the cost-effectiveness of the
intervention in preventing illness or injury or in improving the health of residents with existing
illness;
c. The ability of the study to generate definitive results. If your proposed study design does not
incorporate the strongest methodology (i.e., a randomized controlled trial) to assess the effect of
an intervention on health outcomes, you should consider focusing on important indoor
environmental quality (IEQ) measures instead of health outcomes where this is appropriate. A
focus on environmental outcomes is generally expected to produce more definitive results as
Page 26 of 86

opposed to a health outcome focus, and the impact of improvements to IEQ on health outcomes
can be inferred where the evidence base is sufficient;
d. Where and how these methods would be applied and tested, and/or perform demonstration
activities;
e. The degree to which the study will help develop practical, widely applicable, and accepted
methods and protocols or improve our understanding of a key residential health hazard; and
f. The likelihood that the study findings could be used to reduce social disparities of health that
are attributable or strongly associated with exposure to residential health and safety hazards.
Applicants should consider the efficiencies that might be gained by working cooperatively with
one or more recipients of HUD’s Office of Lead Hazard Control and Healthy Homes grantees,
which are widely distributed throughout the United States. Information on current grantees is
available at https://www.hud.gov/program_offices/healthy_homes/lbp/lhc.
NOTE: A limited amount of hazard control activities, which involve construction limited to
what is necessary to conduct the proposed research, may be conducted as part of Healthy Homes
or Lead Technical Study (see Section IV.F.7).
4. Program Requirements
a. Program Performance. Grantees shall take all reasonable steps to accomplish all activities
within the approved period of performance. HUD reserves the right to terminate the cooperative
agreement prior to the expiration of the period of performance if the grantee fails to make
reasonable progress in implementing the approved program of activities or fails to comply with
the terms of the cooperative agreement.
b. Regulatory Compliance. Grantees must comply with all relevant federal (40 CFR 260 - 268
(RCRA) and 300 - 374 (CERCLA)), state, tribal, and local regulations regarding exposure to and
proper disposal of hazardous materials.
c. Blood Lead Testing. Any blood lead testing, blood lead level test results, medical referral, or
follow-up for children under 6 years of age must be conducted according to the
recommendations of the CDC, Preventing Lead Poisoning in Young Children (see Appendix C
of this NOFO).
d. Restricted Use of Funds. HUD LHHTS grant funds must not be used to replace existing
resources dedicated to any ongoing project.
e. Laboratory Analysis for Lead. Laboratory analysis covered by the EPA’s National Lead
Laboratory Accreditation Program (NLLAP) must be conducted by a laboratory recognized
under the program, unless approved by HUD based on its prior consideration of the justification
by the grantee.
f. Laboratory Analysis for Mold. Samples to be analyzed for mold (fungi) must be submitted to
a laboratory accredited through the Environmental Microbiological Laboratory Accreditation
Program (EMLAP), administered by the American Industrial Hygiene Association (AIHA),
unless approved by HUD based on its prior consideration of the justification by the grantee.
g. Human Research. Human research subjects will be protected from research risks in
conformance with Federal Policy for the Protection of Human Subjects, required by HUD at 24
CFR 60 (See Section V.A.1.b.(3).(b).(iii) below regarding the Institutional Review Board
process, which is required for some technical studies).
h. OSHA Compliance. The requirements of the Occupational Safety and Health Administration
(OSHA) (e.g., 29 CFR parts 1910 and/or 1926, as applicable) or the state or local occupational
safety and health regulations, whichever are most stringent, must be met.
Page 27 of 86

i. Disclosure. All test results and other information in pre-1978 housing related to lead-based
paint or lead-based paint hazards must be provided to the owner of the unit, together with a
statement describing the owner’s legal duty to disclose the knowledge of lead-based paint and its
hazards to prospective tenants (before initial leasing or lease renewal with changes) and buyers
(before sale) (24 CFR Part 35, subpart A). Disclosure of other identified housing-related health
or safety hazards to the owner of the unit, for purposes of encouraging remediation is encouraged
but not required by HUD unless such disclosure is an element of an Institutional Review Board
(IRB) approval of the research.
j. Privacy. Submission of any information to databases (whether website, computer, paper, or
other format) of addresses of housing units identified, treated, or cleared under these studies may
be subject to the protections of the Privacy Act of 1974, and shall not include any personal
information that could identify any household member. You should also check to ensure you
meet state and local privacy regulations as well as other federal privacy laws and regulations.
k. Community Involvement. Applicants who incorporate meaningful community involvement
into any study that requires a significant level of interaction with a community during
implementation (e.g., projects being conducted within occupied dwellings, or which involve
surveys of community residents) will receive a higher score in rating factor 3, Soundness of
Approach. The term community refers to a variety of populations comprised of persons who
have commonalities that can be identified (e.g., based on geographic location, ethnicity, health
condition, age, disability, limited English proficiency (LEP), etc.). Applicants should identify the
community that is most relevant to their particular project. Meaningful community involvement
also requires that recipients ensure that individuals with disabilities can access and fully
participate in activities and throughout all phases of a study. This includes providing information
to the community that is accessible and effective for individuals with disabilities and providing
auxiliary aids and services as well as reasonable accommodations to ensure effective
communication for and equal participation by individuals with disabilities (see 24 CFR § 8.6 and
§ 8.33). Recipients must also ensure meaningful access for persons with limited English
proficiency (LEP). This includes providing language assistance services and documents in other
languages to ensure that LEP persons can participate in activities and throughout all phases of a
study (see Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and Executive Order 13166).
In accordance with Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 (29 U.S.C.§ 794) and HUD’s
implementing regulations at 24 CFR Part 8, and Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act
(42 U.S.C. §§ 12131-12134) and the implementing regulation at 28 CFR Part 35, the programs
services, and activities funded through this NOFO must be accessible to and usable by persons
with disabilities. All meetings must be held in facilities that are physically accessible to persons
with disabilities. Recipients and subrecipients must also provide effective communication for
individuals with disabilities (see 24 CFR § 8.6). Auxiliary aids or services and reasonable
accommodations must be provided to ensure equal participation by individuals with disabilities.
Recipients and subrecipients must take reasonable steps to ensure meaningful language access
for persons with limited English proficiency (LEP) pursuant to Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of
1964 and Executive Order 13166. For assistance in ensuring meaningful access for individuals
with limited English proficiency, recipients and subrecipients should consult HUD’s Final
Guidance to Federal Financial Assistance Recipients Regarding Title VI Prohibition Against
National Origin Discrimination Affecting Limited English Proficient Persons (HUD’s LEP
Guidance) published in the Federal Register on January 22, 2007 (72 Fed. Reg. 2732).
Page 28 of 86

There are many different approaches to involving the community in the conception, design, and
implementation of a study and the subsequent dissemination of findings. Examples include but
are not limited to: establishing a structured approach to obtain community input and feedback
(e.g., through a community advisory board); including one or more community-based
organizations as study partners; employing community residents to recruit study participants and
collect data; and enlisting the community in the dissemination of findings and translation of
results into improved policies and/or practices. A discussion of community involvement in
research involving housing-related health hazards can be found in Chapter 5 of the Institute of
Medicine publication titled “Ethical Considerations for Research on Housing-Related Health
Hazards Involving Children” (see Appendix C for more information on this report).
l. Standardized Dust Sampling Protocol and Quality Control Requirements. Grantees
collecting samples of settled dust from participant homes for environmental allergen analysis
(e.g., cockroach, dust mite) will be required to use a standard dust sampling protocol, unless the
grantee provides compelling justification to use an alternate protocol (e.g., the study involves the
development of an alternative sampling method). The HUD protocol is on the OLHCHH website
at: https://www.hud.gov/sites/documents/DOC_12539.PDF
m. Requirements for Peer Review of Scientific Data. All HUD-sponsored research is subject
to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) Final Information Quality Bulletin for Peer
Review (70 FR 2664-2677, January 14, 2005) prior to its public dissemination. In accordance
with paragraph II.2 of the Bulletin, HUD will not require further peer review conducted on
information that has already been subjected to adequate peer review.
n. Principal Investigator (PI). The PI for the proposed study must directly represent and be
directly employed by the applicant organization for the proposed role in the grant application. If
the proposal includes co-PIs, the lead co-PI must represent and be directly employed by the
applicant organization.
Advancing Racial Equity
In accordance with Executive Order 13985, Executive Order On Advancing Racial Equity and
Support for Underserved Communities Through the Federal Government, and federal fair
housing and civil rights laws, you must submit a narrative demonstrating the following:
▪
▪
▪
▪

You analyzed the racial composition of the persons or households who are expected to
benefit from your proposed grant activities;
You identified any potential barriers to persons or communities of color equitably
benefiting from your proposed grant activities;
You detailed the steps you will take to prevent, reduce or eliminate these barriers; and
You have measures in place to track your progress and evaluate the effectiveness of your
efforts to advance racial equity in your grant activities.

Note that any actions taken in furtherance of this section must be consistent with federal
nondiscrimination requirements.
This narrative is required and must address each of the four bullets in the paragraph above.
Applicants will submit this narrative according to the instructions in Section IV.B. Applicants
should provide their response in Appendix B (maximum of 2 pages). This narrative will be
evaluated for sufficiency. If the narrative is deemed insufficient, it will be a “Curable Deficiency”
that will be communicated to the applicant for correction with a notice of deficiency.
Page 29 of 86

Affirmative Marketing
You must submit a narrative demonstrating that the housing, services, or other benefits provided
under this grant will be affirmatively marketed broadly throughout the local area and nearby
areas to any demographic groups that would be unlikely or least likely to apply absent such
efforts. Such demographic groups may include, for example, Black and Brown persons or
communities, individuals with limited English proficiency, individuals with disabilities, or
families with children. Such activities may include outreach through community contacts or
service providers or at community centers serving the target population; and marketing on
websites, social media channels, television, radio, and print media serving local members of the
targeted group. Documentation for this factor consists of a narrative describing the activities that
will fulfill the factor requirements.
This narrative is required and must address the issues outlined in the paragraph above, according to
the instructions in Section IV.B. Applicants will submit this narrative in the Appendix B. This
narrative will be evaluated for sufficiency. If the narrative is deemed insufficient, it will be a
“Curable Deficiency” that will be communicated to the applicant for correction with a notice of
deficiency. This is a mandatory requirement.

G. Criteria for Beneficiaries.
N/A

IV. APPLICATION AND SUBMISSION INFORMATION
A. Obtain an Application Package
Instructions for Applicants
All application materials, including the Application Instructions and Application Package, are
available through Grants.gov. You must access and review all available application materials.
You must submit your application electronically via Grants.gov under the Funding Opportunity
Number cited within this NOFO. Your application must list the applicable Funding Opportunity
Number.
You can request a waiver from the requirement for electronic submission, if you demonstrate
good cause. An example of good cause may include: a lack of available Internet access in the
geographic area in which your business offices are located. However, lack of SAM registration
or valid UEI is not a good cause. If you cannot submit your application electronically, you must
ask in writing for a waiver of the electronic grant submission requirements. HUD will not grant a
waiver if you fail to submit to HUD in writing or via email a request for a waiver at least 15
calendar days before the application deadline. If HUD grants a waiver, a paper application must
be received before the deadline for this NOFO. To request a waiver, you must contact:
Name:
Page 30 of 86

Brenda Reyes, MD MPH
Email:
[email protected]
HUD Organization:
OLHCHH
Street:
451 7th Street, S.W. Rm 8236
City:
Washington
State:
DC DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
Zip:
20410
Grants.gov provides customer support information on its website at
https://www.grants.gov/web/grants/support.html. If you have difficulty accessing the application
and instructions or have technical problems, you can receive customer support from Grants.gov
by calling (800) 518-GRANTS (this is a toll-free number) or by sending an email to
[email protected]. HUD welcomes and is prepared to receive calls from individuals who are
deaf or hard of hearing, as well as individuals with speech or communication disabilities. To
learn more about how to make an accessible telephone call, please visit
https://www.fcc.gov/consumers/guides/telecommunications-relay-service-trs. The Grants.gov
Help Desk can be reached twenty-four hours per day, seven days per week, except federal
holidays. HUD recommends calling the Help Desk rather than emailing, because determining the
basis for the problem may require a conversation with the Grants.gov Support Customer Service
Representative.

B. Content and Form of Application Submission
You must verify that boxes 11, 12, and 13 on the SF-424 match the NOFO for which you are
applying. If they do not match, you have downloaded the wrong Application Instruction and
Application Package.
Submission of an application that is otherwise sufficient, under the wrong Assistance Listing and
Funding Opportunity Number is a Non-Curable Deficiency, unless otherwise stated under the
Threshold requirements section.
1. Content
Forms/Assurances/Certifications

Submission
Notes/Description
Requirement

Application for Federal Assistance
(SF-424)

This form is
required.

Review section IV.B.2. of this NOFO for
detailed submission requirements

Page 31 of 86

Forms/Assurances/Certifications

Submission
Notes/Description
Requirement

Applicant and Recipient
Assurances and Certifications
(HUD 424-B)

This form is
required.

Review section IV.B.2. of this NOFO for
detailed submission requirements

Applicant/Recipient
Disclosure/Update Report (HUD
2880)

This form is
required.

Review section IV.B.2. of this NOFO for
detailed submission requirements

Review
section IV.G.
of this NOFO
for detailed
submission
requirements.

Federally recognized Indian tribes and
tribally designated housing entities
(TDHEs) established by federally
recognized Indian tribes as a result of the
exercise of the tribe’s sovereign power
are excluded from coverage of the Byrd
Amendment, but state-recognized Indian
tribes and TDHEs established only under
state law shall comply with this
requirement.

Disclosure of Lobbying Activities
(SF-LLL)

HUD will
provide
instructions to HUD will provide instructions to
Grant Application Detailed Budget
grantees on
grantees on how the form is to be
Worksheet (HUD424-CBW)
how the form submitted.
is to be
submitted.

Additionally, your complete application must include the following narratives and non-form
attachments.
a. Application:
Applications must contain the items listed in this section. These items include the standard forms
that are applicable to this funding announcement (collectively referred to as the "standard
forms"). Copies of these forms are available online at How to Apply for Grants | GRANTS.GOV
(https://www.grants.gov/web/grants/applicants/apply-for-grants.html). The required items are:
•

Application Abstract (two-page maximum, see section IV.B.2.b., below for the page
layout requirements). An abstract with the project title, the names and affiliations of all
investigators; identification of partner organizations; a summary of the objectives, study
design, and expected results, and the total funds requested, must be included in the
proposal. Information contained in the abstract will not be considered in the evaluation
Page 32 of 86

•

•

and scoring of your application and will not be counted towards the 25-page maximum.
Any information you wish to be considered in scoring of the application must be
provided under the appropriate rating factor response.
Response to Rating Factors. A project description/narrative statement addressing the
rating factors for award, which are identified in section V.A.1.b. The narrative statement
must be identified in accordance with each factor for award (Rating Factors 1 through 4).
The full application must be formatted as per section IV.B.2.b. The project description or
narrative must be included in the responses to the rating factors. Any
description/narrative more than this limit will not be read. The points you receive for
each rating factor will be based on the portion of your narrative statement that you submit
in response to that particular factor, supplemented by any appendices that are referenced
in your narrative response to the rating factor. Supporting materials that are not
referenced or discussed in your responses to the individual rating factors will not be
considered. Additional materials (e.g., appendices) can be submitted with your
application. The footer on the pages of these materials should identify the rating factor
that they are supporting.
Equity Narratives. The applicant is required to complete and submit the following four
(4) narratives (maximum of 2 pages) in the Appendix B:
o a written narrative on Advancing Racial Equity that addresses the four bullets in
Section III.F;
o a written narrative on Affirmative Marketing that addresses the issues outlined in
Section III.F;
o a written narrative on Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing that addresses the
issues outlined in Section IV.G; and
o a narrative for Experience Promoting Racial Equity outlined in Section V.B.
Each narrative will be evaluated for sufficiency and will not change the applicant’s score
or rank as compared to other applicants. If a narrative is deemed insufficient, it will be a
“Curable Deficiency” that will be communicated to the applicant for correction with a
notice of deficiency.

•

Supporting Materials. Include, as appendices, the following materials that are needed to
support your responses to the rating factors. These will not be counted towards the Rating
Factors narrative 25-page limit:
o The resumes of the PI and other key personnel. Each resume shall not exceed
three pages and is limited to information that is relevant in assessing the
qualifications and experience of key personnel to conduct and/or manage the
proposed technical study.
o Organizational chart.
o Letters of commitment.
o List of references cited in your responses to the rating factors.

•

Additional Information. The additional optional materials must not exceed 20 pages.
Any pages more than this limit will not be read. The additional information should not be
a continuation of the rating factor narrative but provide further clarification if needed, of
statements made in the rating factor narrative. Additional information that is a
continuation of rating factor narrative will not be considered.
Page 33 of 86

•

Budget. Include a total budget using form HUD424CBW
(https://www.hudexchange.info/resource/304/hud-form-424cbw/) included in the
Instructions download at Grants.gov, with supporting cost justification of up to four
pages, which will cover all budget categories of the federal grant request. This
information will not be counted towards the Rating Factors narrative 25-page limit. Use
the budget format discussed in Rating Factor (3), Section V.A.1.b.(3).(d).(i) below. In
completing the budget forms and justification, you should address the following
elements:
o Direct Labor costs, including all full- and part-time staff required for the planning
and implementation phases of the project. These costs should be based on full
time equivalent (FTE) or hours per year (hours/year) (i.e., one FTE equals 2,080
hours/year);
o Allowance for two trips to HUD OLHCHH required conference, location to be
determined, during the period of performance of your grant, planning each trip for
1-2 people, as needed. In planning your trips, you should assume one or two
overnight stays depending on your location;
o Allowance for the cost of publications, such as article processing charges and
page charges. For more information please see link: What is the difference
between APCs and page charges? A guide to potential costs associated with
publishing your manuscript — (sagepub.com)
o A separate budget form and justification for each sub-recipient receiving more
than 10 percent of the total federal budget request; and
o Supporting documentation for salaries and prices of materials and equipment,
upon request.

2. Format and Form
Narratives and other attachments to your application must follow the following format
guidelines. Do not submit password protected or encrypted files.
25 Pages maximum length of narratives
Other
a. Application:
Up to twenty-five (25) 8-1/2 x 11-inch page limit.
Number the pages of the narrative.
Minimum 12-point Times New Roman font. Minimum margin width of 1-inch on all sides.
Minimum of single line spacing.

C. System for Award Management (SAM) and Unique
Entity Identifier (UEI)
1. SAM Registration Requirement
You must register with https://www.sam.gov/before submitting their application. You must
maintain current information in SAM on immediate and highest-level owner and subsidiaries, as
well as on all predecessors that have been awarded a federal contract or grant within the last
three years, if applicable. Information in SAM must be current for all times during which you
have an active Federal award or an application or plan under consideration by HUD.
Page 34 of 86

2. UEI Requirement
As of April 4, 2022, entities doing business with the federal government must use the UEI
created in SAM.gov. Also, you must provide a valid UEI, registered and active at www.sam.gov/
in the application. For more information, see: https://www.gsa.gov/aboutus/organization/federal-acquisition-service/office-of-systems-management/integrated-awardenvironment-iae/iae-systems- information-kit/unique-entity-identifier-update.
3. Requirement to Register with Grants.gov
Anyone planning to submit applications on behalf of an organization must register at Grants.gov
and be approved by the E-Biz POC in SAM to submit applications for the organization.
Registration for SAM and Grants.gov is a multi-step process and can take four (4) weeks or
longer to complete if data issues arise. Applicants without a valid registration cannot apply
through Grants.gov. Complete registration instructions and guidance are provided on Grants.gov.

D. Application Submission Dates and Times
1. Application Due Date Explanation
The application deadline is 11:59:59 PM Eastern time on
11/06/2023
Submit your application to Grants.gov unless a waiver has been issued allowing you to submit a
paper application. Instructions for submitting your paper application will be contained in the
waiver of electronic submission.
“Received by Grants.gov” means the applicant received a confirmation of receipt and an
application tracking number from Grants.gov. Grants.gov then assigns an application tracking
number and date-and timestamp each application upon successful receipt by the Grants.gov
system. A submission attempt not resulting in confirmation of receipt and an application tracking
number is not considered received by Grants.gov.
Applications received by Grants.gov must be validated by Grants.gov to be received by HUD.
“Validated by Grants.gov” means the application has been accepted and was not rejected with
errors. You can track the status of your application by logging into Grants.gov, selecting
“Applicants” from the top navigation, and selecting “Track my application” from the dropdown
list. If the application status is “rejected with errors,” you must correct the error(s) and resubmit
the application before the 24-hour grace period ends. Applications in “rejected with errors” status
after the 24-hour grace period expires will not be received by HUD. Visit Grants.gov for a
complete description of processing steps after applying.
HUD strongly recommends you submit your applications at least 48 hours before the deadline
and during regular business hours to allow enough time to correct errors or overcome other
problems.
2. Grants.gov Customer Support
Grants.gov provides customer support information on its website at
https://www.grants.gov/web/grants/support.html. If you have difficulty accessing the application
and instructions or have technical problems, contact Grants.gov customer support center by
calling (800) 518-GRANTS (this is a toll-free number) or by sending an email to
Page 35 of 86

[email protected] customer support center is open 24 hours a day, seven days per week,
except Federal holidays. Individuals who are deaf or hard of hearing, or who have speech and
other communication disabilities may use a relay service to reach Grants.gov Customer Support.
To learn more about how to make an accessible telephone call, visit the webpage for Federal
Communications Commission.
3. Grants.gov Application Submission
You can verify the contents of your submitted application to confirm Grants.gov received
everything you intended to submit. To verify the contents of your submitted application:
•
•
•
•
•
•

Log in to Grants.gov.
Click the Check Application Status link, which appears under the Grant Applications
heading in the Applicant Center page. This will take you to the Check Application Status
page.
Enter search criteria and a date range to narrow your search results.
Click the Search button. To review your search results in Microsoft Excel, click the
Export Data button.
Review the Status column. To view more detailed submission information, click the
Details link in the Actions column.
To download the submitted application, click the Download link in the Actions column.

Take note of the Grants.gov tracking number, as it is needed by the Grants.gov customer support
center should you seek their assistance.
HUD may extend the application deadline for any program if Grants.gov is offline or not
available to applicants for at least 24 hours immediately prior to the deadline date, or the system
is down for 24 hours or longer and impacts the ability of applicants to cure a submission
deficiency within the grace period.
HUD may also extend the application deadline upon request if there is a presidentially declared
disaster in the applicant’s area.
If these events occur, HUD will post a notice on its website establishing the new, extended
deadline for the affected applicants. HUD will also publish the extension on Grants.gov.
In determining whether to grant a request for an extension based on a presidentially declared
disaster, HUD will consider the totality of the circumstances including the date of an applicant’s
extension request (how closely it followed the basis for the extension), whether other applicants
in the geographic area are similarly affected by the disaster, and how quickly power or services
are restored to enable the applicant to submit its application.
NOTE: Busy servers, slow processing, large file sizes, improper registration
or password issues are not valid circumstances to extend the deadline dates or the grace period.
4. Amending or Resubmitting an Application
Before the submission deadline, you may amend a validated application through Grants.gov by
resubmitting a revised application containing the new or changed material. The resubmitted
application must be received and validated by Grants.gov by the applicable deadline.
Page 36 of 86

If HUD receives an original and a revised application for a single proposal, HUD will evaluate
only the last submission received by Grants.gov before the deadline.
5. Grace Period for Grants.gov Submissions
If your application is received by Grants.gov before the deadline, but is rejected with errors, you
have a grace period of 24 hours after the application deadline to submit a corrected, received, and
validated application through Grants.gov. The date and time stamp on the Grants.gov system
determines the application receipt time. Any application submitted during the grace period but
not received and validated by Grants.gov will not be considered for funding. There is no grace
period for paper applications.
6. Late Applications
An application received after the NOFO deadline date that does not meet the Grace Period
requirements will be marked late and will not be reviewed by HUD for funding
consideration. Improper or expired registration and password issues are not sufficient causes to
allow HUD to accept applications after the deadline date.
7. Corrections to Deficient Applications
HUD will not consider information from applicants after the application deadline except for
curable deficiencies.
HUD will uniformly notify applicants of each curable deficiency. See curable deficiency
definition in section I.A of this NOFO. Examples of curable (correctable) deficiencies include
inconsistencies in the funding request and failure to submit required certifications. These
examples are non-exhaustive.
When HUD identifies a curable deficiency, HUD will notify the authorized organization
representative identified on the SF-424 Application for Federal Assistance via email. This email
is the official notification of a curable deficiency.
You must email corrections of Curable Deficiencies to [email protected] within the
time limits specified in the notification. The time allowed to correct deficiencies will be no less
than 48 hours and no more than 14 calendar days from the date of the email notification. The
start of the cure period will be the date stamp on the email sent from HUD. If the deficiency cure
deadline date falls on a Saturday, Sunday, Federal holiday, or on a day when HUD’s
Headquarters are closed, then the applicant’s correction must be received on the next business
day HUD Headquarters offices in Washington, DC are open.
The subject line of the email sent to [email protected] must state: Technical Cure and
include the Grants.gov application tracking number or the GrantSolutions application number
(e.g., Subject: Technical Cure - GRANT123456 or Technical Cure - XXXXXXXXXXX). If this
information is not included, HUD cannot match the response with the application under review
and the application may be rejected due to the deficiency.
Corrections to a paper application must be sent in accordance with and to the address indicated in
the notification of deficiency. HUD will treat a paper application submitted in accordance with a
waiver of electronic application containing the wrong UEI as having a curable deficiency.

Page 37 of 86

Failure to correct the deficiency and meet the requirement to have a UEI and active registration
in SAM will render the application ineligible for funding.
8. Authoritative Versions of HUD NOFOs
The version of this NOFO posted on Grants.gov includes the official documents HUD uses to
solicit applications.
9. Exemptions
Parties that believe the requirements of the NOFO would impose a substantial burden on the
exercise of their religion should seek an exemption under the Religious Freedom Restoration Act
(RFRA).

E. Intergovernmental Review
This program is not subject to Executive Order 12372, Intergovernmental Review of Federal
Programs.

F. Funding Restrictions
1. Purchase of Real Property. The purchase of real property is not an allowable cost under these
programs.
2. Purchase or Lease of Equipment. The purchase or lease of equipment having a per-unit cost
more than $5,000 is not an allowable cost unless prior written approval is obtained from HUD.
3. Medical Treatment. Medical treatment costs are not allowable under this program.
4. Profit. For profit entities are not allowed to earn a profit under this grant program.
5. You must comply with the Coastal Barrier Resources Act (16 U.S.C. § 3501 et seq.).
6. You may not conduct lead or healthy home hazard control activities or related work that
constitutes construction, reconstruction, repair, or improvement (as referenced in Section 3(a)(4)
of the Flood Disaster Protection Act of 1973 (42 U.S.C. §§ 4001-4128)) of a building or mobile
home which is in an area identified by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) as
having special flood hazards unless:
a. The community in which the area is situated is participating in the National Flood Insurance
Program in accordance with the applicable regulations (44 CFR parts 59-79), or less than a year
has passed since FEMA notification regarding these hazards; and
b. Where the community is participating in the National Flood Insurance Program, flood
insurance on the property is obtained in accordance with section 102(a) of the Flood Disaster
Protection Act (42 U.S.C. § 4012a(a)). You are responsible for assuring that flood insurance is
obtained and maintained for the appropriate amount and term.
7. Construction Activities. Construction activities supported with funds awarded under this
NOFO are limited to what is necessary to conduct the proposed research and subject to the
limitations cited below;
a. The amount of HHTS grant funds used for construction activities, e.g., to supplement a new
housing construction or substantial rehabilitation project to improve indoor environmental
quality may not exceed 20% of the total HUD funds awarded and must be limited to construction
that is necessary to conduct the proposed research. Furthermore, the majority of any funds
dedicated to construction activities supported by a HHTS grant shall be spent for interventions
not intended for lead hazard control.
b. The amount of LTS grant funds used for construction activities, e.g., to conduct repair or
Page 38 of 86

substantial rehabilitation that is necessary to conduct the proposed study, may not exceed 20% of
the total HUD funds awarded.
8. Costs related to insect or animal testing are not allowable under this program except, when
necessary, in the context of a broader study focusing on improving integrated pest management
methods.
Indirect Cost Rate
Normal indirect cost rules under 2 CFR part 200, subpart E apply. If you intend to charge
indirect costs to your award, your application must clearly state the rate and distribution base you
intend to use. If you have a Federally negotiated indirect cost rate, your application must also
include a letter or other documentation from the cognizant agency showing the approved rate.
Successful applicants whose rate changes after the application deadline must submit the new rate
and documentation to assure the award agreement incorporates the applicable rate.
Applicants other than state and local governments. If you have a Federally negotiated indirect
cost rate, your application must clearly state the approved rate and distribution base and must
include a letter or other documentation from the cognizant agency showing the approved rate. If
your organization does not have a current negotiated rate (including provisional rate) and elects
to use the de minimis rate, your application must clearly state you intend to use the de minimis
rate of 10% of Modified Total Direct Costs (MTDC), as defined at 2 CFR 200.1. Costs must be
consistently charged as either indirect or direct costs but may not be double charged or
inconsistently charged as both, as described in 2 CFR 200.403. Once elected, the de minimis rate
must be applied consistently for all Federal awards until the organization chooses to negotiate a
rate, which the organization may apply to do at any time. Documentation of the decision to use
the de minimis rate must be retained on file for audit.
State and local governments. If your department or agency unit has a Federally negotiated
indirect cost rate, your application must include that rate, the applicable distribution base, and a
letter or other documentation from the cognizant agency showing the negotiated rate. If your
department or agency unit receives more than $35 million in direct Federal funding per year, you
may not claim indirect costs until you receive a negotiated rate from your cognizant agency for
indirect costs as provided in Appendix VII to 2 CFR part 200.
If your department or agency unit receives no more than $35 million in direct Federal funding
per year and your department or agency unit has developed and maintains an indirect cost rate
proposal and supporting documentation for audit in accordance with 2 CFR Part 200, Appendix
VII, you may use the rate and distribution base specified in that indirect cost rate proposal.
Alternatively, if your department or agency unit receives no more than $35 million in direct
Federal funding per year and does not have a current negotiated rate (including provisional) rate,
you may elect to use the de minimis rate of 10% of MTDC. As described in 2 CFR 200.403,
costs must be consistently charged as either indirect or direct costs but may not be double
charged or inconsistently charged as both. Once elected, the de minimis rate must be applied
consistently for all Federal awards until your department or agency chooses to negotiate for a
rate, which you may apply to do at any time. Documentation of the decision to use the de
minimis rate must be retained on file for audit.

Page 39 of 86

G. Other Submission Requirements
1. Standard Application, Assurances, Certifications and Disclosures
Standard Form 424 (SF-424) Application for Federal Assistance
The SF-424 is the government-wide form required to apply for Federal assistance programs,
discretionary Federal grants, and other forms of financial assistance programs. You must
complete and submit the form with the other required forms and information as directed in this
NOFO.
By signing the forms in the SF-424 either through electronic submission or in paper copy
submission (for those granted a waiver), you and the signing authorized organization
representative affirm that you both have reviewed the certifications and assurances associated
with the application for Federal assistance and (1) are aware the submission of the SF-424 is an
assertion that the relevant certifications and assurances are established and (2) acknowledge that
the truthfulness of the certifications and assurances are material representations upon which
HUD will rely when making an award to the applicant. If it is later determined the signing
authorized organization representative to the application made a false certification or assurance,
caused the submission of a false certification or assurance, or did not have the authority to make
a legally binding commitment for the applicant, the applicant and the individual who signed the
application may be subject to administrative, civil, or criminal action. Additionally, HUD may
terminate the award to the applicant organization or pursue other available remedies. Each
applicant is responsible for including the correct certifications and assurances with its application
submission, including those applicable to all applicants, those applicable only to Federally
recognized Indian tribes, or Alaskan native villages and those applicable to applicants other than
Federally recognized Indian tribes, or Alaskan native villages.
Assurances (HUD 424-B)
By submitting your application, you provide assurances that, if selected to receive an award, you
will comply with U.S. statutory and other requirements, including, but not limited to civil rights
requirements. All recipients and subrecipients of the award are required to submit assurances of
compliance with federal civil rights requirements. See, e.g., Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of
1964, Title IX of the Education Amendments Act of 1972, Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act
of 1973, Violence Against Women Act, and the Age Discrimination Act of 1975; see also 24
C.F.R. §§ 1.5; 3.115; 8.50; and 146.25. HUD accepts these assurances in the form of the HUD
424-B, which also require compliance with HUD Reform Act requirements and all general
federal nondiscrimination requirements in the administration of the federal assistance award.
Applicant Disclosure Report Form 2880 (HUD 2880)
The form HUD 2880 is required if you are applying for assistance within the jurisdiction of HUD
to any project subject to Section 102(d) of the HUD Reform Act. Assistance is provided directly
by HUD to any person or entity, but not to subrecipients. It includes assistance for the
acquisition, rehabilitation, operation, conversion, modernization, renovation, or demolition of
any property containing five or more dwelling units that is to be used primarily for residential
purposes. It includes assistance to independent group residences, board and care facilities, group
homes and transitional housing but does not include primarily nonresidential facilities such as
intermediate care facilities, nursing homes and hospitals. It also includes any change requested
Page 40 of 86

by a recipient in the amount of assistance previously provided, except changes resulting from
annual adjustments in Section 8 rents under Section 8(c)(2)(A) of the United States Housing Act
of 1937 (42 U.S.C. 1437f). See HUD Reform Act regulation for additional information.
Code of Conduct
Both you, as the award recipient, and all subrecipients must have a code of conduct (or written
standards of conduct). The code of conduct must comply with the requirements included in the
“Conducting Business in Accordance with Ethical Standards” section of the Administrative,
National and Department Policy Requirements and Terms for HUD Financial Assistance
Awards, as well as any program-specific requirements. These requirements include ethical
standards related to conflicts of interest for procurements in 2 CFR 200.318(c) and 2 CFR
200.317, as well as HUD-specific conflict of interest standards. HUD maintains a list of
organizations that have previously submitted written standards of conduct on its Code of
Conduct for HUD Grant Programs webpage. But it is your responsibility to ensure that the
standards are compliant with the noted requirements and that HUD has the latest version of the
written standards. Updated written standards should be submitted with the application. Any
updates to your written standards, after the application period, should be submitted as directed by
the HUD program contact for this NOFO.
Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing
With some exceptions for Federally recognized Indian tribes and their instrumentalities, the
application must discuss how the applicant will carry out the proposed activities in a manner that
affirmatively furthers fair housing in compliance with the Fair Housing Act and its implementing
regulations, and how applicants will meet the requirements of the definition of AFFH at 24 CFR
5.151. Applicants may propose activities that are consistent with their jurisdiction’s Analysis of
Impediments (AI), an Assessment of Fair Housing (AFH), or other means of fair housing
planning that meaningfully supports their AFFH certification.
If the applicant will carry out proposed activities in a jurisdiction with an AFH, the proposed
activities should be consistent with the AFH’s fair housing goals and with fair housing strategies
specified in the jurisdiction’s Consolidated Plan or Public Housing Agency Plan.
You must submit a narrative in Appendix B, according to the instructions in Section IV.B.,
which describes how your proposed NOFO activities are aligned with Affirmatively Furthering
Fair Housing (AFFH) requirements. This narrative will be evaluated for sufficiency. If the
narrative is deemed insufficient, it will be a “Curable Deficiency” that will be communicated to
you for correction with a notice of deficiency.
2. Other Program-Specific Requirements
None.

V. APPLICATION REVIEW INFORMATION
A. Review Criteria
Each of the four factors is weighted as indicated by the number of points that are assigned to it.
The maximum score that can be attained is 102 points (100 points from the four rating factors
and an extra 2 preference points if the applicant is a Minority Serving Institution (MSI), or
partnering with an MSI that is substantially involved in conducting the technical studies). For the
Page 41 of 86

MSI partner to be substantially involved, they must either manage a phase of the proposed study
and/or at least have one person as key personnel on the study team). Applicants should be certain
that each of these factors is adequately addressed in the project description and accompanying
materials. To the extent feasible, include all the needed information within your response to each
rating factor. If your response to a particular rating factor cites information provided in your
response to another rating factor, clearly indicate where the information is located so that the
reviewer can easily locate it.
1. Rating Factors
(1) Capacity of the Applicant and Relevant Organizational Experience: Maximum Points =
20
This factor addresses the extent to which you have the ability, capacity, and organizational
resources necessary to successfully implement your proposed activities in a timely manner. The
rating of your application will include any sub-grantees, consultants, sub-recipients, and
members of consortia that are firmly committed to the project (generally, "subordinate
organizations"). In rating this factor, HUD will consider the extent to which your application
demonstrates:
(a) The capability and qualifications of key and supporting personnel (13 points).
HUD will assess the qualifications of key personnel (especially the PI and co-Principal
Investigator(s) (co-PIs)) to carry out the proposed study as evidenced by academic and
professional background, publications, and recent (within the past 5 years) research experience.
The proposed PI must directly represent and be compensated directly by the applicant for their
role in the proposed study. Publications and/or research experience are considered relevant if
they require the acquisition and use of knowledge and skills that can be applied in the planning
and execution of the technical study that is proposed under this NOFO. In providing
information on the key personnel, please include information on their organization position
title, phone/fax numbers, email addresses, percentage of time proposed for this grant,
percentage of time being spent on other HUD grants, and percentage of time to be spent on
other activities. (Note: you have the option to provide the information on key personnel's
organization, position title, phone/fax numbers, email addresses, percentage of time
proposed for this grant, and percentage of time to be spent on other activities as an
attachment). HUD will also evaluate the qualifications of supporting personnel such as
statisticians and research assistants. Indicate roles and activities of partner organizations as they
will be evaluated with respect to their qualifications and capabilities to successfully implement
their proposed project roles and activities. HUD strongly encourages collaboration with Minority
Serving Institutions (MSIs) such as the Historic Black Colleges and Universities (HBCUs), the
Hispanic Associations of Colleges and Universities (HACUs), etc., as partners (MSI must be
substantially involved in conducting the technical studies). For the MSI partner to be
substantially involved, they must either manage a phase of the proposed study and/or at least
have one person as key personnel on the study team. Please do not include the Social Security
Numbers (SSN) of any staff members.
(b) Past performance of the study team in managing similar projects (7 points).
HUD will evaluate your demonstrated ability to successfully manage various aspects (e.g.,
personnel management, data management and analysis, quality control, reporting) of a complex
technical study, as well as your overall success in completing studies on time and within budget.
Page 42 of 86

If applicable, provide the number and title of any past OLHCHH grants and describe the
objectives and outcomes of those grants and your organization’s performance in their
implementation (e.g., whether they were completed on time without the request for an extension
of the original period of performance). Also, describe the past performance of the organization
(applicant and/or partners) on other research related to residential environmental health and
safety, or other relevant experiences. Provide details about the nature of the project, the funding
organization, and your performance (e.g., timely completion, achievement of desired outcomes).
If your organization has an active OLHCHH grant or cooperative agreement, provide a
description of the progress and outcomes achieved under that award. If you completed one or
more HUD-funded Technical Studies grants, your performance will be evaluated in terms of
achievements made under the previous grant(s). If you were a PI or a co-PI of a previous HUD
technical studies grant from OLHCHH in a fiscal year in which the NOFO required that grantees
provide HUD with a draft manuscript for publication as a final work product (i.e., NOFOs
starting in Fiscal Year 2006) and you have not submitted a final report or demonstrated a
credible attempt to publish the results in a scientific or professional journal, 5 points will be
deducted under this sub-factor.
(2) Need for the research: Maximum Points = 30
This factor addresses the need for the proposed technical study based on the extent to which it is
expected to advance scientific knowledge on a key healthy homes or lead hazard control issue by
addressing an important information gap. In responding to this factor, you should document in
detail how your project will make a significant contribution towards achieving some or all of
HUD's stated goals and objectives for one or more of the topic areas described under section
III.F.1. For example, you should demonstrate how your proposed study addresses a need with
respect to the development of improved methods for the assessment and control of residential
hazards or addresses a need associated with an important housing-related environmental health
hazard. Keep in mind that HUD is particularly interested in protecting the health of children,
communities of color who are disproportionately exposed to health and safety hazards in
housing, persons with disabilities, and other sensitive populations such as seniors. This is
especially important if you are proposing to study a topic that is not highlighted as a priority area
by HUD in Section III.F.1. Specific issues to be addressed for this factor include:
(a) Research Need to be addressed:
(i) A concise review of the research need that is addressed by your proposed study and why it is
consistent with the goals and objectives of the NOFO; identify which NOFO goals and
objectives are addressed by the proposed study. Explain why the knowledge gap that your
proposed study will address is considered key (e.g., based on identified gaps in the literature or
well documented knowledge from professional practice) for advancing our understanding of
important healthy homes or lead-based paint hazard issues. The importance of the issue that the
proposed study addresses can be demonstrated by factors such as: the severity and frequency of
occurrence of the illness/injury that is causally related to the study focus; the prevalence of the
condition; the economic impact of the issue, and the impact of the illness/injury on vulnerable
populations. If your proposed study involves implementation science, clearly describe the
effective interventions, and provide data that shows that the interventions have not been widely
adopted to address the residential environmental hazards they are intended for (12 points).
(ii) If you are proposing research on a topic identified in Section III.F.1 of this NOFO or you
Page 43 of 86

have partnered with an OLHCHH program grantee and a significant part of your study (over 50
percent) will be conducted on properties that are or were remediated with an OLHCHH grant,
you will be awarded additional points under this rating factor. (3 points).
(b) Discuss the relevant scientific literature, which should be thoroughly cited in your
application. Your proposed study will be judged in part on the soundness of the underlying body
of research upon which it is based (e.g., the degree to which it is based upon well-understood or
poorly understood associations from previous studies) and the clarity and soundness of your
summary and interpretation of this research base. If your application also incorporates the results
of unpublished research, you should clearly summarize the results of that research in your
response to this rating factor (7 points).
(c) A discussion of how your proposed study would significantly advance the current state of
scientific knowledge by summarizing its relationship to past research that is published in the
peer-reviewed literature and/or which builds upon pilot research that has not been published (a
summary of the latter data should be provided in the application, if applicable). HUD will award
the most points under this sub-factor for proposals that are expected to have the greatest impact
in advancing the evidence base on key healthy homes or lead hazard topics, with the goal of
applying the research findings to the creation of a larger supply of healthy housing in the U.S. (4
points).
(d) A discussion on how you anticipate your study findings will be used to improve current
methods for assessing or mitigating the hazards under study, particularly for affordable housing.
Describe how the findings from your study could ultimately be used by programs conducting
housing interventions, such as HUD’s Lead Hazard Control Program that also conduct non-lead
focused interventions with “healthy homes supplement” funding. If applicable, indicate why the
method/protocol that would be improved through your study would lead to improved practice
and could be widely adopted (e.g., low cost, easily replicated, lack of other options). (4 points).
(3) Soundness of Approach: Maximum Points = 38
This factor addresses the quality of your proposed technical study plan. Specific components
include the following:
(a) Soundness of the study design (20 points).
(i) Clearly and thoroughly describe your proposed study and its design and identify the major
objectives. If you are proposing an implementation science study, clearly identify the effective
interventions and the context within which you intend to conduct your studies. Describe and
discuss why your choice of research design, variables to be measured, and the expected
outcomes will address the knowledge gap identified in Rating Factor 2a. If you are proposing a
community-based research of home interventions to reduce the risk or severity of an illness or
injury, provide evidence for the need for the interventions in the target community (e.g., the
prevalence of the targeted hazard and/or the related health outcome). If possible, your study
should be designed to address one or more testable hypotheses that you should state clearly and
specifically. If you are requesting an award of $800,000 or more under the HHTS Grant
Program, you must clearly describe how funding at this level allows you to design your study in
a manner that will provide more definitive findings than would a lower funding level (e.g., use of
a randomized controlled trial or other design that incorporates a control group). Failure to
describe the study design in sufficient detail will result in the loss of points (10 points).
(ii) The study should be presented as a logical sequence of steps or phases with individual tasks
Page 44 of 86

described for each phase and all-important milestones identified, as well as any important
"decision points" (2 points).
(iii) Describe the statistical basis for your study design and demonstrate that you would have
adequate statistical power (showing the power calculations) to test your stated hypotheses and
achieve your study objectives (2 points).
(iv) Discuss your plans for data management and analysis describing key data and the statistical
methods that will be employed to analyze these data. (3 points).
(v) If you are proposing to conduct a study that includes a significant level of community
interaction (e.g., studies involving participant recruitment, survey research, environmental
assessment, or intervention in homes), describe your plan for meaningful involvement of the
affected community in your proposed study, including how you will ensure the programs,
services, and activities funded through this NOFO will be accessible to and usable by persons
with disabilities and meaningful access for persons with Limited English Proficiency (LEP).
This includes describing how all meetings are held in facilities that are physically accessible to
persons with disabilities and how you will provide effective communication including auxiliary
aids and services and providing reasonable accommodations to ensure equal opportunity for
persons with disabilities consistent with obligations under Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act
of 1973 (29 USC 794), HUD’s implementing regulations at 24 CFR Part 8, and Title II of the
Americans with Disabilities Act (42 USC 12131-12134) and implementing regulations at 28
CFR Part 35.
You should also describe how your community interaction will take reasonable steps to ensure
meaningful language access for persons with limited English proficiency (LEP) pursuant to Title
VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and Executive Order 13166. For assistance in ensuring
meaningful access for individuals with limited English proficiency, you should consult HUD’s
Final Guidance to Federal Financial Assistance Recipients Regarding Title VI Prohibition
Against National Origin Discrimination Affecting Limited English Proficient Persons (HUD’s
LEP Guidance) published in the Federal Register on January 22, 2007 (72 Fed. Reg. 2732).
You should define the community of interest with respect to your proposed study and discuss
why and how your proposed approach to community involvement will make a meaningful
contribution to your study and to the community. For studies in which community participants
must visit a facility operated by the applicant pursuant to activities conducted under this NOFO,
applicants are advised that such activities must be held in facilities that are physically accessible
to persons with disabilities as required by Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act and its
implementing regulations at 24 CFR Part 8 and Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act
(42 USC 12131-12134) and its implementing regulations at 28 CFR Part 35.
Where physical accessibility is not achievable, recipients and subrecipients must give priority to
alternative methods of involvement and product delivery that are accessible to and usable by
individuals with disabilities and offer programs, services, and activities to individuals with
disabilities in the most integrated setting appropriate (3 points or NA).
(b) Quality assurance mechanisms (6 points).
You must describe the quality assurance mechanisms that will be integrated into your project
design to ensure the validity and quality of the results. Applicants that receive awards will be
required to submit a quality assurance plan to HUD. You should plan for this and include quality
assurance activities in your study work plan.
Page 45 of 86

(i) Discuss the major quality assurance mechanisms that are relevant for your proposed study.
Examples of quality assurance mechanisms include but are not limited to: procedures for
selection of samples/sample sites, sample handling, use of quality control samples, validating the
accuracy of instrumentation, standardization of interventions, measures to ensure accuracy
during data capture and management, staff training and oversight, and final validation of your
dataset. If applicable, documents (e.g., government reports, peer-reviewed academic literature)
that provide the basis for your quality assurance mechanisms should be cited. Identify who will
have primary responsibility for drafting and ensuring compliance with the Quality Assurance
Plan (QAP) and describe how the QAP will be used during the implementation of your study. (A
sample QAP template is available at http://www.hud.gov/sites/documents/DOC_36504.DOC.)
Your application will be rated on the thoroughness, clarity, and validity of your proposed quality
assurance activities, and their appropriateness for ensuring the validity and quality of the data (3
points).
(ii) For the collection of data using survey or other observational tools, describe the procedures
that you will follow to ensure accurate data capture and transfer (e.g., transfer of data from the
field to a database). Also, describe any research done (or planned) to validate the instrument (2
points or NA).
(iii) Institutional Review Boards. In conformance with the Common Rule (Federal Policy for the
Protection of Human Subjects, codified by HUD at 24 CFR 60.101, which incorporates the
DHHS regulation at 45 CFR part 46, subpart A), if your research involves human subjects, your
organization must provide proof (e.g., a letter signed by an appropriate official) that the research
has been reviewed and approved by an Institutional Review Board (IRB) before you can initiate
activities that require IRB approval. Before initiating such activities, you must also provide the
number for your organization’s assurance (i.e., an “institutional assurance”) that has been
approved by the DHHS’s Office for Human Research Protections (OHRP). You must also
provide proof that the IRB that approves your study is registered with the OHRP. You do not
have to provide proof of IRB approval with your application. If you do not have IRB approval
yet, you should address how you will obtain such approval. Describe how you will obtain
informed consent (e.g., from the subjects, their parents, or their guardians, as applicable) and
discuss the steps you will take to help ensure participants’ understanding of the elements of
informed consent, such as the purpose, benefits, and risks of the research. Describe how this
information will be provided and how the consent will be collected. For example, describe your
use of “plain language” forms, flyers, and verbal scripts, and how you plan to work with families
with LEP or primary languages other than English, and with families including persons with
disabilities. For additional information on what constitutes human subject research or how to
obtain an institutional assurance see the OHRP website at https://www.hhs.gov/ohrp/index.html
(1 point or NA).
(c) Section 3 Requirements (1 point or NA).
If your proposed project will conduct limited housing construction or rehabilitation, explain in a
separate narrative how you will provide appropriate opportunities to Section 3 residents and
Section 3 businesses of the target area, in compliance with Section 3 of the Housing and Urban
Development Act of 1968 (12 U.S.C. § 1701u) and HUD’s implementing rules at 24 CFR Part
75. If, on the other hand, your proposed project will not conduct housing construction or
rehabilitation, your application need only include an explicit statement (in your narrative
response to this sub-factor) to that effect.

Page 46 of 86

(d) Budget Proposal (8 points).
(i) Your budget proposal should thoroughly estimate all applicable direct and indirect costs and
be presented in a clear and coherent format. HUD is not required to approve or fund all proposed
activities. You must thoroughly document and justify all budget categories and costs (Form
HUD424CBW) and all major tasks, for yourself, sub-recipients, major subcontractors, joint
venture participants, or others contributing resources to the project (2 points).
(ii) A separate budget must be provided for partners who are proposed to receive 10 percent or
more of the federal budget requested. (1 point or NA).
(iii) Your narrative justification associated with these budgeted costs should be submitted as part
of the Total Budget (Federal Share and Leveraging) but is not included in the 25-page limit for
this submission. The narrative should clearly provide an explanation of the basis for the major
budget items and reflect the HUD 424 CBW line-by-line. Separate narrative justifications should
be submitted for partners that are submitting separate HUD 424 CBW budget forms (3 points).
(iv) Your budget will be assessed on the degree to which it appears to be an efficient use of
resources considering the proposed scope of your study. A particular focus will be on the mix of
individuals that will be compensated by the grant and the estimated number of hours for each (2
points).
(e) Leveraging Resources (3 points)
Your proposal will be assessed on the extent to which it demonstrates that the effectiveness of
HUD’s Technical Studies grant funds is being increased by securing other resources or by
structuring the study in a cost-effective manner, such as integrating the work into an existing
study that will be concurrent with your proposed study. Contributed resources must be shown to
be specifically dedicated to and integrated into supporting study activities. Staff and in-kind
contributions should be assigned a market-rate monetary value. You should be aware that federal
sources are generally not allowed to be used for monetary leverage unless otherwise permitted by
that specific federal program’s authorizing statute. Your proposal will be scored based on the
magnitude of your proposed leveraging, with leveraging valued at 6% or more of your proposed
budget awarded the maximum number of points.
To receive points for leveraging from a partner or a source outside your organization, it must be
documented with a letter of firm commitment that identifies the monetary value of the
contribution. The commitment letter must also be signed by an official of the organization
legally able to make commitments on behalf of the organization.
(4). Achieving Results and Project Management: Maximum Points =12
This factor emphasizes HUD’s commitment to ensuring that applicants keep promises made in
their applications. The performance of successful applicants will be assessed quarterly to ensure
that performance goals are met. This factor requires applicants to clearly identify benchmarks
and milestones that demonstrate progress in study completion as well as final study outcomes.
Applicants must also provide a management plan that indicates how they will ensure timely and
successful completion of the study.
The application should include the following:
(a) Demonstration that it is clearly feasible to complete the study within the proposed period of
performance and successfully achieve your objectives. You should provide a schedule for the
clear and expeditious completion of all major tasks, with associated benchmarks and major study
milestones and deliverables. Benchmarks and important milestones (e.g., completing the
Page 47 of 86

recruitment of study participants) should be identified on a quarterly basis in a study timeline.
Any interim products should be identified. HUD has observed that studies can miss targeted
performance timelines because of delays in the IRB approval process, unexpected difficulties
with recruiting study participants, or delays in developing new laboratory methods or
instruments. Successful applicants will be required to enter project benchmarks and milestones
into a spreadsheet, which will be used by HUD to track study progress. (3 points).
(b) A management plan that discusses the schedule for the completion of all major tasks, with
associated benchmarks and major study milestones and deliverables. Identify the
organization/person that will have primary responsibility for completion of each of the major
study tasks and indicate plans for ensuring effective communication among members of the
study team as well as the community, if applicable, about goals, methods, progress, and
timeliness. You must also submit an organizational chart that shows the key players in the
project, their roles, and their reporting relationships. The chart may be submitted as an
attachment and will not count towards the 25-page maximum. (6 points).
(c) In your response you should identify potential obstacles and delays in maintaining your
proposed schedule and achieving your study objectives (e.g., recruitment and/or retention) and
discuss steps and adjustments you would take to respond to these potential obstacles and delays
to ensure timely completion of the study (2 points).
(d) Include plans and schedules for preparation and submission of a minimum of one manuscript
for publication in a peer-reviewed academic journal following HUD acceptance. Depending on
the study’s focus, HUD may also accept submission of a manuscript for publication of study
findings in one or more high quality professional journals (i.e., if this is considered more
appropriate for the focus area than publication in a scientific/academic journal). Where possible,
include the name of the journal in which you plan to publish. The final deliverable can be
submitted to HUD during the agreed upon period of performance or during the 90-day closeout
period following award expiration (1 point).
Maximum Points: 100
Section 3
In accordance with HUD's Section 3 regulations at 24 CFR 75.7, your application will receive up
to 1 points based the quality of Section 3 plans submitted. The program office will consider the
following in evaluating the quality of the Section 3 plan: _________.
If your proposed project will conduct limited housing construction or rehabilitation, explain in a
separate narrative how you will provide appropriate opportunities to Section 3 residents and
Section 3 businesses of the target area, in compliance with Section 3 of the Housing and Urban
Development Act of 1968 (12 U.S.C. § 1701u) and HUD’s implementing rules at 24 CFR Part
75. If, on the other hand, your proposed project will not conduct housing construction or
rehabilitation, your application need only include an explicit statement (in your narrative
response to this sub-factor) to that effect.

2. Other Factors
Preference Points
Page 48 of 86

This NOFO supports the following policy initiatives. If your application demonstrates the
appropriate information for the policy initiative, your application will receive up to two (2)
points for each initiative, and will receive no more than a total of four (4) points. These points
are added to your application's overall score.
Minority-Serving Institutions (2 points)
You may choose to voluntarily commit to address policy initiatives in your application.
Addressing these policy initiatives is not a requirement to apply for or receive an award. If you
choose to address a voluntary policy initiative in your application, however, you will be required
to adhere to the information submitted with your application should you receive an award. The
proposed information will be included as a binding requirement of any federal award you receive
as a term and condition of that award.
This program does not offer points for Climate Change
This program does not offer points for Environmental Justice.
This program does not offer preference points related to HBCUs.
Minority-Serving Institutions
Pursuant to Executive Orders 13985, 14041, 14045, and 14031, you may receive up to two (2)
preference points if you are an applicant designated as a minority-serving institution (MSI) or if
your application proposes one or more partnerships with minority-serving educational
institutions that have been historically underserved.
An applicant designated by the U.S. Department of Education as an MSI will receive up to two
(2) preference points when the application includes documentation of the applicant’s status as an
HBCU, Hispanic-serving institution, Tribal-controlled postsecondary institution, Alaska Nativeserving or Native-Hawaiian-serving institution, Predominantly Black Institution, Asian and
Native American Pacific Islander-serving institution or Native American-serving nontribal
institution.
An applicant partnering with an HBCU, Hispanic-Serving Institution, Tribal-controlled
postsecondary institution, Alaskan Native-serving or Native-Hawaiian-serving institution,
Predominantly Black Institution, Asian and Pacific Islander-serving institution, or Native
American-serving nontribal institution will receive up to two (2) Preference Points when the
application includes a Letter of Commitment certifying that a partnership is in place and signed
by an authorizing official of the MSI and documentation of the college or university's status as
an HBCU, Hispanic-serving institution, Tribal-controlled postsecondary institution, Alaska
Native-serving or Native-Hawaiian-serving institution, Predominantly Black Institution, Asian
and Native American Pacific Islander-serving institution, or Native American-serving nontribal
institution.
The Minority Serving Institution must be substantially involved (the MSI partner must either
manage a phase of the proposed study and/or at least have one person as key personnel on the
study team) in carrying out the technical study for the applicant to receive the preference points
for partnering with an MSI.
This program does not offer Promise Zone preference points.

Page 49 of 86

B. Review and Selection Process
1. Past Performance
In evaluating applications for funding, HUD will consider an applicant’s past performance in
managing funds. Items HUD will consider include, but are not limited to:
OMB-designated repositories of governmentwide data, as noted in 2 CFR 200.206(a)
The ability to account for funds in compliance with applicable reporting and recordkeeping
requirements
Timely use of funds received from HUD
Timely submission and quality of reports submitted to HUD
Meeting program requirements
Meeting performance targets as established in the grant agreement
The applicant's organizational capacity, including staffing structures and capabilities
Timely completion of activities and receipt and expenditure of promised matching or leveraged
funds
Promoting self-sufficiency and economic independence
Producing positive outcomes and results
HUD may reduce scores based on the past performance review, as specified under V.A. Review
Criteria. Whenever possible, HUD will obtain and review past performance information. If this
review results in an adverse finding related to integrity of performance, HUD reserves the right
to take any of the remedies provided in the Pre-Selection Review of Performance section of the
Eligibility Requirements for Applicants of HUD Financial Assistance Programs.
2. Assessing Applicant Risk
In evaluating risks posed by applicants, HUD may use a risk-based approach and may consider
any items such as the following:
(1) Financial stability;
(2) Quality of management systems and ability to meet the management standards prescribed
in this part;
(3) History of performance. The applicant's record in managing Federal awards, if it is a prior
recipient of Federal awards, including timeliness of compliance with applicable reporting
requirements, failing to make significant progress in a timely manner, failing to meet planned
activities in a timely manner, conformance to the terms and conditions of previous Federal
awards, and if applicable, the extent to which any previously awarded amounts will be
expended prior to future awards;
(4) Reports and findings from audits performed under Subpart F—Audit Requirements of
this part or the reports and findings of any other available audits; and
(5) The applicant's ability to effectively implement statutory, regulatory, or other
requirements imposed on non-Federal entities.
Page 50 of 86

a. Applications. An award will be made to the highest scoring “new applicant” that is eligible for
an award if the decision is supported by the majority of the Application Review Panel and the
applicant's score is 82 points or higher. Awards will then be made in rank order in the LTS and
HHTS programs separately, within the limits of funding availability of each program, from
among applications that scored at least 75 points; however, for the lowest ranked of the highest
ranked applications that differ in score by one point or less, the Application Review Panel will
make the final funding recommendation based on which application(s) it judges address(es) the
most critical research needs.
b. Partial Funding. In the selection process, HUD reserves the right to offer partial funding to any
or all applicants. If you are offered a reduced grant amount, you will have a maximum of 14
calendar days to accept such a reduced award. If you fail to respond within the 14-day limit, you
shall be considered to have declined the award.
3. Experience Promoting Racial Equity
In evaluating applications for funding, HUD will consider the extent to which the application
demonstrates that the applicant has the experience and the resources to effectively address the
needs of underserved communities, particularly Black and Brown communities. This may
include experience successfully working directly with such groups, experience designing or
operating programs that equitably benefit such groups, or experience successfully advancing
racial equity in other ways. This may also include experience soliciting, obtaining, and applying
input from such groups when designing, planning, or implementing programs and activities.
This narrative is required and must address the issues outlined in the paragraph above.
Applicants will submit the Experience Promoting Racial Equity narrative, according to the
instructions in Section IV.B. Specifically, applicants should describe their experience and/or
resources to effectively address the needs of underserved communities, particularly Black and
Brown communities. The narrative will be submitted in Appendix B. This narrative will be
evaluated for sufficiency and will not change the applicant’s score, or rank as compared to other
applicants. If the narrative is deemed insufficient, it will be a “Curable Deficiency” that will be
communicated to the applicant for correction with a notice of deficiency.

VI. AWARD ADMINISTRATION INFORMATION
A. Award Notices
Following the evaluation process, HUD will notify successful applicants of their selection for
funding. HUD will also notify other applicants, whose applications were received by the
deadline but were not chosen for award. Notifications will be sent by email to the person listed as
the AOR in item 21 of the SF-424.
1. Final Grant
After HUD has made selections, HUD will finalize specific terms of the award and budget in
consultation with the selected applicant. If HUD and the selected applicant do not finalize the
terms and conditions of the award in a timely manner, or the selected applicant fails to provide
requested information, an award will not be made to that applicant. In this case, HUD may select
Page 51 of 86

another eligible applicant. HUD may also impose specific conditions on an award as provided
under 2 CFR 200.208.
2. Adjustments to Funding
To ensure the fair distribution of funds and enable the purposes or requirements of a specific
program to be met, HUD reserves the right to fund less than the amount requested in an
application.
a. HUD may fund no portion of an application that:
(1) Is ineligible for funding under applicable statutory or regulatory requirements;
(2) Fails, in whole or in part, to meet the requirements of this notice;
(3) Duplicates activities funded by other federal awards; or
(4) Duplicates activities funded in a prior year.
b. HUD may adjust the funding for an application to ensure funding diversity, geographic
diversity, and alignment with HUD administrative priorities.
c. If an applicant turns down an award offer, or if HUD and an applicant do not finalize the terms
and conditions of the award in a timely manner, HUD may withdraw the award offer and make
an offer of funding to another eligible application.
d. If funds remain after all selections have been made, remaining funds may be made available
within the current fiscal year for other competitions within the program area, or be held for
future competitions (if allowable in accordance with the applicable appropriation or authorizing
statute), or be used as otherwise provided by authorizing statute or appropriation.
e. If, after announcement of awards made under the current NOFO, additional funds become
available either through the current appropriations, a supplemental appropriation, other
appropriations or recapture of funds, HUD may, in accordance with the appropriation, use the
additional funds to provide additional funding to an applicant awarded less than the requested
amount of funds to make the full award, and/or to fund additional applicants that were eligible to
receive an award but for which there were no funds available.
3. Funding Errors
If HUD commits an error that when corrected would cause selection of an applicant during the
funding round of a Program NOFO, HUD may select that applicant for funding, subject to the
availability of funds. If funding is not available to award in the current fiscal year, HUD may
make an award to this applicant during the next fiscal year, if funding is available.
4. Applicants who have been selected for the award will be notified by email from the OLHCHH
Grant Officer. The email will state the amount the applicant is eligible to receive, and the name
of the Government Technical Representative (GTR). This email is not an authorization to begin
work or incur costs under the award. An executed cooperative agreement is the authorizing
document.
5. HUD may require that the selected applicants participate in negotiations to determine the
specific terms of the cooperative agreement and budget. If you accept the terms and conditions of
the cooperative agreement, you must return your signed cooperative agreement by the date
Page 52 of 86

specified during the negotiation. In cases where HUD cannot successfully conclude negotiations
with a selected applicant or a selected applicant fails to provide HUD with the requested
information, an award will not be made to that applicant. In this instance, HUD may offer an
award, and proceed with negotiations with the next highest-ranking applicant. You should note
that, if you are selected for multiple OLHCHH awards, you must ensure that you have sufficient
resources to provide the promised leveraging for the multiple awards. During negotiations, if you
are selected for multiple awards, you will be required to provide alternative leveraged resources,
if necessary, before any of the cooperative agreements can be awarded. This is required in order
to avoid committing duplicate leveraged resources to more than one OLHCHH cooperative
agreement.
6. If you are awarded a cooperative agreement, you will receive instructions on how to have the
grant account entered into HUD’s Line of Credit Control System (eLOCCS) payment system.
Other forms and program requirements will also be provided.
7. In accordance with 2 CFR § 200, Subpart F - Audits Requirements, grantees expending
$750,000 in Federal funds within a program or fiscal year must have a single or program-specific
audit conducted for that year in accordance with the provisions of that subpart.

B. Administrative, National and Departmental Policy
Requirements and Terms for HUD Applicants and
Recipients of Financial Assistance Awards
Unless otherwise specified, the following Administrative, National and Department Policy
Requirements and Terms for HUD Financial Assistance Awards apply. Failure to comply with
these requirements may impact your ability to receive or retain a financial assistance award from
HUD. Read the requirements carefully as the requirements are different among HUD’s
programs.
1. Compliance with The Fair Housing Act (42 U.S.C. 3601-3619) and implementing regulations
at 24 CFR part 100 et seq
2. Compliance with Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42 U.S.C. 2000d-2000d-4
(Nondiscrimination in Federally Assisted Programs) and implementing regulations at 24 CFR
part 1
3. Compliance with the Age Discrimination Act of 1975 (42 U.S.C. 6101-6107) and
implementing regulations at 24 CFR part 146
4. Compliance with Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 (29 U.S.C. 794) and
implementing regulations at 24 CFR part 8
5. Compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act, 42 U.S.C. 12101 et seq
6. Compliance with Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing (AFFH) requirements, including
those listed on HUD's Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing webpage
7. Compliance with Economic Opportunities for Low-and Very Low-income Persons (Section 3)
requirements, including those listed at 24 CFR part 75
8. Compliance with Improving Access to Services for Persons with Limited English Proficiency
(LEP) requirements, including those listed within Federal Register Notice, FR-4878-N-02 (also
see HUD's webpage)
9. Compliance with Accessible Technology requirements, including those listed on in HUD's
Policy on Section 508 of the Rehabilitation Act and Accessible Technology
Page 53 of 86

10. Compliance with Equal Access Requirements (see 24 CFR 5.105(a)(2) and 5.106)
11. Compliance with Ensuring the Participation of Small Disadvantaged Business, and WomenOwned Business requirements at 2 CFR 200.321
12. Compliance with Energy Efficient, Sustainable, Accessible, and Free from Discrimination by
Design
13. Compliance with Real Estate Acquisition and Relocation requirements (see 49 CFR part 24
and applicable program regulations)
14. Compliance with Participation in HUD-Sponsored Program Evaluation (see Federal Register
Notice, FR-6278-N-01)
15. Compliance with OMB Uniform Administrative Requirements, Cost Principles, and Audit
Requirements for Federal Awards (see 2 CFR part 200)
16. Compliance with Drug-Free Workplace requirements (see 2 CFR part 2429, which is HUD's
implementation of 41 U.S.C. 701, et seq.)
17. Compliance with the requirements related to safeguarding resident/client files
18. Compliance with the Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency Act of 2006 (2 CFR
part 170) (FFATA), as amended
19. Compliance with Eminent Domain
20. Compliance with Accessibility for Persons with Disabilities requirements on HUD's
Disability Overview webpage
21. Compliance with Violence Against Women Act at 24 CFR part 5, subpart L and applicable
program regulations
22. Compliance with Conducting Business in Accordance with Ethical Standards/Code of
Conduct, including 2 CFR 200.317, 2 CFR 200.318(c) and other applicable conflicts of interest
requirements
23. Compliance with the Build America, Buy America (BABA) Act procurement requirements
and implementing guidance available on HUD's dedicated webpage
24. Compliance with System for Award Management and Universal Identifier Requirements at 2
CFR part 25
25. Compliance with section 106(g) of the Trafficking Victims Protection Act of 2000 (TVPA),
as amended (22 USC 7104(g)) and implementing regulations at 2 CFR part 175 (Award Term for
Trafficking in Persons)
26. Compliance with Award Term and Condition for Recipient Integrity and Performance
Matters (see Appendix XII to 2 CFR part 200)
27. Compliance with Suspension and Debarment (see 2 CFR part 2424 and 2 CFR part 180)
28. Compliance with environmental justice requirements under Executive Orders 12898 and
14008, and OMB Memorandum M-21-28, which implements the Justice40 Initiative, section 223
of Executive Order 14008.
29. Compliance with Eliminating Barriers That May Unnecessarily Prevent Individuals with
Criminal Histories from Participation in HUD Programs (see HUD Secretary Fudge's April 12,
2022 memorandum)
30. Compliance with equity requirements, which include compliance with racial equity and
underserved communities and LGBTQ+ requirements under Executive Orders 13985 and 13988
31. Compliance with waste, fraud, and abuse requirements, including whistleblower protections
(see HUD's webpage)

Page 54 of 86

31. Compliance with 41 U.S.C. § 4712, Enhancement of contractor protection from reprisal for
disclosure of certain information. Compliance with 41 U.S.C. § 4712, which includes informing
your employees in writing of their rights and remedies, in the predominant native language of the
workforce. Under 41 U.S.C. § 4712, employees of a contractor, subcontractor, grantee,
subgrantee, and personal services contractor may not be discharged, demoted, or otherwise
discriminated against as a reprisal for disclosing information that the employee reasonably
believes is evidence of gross mismanagement of a Federal contract or grant, a gross waste of
Federal funds, an abuse of authority relating to a Federal contract or grant, a substantial and
specific danger to public health or safety, or a violation of law, rule, or regulation related to a
Federal contract (including the competition for or negotiation of a contract) or grant. (See
Federal Contractor or Grantee Protections | Office of Inspector General, Department of Housing
and Urban Development (hudoig.gov)
Environmental Review
Compliance with environmental requirements, including regulations at 24 CFR part 50 or 58:
Compliance with 24 CFR part 50 or 58 procedures is explained below:
a. Eligible Construction and Rehabilitation Activities. A FY 2023 LHHTS award does not
constitute approval of specific sites where activities that are subject to environmental review may
be carried out. The provisions of section 305(c) of the Multifamily Housing Property Disposition
Reform Act of 1994, implemented by HUD regulations at 24 CFR part 58, “Environmental
Review Procedures for Entities Assuming HUD Environmental Responsibilities,” are applicable
to properties assisted with LHHTS grant funds. Therefore, recipients conducting eligible
construction and rehabilitation activities must comply with 24 CFR part 58. Recipients that are
States, units of general local government or Native American tribes must carry out
environmental review responsibilities as a responsible entity under part 58. Recipients that are
academic, not-for-profit, for-profit institutions or specialized units of local government must
contact and partner with a non-recipient responsible entity, usually the unit of general local
government or Native American tribe, to assume the environmental review responsibilities for
construction or rehabilitation activities funded (in whole or in part) under this NOFO.
Reasonable expenses incurred for compliance with these environmental requirements are eligible
expenses under this NOFO. Under 24 CFR 58.11, where the recipient is not a State, unit of
general local government or Native American tribe, if a responsible entity objects to performing
the environmental review, or the recipient objects to the responsible entity performing the
environmental review, HUD may designate another responsible entity to perform the review or
may perform the environmental review itself under the provisions of 24 CFR part 50. When
HUD performs the review itself, following grant award execution, HUD will be responsible for
ensuring that any necessary environmental reviews are completed.
b. For all cooperative agreements under this NOFO, recipients and other participants in the
project are prohibited from undertaking, or committing or expending HUD or non-HUD funds
(including leveraged funds) on, a project or activities under this NOFO (other than activities
listed in 24 CFR 58.34, 58.35(b) or 58.22(f)) until the responsible entity completes an
environmental review and the applicant submits and HUD approves a Request for the Release of
Funds and the responsible entity’s environmental certification (both on Form HUD-7015.15) or,
in instances where the recipient is not a State, unit of general local government or Native
American tribe and HUD performs the environmental review under part 50, HUD has completed
Page 55 of 86

the review and notified the grantee of its approval. The results of the environmental reviews may
require that proposed activities be modified, or proposed sites rejected. For Part 58 procedures,
see https://www.hudexchange.info/programs/environmental-review/. For assistance, contact
Karen Griego, the Office of Lead Hazard Control and Healthy Homes Program
Environmental Clearance Officer at (505) 346-6462 (this is not a toll-free number) or the
HUD Environmental Clearance Officer in the HUD Field Office serving your area. HUD
welcomes and is prepared to receive calls from individuals who are deaf or hard of hearing, as
well as individuals with speech or communication disabilities. To learn more about how to make
an accessible telephone call, please visit
https://www.fcc.gov/consumers/guides/telecommunications-relay-service-trs. Recipients of a
grant under this program will be given additional guidance in these environmental
responsibilities.
c. All other activities not related to construction or rehabilitation activities are exempt or
categorically excluded under 24 CFR 50.19 (b)(1), (3), (5) and (9), and 24 CFR 58.34(a)(1), (3),
(5), and (9) from the requirements of the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C.
§ 4321) and are not subject to environmental review under the related environmental laws and
authorities at 24 CFR 50.4 and 24 CFR 58.5.
Prohibition on Surveillance
Compliance with 2 CFR 200.216, Prohibition on Certain Telecommunication and Video
Surveillance Services or Equipment is required.
Remedies for Noncompliance
HUD may terminate a Federal award, in whole or in part, for any of the reasons specified in 2
CFR 200.340, Termination.
1. The Grant Officer (GO) may, on reasonable notice to the Grantee and/or subgrantee,
temporarily suspend the award and withhold further payments pending corrective action by the
Grantee and/or subgrantee. The award may be terminated in whole or in part before the end of
the performance period when the Grantee and/or subgrantee has failed to comply with the terms,
conditions, standards, or provisions of this award, or if an award no longer effectuates the
program goals or agency priorities. The award may be terminated for convenience when both
parties agree that the continuation of the award would not produce beneficial results. Action will
be taken in accordance with 2 CFR §200.339 – §200.343.
2. Effects of Suspension and Termination - Costs of Grantee or subgrantee resulting from
obligations incurred by the Grantee or subgrantee during a suspension or after the termination of
an award are not allowable unless HUD expressly authorizes them in the notice of suspension or
termination. Other Grantee or subgrantee costs during suspension or after termination which are
necessary and not reasonably avoidable are allowable if:
a. The costs result from financial obligations which were properly incurred by the
Grantee or subgrantee before the effective date of suspension or termination, are not in
anticipation of it; and
b. The costs would be allowable if the award was not suspended or expired normally at
the end of the period of performance in which the termination takes effect.

Page 56 of 86

3. Relationship to Debarment and Suspension - The enforcement remedies identified in this
section, including suspension and termination, do not preclude the Grantee or subgrantee from
being subject to “Debarment and Suspension” under Executive Orders 12549 and 12689, 2 CFR
Part 180 as outlined in 2 CFR §200.339

Lead-Based Paint Requirements
When providing housing assistance funding for purchase, lease, support services, operation, or
work that may disturb painted surfaces, of pre-1978 housing, you must comply with the leadbased paint evaluation and hazard reduction requirements of HUD’s lead- based paint rules
(Lead Disclosure; and Lead Safe Housing (24 CFR part 35)); and EPA’s lead- based paint rules
(e.g., Repair, Renovation and Painting; Pre-Renovation Education; and Lead Training and
Certification (40 CFR part 745)).
When providing education or counseling on buying or renting housing that may include pre-1978
housing under your grant you must inform clients of their rights under the Lead Disclosure Rule
(24 CFR part 35, subpart A), and, if the focus of the education or counseling is on rental or
purchase of HUD-assisted pre-1978 housing, the Lead Safe Housing Rule (subparts B, R, and, as
applicable, F - M).

C. Reporting
HUD requires recipients to submit performance and financial reports under OMB guidance and
program instructions.
1. Recipient Integrity and Performance Matters
You should be aware that if the total Federal share of your federal award includes more than
$500,000 over the period of performance, the award will be subject to post award reporting
requirements reflected in Appendix XII to 2 CFR part 200, Award Terms and Conditions for
Recipient Integrity and Performance Matters.
2. Race, Ethnicity and Other Data Reporting
HUD requires recipients that provide HUD-funded program benefits to individuals or families to
report data on the race, color, religion, sex, national origin, age, disability, and family
characteristics of persons and households who are applicants for, participants in, or beneficiaries
or potential beneficiaries of HUD programs in order to carry out the Department’s
responsibilities under the Fair Housing Act, Executive Order 11063, Title VI of the Civil Rights
Act of 1964, and Section 562 of the Housing and Community Development Act of 1987. These
authorities prohibit discrimination in housing and in programs receiving financial assistance
from the Department and direct the Secretary to administer the Department's programs and
activities in a manner affirmatively to further these policies and to collect certain data to assess
the extent of compliance with these policies. Each recipient shall keep such records and submit
to the Department timely, complete, and accurate compliance reports at such times, and in such
form and containing such information, as the Department may determine to be necessary to
enable it to ascertain whether the recipient has complied or is complying with 24 CFR parts 1

Page 57 of 86

and 121. In general, recipients should have available for the Department data showing the
demographics of beneficiaries of federally-assisted programs.
Depending on the type of research the applicant may need to complete the Race and Ethnic Data
Reporting Form HUD-27061, U.S. Department of Housing OMB Approval No. 2535-0113.
3. Compliance with the Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency Act of 2006
(Pub. L. 109-282) as amended (FFATA)
FFATA requires information on federal awards be made available to the public via a single,
searchable website, which is www.USASpending.gov. Accordingly, each award HUD makes
under this NOFO will be subject to the requirements provided by the Award Term in Appendix
A to 2 CFR part 170, “REPORTING SUBAWARD AND EXECUTIVE COMPENSATION
INFORMATION,” unless the Federal funding for the award (including funding that may be
added through amendments) is not expected to equal or exceed $30,000. Requirements under this
Award Term include filing subaward information in the Federal Funding Accountability and
Transparency Act (FFATA) Sub-award Reporting System (FSRS.gov) by the end of the month
following the month in which the recipient awards any sub-grant equal to or greater than
$30,000.
4. Program-Specific Reporting Requirements
a. Performance Reporting. All HUD-funded programs, including this program, require
recipients to submit, not less than annually, a report documenting achievement of outcomes
under the purpose of the program and the work plan in the award agreement.
(1) Final budget and work plans are due 60 days after the start date.
(2) Progress reporting is required on a quarterly basis. Project benchmarks and milestones will be
tracked using a benchmark spreadsheet that incorporates the benchmarks and milestones
identified in the response to the application rating factor (4) (see section V.A.1.b.(4)).
(3) Tangible Personal Property Report: Grant recipients who purchase equipment in excess of
$5,000 a piece must complete OMB’s annual Tangible Personal Property Report, if and after that
report receives OMB approval under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (see 75 Federal
Register 14441-14442; March 25, 2011). This report has four components: the Annual Report,
the Final (Award Closeout) Report, and the Disposition Report/Request, and, if needed, the
Supplemental Sheet (see https://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/grants_forms). Generally, the
average estimated time to complete each of these components is 0.5 hours; it is likely to be less
for this grant program.
(4) Section 3: Grant recipients covered by Section 3 (see Section V.A.1.b.3.(c).(ii) of this NOFO)
must comply with reporting and record-keeping requirements for Section 3 of the Housing and
Urban Development Act of 1968, 12 U.S.C. § 1701u (Economic Opportunities for Low- and
Very Low-Income Persons in Connection with Assisted Projects). Those requirements can be
found at 24 CFR part 75.
(5) Compliance with Section 872 of the Duncan Hunter National Defense Authorization Act for
Fiscal Year 2009 (Pub. L. 110-417), (“Section 872”). Section 872 requires the establishment of a
government-wide data system – the Federal Awardee Performance and Integrity Information
System (FAPIIS) - to contain information related to the integrity and performance of entities
awarded federal financial assistance and making use of the information by federal officials in
making awards. OMB is in the process of issuing regulations regarding federal agency
implementation of section 872 requirements. A technical correction to this NOFO may be issued
Page 58 of 86

when such regulations are promulgated. HUD anticipates that the terms and conditions to its FY
2022 awards will contain requirements related to meeting FFATA and Section 872 requirements.
(6) Annual submission of Form HUD27061, if applicable (i.e., when using human subjects), for
reporting on racial and ethnic data on human subjects.
(7) Final Report: The cooperative agreement will specify the requirements for final reporting
(e.g., final technical report and final project benchmarks and milestones achieved against the
proposed benchmarks and milestones which were approved and incorporated into your
cooperative agreement).
(8) Draft Scientific Manuscript(s) and brown-bag presentation: Grantees will be required to
complete a minimum of one draft manuscript for publication in a peer-reviewed journal as well
as deliver a "brown-bag" presentation to OLHCHH staff on the results of their study.
Questions regarding specific program requirements should be directed to the point of contact
listed in Section VII below.

D. Debriefing
For a period of at least 120 calendar days, beginning 30 calendar days after the public
announcement of awards under this NOFO, HUD will provide a debriefing related to their
application to requesting applicants. A request for debriefing must be made in writing or by
email by the AOR whose signature appears on the SF-424 or by his or her successor in office and
be submitted to the POC in Section VII Agency Contact(s) of this NOFO. Information provided
during a debriefing may include the final score the applicant received for each rating factor, final
evaluator comments for each rating factor, and the final assessment indicating the basis upon
which funding was approved or denied.
An organization that submitted an application will receive a verbal debriefing after a request is
made by the authorized official or his/her successor in office.

VII. AGENCY CONTACT(S)
HUD staff will be available to provide clarification on the content of this NOFO.
Questions regarding specific program requirements for this NOFO should be directed to the POC
listed below.
Name:
Brenda M. Reyes MD, MPH
Phone:
202 402 6745
Email:
[email protected]
Individuals who are deaf or hard of hearing, or who have speech and other communication
disabilities may use a relay service to reach the agency contact. To learn more about how to
make an accessible telephone call, visit the webpage for the Federal Communications
Commission. Note that HUD staff cannot assist applicants in preparing their applications.

VIII. OTHER INFORMATION
1. Compliance of this NOFO with the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA)
Page 59 of 86

A Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI) with respect to the environment has been made for
this NOFO in accordance with HUD regulations at 24 CFR part 50, which implement section
102(2)(C) of the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C.
4332(2)(C)). The FONSI is available for inspection at HUD’s Funding Opportunities web page.
2. Web Resources.
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•

Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing
Assistance Listing (formerly CFDA)
Climate Action Plan
Climate and Economic Justice Screening Tool (CEJST)
Code of Conduct Requirements and E-Library
Environmental Review
Equal Participation of Faith-Based Organizations
Fair Housing Rights and Obligations
Federal Awardee Performance and Integrity Information System
Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency Act (FFATA) Subaward
Reporting System
Grants.gov
Healthy Homes Strategic Plan
Healthy Housing Reference Manual
Historically Black Colleges and Universities (HBCUs)
HUD’s Strategic Plan
HUD Grants
HUD Reform Act
HUD Reform Act: HUD Implementing Regulations
Limited English Proficiency (LEP)
NOFO Webcasts
Procurement of Recovered Materials
Promise Zones
Section 3 Business Registry
State Point of Contact List
System for Award Management (SAM)
Real Estate Acquisition and Relocation
Unique Entity Identifier
USA Spending

3. Program Relevant Web Resources
None.
4. Additional Information

Page 60 of 86

For programmatic questions on the LHHTS Grant Program, you may contact Brenda M. Reyes,
MD, MPH, Office of Lead Hazard Control & Healthy Homes, at 202-402-6745 or via email at
[email protected].
For grants administrative questions, you may contact Ms. Jonnette H. Simmons, Office of Lead
Hazard Control & Healthy Homes, at telephone 678-732-2625 or via email at
[email protected].
HUD welcomes and is prepared to receive calls from individuals who are deaf or hard of
hearing, as well as individuals with speech or communication disabilities. To learn more about
how to make an accessible telephone call, please visit
https://www.fcc.gov/consumers/guides/telecommunications-relay-service-trs.
Other Office of Lead Hazard Control & Healthy Homes Information: For additional general,
technical, and grant program information pertaining to the Office of Lead Hazard Control and
Healthy Homes, visit www.hud.gov/healthyhomes.
Appendices: Appendices A, B and C to this NOFO are available for downloading with the
application at https://www.Grants.gov.
Applicants may use the checklist below as a guide when preparing the APPLICATION
package.
a. Applicant Abstract (limited to 2 pages)
b. Application Rating Factor Responses (Total narrative response limited to 25 pages.)
(1) Capacity of the Applicant and Relevant Organizational Experience (20 points)
(2) Need for the Research (30 points)
(3) Soundness of Approach (38 points)
(4) Achieving Results and Project Management (12 points)
c. Required materials in response to rating factors (do not count towards the application 25-page
limit)
(1) Resumes of Key Personnel (limited to 3 pages per resume; do not include Social Security
Numbers on resumes)
(2) Organizational Chart
(3) Letters of Commitment (if applicable) – Letters of commitment should include language
defining the activities to be performed, the contributions to be made, and the monetary value of
each. NOTE: HUD recommends against including letters of support that do not commit services,
materials, or funds; they will not be considered in the evaluation of your application.
d. Optional material in support of the Rating Factors (20-page limit).
e. All required forms in the SF-424 Family of Forms SF-LLL, HUD-424CBW and HUD-2880.
f. Applicant and Recipient Assurances and Certifications (HUD 424-B)
g. Narratives. All required narratives, including a written narrative on Advancing Racial Equity
that addresses the four bullets in Section III.F; a written narrative on Affirmative Marketing that
addresses the issues outlined in Section III.F., and a written narrative on Affirmatively
Furthering Fair Housing that addresses the issues outlined in Section IV.G. Each narrative must
be submitted on Appendix B (maximum of 2 pages total), and must address the issues described
in the corresponding sections:
Page 61 of 86

•
•
•
•

Advancing Racial Equity narrative (Section III.F)
Affirmative Marketing narrative (Section III.F)
Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing (Section IV.G); and
Experience Promoting Racial Equity (Section V.B)

Each narrative will be evaluated for sufficiency and will not change the applicant’s score or rank
as compared to other applicants. If a narrative is deemed insufficient, it will be a “Curable
Deficiency” that will be communicated to the applicant for correction with a notice of
deficiency.

APPENDIX
APPENDIX A: Key Residential Health and Safety Hazards
The following briefly describes the residential health and injury hazards HUD considers key
targets for intervention:
Allergens and Asthma: In 2007, the CDC estimated that over 25 million Americans have
asthma with an associated annual cost of more than $56 billion. Asthma is now recognized as the
leading cause of school and work absences, emergency room visits, and hospitalizations. For
sensitized children, exposure to allergens from dust mites, cats, mold, and cockroaches have
been confirmed to cause exacerbation of asthma, with suggestive evidence that dust mite and
cockroach allergen can also exacerbate asthma in children that are not sensitized to them. There
is sufficient evidence that exposure to tobacco smoke and damp conditions can exacerbate
asthma in children. A causal relationship has also been identified for exposure to some of these
agents (e.g., cockroaches, cats) and exacerbation of asthma in adults (Kanchongkittiphon et al.,
2015). A study of children with atopic (allergic) asthma from seven major U.S. cities reported
that over half of the children were allergic to cockroach and dust mite allergens (approximately
70% and 63%, respectively), with approximately 50% of the children allergic to mold (Morgan
et al. 2004). Significant fractions of children also tested positive for allergy to cat, rodent and
dog allergens. This is consistent with other studies that have found that cockroach allergens tend
to be the dominant allergen among asthmatic children living in the inner-city, whereas dust mite
allergens appear to dominate among asthmatic children living in most suburban environments.
While children are the population most at risk for developing asthma, there is a growing need to
address the onset of new cases in older adults, and to examine how their risk factors might differ
from those of children (Selgrade et al. 2006).
HUD-funded researchers reported a significant association between higher values of the
Environmental Relative Moldiness Index (ERMI), a measure of mold exposure derived using
DNA-based measurements of specific fungi in house dust samples, during the first year of life
and the diagnosis of asthma at age seven (Reponen et al., 2011). In a follow-up paper, the
researchers identified three specific mold species that were significantly associated with asthma
development among the study cohort (Reponen et al., 2012).
Interventions known to have beneficial effects include the installation of impervious mattress and
pillow covers, which can reduce dust mite allergen exposure by 90 percent. Other dust mite
control measures include dehumidification, laundering bedding in hot water, specialized cleaning
(dry steam or use of a HEPA vacuum), and removal of carpets and other materials that
accumulate dust and are difficult to clean (e.g., dust sinks). Providing residents with education
Page 62 of 86

and instruction on cleaning with repeat visits by outreach workers have been shown to result in
significant reduction in levels of dust mite and cockroach allergens in floor dust and significant
reductions in asthma symptoms among children living in the intervention group when compared
to the control group (Takaro et al. 2004; Morgan et al. 2004). Numerous studies employing
community health workers to conduct home interventions have demonstrated improvements in
children’s asthma control (Breysse et al. 2013; Campbell et al. 2015; Kapheim et al. 2015;
Turcotte et al. 2014). CDC health scientists in coordination with the Task Force on Community
Preventive Services reviewed 20 studies in which multi-trigger, multicomponent, interventions
were conducted in the homes of children, and they reported reductions in symptoms, missed
school days, and asthma acute care visits (Crocker et al., 2011). A separate analysis reported a
positive return on investment for the interventions in these studies (Nurmagambetov et al., 2011).
Interventions emphasizing the mitigation of mold and moisture problems in the homes of
asthmatic children have also been shown to be effective. In one HUD-supported study, asthmatic
children living in homes in which nontrivial mold growth was identified, were randomized into
two groups, with one group receiving interventions to address the residential mold/moisture
problems. The remediation group showed statistically significant reductions in symptom days,
symptom score, and the need for acute care (Kercsmar et al. 2006). The mean cost of home
interventions was $3,458 per home, including the cost of addressing lead-based paint hazards.
Moving families with an asthmatic child into new housing designed to reduce exposure to
asthma triggers has also been shown to be effective. HUD-supported research conducted by
Takaro et al. (2011) demonstrated improvements in asthma symptoms and other indicators for
subjects who lived in asthma-friendly Breathe-Easy Homes in addition to receiving traditional
in-home asthma education and outreach. Breathe-Easy Homes addressed multiple asthma
triggers by incorporating comprehensive enhancements into the physical structure, including
moisture-reduction features, low dust-generating and chemical-emitting finishes, and advanced
fresh-air ventilation systems. The authors reported significant improvements in primary (e.g.,
symptom-free days, FEV1) and secondary (days rescue medicine used, nights with symptoms)
outcomes among BEH occupants. Another HUD-funded study conducted in Boston public
housing that was newly constructed or rehabbed using green construction methods (and
incorporated green management approaches) also demonstrated improvements in children’s
asthma and in adult sick-building type symptoms (Colton et al. 2015).
Asbestos: Asbestos is a mineral fiber that has been used commonly in a variety of building
construction materials and household products for insulation and as a fire-retardant. The
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC)
have banned most asbestos products. Manufacturers have also voluntarily limited the use of
asbestos. Today, asbestos is most commonly found in older homes in pipe and furnace insulation
materials, asbestos shingles, millboard, textured paints and other coating materials, and floor
tiles. Elevated concentrations of airborne asbestos can occur when asbestos-containing materials
(ACMs) are disturbed by cutting, sanding or other remodeling activities. Improper attempts to
remove these materials can release asbestos fibers into the air in homes, increasing asbestos
levels and endangering the people living in those homes. The most dangerous asbestos fibers are
too small to be visible. After they are inhaled, they can remain and accumulate in the lungs.
Asbestos can cause lung cancer, mesothelioma (a cancer of the chest and abdominal linings), and
asbestosis (irreversible lung scarring that can be fatal). Most people with asbestos-related
diseases were exposed to elevated concentrations on the job; some developed disease from
Page 63 of 86

exposure to clothing and equipment brought home from job sites. As with radon, dose-response
extrapolations suggest that lower-level exposures, as may occur when asbestos-containing
building materials deteriorate or are disturbed, may also cause cancer. Intact asbestos-containing
materials are not a hazard; they should be monitored for damage or deterioration and isolated if
possible. Repair of damaged or deteriorating ACMs usually involves either sealing
(encapsulation) or covering it (enclosure). Repair is usually cheaper than removal, but it may
make later removal of asbestos more difficult and costly. Repairs should only be done by a
trained professional certified to handle asbestos safely and can cost from a few hundred to a few
thousand dollars; removal can be more expensive.
Combustion Products of Heating Systems: Burning of oil, natural gas, kerosene, and wood for
heating or cooking purposes can release a variety of combustion products of health concern.
Depending upon the fuel, these may include carbon monoxide (a chemical asphyxiant), oxides of
nitrogen (respiratory irritants), polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (e.g., the carcinogen
benzo[a]pyrene) and inhalable particulate matter (PM). Exposure to carbon monoxide, an
odorless gas, can be fatal. Nitrogen dioxide can irritate or damage the respiratory tract, and sulfur
dioxide can irritate the eyes, nose and respiratory tract. Improper venting and poor maintenance
of heating systems and cooking appliances can dramatically increase exposure to combustion
products. As green construction and rehabilitation become more popular, and homes become
increasingly airtight to improve energy efficiency, there are concerns about potential trade-offs
in indoor air quality and resident health (Selgrade et al. 2006, Wilson et al. 2014). Experts
recommend having combustion heating systems inspected by a trained professional every year to
identify blocked openings to flues and chimneys, cracked or disconnected flue pipes, dirty filters,
rust or cracks in the heat exchanger, soot or creosote build-up, and exhaust or gas odors. Also
installing a carbon monoxide detector is recommended; however, such a detector will not detect
other combustion by-products.
E-Cigarettes: A recent review of the public health consequences of electronic cigarettes by the
National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine (NASEM, 2018) noted in summary
that while “[e]-cigarette aerosol contains fewer numbers and lower levels of most toxicants than
smoke from combustible tobacco cigarettes does,” “[t]here is conclusive evidence that e-cigarette
use increases airborne concentrations of particulate matter and nicotine in indoor environments
compared with background levels,” and “that in addition to nicotine, most e-cigarette products
contain and emit numerous potentially toxic substances.” The review noted that, “the absolute
risks of the products cannot be unambiguously determined at this time. Long-term health effects,
of particular concern for youth who become dependent on them, are not yet clear,” and
recommended research on “the impact of e-cigarette use in indoor air quality and biomarkers of
second-hand e-cigarette exposure in scenarios and exposure surveys that are relevant for the
populations exposed, including ... children, [and] pregnant women.”
Environmental Tobacco Smoke (ETS): ETS (also known as secondhand smoke) results from
the combustion of tobacco products and exhalation of inhaled tobacco smoke by active smokers.
Tobacco smoke contains as many as 7000 individual compounds, including formaldehyde,
carbon monoxide, nicotine, nitrosamines and polyaromatic hydrocarbons, with nearly 70
compounds identified as carcinogens (US DHHS, 2010; IARC, 2004). Exposure to ETS has been
associated with numerous adverse health effects, including multiple types of cancer, coronary
Page 64 of 86

heart disease, asthma, respiratory tract infections and others. Additionally, exposure to ETS has
been estimated to cause approximately 50,000 excess deaths annually in the U.S., including
sudden infant death syndrome (Cal EPA, 2005). Children are particularly vulnerable to the
effects of ETS. The U.S. Surgeon Generals' office reported that approximately 22 million
children may be exposed to ETS in the U.S. (US DHHS, 2006). Exposure to ETS can be a
problem even in rooms or units where smoking does not occur. Van Deusen et al. (2009)
reported that levels of particulate matter (an indicator of tobacco smoke) were elevated in rooms
within a home that were distant from the primary room where smoking occurred. In addition,
ETS also migrates between units in multi-unit buildings. Kraev et al. (2009), measured nicotine
in air and air exchange rates in individual units of a lower-income multi-unit building in the
Boston area and found measurable levels of nicotine in units where no smoking occurred; King
et al. (2010) reported similar results in nonsmoking units and hallways as part of a study in
Buffalo. Wilson et al. (2011) analyzed measurements of cotinine exposure in children (an
indicator of ETS exposure) and found that those living in multifamily housing had higher levels
than children in detached housing, indicating the contribution from ETS migrating between units
of multifamily housing.
Green Construction and Energy Upgrades: Green building and design standards are being
incorporated into housing construction and rehab specifications with increasing frequency. The
use of green standards has been primarily driven by the efficiency gains and the resulting
reductions in cost of energy and water usage. The potential impact of green standards on indoor
environmental quality and health has mainly been based on the expectation that green features
and management practices would reduce exposure to allergens and toxic substances within the
home (e.g., improved indoor air quality, use of integrated pest management). Some recent studies
have shown a positive correlation between green construction/weatherization and improved
health of residents. A HUD-funded study demonstrated benefits to indoor air quality and resident
health in green vs. conventional low-income housing. The researchers reported
57%, 65%, and 93% lower concentrations of PM 2.5, NO2, and nicotine, respectively, in green
vs control homes, as well as fewer reports of mold, pests, inadequate ventilation, and stuffiness
(Colton et al. 2014). They further reported that asthmatic children living in green homes
experienced fewer asthma symptoms, asthma attacks and asthma-related school absences when
compared to those in conventional housing (Colton et al., 2015). In another HUD-funded study,
Breysse et al. 2013 reported decreases in the overall number of children with poorly controlled
asthma when combining weatherization and healthy homes interventions.
Infiltration of Ambient Pollutants: Personal exposure to airborne contaminants is a function of
indoor and outdoor exposures. For people living in areas that are near roadways or a point source
generating hazardous pollutants, for example, the infiltration of ambient pollutants has the
potential to dominate personal exposures. Logue et al. (2010, 2011) identified a number of
pollutants that present significant health risks in indoor environments; however, many of those
pollutants are found also in the ambient environment suggesting infiltration of ambient air
pollution may be of concern when identifying exposure risks to occupants of a home. Meng et al.
(2005) reported in the Relationships of Indoor, Outdoor, and Personal Air (RIOPA) study across
three U.S. cities that approximately 60% of indoor PM 2.5 originated from the outdoors.
Allen et al. (2012) identified the frequency of air conditioner use and the opening of windows as
predictors of ambient pollution infiltration during the summer months, while temperature and the
Page 65 of 86

use of forced air heat were predictors during winter months. Studies on practical control
technologies and to reduce the infiltration of outdoor air pollutants into homes are needed.
Insect and Rodent Pests: The observed association between exposure to cockroach allergen and
asthma severity has already been noted above. In addition, cockroaches may act as vehicles to
contaminate environmental surfaces with certain pathogenic organisms. Rodents can transmit a
number of communicable diseases to humans, either through bites, arthropod vectors, or
exposure to aerosolized excreta. Humans can become sensitized to proteins in rodent urine,
dander and saliva. Such sensitization may contribute to asthma severity among sensitized
individuals. Insect and rodent infestations are frequently associated with substandard housing
that makes them difficult to eliminate. Even though studies have shown that bedbugs do not
transmit any human diseases, CDC, EPA and USDA have declared bedbugs as pest of significant
public health importance. Research indicates that the presence of bedbugs and their bites can
result in adverse physical and mental health effects (e.g., infections, anxiety, and insomnia) as
well as economic consequences. These include allergic reactions to their bites, secondary
infections and expensive control measures and therefore have to be treated. However, the
treatment of rodent and insect infestations often includes the use of toxic pesticides that may
present hazards to occupants (see below). A HUD-funded study demonstrated that the use of an
integrated pest management (IPM) approach resulted in significant reduction in cockroaches in
heavily infested public housing (Wang et al., 2009). The use of IPM for pest control is
recommended by federal agencies, including the U.S. EPA, HUD, and the CDC because it
minimizes the use of toxic pesticides and instead emphasizes environmental controls such as
elimination of harborages and removing access to food and water. This recommendation was
recently confirmed by an expert panel that systematically reviewed the literature on this topic
(Sandel et al., 2010). According to the expert panel, sufficient evidence was available to support
the implementation of an IPM approach as a way of reducing pesticide residues in the home.
Lead Hazards: Exposure to lead, especially from deteriorating lead-based paint, remains one of
the most important and best-studied of the household environmental hazards to children.
Although blood lead levels (BLLs) have fallen nationally, a large reservoir of lead remains in
housing. Recent results from CDC's Fourth National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey
(NHANES 2002) demonstrate that the national geometric mean blood lead concentration of
children aged 1-5 years has decreased from 2.3 µg/dL in 1991 to 1.6 µg/dL in the period 19992002 (CDC 2005). During the 1999-2002 survey period, children aged 1-5 years had the highest
prevalence of elevated BLLs (1.6%), so that approximately 310,000 children aged 1-5 years
remained at risk for exposure to harmful lead levels. Overall, by race/ethnicity, non-Hispanic
blacks and Mexican Americans had higher percentages of elevated BLLs (1.4% and 1.5%,
respectively) than non-Hispanic whites (0.5%). Among subpopulations, non-Hispanic blacks
aged 1-5 years and aged >60 years had the highest prevalence of elevated BLLs (3.1% and 3.4%,
respectively). As BLLs have dropped over the years, recent analyses have examined the
relationship between relatively low blood lead concentrations (<10g/dL) and cognitive
functioning in representative samples of U.S. children and adolescents and have found evidence
that suggests that deficits in cognitive and academic skills associated with lead exposure have no
threshold (Lanphear et al., 2000; Canfield et al., 2003). These findings clearly support the
importance of primary prevention with respect to childhood lead exposure. Despite dramatic
reductions in blood lead levels over the past 15 years, lead poisoning continues to be a
Page 66 of 86

significant health risk for young children.
According to the recent HUD funded American Healthy Homes Survey II lead findings report
(AHHS II), an estimate of 34.6 million homes (about 29.4% of US housing stock) contain LBP,
of which about 30.9 million (89%) were built before 1978. Using the definition of lead dust
hazards applicable to AHHS, about 22.3 million (18.9% of all homes) have one or more
significant LBP hazards. The survey further estimates that 1.6 million homes with one or more
LBP hazards poses the highest risk of lead poisoning because they housed low-income families
(household income less than $35,000 per year) and have children who are less than six years of
age. Among HUD grantees, lead hazard control (LHC) costs tend to range from $500 to $15,000
per unit, with a median cost of $5,960. Corrective measures include paint stabilization, enclosure
and removal of certain building components coated with lead paint, cleanup and 'clearance
testing,' which ensures the unit is safe for young children. In addition, acute injuries to children
have been well documented, most notably in instances involving sanding or stripping of leadbased paint or visible deterioration of lead-based painted residential building components
combined with children who exhibit pica tendencies.
Evaluation of lead hazard control interventions conducted by recipients of HUD’s lead hazard
control grants found that interventions were effective in significantly reducing pre-intervention
dust-lead levels on floors and window surfaces up to six years following intervention (Wilson et
al. 2006). More intensive treatments were found to significantly reduce dust lead loadings on
windowsills and troughs compared to lower-level treatments, however, no significant differences
in dust-lead loadings on floors were reported. Sandel et al. (2010) confirmed these general
findings, citing that lead hazard control interventions were effective in reducing exposures to
lead exposures. The authors concluded that the evidence was sufficient to promote lead hazard
control interventions as a means of reducing lead exposure and associated health effects,
particularly in children. In a HUD-funded follow-up study of residential window replacement
and lead hazard control after homes were enrolled in an evaluation of the HUD Lead Hazard
Control Grant Program, Dixon, et al. 2012, reported that 12 years after intervention, homes with
all replacement windows had significantly lower interior floor dust-lead and sill-lead levels
compared to homes with partial window replacement. Wilson, et al. 2015 reported on the
importance of including porches in the evaluation and control of lead-based paint hazards. The
study demonstrated significant reductions in porch dust-lead levels following floor replacement
or paint stabilization.
Drinking water can also be an important source of lead exposure. Lead can leach from brass
fixtures into water as well as from lead solder used in interior plumbing. Also, some older homes
in the U.S. have lead supply lines connecting the home to the larger public water supply line.
Lead leaching from supply lines can be mitigated through treatment of the water using chemical
agents at water treatment plants. Lead exposure from inadequate water treatment was
documented among children living in Flint, Michigan in 2015 (Hanna-Attisha et al., 2016).
Mold and Moisture: An analysis of several pulmonary disease studies estimates that 25 percent
of airways disease, and 60 percent of interstitial lung disease may be associated with moisture in
the home or work environment. Moisture is a precursor to the growth of mold and other
biological agents, which is also associated with respiratory symptoms. An investigation of a
cluster of Pulmonary Hemosiderosis (PH) cases in infants showed PH was associated with a
history of recent water damage to homes and with levels of the mold Stachybotrys Atra (SA) in
air and cultured surface samples, although this association could not be considered a causal
Page 67 of 86

relationship Associations between exposure to SA and 'sick building' symptoms in adults have
also been observed. Other related toxigenic fungi have been found in association with SAassociated illness and could play a role. For sensitive individuals, exposure to a wide variety of
common molds may also aggravate asthma. A review by an expert committee convened by the
Institute of Medicine found sufficient evidence for an association between exposure to mold and
other agents in damp indoor environments and asthma symptoms in sensitized persons, upper
respiratory tract symptoms, cough, and wheeze (IOM 2004). The committee also found limited
or suggestive evidence for an association between damp indoor environments and the
development of asthma. A HUD-funded study reported three mold species common to water
damaged buildings, Aspergillus ochraceus, Aspergillus unguis, and Penicillium variabile, when
measured in house dust during the first year of life, were significantly associated with the
development of asthma in children at age 7 (Reponen et al. 2012; Reponen et al. 2013).
Addressing mold problems in housing requires coordination among the medical, public health,
microbiological, housing, and building science communities. Krieger et al. (2010) report that an
expert panel review of relevant literature on this topic found that a combined approach of
eliminating active leaks and moisture intrusion into the home while also removing moldy items
already in place was an effective intervention strategy for reducing exposure to mold and
associated respiratory health effects. The panel concluded that there was sufficient evidence to
support implementation of a coordinated intervention strategy for mold and moisture problems.
The cost of mold/moisture-related intervention work (e.g., IPM, clean and tune furnace, remove
debris, vent clothes dryer, cover dirt floor with impermeable vapor barrier) is a few hundred
dollars, unless major modification of the ventilation system or structural repairs is needed. For
example, in Cleveland, mold interventions, including repairs to ventilation systems and basement
flooring, in the most heavily contaminated homes range from $500 to $5,000, with some costs
also being dedicated to LHC simultaneously through its lead and asthma program.
Pesticide Residues: According to the EPA, 75 percent of U.S. households used at least one
pesticide product indoors during the past year. Products used most often are insecticides and
disinfectants. Another study suggests that 80 percent of most people's exposure to pesticides
occurs indoors and that measurable levels of up to a dozen pesticides have been found in the air
inside homes. The amount of pesticides found in homes appears to be greater than can be
explained by recent pesticide use in those households; other possible sources include
contaminated soil or dust that migrates in from outside, stored pesticide containers, and
household surfaces that collect and then release the pesticides. Pesticides used in and around the
home include products to control insects (insecticides), termites (termiticides), rodents
(rodenticides), molds and fungi (fungicides), and microbes (disinfectants). In 2005, the American
Association of Poison Control Centers reported that some 1.6 million children were involved in
common household pesticide poisonings or exposures (AAPCC 2005). In households with
children less than five years of age, almost half stored at least one pesticide product within the
reach of children. Exposure to high levels of cyclodiene pesticides, commonly associated with
misapplication, has produced various symptoms, including headaches, dizziness, muscle
twitching, weakness, tingling sensations, and nausea. In addition, the EPA is concerned that
cyclodienes might cause long-term damage to the liver and the central nervous system, as well as
an increased risk of cancer. A recent expert panel review (Sandel et al., 2010) found that
implementation of an integrated pest management approach was an effective intervention for
reducing pesticide residues in the home and should be implemented in lieu of pesticide
Page 68 of 86

application for reducing pests. Furthermore, there is evidence to suggest that the usage of
insecticides for combating bed bugs is becoming increasingly ineffective due to the development
of resistance to pyrethroids, the active ingredient (Adelman et al, 2011).
Radon: The National Academy of Sciences estimates that approximately 15,000 cases of lung
cancer per year are related to radon exposure. Epidemiologic studies of miners exposed to high
levels of radon in inhaled air have defined the dose response relation for radon-induced lung
cancer at high exposure levels. Extrapolation of these data has been used to estimate the excess
risk of lung cancer attributable to exposure to radon gas at the lower levels found in homes.
These estimates indicate that radon gas is an important cause of lung cancer deaths in the U.S.
Excessive exposures are typically related to home ventilation, structural integrity and location.
Radon measurement and remediation methods are well developed, and the EPA recommends
that every home be measured for radon. Sandel et al. (2010) conducted a review of the literature
and concluded that active soil depressurization beneath the foundation of the structure was an
effective method for reducing radon exposures in the home. EPA estimates that materials and
labor costs for radon reduction in an existing home are $800-$2,500. Including radon resistant
techniques in new home construction costs $350-$500 and can save up to $65 annually in energy
costs, according to the EPA. The American Association of Radon Scientist (AARST) has
published several standard protocols for the testing and mitigation of radon hazards in single and
multifamily housing (e.g., ANSI/AARST ASD-RMS-2006, CCAH-2012, MAMF-2012, RMSMF 2014, MAH 2014).
Semi-Volatile Organic Compounds (SVOCs): Several SVOCs are emerging as potential health
risks in the home due to their ubiquitous nature in consumer and building products that are
produced in high volume and used worldwide. SVOCs exist partially in the gas-phase and emit
their respective chemical gradually over time, particularly in the presence of increased
temperatures. Two compounds of increasing concern are phthalates and polybrominated
diphenyl ethers (PBDE). During recent years, phthalate and PBDE compounds have received
increased scrutiny due to their potential cumulative health risks and increased use in consumer
products. PBDE are found in flame retardants, plasticizers, and flexible foams, and may also be
found in children's products. Pthalates are used as plasticizers and are most notable for their use
in children's products, such as teething rings, food contact items and other flexible polyvinyl
chloride (PVC)-based products. The health effect most widely associated with phthalates
exposures are reproductive effects, while PBDE has shown toxicity potential in liver, thyroid and
neurodevelopment systems. Exposure to phthalates may occur via many different routes;
inhalation, ingestion, water and soil. It may occur in various environments from the home to the
workplace. Children are reported to have the highest exposures to pthalates among all age groups
(CDC, 2005), along with lower socioeconomic status households (Zota et al., 2008). Both
phthalates and PBDE have been found in house dust; exposure to dust has been reported as the
primary route of exposure for PBDE (Wilford et al., 2005; Zota et al., 2008). The presence of
both phthalates and PBDE in house dust presents potential risks particularly to young children.
Several house characteristics, including older age of house, water leakage and use of PVC in
flooring materials, have been identified as significant indicators for potential phthalates
exposures (Bornehag et al., 2005). The increased concern over phthalates and PBDE has led to
increased regulatory scrutiny. In 2008, the U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission issued a
prohibition on the use of several phthalate compounds above threshold levels in children's toys
Page 69 of 86

and items used for childcare. Furthermore, PBDE have been banned at the state level, including
in California and Washington.
Third Hand Smoke (THS): Adverse health effects from exposure to active smoking and
passive smoking (ETS or Second-Hand Smoke (SHS)) are well documented. Tobacco smoke
contains as many as 7,000 individual compounds, including formaldehyde, carbon monoxide,
nicotine, nitrosamines and polyaromatic hydrocarbons, with nearly 70 compounds identified as
carcinogens (US DHHS, 2010; IARC, 2004). THS refers to residual pollutants originating from
tobacco smoke that persist in dust and adsorb onto surfaces, ultimately re-emitting pollutants into
the gaseous phase over time after the smoke has dissipated (Hoh et al., 2012). Pollutants that are
re-emitted also have the potential to interact with the local atmosphere resulting in physical and
chemical transformation of original contaminants into secondary pollutants, some of which may
be more hazardous than the original pollutant (Matt et al., 2011). HUD-funded research also
found that the presence of smokers in a home was a significant predictor of both children's
blood-lead levels and surface dust-lead loading (Dixon et al., 2009; Gaitens et al., 2009).
Exposure to THS occurs most often by inhalation, but may also occur through ingestion of
contaminated dust, or through dermal contact with surfaces that have residual contamination.
While this is an emerging area of research with relatively sparse information to date, there is
initial evidence to suggest that THS may be a concern, particularly for children who have a
higher frequency of hand-to-mouth activity that might increase their exposure by ingestion and
dermal routes, in addition to inhalation. Matt et al. (2010) reported that THS residue persisted in
homes even after they had been cleaned and prepared for the next tenant.
Unintentional Injuries/Fire: In 1997, nearly 7 million persons in the U.S. were disabled for at
least one full day by unintentional injuries received at home; for children younger than 15 years
of age, unintentional injury is now the leading cause of death and disability. A HUD-supported
study of deaths among US children and adolescents from 1985 to 1997 found that an average of
2,822 unintentional deaths occurred annually from residential injuries (Nagaraja et al., 2005).
The highest death rates were attributable to fires, submersion or suffocation, and poisoning.
Black children were two times more likely to die from residential injuries than white children.
The elderly are also at an elevated risk for residential injuries. Home visitation protocols have
been shown to be effective in reducing exposure to injury hazards. The 'add-on' cost of injury
prevention measures, when combined with other housing interventions, are estimated at about
$100 per unit. This includes the cost of some injury prevention devices (e.g., smoke alarms,
electrical socket covers, etc.). DiGuiseppi et al. (2010) reported on an expert panel review of
seventeen interventions intended to reduce injuries due to residential deficiencies. Installed and
properly working smoke detectors were determined to be an effective intervention that should be
implemented for reducing fire-related injuries. This panel deemed four-sided pool enclosures
efficacious and pre-set safe hot waters heaters sufficient for reducing residential-based injuries.

APPENDIX B: Advancing Racial Equity, Affirmative Marketing, Affirmatively Furthering
Fair Housing (AFFH) and Experience Promoting Racial Equity Narratives.

Page 70 of 86

The Applicant is required to submit in a maximum of 2 pages, the following narratives
addressing the issues described in the corresponding sections:
•
•
•
•

Advancing Racial Equity narrative (Section III.F)
Affirmative Marketing narrative (Section III.F)
Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing (Section IV.G); and
Experience Promoting Racial Equity (Section V.B)

Applicants will submit each of the equity narratives in this Appendix. Each narrative will be
evaluated for sufficiency and will not change the applicant’s score or rank as compared to other
applicants. If a narrative is deemed insufficient, it will be a “Curable Deficiency” that will be
communicated to the applicant for correction with a notice of deficiency.

APPENDIX C: Relevant Publications, Guidelines and Other Resources
The sources below are provided for informational purposes only. By inclusion in this Appendix,
HUD is not necessarily endorsing any of the research, findings, or policies. To secure any of the
documents listed, call the telephone number provided. HUD welcomes and is prepared to receive
calls from individuals who are deaf or hard of hearing, as well as individuals with speech or
communication disabilities. To learn more about how to make an accessible telephone call,
please visit https://www.fcc.gov/consumers/guides/telecommunications-relay-service-trs. A
number of these references are provided on HUD's CD, Residential Lead Desktop Reference, 3rd
Edition. Several of these references can be downloaded from the Internet without charge from
the HUD Office of Lead Hazard Control and Healthy Homes Internet site,
https://www.hud.gov/program_offices/healthy_homes.
1. REGULATIONS:
Worker Protection: Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) publications listed
below can be purchased by calling either OSHA Regulations at 202-693-1888(OSHA
Regulations) (this is not a toll-free number) or the Government Printing Office (GPO) at 202512-1800(this is not a toll-free number). OSHA standards and other publications can be
downloaded or purchased (as applicable) from OSHA's publication web page, www.osha.gov/
pls/publications/pubindex.list. https://www.osha.gov/publications A broad range of information
on construction and other worker protection requirements and guidelines is available from
OSHA's home page, www.osha.gov/ and from www.osha.gov/SLTC/lead/.
Waste Disposal: A copy of the EPA regulations at 40 CFR parts 260-268 can be purchased by
calling 800-424-9346, or, from the Washington, DC, metropolitan area, 703-412-9810(this is not
a toll-free number). The regulations can also be downloaded without charge from the EPA
website at www.epa.gov/lead/pubs/fslbp.htm.
Lead
a. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Requirements for Lead-Based Paint Activities in
Target Housing and Child-Occupied Facilities; Final Rule: 40 CFR part 745 (EPA) (Lead Hazard
Page 71 of 86

Standards, Work Practice Standards, EPA and State Certification and Accreditation Programs for
those engaged in lead-based paint activities) can be purchased by calling the Toxic Substances
Control Act (TSCA) Assistance Service at 202-554-1404 (this is not a toll-free number). The
rule and guidance can be downloaded from the Internet without charge at
www.epa.gov/lead/pubs/leadcert.htm.
b. HUD. Requirements for Notification, Evaluation and Reduction of Lead-Based Paint Hazards
in Federally Owned Residential Property and Housing Receiving Federal Assistance; Final Rule:
24 CFR part 35, subparts B through R, published September 15, 1999 (64 FR 50201) (HUD) can
be purchased by calling the NLIC's toll-free number (800-424-LEAD) or downloaded without
charge from the HUD website at
https://www.hud.gov/program_offices/healthy_homes/enforcement/lshr.
c. HUD. Requirements for Disclosure of Information Concerning Lead-Based Paint in Housing,
24 CFR Part 35, Subpart A (HUD, Lead-Based Paint Disclosure Rule) by calling the NLIC's tollfree number (800-424-LEAD). The rule, guidance, pamphlet and disclosure formats can be
downloaded from the HUD website at
https://www.hud.gov/program_offices/healthy_homes/enforcement/lshr.
d. HUD. Requirements for Notification, Evaluation and Reduction of Lead-Based Paint Hazards
in Federally Owned Residential Property and Housing Receiving Federal Assistance, Response
to Elevated Blood Lead Levels. Final rule. 82 FR 4151-4172; January 13, 2017.
https://www.federalregister.gov/d/2017-00261.
e. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Lead; Identification of Dangerous Levels of Lead;
Final Rule at 66 FR 1205-1240 (January 5, 2001). This rule and guidance can be obtained
without charge by calling the NLICs toll-free number (800-424-LEAD) or by calling the TSCA
Assistance Service at: 202-554-1404(this is not a toll-free number). The rule and guidance can be
downloaded from the EPA website at www.epa.gov/lead/pubs/leadhaz.htm.
f. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Lead; Renovation, Repair, and Painting Program;
Final Rule at 73 FR 21692- 21769 (April 22, 2008). As of April 22, 2011, the rule was fully
implemented. This rule and guidance can be obtained without charge by calling the NLIC's tollfree number (800-424-LEAD) or by calling the TSCA Assistance Service at: 202- 554-1404 (this
is not a toll-free number). The rule and guidance can be downloaded from the EPA website at
www.epa.gov/lead/pubs/renovation.htm.
2. GUIDELINES AND OTHER RESOURCES:
Lead
Guidelines for the Evaluation and Control of Lead-Based Paint Hazards in Housing; HUD. The
Guidelines can be downloaded from the HUD website without charge at
www.hud.gov/program_offices/healthy_homes/lbp/hudguidelines.
Preventing Lead Poisoning in Young Children; Centers for Disease Control, August 2005. These
guidelines can be obtained without charge by calling the CDC toll free number at 888-232-6789.
The guidelines can also be downloaded from
Page 72 of 86

www.cdc.gov/nceh/lead/publications/PrevLeadPoisoning.pdf.
Screening Young Children for Lead Poisoning: Guidance for State and Local Public Health
Officials, November 1997; Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). These guidelines
can be obtained without charge by calling the CDC toll free number at 888-232-6789 or they can
be downloaded from www.cdc.gov/nceh/lead/publications/screening.htm.
EPA’s TRW Bioavailability Committee has developed the following guidance and documents on
the use of soil treatments for Pb contamination;
https://semspub.epa.gov/work/HQ/100000048.pdf
http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/pdf/10.1080/10937404.2013.825216
OLEM 9200.2-164. EPA issued this memo to transmit the Technical Review Workgroup
(TRW) for Metals and Asbestos technical documents entitled “Standard Operating Procedure for
an In Vitro Bioaccessibility Assay for Lead and Arsenic in soil” and “Validation Assessment of
In Vitro Arsenic Bioaccessibility Assay for Predicting Relative Bioavailability of Arsenic in
Soils and Soil-like materials at superfund sites.” https://cluin.org/download/contaminantfocus/arsenic/arsenic-SOP-OLEM-9200.2-164.pdf
Green Buildings
U.S. Department of Energy. Building Energy Codes Programs. Available at:
www.energycodes.gov/development/green/codes.
Enterprise Community Partners. Green Communities. Available at:
www.enterprisecommunity.org/solutions-and-innovation/green-communities
National Association of Home Builders. National Green Building Programs Information.
Available at: www.nahb.org/en/nahb-priorities/green-building-remodeling-and-development
/NAHB-toolkit-for-sustainability/national-green-building-program-information.aspx.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Indoor air PLUS Program. Available at:
www.epa.gov/indoorairplus/.
U.S. Green Building Council. LEED for Homes. Available at: https://new.usgbc.org/.
IPM
IPM: A Guide for Affordable Housing: http://www.stoppests.org/what-is-ipm/.
Bed Bugs
Collaborative Strategy on Bed Bugs. 2015. Prepared by The Federal Bed Bug Workgroup.
https://www.epa.gov/sites/production/files/2015-02/documents/fed-strategy-bedbug-2015.pdf
Climate Change
HUD's New Climate Action Plan | HUD.gov / U.S. Department of Housing and Urban
Development (HUD) available at: https://www.hud.gov/climate
•
•

Research that identifies actions that protect the health and safety of the families from
hazards resulting from natural disasters and help them to mitigate the risks of such health
and safety hazards in housing occurring before such anticipated disasters.
Reducing Carbon Emissions
Page 73 of 86

3. REPORTS:
Lead
Putting the Pieces Together: Controlling Lead Hazards in the Nation's Housing, (Summary and
Full Report); HUD, July 1995. A copy of this summary and report can be purchased by calling
800-245-2691 toll free
Preventing Lead Poisoning in Young Children, A Statement by the Centers for Disease Control
and Prevention, Atlanta, GA, August. 2005. This can be downloaded from the Internet without
charge at ww.cdc.gov/nceh/lead/publications/prevleadpoisoning.pdf.
American Healthy Homes Survey II Lead Findings final Report. U.S. Department of Housing
and Urban Development, Office of Lead Hazard Control and Healthy Homes. October 29, 2021
at
www.hud.gov/sites/dfiles/HH/documents/AHHS_II_Lead_Findings_Report_Final_29oct21.pdf
Healthy Homes
Healthy Housing Reference Manual; HUD/CDC, 2006. A copy of this manual can be
downloaded from the CDC website without charge at www.cdc.gov/nceh/publications/books
/housing/housing_ref_manual_2012.pdf.
The Healthy Homes Initiative: A Preliminary Plan (Summary and Full Report); HUD, July 1995.
A copy of this summary and report can be downloaded from the HUD website without charge at
https://www.hud.gov/program_offices/healthy_homes.
Institute of Medicine. Damp Indoor Spaces and Health. The National Academies Press.
Washington, D.C. 2004.
Institute of Medicine. Indoor Allergens. Assessing and Controlling Adverse Health Effects. The
National Academies Press. Washington, D.C. 1993.
National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2018. Public health consequences
of e-cigarettes. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.
https://www.nap.edu/catalog/24952/public-health-consequences-of-e-cigarettes.
National Research Council and the Institute of Medicine. Ethical Considerations for Research on
Housing-Related Health Hazards Involving Children. The National Academies Press.
Washington, D.C. 2005.
Natural Resources Defense Council. Our Children at Risk. Washington, D.C. 1997. This can be
ordered from the Internet from www.nrdc.org.
Pleis JR., Lucas JW, Ward BW. Summary Health Statistics for U.S Adults: National Health
Interview Survey, 2008. National Center for Health Statistics. Vital Health Stat 10(242). 2009.
Bloom B, Cohen RA, Freeman G. Summary health statistics for U.S. children: National Health
Interview Survey, 2008. National Center for Health Statistics. Vital Health Stat 10(244). 2009.
President's Task Force on Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks to Children. Asthma and
The Environment: An Action Plan to Protect Children. Washington, DC 1999.
U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. How Tobacco Smoke Causes Disease: The
Biology and Behavioral Basis for Smoking-Attributable Disease: A Report of the Surgeon
General. Atlanta, GA: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Centers for Disease
Page 74 of 86

Control and Prevention, National Center for Chronic Disease Prevention and Health Promotion,
Office on Smoking and Health, 2010.
U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. U.S. Department of Health and Human
Services. The Health Consequences of Involuntary Exposure to Tobacco Smoke: A Report of the
Surgeon General. Atlanta, GA: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Centers for
Disease Control and Prevention, Coordinating Center for Health Promotion, National Center for
Chronic Disease Prevention and Health Promotion, Office on Smoking and Health, 2006.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 2009. Phthalates Action Plan. Accessed August 4, 2011.
https://www.epa.gov/sites/production/files/201509/documents/phthalates_actionplan_revised_2012-03-14.pdf. California Environmental
Protection Agency. 2005. Proposed Identification of Environmental Tobacco Smoke as a Toxic
Air Contaminant. Part B: Health Effects. Sacramento, CA: California Environmental Protection
Agency, Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment.
CDC. 2018. Center for Disease Control and Prevention. Fourth National Report on Human
Exposure to Environmental Chemicals. https://www.cdc.gov/exposurereport/pdf/FourthRepo
rt_UpdatedTables_Volume1_Mar2018.pdf.
International Agency for Research on Cancer. IARC Monographs on the Evaluation of
Carcinogenic Risks to Humans: Tobacco Smoke and Involuntary Smoking. Vol. 83. Lyon
(France): International Agency for Research on Cancer, 2004.

4. PAPERS
Adelman ZN, Kilcullen KA, Koganemaru R, Anderson MAE, Anderson TD, Miller DM. 2011.
Deep sequencing of pyrethroid-resistant bed bugs reveals multiple mechanisms of resistance
within a single population. PLoS ONE 6(10): e26228. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0026228
Adhikari A, Jung J, Reponen T, Lewis JS, DeGrasse EC, Grimsley LF, Chew GL, Grinshpun
SA. 2009. Aerosolization of fungi, (1->3)-β-D glucan, and endotoxin from flood-affected
materials collected in New Orleans homes. Environmental Research 109(3): 215-224.
Adhikari A, Kettleson E, Vesper S, Kumar S, Popham D, Schaffer C, Indulgula R, Chatterjee K,
Allam K, Grinshpun S, Reponen T. 2014. Dustborne and airborne gram-positive and gramnegative bacteria in high versus low ERMI homes. Science of the Total Environment 482-483:
92-99. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv. 2014.02.110
Adhikari A, Lewis JS, Reponen T, DeGrasse EC, Grimsley LF, Chew GL, Iossifova Y,
Grinshpun SA. 2010. Exposure Matrices of endotoxin, B-D-glucan, fungi and dust mite allergens
in flood-affected homes of New Orleans. Science of the Total Environment 408: 5489-5498,
http://doi:10.1016/j.scitotenv. 2010.07.087
Allen RW, Adar SD, Avol E, Cohen M, Curl CL, Larson T, Liu LJ, Sheppard L, Kaufman JD.
2012. Modeling the residential infiltration of outdoor PM2.5 in the multi-ethnic study of
atherosclerosis and air pollution (MESA Air). Environ Health Perspect. 120:(6) 824-30.

Page 75 of 86

ANSI/AARST RMS-13 Radon Mitigation Standards for Multifamily Buildings
ANSI/AARST MAH2014 Protocol for Conducting Measurements of Radon and Radon Decay
Products in Homes.
Arbes SJ, Sever M, Mehta J, Gore JC, Schal C, Vaughn B, Mitchell H, Zeldin DC. 2004.
Abatement of cockroach allergens (Bla g 1 and Bla g 2) in low-income, urban housing: Month
12 continuation results. J Allergy Clin Immunol, 113(1):109-114.
Bauer MS, Kirchner J. 2020. Implementation science: What is it and why should I care?
Psychiatry Research 283 112376
Berges M, Metcalf M. 2013. Lessons Learned on Energy-Efficient Affordable Housing. Journal
of Light Construction (JLC) February. 55-63.
Binns HJ, Gray KA, Chen T, Finster ME, Peneff N, Schaefer P, Ovsey V, Fernandes J, Brown
M, Dunlap B. 2004. Evaluation of landscape coverings to reduce soil lead hazards in urban
residential yards: The safer yards project. Environ Res. 96(2): 127-38.
Bornehag CG, Lundgren B, Weschler CJ, Sigsgaard T, Hagerhed-Engman L, Sundell J. 2005.
Phthalates in indoor dust and their association with building characteristics. Environ Health
Perspect 113(10):1399-404.
Bradham KD, Daimond GL, Nelson CM, Noerpel M, Scheckel KG, Elek B, Chaney RL, Ma Q,
Thomas DJ. 2018. Long-term in situ reduction in soil lead bioavailability measured in a mouse
model. Environ. Sci. Technol. 52: 13908 -13.
Breysse J, Jacobs DE, Weber W, Dixon S, Kawecki C, Aceti S, Lopez J. 2011. Health outcomes
and green renovation of affordable housing. Public Health Reports, 126, Supplement 1, 64-75
Breysse J, Dixon S, Gregory J, Philby M, Jacobs DE, Krieger J. 2013. Effect of weatherization
combined with community health worker in-home education on asthma control. Am J Public
Health. 04:e57–e64. doi:10.2105/AJPH.2013.301402)
Breysse J, Dixon S, Jacobs DE, Lopez J, Weber W. Arch M. 2015. Self-reported health
outcomes associated with green-renovated public housing among primarily elderly residents. J
Public Health Management Practice, 00(00), 1–13
Campbell JD, Brooks M, Hosokawa P, Robinson J, Song L, Krieger J. 2015. Community health
worker home visits for Medicaid-enrolled children with asthma: Effects on asthma outcomes and
costs. Am J Public Health. August 13: e1–e7. doi:10.2105/AJPH.2015.302685
Canfield RL, Henderson CR, Cory-Slechta DA, Cox C, Jusko TA, Lanphear BP. 2003.
Intellectual impairment in children with blood lead concentrations below 10 g per deciliter. N
Engl J Med. 348: 1517-26.

Page 76 of 86

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Blood Lead Levels United States, 1999-2002,
Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Reports. 2005.
https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/mm5420a5.htm.
Chan WR and Singer BC. 2014. Measurement-based evaluation of installed filtration system
performance in single-family homes. Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, Environmental
Energy Technologies Division. April; LBNL-6607E.
Cho SJ, Ramachandran G, Grengs J, Ryan AD, Eberly LE, Adgate JL. 2008. Longitudinal
evaluation of allergen and culturable fungal concentrations in inner-city households. Journal of
Occupational and Environmental Hygiene. 5, 2, 107-18.
Cluett R, Fleisch A, Decker K, Frohmberg E, Smith AE. 2019. Findings of a statewide
environmental lead inspection program targeting homes of children with blood lead levels as low
as 5 μg/dL. Journal of Public Health Management and Practice, 25(1 Supp), S76–S83 DOI:
10.1097/PHH.0000000000000869.
Cohn RD, Arbes Jr. SK, Jaramillo R, Reid L, Zeldin D. National prevalence and exposure risk
for cockroach allergen in U.S. households. Envir. Health Perspect. 114(4): 522-526.
Cohn RD, Arbes Jr. SK, Yin M, Jaramillo R, Zeldin D. National Prevalence of Exposure Risk for
mouse allergen in U.S. Households. Journal of Allergy and Clinical Immunology, 113(8):11671171.
Colton MD, Laurent JGC, MacNaughton P, Vallarino J, Kane J, Bennett-Fripp M, Spengler J,
Adamkiewicz G. 2014. Indoor air quality in green vs conventional multifamily low-income
housing. Environ. Sci. Technol. 48, 7833−41
Colton MD, Laurent JGC, MacNaughton P, Kane J, Bennett-Fripp M, Spengler J, Adamkiewicz
G. 2015. Health benefits of green public housing: Associations with asthma morbidity and
building-related symptoms. Am J Public Health. October 15: e1–e8.
doi:10.2105/AJPH.2015.302793
Crawford C, Reponen T, Lee T, Iossifova Y, Levin L, Adhikari A, Grinshpun S. 2009. Temporal
and spatial variation of indoor and outdoor airborne fungal spores, pollen, and (1→3)-β-dglucan. Aerobiologia 25:147-158. doi 10.1007/s10453-009-9120-z
Dewalt FG, Cox DC, O’Haver R, Salatino D, Holmes D, Ashley PJ, Pinzer EA, Friedman W,
Marker D, Viet SM, Fraser A. 2015. Prevalence of Lead Hazards and Soil Arsenic in U.S.
Housing. J. Environ Health, 78(5) 22-9.
Digenis-Bury EC, Brooks DR, Chen L, Ostrem M, Horsburgh CR. 2008. Use of a populationbased survey to describe the health of Boston public housing residents. Amer. J. Pub. Health,
98(1): 85-91.
DiGuiseppi C, Jacobs DE, Phelan KJ, Mickalide AD, Ormandy D. 2010. Housing interventions
Page 77 of 86

and control of injury-related structural deficiencies: a review of the evidence. J Public Health
Manag Pract. 16(5 Suppl):S34-43.
Dixon, SL., et al., 2012. Window replacement and residential lead paint hazard control 12 years
later. Environ. Res. doi.10.1016/j.envres.2012.01.005
Dixon SL, Fowler C, Harris J, Moffat S, Martinez Y, Walton H, Ruiz B, Jacobs DE. 2009. An
examination of interventions to reduce respiratory health and injury hazards in homes of lowincome families. Environmental Research 109 123-30
Dixon SL, Gaitens JM, Jacobs DE, et al. 2009. Exposure of U.S. children to residential dust lead,
1999-2004: The contribution of lead-contaminated dust to children’s blood lead levels. 117(4):
Environ Health Perspect. 461-7.
Gaitens JM, Dixon SL, Jacobs DE. 2009. Exposure of U.S. children to residential dust lead,
1999-2004: Housing and demographic factors. 117(4): Environ Health Perspect. 468-74.
Galke W, Clark S, Wilson J, Jacobs D, Succop P, Dixon S, Bornschein B, McLaine P, Chen M.
2001. Evaluation of the HUD lead hazard control grant program: Early overall findings. Environ.
Research. 86, 149-56.
Glasgow RE, Vinson C, Chambers D, Khoury MJ, Kaplan RM, Hunter C. 2012. National
Institutes of Health Approaches to Dissemination and Implementation Science: Current and
Future Directions. Am J Public Health. 102:1274–81. doi:10.2105/AJPH.2012.300755
Gold DR, Adamkiewicz G, Arshad SH, Celedon JC, Chapman MD, Chew GL, Cook DN,
Custovic A, Gehring U, Gern JE, Johnson CC, Kennedy S, Koutrakis P, Leaderer B, Mitchell H,
Litonjua AA, Mueller GA, et al. 2017. NIAID, NIEHS, NHLBI, MCAN Workshop Report: The
Indoor Environment and Childhood Asthma: Implications for Home Environmental Intervention
in Asthma Prevention and Management. J Allergy Clin Immunol. 2017; 140(4): 933–949.
doi:10.1016/j.jaci.2017.04.024.
Guo Y, Kannan K. 2011 Comparative assessment of human exposure to phthalate esters from
house dust in China and the United States. Environ Sci Technol. Mar 24.
Hanna-Attisha M, LaChance J, Sadler RC, Schnepp AC. 2016. Elevated blood lead levels in
children associated with the Flint drinking water crisis: a spatial analysis of risk and public
health response. Am J Public Health. Feb; 106 (2):283-90.
https://ajph.aphapublications.org/doi/full/10.2105/AJPH.2015.303003. Epub 2015 Dec 21.
Hoh E, Hunt RN, Quintana PJ, Zakarian JM, Chatfield DA, Wittry BC, Rodriguez E, Matt GE.
2012. Environmental tobacco smoke as a source of polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons in settled
household dust. Environ Sci Technol. 46(7):4174-83.
Imm P, Knobeloch L, Buelow C, Anderson HA. 2009. Household exposures to polybrominated
diphenyl ethers (PBDEs) in a Wisconsin Cohort. Environ Health Perspect. 117(12):1890-5.
Page 78 of 86

Jacobs DE, Clickner RP, Zhou JY, Viet SM, Marker DA, Rogers JW, Zeldin DC, Broene P,
Friedman W. 2002. Prevalence of lead-based paint in U.S. housing. Environmental Health
Perspect. 110(10): A599-606.
Jacobs DE, Wilson J, Dixon SL, Smith J, Evens A. 2009. The relationship of housing and
population health: A 30-year retrospective analysis. Environmental Health Perspect.117(4), 597604
Johansson E, Reponen T, Meller J, Vesper S, Yadav J. 2014. Association of Streptomyces
community composition determined by PCR-denaturing gradient gel electrophoresis with indoor
mold status. Environ Monit Assess 186: 8773-83.
Johansson E, Reponen T, Vesper S, Levin L, Lockey J, Ryan P, Bernstein D, Villareal M,
Hershey g, Schaffer C, LeMasters G. 2013. Microbial content of household dust associated with
exhaled NO in asthmatic children. Environment International 59:141-7. http://doi.org/10
.1016/j.envint.2013.05.011
Julien R, Adamkiewicz G, Levy JL, Bennett D, Nishioka M, Spengler JD. 2008. Pesticide
loadings of select organophosphate and pyrethroid pesticides in urban public housing. Journal of
Exposure Science and Environmental Epidemiology. 18, 167–174.
Kanchongkittiphon W, Mendell MJ, Gaffin JM, Wang G, Phipatanakul W. 2015.Indoor
environmental exposures and exacerbation of asthma: an update to the 2000 review by the
Institute of Medicine. Environ Health Perspect 123:6–20.
Kapheim MG, Ramsay J, Schwindt T, Hunt BR, Margellos-Anast H. Utilizing the community
health worker model to communicate strategies for asthma self-management and self-advocacy
among public housing residents. J Comm Healthcare, 8 (2): 95-105.
Kass D, McKelvey W, Carlton E, Hernandez M, Chew G, Nagle S, Garfinkel R, Clarke B, Tiven
J, Espino C. 2009. Effectiveness of an integrated pest management intervention in controlling
cockroaches, mice, and allergens in New York City public housing. Environ Health Perspect
117(8):1219.
Kercsmar CM, Dearborn DG, Schluchter M, Xue L, Kirchner HL, Sobolewski J, Greenberg SJ,
Vesper SJ, Allan T. 2006. Reduction in asthma morbidity in children as a result of home
remediation aimed at moisture sources. Environ Health Perspect. Oct;114(10):1574-80.
Kettleson S, Kumar S, Reponen T, Vesper S, Meheust D, Grinshpun SA, Adhikari A. 2013.
Stenotrophomonas, Mycobacterium, and Streptomyces in home dust and air: associations with
moldiness and other home/family characteristics. Indoor Air 23:387-96.
King BA, Travers MJ, Cummings KM, Mahoney MC, Hyland AJ. 2010. Secondhand smoke
transfer in multiunit housing. Nicotine Tob Res. 12(11):1133-41.

Page 79 of 86

Klitzman S, Caravanos J, Belanoff C, Rothenberg L. 2005. A multihazard, multistrategy
approach to home remediation: Results of a pilot study. Environmental Research 99: 294–306.
doi:10.1016/j.envres.2005.03.003.
Kraev TA, Adamkiewicz G, Hammond SK, Spengler JD. 2009. Indoor concentrations of
nicotine in low-income, multi-unit housing: associations with smoking behaviors and housing
characteristics. Tob Control. 18(6):438-44.
Krieger J, Higgins DL. 2002. Housing and health: time again for public health action. Am J
Public Health. May;92(5):758-68. doi: 10.2105/ajph.92.5.758. PMID: 11988443
Krieger J, Jacobs DE, Ashley PJ, Baeder A, Chew GL, Dearborn D, Hynes HP, Miller JD,
Morley R, Rabito F, Zeldin DC. 2010. Housing interventions and control of asthma-related
indoor biologic agents: a review of the evidence. J Public Health Manag Pract. 16(5 Suppl): S1120. Review
Krieger JW, Takaro TK, Song L, Weaver M. 2005. The Seattle-King county healthy homes
project: A randomized, controlled trial of a community health worker intervention to decrease
exposure to indoor asthma triggers. Amer. J. Pub. Health, 95(4): 652-9.
Lai MW, Klein-Schwartz W, Rodgers GC, Abrams JY, Haber DA, Bronstein AC, Wruk KM.
2006. 2005 Annual report of the American Association of Poison Control Centers national
poisoning and exposure database. Clinical Toxicology, 44: 803-932.
Lanphear BP, Dietrich K, Auinger P, Cox C. 2000. Cognitive deficits associated with blood lead
concentration. Public Health Reports. 115(6): 530-1.
Lane-Fall MB, Curran GM, Beidas RS. 2019. Scoping implementation science for the beginner:
locating yourself on the “subway line” of translational research. BMC Medical Research
Methodology 19:133 https://doi.org/10.1186/s12874-019-0783-z
Largo TW, Borgialli M, Wisinski CL, Wahl RL, Priem WF. 2011. Healthy Homes University: A
home-based environmental intervention and education program for families with pediatric
asthma in Michigan. Public Health Reports, 12614-26.
Leas BF, D’Anci KE, Apter AJ, Bryant-Stephens T, Lynch MP, Kaczmarek JL, Umscheid CA.
2018. Effectiveness of indoor allergen reduction in asthma management: A systematic review. J
Allergy Clin Immunol;141:1854-69.
Lee T, Grinshpun SA, Martuzevicius D, Adhikari A, Crawford CM, Reponen T. 2006.
Culturability and concentration of indoor and outdoor airborne fungi in six single-family homes.
Atmospheric Environment 40:2902-10.
Lobb R, Colditz GA. 2013. Implementation science and Its application to population health.
Annu. Rev. Public Health. 34:235–51
Logue JM, McKone TE, Sherman MH, Singer BC. 2011. Hazard assessment of chemical air
Page 80 of 86

contaminants measured in residences. Indoor Air. 21(2):92-109
Logue JM, Price PN, Sherman MH, Singer BC. 2012. A method to estimate the chronic health
impact of air pollutants in U.S. residences. Environ Health Perspect. 120(2):216-22
MacDonald C, Sternberg A, Hunter PR. 2007. A systematic review and meta-analysis of
interventions aimed at reducing exposure to house dust on the development and severity of
asthma. Environ Health Perspect 115:1691-95.
Mankikar D, Campbell C, Greenberg R. 2016. Evaluation of a Home-Based Environmental and
Educational Intervention to Improve Health in Vulnerable Households: Southeastern
Pennsylvania Lead and Healthy Homes Program. Int J Environ Res Public Health. Sep
9;13(9):900. doi: 10.3390/ijerph13090900. PMID: 27618087
Matt GE, Quintana PJ, Zakarian JM, Fortmann AL, Chatfield DA, Hoh E, Uribe AM, Hovell
MF. 2010. When smokers move out and non-smokers move in: residential thirdhand smoke
pollution and exposure. Tob Control. 20(1): e1.
Matt GE, Quintana PJ, Destaillats H, Gundel LA, Sleiman M, Singer BC, Jacob P, Benowitz N,
Winickoff JP, Rehan V, Talbot P, Schick S, Samet J, Wang Y, Hang B, Martins-Green M,
Pankow JF, Hovell MF. 2011. Thirdhand tobacco smoke: emerging evidence and arguments for
a multidisciplinary research agenda. Environ Health Perspect. 119(9):1218-26.
Matte TD, Jacobs DE. 2000. Housing and health-current issues and implications for research and
programs. Journal of Urban Health: New York Academy of Medicine: 77, 1: 7-25.
Meng QY, Turpin BJ, Korn L, Weisel CP, Morandi M, Colome S, Zhang JJ, Stock T, Spektor D,
Winer A, Zhang L, Lee JH, Giovanetti R, Cui W, Kwon J, Alimokhtari S, Shendell D, Jones J,
Farrar C, Maberti S. 2005. Influence of ambient (outdoor) sources on residential indoor and
personal PM2.5 concentrations: analyses of RIOPA data. J Expo Anal Environ Epidemiol.
15(1):17-28.
Mielke HW, Powell ET, Gonzales CR, Mielke Jr. PW Ottesen RT, Langedal M, 2006. New
Orleans soil lead (Pb) cleanup using Mississippi River alluvium: need, feasibility, and cost.
Environ Sci. Technol., 40(8): 2784- 9.
Mielke HW, Powell ET, Gonzales CR, Mielke PW. 2007. Potential lead on play surfaces:
Evaluation of the PLOPS sampler as a new tool for primary lead prevention. Environ. Res.
103(2): 154-9.
Morgan WJ, Crain EF, Gruchalla RS, O'Connor GT, Kattan M, Evans 3rd R, Stout J, Malindzak
G, Smartt E, Plaut M, Walter M, Vaughn B, Mitchell H; Inner-City Asthma Study Group. 2004.
Results of home-based environmental intervention among urban children with asthma. N Engl J
Med. 351: 1068-80.
Nagaraja J, Menkedick J, Phelan KJ, Ashley P, Zhang X, Lanphear BP. 2005. Deaths from
Page 81 of 86

residential injuries in US children and adolescents, 1985-1997. Pediatrics. 116(2): 454-61.
Northridge J, Ramirez OF, Stingone JA and Claudio L. 2011. The role of housing type and
housing quality in urban children with asthma. J Urban Health. Mar;87(2):211-24.
Pate AD, Hamilton RG, Ashley PJ, Zeldin DC, Halsey JF. 2005. Proficiency testing of allergen
measurements in residential dust. The Journal of Allergy and Clinical Immunology, 116, 4: 84450.
Patton AP, Calderon L, Xiong Y, Wang Z, Senick J, Sorensen-Allacci M, Plotnik D, Wener R,
Andrews CJ, Krogmann U, Mainelis G. 2016. Airborne Particulate Matter in Two Multi-Family
Green Buildings: Concentrations and Effect of Ventilation and Occupant Behavior. Int. J.
Environ. Res. Public Health 13(1):144.
Paulin LM, Diette GB, Scott M, McCormack MC, Matsui EC, Curtin-Brosnan J, Williams DL,
Kidd-Taylor A, Shea M, Breysse PN, Hansel NN.2013. Home interventions are effective at
decreasing indoor nitrogen dioxide concentrations. Indoor Air. Dec 14. doi: 10.1111/ina.12085.
[Epub ahead of print] PMID: 24329966
Peck RL, Grinshpun SA, Yermakov M, Rao MB, Kim J, Reponen T. 2015. Efficiency of
portable HEPA air purifiers against traffic related combustion particles. Building and
Environment 98 (2016): 21-9. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.buildenv.2015.12.018.
Peters JL, Levy JI, Muilenberg ML, Coull BA, Spengler JD. 2007. Efficacy of integrated pest
management in reducing cockroach allergen concentrations in urban public housing. The Journal
of Asthma: Official Journal of the Association for the Care of Asthma. 44(6), 455-60.
Rabito F, Carlson J, Holt E, Iqbal S, James M. 2011. Cockroach exposure independent of
sensitization status and association with hospitalizations for asthma in inner-city children. Annals
of Allergy, Asthma and Immunology, Vol. 106, Feb:103-9.
Rabito FA, Carlson JC, He H, Werthmann D, Schal C. 2017. A single intervention for cockroach
control reduces cockroach exposure and asthma morbidity in children. J Allergy Clin Immunol
140(2):565-570.
Ramsay J, Schwindt T, Nguyen T, Margellos-Anast H. 2018. Translating a proven pediatric
healthy homes intervention to adults. Health Promot Pract. Mar;19(2):222-32. doi:
10.1177/1524839916675118. Epub 2016 Oct 27.
Reddy AL, Gomez M, Dixon SL. 2017. The New York State healthy neighborhoods program:
Findings from an evaluation of a large-scale, multisite, state-funded healthy homes program.
March/April. 23(2): 210-18
Reponen T, Levin L, Zheng S, Vesper S, Ryan P, Grinshpun SA, Lemasters G. 2013. Family and
home characteristics correlate with mold in homes. Environ Res. 124:67-70. PMID:23683889.

Page 82 of 86

Reponen T, Lockey J, Bernstein J, et al. 2012. Infant origins of childhood asthma associated with
specific molds. J Allergy Clin Immunol. 130:639-44. PMID: 22789397
Reponen T, Singh U, Schaffer C, Vesper S, Johansson E, Adhikari A, Grinshpun SA, Indulgula
R, Ryan P, Levin L, LeMasters G. 2010. Visually observed mold and moldy odor versus
quantitatively measured microbial exposure in homes. Science of the Total Environment
408:5565-74
Reponen T, Trakumas S, Willeke K, Grinshpun S, Choe K, Friedman W. 2002. Dynamic
Monitoring of the Dust Pickup Efficiency of Vacuum Cleaners. AIHA Journal 63 689-97.
Reponen T, Vesper S, Levin L, et al. 2011. High environmental relative moldiness index during
infancy as a predictor of asthma at 7 years of age. Ann Allergy Asthma Immunol. 107(2): 120.
Saegert SC, Klitzman S, Freudenberg N, Cooperman-Mroczek J, Nassar S. 2003. Healthy
housing: a structured review of published evaluations of US interventions to improve health by
modifying housing in the United States, 1990-2001. Am J Public Health. Sep;93(9):1471-7. doi:
10.2105/ajph.93.9.1471. PMID: 12948965
Sandel M, Baeder A, Bradman A, Hughes J, Mitchell C, Shaughnessy R, Takaro TK, Jacobs DE.
2010. Housing interventions and control of health-related chemical agents: a review of the
evidence. J Public Health Manag Pract. Sep-Oct;16(5 Suppl): S24-33. Review.
Scammell MK, Duro L, Litonjua E, Berry L, Reid M. 2011. Meeting people where they are:
engaging public housing residents for integrated pest management. Progress in Community
Health Partnerships: Research, Education, and Action, 5:2 177-82.
Selgrade MK, Lemanske Jr. RF, Gilmour MI, Neas LM, Ward MD, Henneberger PK, Weissman
DN, Hoppin JA, Dietert RR, Sly PD, Geller AM, Enright PL, Backus GS, Bromberg PA,
Germolec DR, Yeatts KB. 2006. Induction of asthma and the environment: what we know and
need to know. Environ Health Perspect.114(4):615-9.
Singh N, Wang C, Cooper R, Liu C. 2012. Interactions among carbon dioxide, heat and chemical
lures in attracting the bed bug, Cimex lectularius L. (Hemiptera: Cimicidae). Psyche. Article ID
273613 http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2012/273613.
Singh N, Wang C, Cooper R. 2013. Effect of trap design, chemical lure, carbon dioxide release
rate, and source of carbon dioxide on efficacy of bed bug monitors. J. Econ. Entomol. 106(4):
1802Ð1811 (2013);
Singh N, Wang C, Cooper R. 2015. Effectiveness of a sugar-yeast monitor and a chemical lure
for detecting bed bugs. J Econ Entomol. Jun;108(3):1298-303. Epub 2015 Mar 22
Singh U, Levin L, Grunshpun S, Schaffer C, Adhikari A, and Reponen T. 2011. Influence of
home characteristics on airborne and dustborne endotoxin and /3-D-glucan. J. Envir. Monit. 13:
3246-53,
Page 83 of 86

Singh U, Reponen T, Kyungmin JC, Grinshpun SA, Adhikari A, Levin L, Indugula R, Green BJ.
2011. Airborne Endotoxin and /3-D-glucan in PM1 in Agricultural and Home Environments.
Aerosol and Air Quality Research, 11:376-86
Singleton R, Salkoski AJ, Bulkow L, Fish C, Dobson J, Albertson L, Skarada J, Kovesi T,
McDonald C, Hennessy TW, Ritter T. 2017. Housing characteristics and indoor air quality in
households of Alaska Native children with chronic lung conditions. Indoor Air 27(2): 478-86.
First published online June 18, 2016. http://doi.org/10.1111/ina.12315.
Singleton R, Salkoski AJ, Bulkow L, Fish C, Dobson J, Albertson L, Skarada J, Ritter T, Kovesi
T, Hennessy TW. 2018. Impact of home remediation and household education on indoor air
quality, respiratory visits and symptoms in Alaska Native children. International Journal of
Circumpolar Health, 77:1. http://doi.org/10.1080/22423982.2017.1422669.
Smith JD, Li DH, Rafferty MR. 2020. The Implementation Research Logic Model: a method for
planning, executing, reporting, and synthesizing implementation projects. Implementation
Science 15:84 https://doi.org/10.1186/s13012-020-01041-8
Sternthal MJ, Jun HJ, Earls F, Wright RJ. 2010. Community violence and urban childhood
asthma: A multilevel analysis. European Respiratory Journal. 36(6): 1400-9.
Sung-Chul S, Reponen T, Levin L, Borchelt T, Grinshpun S. 2008. 'Aerosolization of Particulate
(1→3)-ß-D-Glucan from Moldy Materials'. Applied & Environmental Microbiology, 74, 3:58593, Academic Search Premier, EBSCOhost, viewed 15 November 2011.
Takaro TK, Krieger JW, Song L. 2004. Effect of environmental interventions to reduce exposure
to asthma triggers in homes of low-income children in Seattle. Journal of Exposure Analysis and
Environmental Epidemiology, 14, S133-43.
Takaro TK, Krieger J, Song L, Sharify D, Beaudet J. 2011. The breath-easy home: the impact of
asthma-friendly home construction on clinical outcomes and trigger exposure. Amer J Public
Health. 101: 55-62.
Trakumas S, Willeke K, Reponen T, Grunshpun S, Friedman W. 2001. Comparison of Filter
Bag, Cyclonic, and Wet Dust Collection Methods in Vacuum Cleaners. AIHA 62:5, 573-83,
Trakumas S, Willeke K, Reponen T, Grunshpun S, Mainelis G, Friedman W. 2001. Particle
Emission Characteristics of Filter-Equipped Vacuum Cleaners. AIHA 62:4: 482-93,
Turcotte DA, Alker H, Chaves E, Gore R, Woskie S. 2014. Healthy Homes: In-home
environmental asthma intervention in a diverse urban community. Am J Public Health. 104:
665–71.
University of California at Davis Western Cooling Efficiency Center. Analysis of Greenhouse
Gas Emissions from Residential Heating Technologies in USA.

Page 84 of 86

https://wcec.ucdavis.edu/analysis-of-greenhouse-gas-emissions-from-residential-heatingtechnologies-in-usa-2/
Van Deusen A, Hyland A, Travers MJ, Wang C, Higbee C, King BA, Alford T, Cummings KM.
2009. Secondhand smoke and particulate matter exposure in the home. Nicotine Tob Res.
11(6):635-41.
Vesper SJ, McKinstry C, Ashley P, Cox D, Dewalt G. 2009. Correlation between ERMI values
and other moisture and mold assessments of homes in the American Healthy Home Survey.
Journal of Urban Health: Bulletin of the New York Academy of Medicine. Oxford University
Press, Cary, NC, 86(6):850-860, (2009).
Wallerstein N, Duran B. 2010. Community-based participatory research contributions to
intervention research: The intersection of science and practice to improve health equity. Am J
Public Health. 100: S40–6. doi:10.2105/AJPH.2009.184036
Wang C, Bennett GW. 2006. Comparative study of integrated pest management and baiting for
German cockroach management in public housing. J Econ Entomol 99(3):879-885.
Wang C, Bennett GW. 2009. Cost and effectiveness of community-wide integrated pest
management for German cockroach, cockroach allergen, and insecticide use reduction in lowincome housing. Journal of Econ Entomol. 102(4): 1614-23
Wang C, Cooper R. 2011. Detection tools and technologies. Pest Control Technology 39(8): 72,
74, 76, 78-79, 112.
Wang C, El-Nour MMA, Bennett GW. 2008. Survey of Pest Infestation, Asthma, and Allergy in
Low-income Housing. J Community Health 33:31-9. doi:10.1007/s10900-007-9064-6
Wang C, Singh N, Zha C, Cooper R. 2016. Bed bugs: prevalence in low-income communities,
resident’s reactions, and implementation of a low-cost inspection protocol. Journal of Medical
Entomology.
Wang C, Tsai W, Cooper R, White J. 2011. Effectiveness of bed bug monitors for detecting and
trapping bed bugs in apartments. Journal of Econ Entomol 104: 274-8.
Wang C, Cooper R. 2012. The future of bed bug monitoring. Pestworld (January/February): 1-6.
Wells EM, Berges M, Metcalf M, Kinsella A, Foreman K, Dearborn D, Greenberg S. 2015.
Indoor air quality and occupant comfort in homes with deep versus conventional energy
efficiency renovations. Building and Environment 93:331-8.
Wilford BH, Shoeib M, Harner T, Zhu J, Jones KC. 2005. Polybrominated diphenyl ethers in
indoor dust in Ottawa, Canada: implications for sources and exposure. Environ Sci Technol. 39.
70277035.

Page 85 of 86

Willeke K, Trakumas S, Grinshpun S, Reponen T, Trunov M, Friedman W. 2001. Test methods
for evaluating the filtration and particulate emission characteristics of vacuum cleaners. AIHAJ
62:3, 313-21,
Wilson J, Pivetz T, Ashley P, Jacobs D, Strauss W, Menkedick J, Dixon S, Tsai HC, Brown V,
Friedman W, Galke W, Clark S. 2006. Evaluation of HUD-funded lead hazard control treatments
at 6 years post-intervention. Environ Res. 102(2): 237-48.
Wilson SE, Kahn RS, Khoury J, Lanphear BP. 2007. The role of air nicotine in explaining racial
differences in cotinine among tobacco-exposed children. Chest. 131(3):856-62.
Wilson KM, Klein JD, Blumkin AK, Gottlieb M, Winickoff JP. 2011. Tobacco-smoke exposure
in children who live in multiunit housing. Pediatrics. 127(1):85-92.
Wilson JW, Dixon SL, Jacobs DE, Breysse JV, Akoto J, Tohn E, Isaacson M, Evens A,
Hernandez Y. 2014. Watts-to-Wellbeing: Does residential energy conservation improve health?
Energy Efficiency, 6(2), 151-60.
Wilson J, Dixon SL, Jacobs DE, Akoto J, Korfmacher KS, Breysse K. 2015. An investigation
into porch dust lead levels. Environmental Research 137: 129–35
Wright R. 2006. Health Effects of Socially Toxic Neighborhoods: The violence and urban
asthma paradigm. Clinics in Chest Medicine. 27: 413-21.
Yu CH, Yiin L, Fan Z, Rhoads GG. 2009. Evaluation of HEPA vacuum cleaning and dry steam
cleaning in reducing levels of polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons and house dust mite allergens in
carpets. J Environ Monit. January; 11(1): 205-11.
Zota A, Adamkiewicz G, Levy JI, Spengler JD. 2005. Ventilation in public housing: implications
for indoor nitrogen dioxide concentrations. Indoor Air, 15, 6, 393-401.
Zota AR, Rudel RA, Morello-Frosch RA, Brody JG. Elevated house dust and serum
concentrations of PBDEs in California: unintended consequences of furniture flammability
standards? Environ Sci Technol. 42(21):8158-648-64

Page 86 of 86