PRIP and ELHAP
Scenario Workflows
Examining Possibilities for Future Collaboration
Scenario | Structure | How it Works | Governance | Data Sharing | Strengths | Limitations |
1. Parallel Operations with Coordinated Hand-Offs | PRIP and ELHAP run separately but coordinate | PRIP finds lead issues → refers to ELHAP for remediation | Separate City/County departments | Shared database (e.g., Accela) | Easy to launch; aligns with current org chart | Risk of gaps or delays in handoffs |
2. Integrated PRIP–ELHAP Team | Joint team conducts inspections and response | Unified inspections; both habitability and lead addressed together | Shared team or interdepartmental MOU | Fully integrated inspection data | Streamlined workflow, one-stop-shop | Requires heavy cross-training, new protocols |
3. Tiered Response Model | PRIP leads, escalates serious cases to ELHAP | PRIP handles minor issues; escalates major lead cases to ELHAP | City initiates; ELHAP kicks in on trigger | Central database flags escalation points | Efficient triage; resource prioritization | Reactive rather than preventive for lead |
4. Joint Governance via Lead Hazard JPA | City + County form a Joint Powers Authority | JPA oversees both programs and funding allocations | Shared JPA board with community seats | Unified oversight and reporting | Clear accountability; joint decision-making | Takes time to form legally; requires formal agreement |
5. Full-Stack Healthy Housing Model | PRIP and ELHAP under a holistic housing health framework | Comprehensive inspections address all hazards (lead, mold, pests, etc.) | New “Healthy Housing Division” or City-County task force | Central public-facing housing health dashboard | Systems-level transformation; addresses root causes | Most complex to implement; cross-sector alignment needed |
Scenario 1: Parallel Operations
Structure:
Workflow:
Opportunities:
Yes
No
PRIP oversees inspections for all habitability issues, including lead paint
Is there a Lead Hazard?
Hazard Remediation
ELHAP Coordinates:
Lead Hazard Remediation
Case Closure:
only after habitability and lead hazard remediation is complete
Alameda Healthy Homes Submits Referrals to PRIP
Close-Out in Accela
Scenario 2: Integrated Team
Structure:
Workflow:
Opportunities:
Habitability
PRIP enforces habitability repairs
Findings are Categorized
Standard PRIP Enforcement
ELHAP Coordinates:
Automatic ELHAP Case Opening
Joint Inspection for PRIP + ELHAP
Alameda Healthy Homes Submits Referrals
Single Inspection Report Triggers both Enforcement Tracks
Lead Hazards
Scenario 3: Tiered Response
Structure:
Workflow:
Opportunities:
Yes
No
PRIP conducts frontline inspection
Is there a severe Lead Hazard?
If minor lead issues → owner required to fix (PRIP manages).
ELHAP Coordinates:
If major lead risk (children, deteriorating paint) → escalation.
Case Closure:
only after habitability and lead hazard remediation is complete
Alameda Healthy Homes Submits Escalated Referrals to ELHAP
Scenario 4
Structure:
Key Features:
Opportunities:
PRIP Coordinates
ELHAP Coordinates:
JPA between the City of Oakland and Alameda County to oversee all lead-related inspections, interventions, funding, and evaluation.
Alameda County Coordinates:
City and County appoint members to a Hazard Oversight Board
Scenario 5
Structure:
Key Features:
Opportunities:
PRIP Inspections trigger a comprehensive housing health screening
Lead
ELHAP Coordinates:
Mold
Asbestos
Code
Health
PRIP enforces habitability repairs
Alameda HH Coordinates: