Targeted Lead Screening Plan for the
Prevention of Childhood Lead Poisoning

Prepared by the Office of Environmental Health

December 2014

Contents
Executive Summary
Introduction

3

4

Childhood Lead Poisoning Background

4

Sources of Exposure to Lead in Arizona

4

Targeted vs. Universal Screening

6

The Arizona Targeted Screening Plan

6

Targeted High-Risk ZIP Codes 6
Identification of high-risk ZIP codes 7
Individual Risk Assessment

10

Summary of ADHS Recommendations
Next Steps

10

10

Appendix A: Risk Assessment Questions 12
English Language Individual Risk Assessment Questions:

12

Spanish Language Individual Risk Assessment Questions:

12

Appendix: B Lead Screening Protocol

13

Appendix C: Targeted High-Risk ZIP Codes
References

14

17

2|Page

December 2014

Executive Summary
The problem: Lead has adverse effects on nearly all organ systems in the body, even at low blood lead
levels, children's intelligence, hearing, and growth can be irreparably damaged. Exposure to lead is
especially harmful to the developing brains and nervous systems of children under the age of 6 years.
For this reason major public health campaigns have focused on eliminating childhood lead poisoning.
Many lead sources have been eliminated or reduced in the last few decades. However, lead poisoning
continues to affect children in Arizona, primarily from paint, imported goods, food, medicines, spices,
leaded crystal and pewter, lead in dust, soil, mining, drinking water, and occupation and hobbies.
Because of ongoing surveillance and analysis, public health professionals are able to target surveillance
and intervention efforts on the children most at risk. Based on recommendations and guidance from
the CDC, many states, including Arizona, have moved from universal lead screening to targeted
screening.
The solution: The Arizona Department of Health Services developed the following recommendations to
identify lead poisoned children in order to eliminate exposure and reduce the effects of lead on Arizona
children:
1. Children living in targeted ZIP codes: All children living in targeted ZIP codes should have a blood
lead test at 12 and 24 months of age. Children aged 36 to 72 months should be tested if they
have not been previously tested. Refer to Appendix C for a list of the targeted ZIP codes.
2. Children living outside of the targeted ZIP codes: Children living in Arizona, but not in a targeted
ZIP code, should receive an individual risk assessment questionnaire at age 12 and 24 months of
age. Refer to Appendix A for our recommended questions.
Next Steps: ADHS’ three year goal is to increase the utility of the targeted screening plan by 1)
increasing screening rates to 85% in targeted ZIP codes, 2) assessing the indicators used to develop the
targeted high-risk ZIP codes, and 3) reducing the number of targeted high-risk ZIP codes.

3|Page

December 2014

Introduction
Childhood Lead Poisoning Background
Lead has adverse effects on nearly all organ systems in the body. Even at low blood lead levels,
children's intelligence, hearing, and growth can be irreparably damaged. At very high blood lead levels
children can have severe brain damage or even die. Exposure to lead is especially harmful to the
developing brains and nervous systems of children under the age of 6 years. For this reason major
public health campaigns have focused on eliminating childhood lead poisoning.
On a community level, lead exposure is associated with an increase in the number of children with
developmental deficits and learning disorders. A number of studies have estimated that a child's IQ will
drop by one to three points for every increase of 10 μg/dL in the child's blood lead level. As a result,
childhood lead poisoning places an unnecessary and expensive burden on the educational system.
On a national level, childhood lead poisoning places a significant burden on the US healthcare system
and to society as a whole. In 1991, the CDC estimated that the average benefit of preventing a child's
blood lead level from rising above 24 μg/dL was $1,300 in medical and public health case management
costs, and $3,331 in special education costs.
The Arizona Administrative Code (AAC) R9-4-302 states that a child is considered lead poisoned at a
blood lead level equal to 10 μg/dL or greater. The Arizona Department of Health Services (ADHS)
focuses education and intervention on cases above 10 μg/dL. The Centers for Disease Control and
Prevention (CDC) previously identified 10 μg/dL as the threshold at which health effects become
significant; however, evidence suggest that negative health effects can be seen at levels below 10 μg/dL.
The CDC has recently lowered the diagnostic threshold to 5 μg/dL, which may triple the number of
children considered to have lead poisoning. Although ADHS currently focuses education and
intervention on cases with blood lead levels above 10 μg/dL, the program provides education and
technical assistance to all parents, clinicians, and public health professionals who contact the program.
The elimination of childhood lead poisoning has been one of the most effective public health campaigns
of the 21st century, but much work remains to be done. ADHS remains committed to preventing new
cases of childhood lead poisoning from occurring, providing excellent case management to children with
elevated blood lead levels, and safeguarding the health of Arizona’s children as a whole.

Sources of Exposure to Lead in Arizona
Like children across the nation, Arizona children can be exposed to lead in paint, dust, soil, mini-blinds,
hobbies, and take-home occupational exposures. However, the unique makeup of Arizona’s
environmental landscape adds to the complexities of lead exposures to Arizona’s children. Some of the
unique lead exposures in Arizona are a result of living in proximity to the Mexico-Arizona border, mining,
and immigration.
Paint: It is well documented that homes built before 1978 have potential to contain lead paint. The
ADHS Children’s Lead Poisoning Prevention Program (CLPPP) reports that lead-based paint has been
4|Page

December 2014

found in homes built after 1978. In these cases, the paint was reported to have been obtained in
Mexico and brought across the border.
Imported goods: There have been several national recalls involving lead in imported goods such as
toys, pottery, and makeup. Additionally, the ADHS CLPPP reports lead exposures from candy,
pottery, and make-up that are brought across the US border. These types of cases generally escape
recall attention. The CLPPP found 920,000 ppm in hanumam sindoor, a powder Hindu women use
in their part line. Glazed pottery imported from other countries, most commonly in Arizona from
Mexico, may contain lead. The Mexican pottery is used to cook beans or hot chocolate. Inexpensive
toys, jewelry, and other objects sold in vending machines and discount stores may contain lead.
Imported foods, medicines, and spices: The CLPPP reports that lead has been found in foods and
spices that were either bought locally in Asian import stores or brought with the family from other
countries, e.g. India, and Mexico. Two home-remedies for stomach illness (empacho) or teething
have been noted in lead poisoning cases: azarcon and greta. In several cases of children with
elevated blood lead levels, spices were found to be heavily contaminated with lead (e.g. turmeric
with 600-800 ppm lead).
Imported goods, foods, medicines, and spices have been a source of lead primarily in families who
continue to visit their countries of origin and/or shop at local ethnic groceries.
Table 1: Sources contributing to elevated blood lead levels in Arizona
Child’s Highest
Contaminated
Origin
Blood lead Level
Spice/s Found in
(BLL)
Child’s Home
Turmeric
Brought from India by parents
16 μg/dL
Turmeric
Brought from Bangladesh by parents
Sibling 1: 23 μg/dL
Sibling 2: 11 μg/dL
Coriander
Purchased locally in Asian imports store
Black Pepper
Purchased locally in Asian imports store
Powder
15 μg/dL
Turmeric
Purchased locally in Asian imports store
* Sibling 1: 3 μg/dL
Thyme
Brought from Lebanon by parents
Sibling 2: 5 μg/dL
10.1 μg/dL
Hanuman Sindoor Brought from India by parents

Concentration
of Lead in Spice
690 ppm
770 ppm
17 ppm
24 ppm
610 ppm
890 ppm
920,000 ppm

* Although these siblings did not meet the ADHS case definition criteria of 10 μg/dL, an investigation
was conducted for several reasons: their BLLs had increased from the previous year and the parents
had BLLs of 16 and 20 μg/dL.
Leaded crystal and Pewter: Lead can be found in crystal and pewter objects, which may be modern
or antiques and may have been imported or locally purchased.
Lead in dust, soil, and mining: Arizona children can come into contact with lead in soil and dust,
whether naturally occurring, from mining, or from other activities in the yard or in the home. In
many areas of Arizona, the soils are naturally high in metals like lead. In addition, mining activities,
both historical and current, can make lead more readily available to human exposure. Zinc, gold,
silver, lead, and copper are some of the most mined metals in Arizona. Currently, most of the
mining focus is on copper, and some of the other metals can be produced as byproducts. Arizona
produces 67% of the nation’s copper from 126 mines across the state. Years ago, it was common
practice in many mining towns to take mine tailings (the left over crushed ore that is the consistency
of soil) to use as fill for residential yards.
5|Page

December 2014

Water: Lead can be found in Arizona water either from plumbing or from naturally occurring lead in
groundwater. Plumbing is not usually an issue in Arizona because the hard water tends to coat the
inside of the pipes making any lead in pipes or soldering less able to leach into the water. In
Arizona, it is the homeowner’s responsibility to test their wells and to take steps to ensure safe
water for consumption. Many times, homeowners are unaware of the need for testing and/or they
are unaware that testing and treatment are their responsibility.
Occupation and hobbies: Some occupations and hobbies can result in lead exposure. These include
working with cars, batteries, radiator repair, construction, mining, glass making, metal working
(including welding and cutting), electronics, plumbing, pottery, refinishing furniture, hunting, and
making or using bullets, fishing weights, or sinkers.

Targeted vs. Universal Screening
The principal federal recommendations on screening young children for lead poisoning are issued by the
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). State health departments and their partners are
encouraged to develop formal childhood lead poisoning screening plans that echo the national
guidelines, while still reflecting local conditions.
The CDC guidance recommends targeted screening in communities or states where less than 12% of
children have lead poisoning and where 27% or fewer of houses were built before 1950. This
recommendation is based partially on an analysis suggesting that the benefits of universal screening
outweigh the costs only when the prevalence of lead poisoning is in the range of 11% to 14% or higher.
Lead poisoning rates in Arizona meet these criteria for development of a targeted screening plan.
In addition to targeted screening based on geography (i.e. targeted ZIP codes), the CDC also
recommends that children who meet any of the following criteria receive a blood lead screening test:


Child has a sibling or frequent playmate with an Elevated Blood Lead Level (EBLL).



Child is a recent immigrant, refugee, or foreign adoptee.



Child's parent or principal caregiver works professionally or recreationally with lead.



Child has a household member who uses traditional, folk, or ethnic remedies or cosmetics or
who routinely eats food imported informally (e.g., by a family member) from abroad.

ADHS has developed a Targeted Screening Policy for children who are at higher risk of lead poisoning.
Surveillance data is analyzed annually to identify ZIP codes at greater risk of childhood lead poisoning.
These ZIP codes are identified as targeted high-risk ZIP codes and are listed below.

The Arizona Targeted Screening Plan
ADHS developed a lead poisoning risk index (described below) to identify geographical areas where
children are at increased risk of being lead poisoned. Other factors can also affect a child’s individual
risk of lead poisoning. The Arizona Targeted Screening Plan addresses geographical as well as other risk
factors for lead poisoning with two approaches: the targeted high-risk ZIP codes and the individual risk
assessment.

Targeted High-Risk ZIP Codes
6|Page

December 2014

All children living in targeted ZIP codes should have a blood lead test at 12 and 24 months of age.
Children aged 36 to 72 months should be tested if they have not been previously tested. Children living
outside of the targeted ZIP codes should receive an individual risk assessment (e.g. questionnaire).

Identification of high-risk ZIP codes
ADHS developed a lead poisoning risk index to identify high-risk ZIP codes in Arizona. The indicators and
methods used are described below.
Description of risk index
To better identify children with elevated blood lead levels, ADHS developed a geographic targeted
screening policy for children who are at greater risk of lead poisoning. The Office of Environmental
Health (OEH) at ADHS incorporated demographic and household data from the 2010 U.S. Census, the
2012 American Community Survey (ACS), and surveillance data reported by state laboratories and
physicians into a single lead poisoning risk score. The score is based on previous reports of lead
poisoning as well as key socio-demographic variables that are known correlates of lead exposure.
Analytical methods
All data were analyzed using ArcGIS software (ESRI, Redlands, CA) and SAS 9.3 (Cary, NC). To create the
lead poisoning risk index, surveillance data were geocoded and aggregated to the census tract level.
While previous lead poisoning risk indices produced by ADHS report data at the ZIP code level, the most
current Census data available at the ZIP code level is from the 2000 Census and would not accurately
represent the current population. Therefore, the risk index was revised to use 2010 Census and 2012
ACS data at the census tract level. A lead poisoning risk score was calculated for each census tract.
Indicators
Variables incorporated into the lead poisoning risk index include:
A. The number of cases aged 0-5 years with a blood lead level of 10 μg/dl or greater, 2003-2012
Source: Surveillance data collected throughout the state of Arizona by laboratories and physicians.
Specific data preparation: Cases of children 0-5 years of age with blood lead levels of 10 μg/dl or
greater reported to ADHS from 2003-2012 were geocoded to the census tract level using Centrus
(Pitney Bowes, Stamford, CT). 1,618 cases were reported and a census tract could be obtained for
1,422 (88%).
Justification: The census tract residence of reported cases of lead poisoning is the best and most
readily available correlate of census tract-level risk of exposure to lead.
B. Percent of the population under the age of five
Source: DP-1 Profile of General Population and Housing Characteristics 2010 Census Summary File 1.
Justification: While lead poisoning may contribute to adverse health effects in all individuals, it is
especially harmful to the developing brains and nervous systems of young children. Because of the
7|Page

December 2014

potentially irreparable, long-term health impacts of lead poisoning, children under the age of five
are critical to the targeted screening policy of ADHS.
C. Percent of the population that identify themselves as Hispanic Latino
Source: DP-1 Profile of General Population and Housing Characteristics 2010 Census Summary File 1.
Justification: Lead-containing folk remedies, toys, foods, candies, and pottery imported from foreign
countries, but particularly from Mexico, are significant sources of lead exposure in Arizona. In 2005,
approximately 75% of lead poisoning cases reported to ADHS identified themselves as Hispanic
Latino. This population is still considered to be at higher risk of lead exposure.
D. Percent of houses whose occupants speak only Spanish
Source: DP02 Selected Social Characteristics in the United States 2012 American Community Survey
5-Year Estimates.


Justification: ADHS incorporated data for households that spoke Spanish as an additional proxy
for identifying homes of children with exposure to imported lead-containing products, especially
from Mexico. (http://www.cdph.ca.gov/programs/CLPPB/Pages/LeadPoisoningOverview.
aspx#riskfactors)

E. Percent of families whose income is below the poverty line
Source: DP03 Selected Economic Characteristics 2012 American Community Survey 5-Year
Estimates.
Justification: Low income has been shown to be associated with greater risk of exposure to lead.
(http://www.cdph.ca.gov/programs/CLPPB/Pages/LeadPoisoningOverview.aspx#riskfactors).
Additionally, families whose income is below the poverty line have been shown to be less likely to
seek medical attention. For these reasons, and due to the lasting effects of lead-poisoning, it is
important to include this metric in the risk index.
F. Percent of houses built before 1980
Source: DP04 Selected Housing Characteristics 2012 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates.
Specific data preparation: The total number of housing structures built before 1980, which includes
all structures built 1979 and earlier, was divided by the total number of housing structures located
within each census tract.
Justification: Lead-based paint in housing structures constructed prior to 1978, the year the use of
lead in paint was banned, and represents a significant source of lead poisoning for children in
Arizona. Because the 2010 Census data aggregates housing structures based on decadal
stratifications as opposed to yearly stratifications (e.g. housing structures built between 1960 and
1969 constitute one stratification), this analysis includes housing structures built in 1979, one year
after the federal ban on lead-based paint. While this likely results in a slight overestimation of the
number of housing structures that are more likely to contain lead-based paint, excluding data of
housing structures constructed between 1970 and 1979 would have likely resulted in a greater
underestimation of exposure to lead-based paints in housing structures.

8|Page

December 2014

G. Percent of individuals employed in the agriculture, forestry, fishing and hunting, mining, and
construction industries
Source: DP03 Selected Economic Characteristics 2012 American Community Survey 5-Year
Estimates.
Specific data preparation: The total number of individuals aged 16 and older employed in the
agriculture, forestry, fishing and mining, hunting, and construction industries was divided by the
employed population 16 years and older for each census tract.
Justification: Individuals exposed to lead at work are likely to transport lead into their homes via
their clothes, shoes, hair, or skin. http://www.cdc.gov/nceh/lead/publications/books/plpyc/
chapter4.htm. Individuals’ employment in certain occupations and engagement in certain hobbies,
however, have an increased risk of lead exposure. Specific occupations that may expose individuals
to lead include: construction, mining, painting, automobile repair, welding, electronics, and
plumbing. Specific hobbies that may expose individuals to lead include: pottery, stained glass,
refinishing furniture, firing ranges (particularly indoor ranges), hunting, and fishing. While not all
individuals employed in these industries are exposed to lead, this measure serves as a proxy
indicator for lead exposure by occupation at the census tract level.
The lead poisoning risk score was calculated as follows:
Score = A*0.14 + B*0.16 + C*0.14 + D*0.14 + E*0.14 + F*0.14 + G*0.14
The greater weighting of the percent of the population under the age of five was chosen to prioritize the
population specific to this targeted screening policy. Census tracts with no residents less than five years
old were assigned scores of zero. There is no threshold risk value that signifies elevated risk to lead
poisoning because this index is specific to Arizona. Thus, the risk index was stratified into quintiles. A
score in the top two quintiles (16.125 or higher) was classified as high risk. It is important to remember
that only one of the seven variables incorporated in this index reflects reported cases of lead poisoning,
and it was weighted at 14%. The remainder of the score (86%) is determined by demographic,
socioeconomic, and household data that have been shown to be associated with increased risk of lead
poisoning and have been included in previous risk indices developed by ADHS. As we have included
numerous demographic, socioeconomic, and household variables and a single variable reflecting actual
cases, certain census tracts have been identified in this analysis to be at elevated risk of lead poisoning
even when no cases have been reported in residents within their boundaries; conversely, certain census
tracts have been identified to be at low risk of lead poisoning even when one or more cases reside
within its boundaries.
Population centroids for high risk census tracts were spatially joined to Arizona ZIP codes to obtain a
final list of high risk ZIP codes. Since ZIP codes and census tracts are incongruent geographies, this list
reflects the ZIP codes in which one or more high risk census tracts fall. Census tracts may cross multiple
ZIP code boundaries and include populations from multiple ZIP codes. The population within a ZIP code
may not experience the same level of risk. Thus, translating risk scores from the census tract level to the
ZIP code level will introduce errors. Given the difficult of obtaining and using census tracts for patients in
the clinical setting, ZIP codes were chosen as the best geography to assess risk of exposure because of
the widespread use and availability of ZIP codes.
9|Page

December 2014

152 ZIP codes were identified as high risk (i.e. lead risk index score ≥ 16.125). These ZIP codes include
210,176 children five years of age or younger including 183,817 AHCCCS members. 1,157 (81%) of 1,422
lead poisoning cases five years of age or younger reported from 2003 to 2012 for whom a census tract
residence could be determined resided in these ZIP codes.

Individual Risk Assessment
In addition to living in a geographically high-risk area children may be at increased risk for lead poisoning
if any of the following factors apply:





Child has a sibling or frequent playmate with EBLL.
Child is a recent immigrant, refugee, or foreign adoptee.
Child's parent or principal caregiver works professionally or recreationally with lead.
Child has a household member who uses traditional, folk, or ethnic remedies or cosmetics or
who routinely eats food imported informally (e.g., by a family member) from abroad.

ADHS recommends Arizona physicians provide an individual risk assessment questionnaire to all children
living outside a targeted ZIP code to determine if the children should receive a blood lead test. The
assessment should be given at age 12 months and again at 24 months. Individual risk assessment
questions are based on the most common exposures on a national and regional level. Validation studies
have demonstrated that adding 5 region-specific questions increases the sensitivity and negative
predictive value of the CDC questions. The CDC and ADHS recommend asking the questions found in
Appendix A (provided in both English and Spanish) as part of an individual risk assessment.

Summary of ADHS Recommendations
The Arizona Department of Health Services developed the following recommendations to identify lead
poisoned children in order to eliminate exposure and reduce the effects of lead on Arizona children:
1. Children living in targeted ZIP codes: All children living in targeted ZIP codes should have a blood
lead test at 12 and 24 months of age. Children aged 36 to 72 months should be tested if they
have not been previously tested. Refer to Appendix C for a list of the targeted ZIP codes.
2. Children living outside of the targeted ZIP codes: Children living in Arizona, but not in a targeted
ZIP code, should receive an individual risk assessment questionnaire at age 12 and 24 months of
age. Refer to Appendix A for our recommended questions.

Next Steps
ADHS conducted an analysis of the effectiveness of the lead poisoning risk index. The analysis
determined that previous methods of identifying high risk ZIP codes would have missed actual lead
poisoned children. In order to capture 80% of cases, the number of ZIP codes included in the 2014
targeted screening plan has increased since the 2013 targeted screening plan.
ADHS recognizes the list of targeted ZIP codes is fairly long. ADHS is committed to revising this list
annually. ADHS’ three year goal is to increase the utility of the targeted screening plan.
10 | P a g e

December 2014

In order to accomplish this goal, ADHS has identified 3 main objectives:
A. Improve the screening rate: 85% of children in targeted ZIP codes receive at least one blood
test before age 6
Currently Arizona screening rates for blood lead levels are low (estimates range from 25% to less
than 40%). By increasing screening rates, the predictive value of the targeted ZIP code formula
will increase.
B. Reassess the risk index annually
ADHS will reassess the indicators used in the targeted ZIP code formula by analyzing AZ lead
poisoning screening data as well as reviewing relevant literature to identify better proxies for
lead poisoning exposures. The current risk index focuses on Hispanic families and leadcontaining products from Mexico. Arizona is home to many other families with unique cultural
exposures, other than those from Mexico. ADHS will revisit the lead poisoning risk index and
eliminate a focus on Hispanic families alone and explore how to incorporate proxies for
additional cultural exposures.
All indicators were given an equal weighting of 14% at that time of the analysis except for
‘percentage of children under the age of five,’ which was weighted at 16%. The greater
weighting was chosen to prioritize the under-five year old population. When ADHS revisits the
lead poisoning risk index, the weighting strategy will also be revisited. Some proxies may be
better predictors for lead poisoning risk and as such, will be reflected in any weighting strategy
updates.
C. Reduce the number of targeted ZIP codes
The current formula identifies a long list of targeted ZIP codes, but by reassessing the indicators
used annually in conjunction with improving screening rates, ADHS will improve the targeted ZIP
code formula and produce a more streamlined (shorter) list of targeted ZIP codes.

11 | P a g e

December 2014

Appendix A: Risk Assessment Questions
English Language Individual Risk Assessment Questions:
CDC questions
1. Does your child live in or regularly visit a house that was built before 1950 (this could apply to a
home day care center or the home of a babysitter or relative)?
2. Does your child live in or regularly visit a house built before 1978 with recent or ongoing
renovations or remodeling (i.e., within the past six months)?
3. Has a sibling or playmate been diagnosed or treated for lead poisoning?
Arizona/Region-specific questions
4. Does your child live with an adult whose job or hobby involves exposure to lead (e.g., mining,
automobile repair, welding, construction, plumbing, shooting, hunting, fishing)?
5. Does your child live near an active lead smelter, battery recycling plant, or other industry likely
to release lead?
6. Has your child been in Mexico, Central America, or South America in the past year?
7. Have you ever given your child any of these home remedies: Azarcon, Alarcon, Greta, Rueda,
Pay-loo-Ah?
8. Does your child eat or drink from imported pottery or ceramic cookware?
9. Does your chid eat foods containing spices (turmeric) purchased in import stores or other
countries, or imported candies (tamarind or chili)?
10. Does your child have pica or have a habit of eating dirt or other non-food items?

Spanish Language Individual Risk Assessment Questions:
Preguntas de los Centros para el Control y la Prevención de Enfermedades
1. ¿Vive o visita regularmente su hijo en una casa construida antes de 1950 (incluyendo centros
de ciudado infantil y casas de parientes o de niñeras)?
2. ¿Vive o visita regularmente su hijoen una casa construida antes de 1978 con restauración o
remodelación reciente (es decir, en los últimos 6 meses)?
3. ¿) Tiene un hermano o amigo que ha sido diagnosticado o tratado por envenenamiento de
plomo?
Arizona: Preguntas específicas para la región
4. ¿Vive su hijo con un adulto cuyo trabajo o pasatiempo le expongan al plomo (por ejemplo, la
minería, la reparación de automóviles, la soldadura, la construcción, la plomería, el tiro al
blanco, la caza, la pesca)?
5. ¿Vive su hijo cerca de un horno activo de fundición de plomo, una planta de reciclar baterías, u
otra industria que tenga probabilidad de emitir plomo al aire ?
6. ¿ Su hijo visitado los siguientes lugares: México, América Central o América del Sur en el ano
pasado?
7. ¿Le ha dado a su hijo los siguientes remedios caseros: Azarcón, Alarcón, Greta, Rueda o Pay-looAh?
8. ¿ Su hijo come o bebe en cerámicas importadas o en vasijas u ollas de barro?
9. ¿La comida de su hijo contiene especias compradas en otros países o compradas en tiendas de
importación (por ejemplo, la cúrcuma o eltumeric), o ha comido dulces importados (por
ejemplo, los dulces con tamarindo o con chile)?
10. ¿ Suele comer su hijo sustancias sin valor nutritivo, como tierra u otras cosas que no son
comida?
12 | P a g e

December 2014

Appendix: B Clinical Algorithm
The following algorithm may be useful for clinicians in assessing an individual’s risk of exposure to lead.

13 | P a g e

December 2014

Appendix C: Targeted High-Risk ZIP Codes
List of Targeted High-Risk ZIP Codes
Sorted sequentially
85003
85006
85007
85008
85017
85018
85019
85020
85032
85033
85034
85035
85053
85119
85120
85122
85173
85192
85194
85201
85210
85212
85213
85225
85282
85283
85301
85302
85337
85338
85339
85344
85354
85356
85363
85364
85534
85539
85540
85543
85615
85617
85621
85623
85643
85646
85648
85701
85713
85714
85715
85716
85746
85750
85756
85757
86046
86047
86301
86314
86535

85009
85021
85037
85128
85202
85226
85303
85345
85365
85546
85629
85704
85719
85925
86320

List of Targeted High-Risk ZIP Codes
Sorted by county and city
County
City
Apache
Eagar
St. Johns
Dennehotso, Teec Nos Pos
Cochise
Hereford
McNeal
San Simon, Portal
Sierra Vista
Tombstone
Willcox, Ft Grant
Benson
Bisbee
Douglas
Coconino
Flagstaff
Gila
Globe
Graham
Bylas
Miami
Pima
Safford

85012
85022
85040
85131
85203
85250
85304
85347
85378
85552
85631
85705
85730
85936
86321

85013
85023
85041
85132
85204
85251
85321
85348
85392
85602
85632
85706
85735
85941
86326

85014
85028
85042
85137
85205
85254
85323
85349
85501
85603
85634
85710
85736
86004
86401

85015
85029
85043
85138
85207
85257
85326
85350
85530
85607
85635
85711
85741
86025
86409

85016
85031
85051
85139
85208
85281
85335
85353
85533
85614
85638
85712
85745
86033
86442

ZIP Codes
85925
85936
86535
85615
85617
85632
85635
85638
85643
85602
85603
85607
86004
85501
85530
85539
85543
85546
14 | P a g e

December 2014

Greenlee

La Paz
Maricopa

Thatcher
Clifton
Duncan
Morenci
Parker
Salome
Avondale
Buckeye
Chandler
El Mirage
Glendale
Gila Bend
Goodyear
Guadalupe
Laveen
Mesa
Peoria
Phoenix

Mohave
Navajo

Pima

Scottsdale
Surprise
Tempe
Tolleson
Tonopah
Youngtown
Kingman
Bullhead City
Whiteriver
Holbrook
Kayenta
Williams
Winslow
Ajo
Green Valley, Madera
Canyon, Sahuarita
Sahuarita
Sells, Pisinemo
Tucson

85552
85533
85534
85540
85344
85348
85323, 85392
85326
85225, 85226
85335
85301, 85302, 85303, 85304
85337
85338
85283
85339
85201, 85202, 85203, 85204, 85205, 85207, 85208,
85210, 85212, 85213
85345
85003, 85006, 85007, 85008, 85009, 85012, 85013,
85014, 85015, 85016, 85017, 85018, 85019, 85020,
85021, 85022, 85023, 85028, 85029, 85031, 85032,
85033, 85034, 85035, 85037, 85040, 85041, 85042,
85043, 85051, 85053,
85250, 85251, 85254, 85257
85378
85281, 85282, 85283
85353
85354
85363
86401, 86409
86442
85941
86025
86033
86046
86047
85321
85614
85629
85634
85701, 85704, 85705, 85706, 85710, 85711,
85712, 85713, 85714, 85715, 85716, 85719, 85730,
85735, 85736, 85741,
15 | P a g e

December 2014

Pinal

Santa Cruz

Yavapai

Yuma

Apache Junction
Casa Grande
Coolidge
Eloy
Florence
Kearny
Maricopa
Superior
Winkelman, Dudleyville
Oracle
San Manuel
Nogales
Tubac
Rio Rico, Nogales
Prescott
Prescott Valley
Ash Fork
Bagdad
Cottonwood
Roll
San Luis
Somerton
Wellton
Yuma

85745, 85746, 85750, 85756, 85757
85119, 85120
85122, 85194
85128
85131
85132
85137
85138
85173
85192
85623
85631
85621
85646
85648
86301
86314
86320
86321
86326
85347
85349
85350
85356
85364, 85365

16 | P a g e

December 2014

References
1) U.S. Census Bureau’s American Fact Finder. Retrieved February 2012 from
http://factfinder2.census.gov/faces/nav/jsf/pages/index.xhtml
2) Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services. Retrieved February 2012 from
www.cms.gov/MedicaidEarlyPeriodicScrn/03_StateAgencyResponsibilities.asp
3) Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services. Retrieved February 2012 from
http://www.cms.gov/medicaidearlyperiodicscrn/02_benefits.asp
4) Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. (2009). MMWR weekly: Recommendations for
Blood Lead Screening of Medicaid-Eligible Children Aged 1--5 Years: an Updated Approach to
Targeting a Group at High Risk. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Retrieved February
2012 from http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/rr5809a1.htm
5) Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. (1991). Preventing Lead Poisoning in Young
Children. Retrieved April 2014 from
http://www.cdc.gov/nceh/lead/publications/books/plpyc/chapter4.htm
6) California Department of Public Health. Retrieved April 2014 from
http://www.cdph.ca.gov/programs/CLPPB/Pages/LeadPoisoningOverview.aspx#riskfactors

17 | P a g e

December 2014