HUD OIG: Public Housing Administration failed to manage lead hazards
- The San Juan Daily Star

- 3 hours ago
- 3 min read

By THE STAR STAFF
The Puerto Rico Public Housing Administration failed to properly manage lead‑based paint hazards in its public housing units, putting thousands of families -- including young children -- at increased risk, according to a new report from the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development’s (HUD) Office of the Inspector General (OIG).
The audit examined how the agency handled lead‑based paint in its portfolio of roughly 53,700 public housing units. Most of the properties were built before 1978, when residential lead‑based paint was banned, and some date as far back as 1941. Inspectors said those factors, combined with reported cases of childhood lead poisoning, placed the agency’s developments in a higher‑risk category for potential exposure.
Under HUD’s Lead Safe Housing Rule, public housing agencies are required to take specific actions to identify and reduce lead hazards, including conducting inspections, performing risk assessments when lead‑based paint is found, and carrying out interim controls or full abatement. But the HUD inspector general found that the Puerto Rico agency did not meet those requirements.
According to the report, the Public Housing Administration (AVP by its initials in Spanish) failed to conduct required lead inspections and risk assessments, did not maintain adequate records, and did not integrate interim controls or ongoing monitoring into its regular operations. It also failed to properly disclose the presence of lead‑based paint to residents. Investigators attributed those deficiencies to weak governance, inadequate oversight, outdated policies, and poor information management that left families uninformed about potential hazards in their homes.
The lack of monitoring meant deficiencies were not identified or corrected in a timely manner, the report said, compromising resident safety and increasing risks for children under 6, who are especially vulnerable to the harmful health effects of lead exposure. The inspector general noted that both HUD and the AVP lacked reliable information needed to ensure proper mitigation.
The audit also found problems in the AVP’s handling of elevated blood lead level cases involving children. Although the agency followed some of HUD’s required procedures, it failed to notify families of the results of environmental investigations, did not inform HUD promptly, and did not perform hazard reduction in one case. Policies for managing such incidents were described as outdated and plagued by operational and communication failures.
The OIG performed the analysis between January 2024 and January 2025 at its offices in San Juan. The review generally covered the period Jan. 1, 2022 through Dec. 31, 2023, but the period was expanded as necessary
While the AVP carried out environmental investigations for the cases reviewed, the report said families were not adequately informed of lead hazards identified in their units, increasing the risk of prolonged exposure and delaying medical follow‑up.
The inspector general issued a series of recommendations directing HUD’s Caribbean Office of Public Housing to require the AVP to perform risk assessments where documentation is incomplete, conduct new lead‑based paint inspections in units where removal work was done without a proper abatement report, and implement abatement or interim controls where hazards are found.
The office was also urged to ensure the AVP establishes an ongoing maintenance program, updates its policies and record‑keeping systems, completes required interim controls, and provides accurate disclosures to tenants.
For elevated blood lead level cases, the report recommended updating policies to guarantee environmental investigations are conducted and that HUD and residents are notified promptly. It also advised HUD to coordinate staff training, offer technical assistance, and require the AVP to provide evidence that hazards were abated in the case where corrective action was not taken.
The AVP has not publicly responded to the findings.






Comments