Order Code RL31865
CRS Report for Congress
Received through the CRS Web
The Low-Income Home Energy Assistance
Program (LIHEAP): Program and Funding
Updated April 6September 26, 2006
Libby Perl
Analyst in Social Legislation
Domestic Social Policy Division
Congressional Research Service ˜ The Library of Congress
The Low-Income Home Energy Assistance Program
(LIHEAP): Program and Funding
Summary
The Low-Income Home Energy Assistance program (LIHEAP), established in
1981 (P.L. 97-35), is a block grant program under which the federal government
gives states and other jurisdictions annual grants to operate home energy assistance
programs for low-income households. For FY2006, Congress twice appropriated
funds for LIHEAP. First, Congress appropriated approximately $2.161 billion, of
which $1.98 billion is regular funds (allotted to all states) and $181 million is
emergency contingency funds (allotted to one or more states at the Administration’s
discretion). The funds were appropriated in the Departments of Labor, Health and
Human Services, and Education Appropriations Act (P.L. 109-149), and were then
subject to a 1% across-the-board rescission in the Department of Defense
Appropriations Act (P.L. 109-148).
Congress added funds to LIHEAP for FY2007 in the Deficit Reduction Act of
2005, P.L. 109-171, enacted February 8, 2006; Congress then made the funds
available for FY2006 through S. 2320, which the President signed into law on March
20, 2006 (P.L. 109-204). The Deficit Reduction Act had appropriated $1 billion for
LIHEAP for FY2007 — $250 million for regular funds and $750 million for
contingency funds. However, P.L. 109-204 changed the allocation of funds — $500
million for regular funds and $500 million for contingency funds — in addition to
making them available for FY2006. Thus, a total of $3.161 billion has been
appropriated was appropriated
for LIHEAP for FY2006, of which $2.48 billion isfor regular funds and
$681 million is for
contingency funds.
The President’s budget proposesproposed $1.782 billion for LIHEAP in FY2007, all of
which would be allocated to regular funds. On March 16, 2006, the Senate voted in
favor of the FY2007 Budget Resolution, S.Con.Res. 83. As part of the Budget
Resolution, Senator Jack Reed introduced an amendment, S.Amdt. 3074, to add
$3.318 billion to LIHEAP funds, bringing the total assumed for LIHEAP in FY2007
to $5.1 billion. The amendment passed by a vote of 51-49.
On March 24, 2006, the Administration released $500 million in contingency
funds to 25 states based on average temperature and type of energy sources used by
low-income households. The Administration had previously released $100 million
in FY2006 contingency funds to all states, the District of Columbia, and the
territories on January 5, 2006. In FY2005, the Administration released $277.25
million of the $298 million in available contingency funds. The remainder of the
FY2005 funds remains available until expended. (See Table 2.)
In FY2003, the most current year for which data is available, some 4.8 million
households received LIHEAP heating/winter crisis assistance, with an average
benefit of $312, compared with an estimated 4.4 million households in FY2002.
More than 493,000 households received cooling aid in FY2003, with an average
benefit of $148, down from 570,000 in FY2002June 20, 2006, the House
Appropriations Committee reported H.R. 5647, the Departments of Labor, Health
and Human Services, and Education Appropriations Act for FY2007, which would
provide $1.93 billion in regular LIHEAP funds and $181 million in contingency
funds. The Senate Appropriations Committee’s version of the Appropriations Act
(S. 3708) would provide $1.98 billion in regular funds and $181 million in
contingency funds.
The Administration has made three contingency fund distributions. The most
recent occurred on September 12, 2006, when just under $80 million was distributed
to 14 states for winter heating needs. In two previous distributions, the
Administration released $600 million in contingency funds: of this amount, $500
million went to 25 states on March 24, 2006, and on January 5, 2006, $100 million
went to all states, the District of Columbia, and the territories. Approximately $21
million in contingency funds remains available. (See Table 2.)
In FY2004, the most current year for which data is available, some 5.0 million
households received LIHEAP heating/winter crisis assistance, with an average
benefit of $277, compared with an estimated 4.8 million households in FY2003.
Approximately 308,000 households received cooling aid in FY2004 and 88,000
received summer crisis assistance (compared to 493,000 and 71,000 in FY2003).
The average cooling/summer crisis benefit was $192. This report will be updated as
legislative or program activities warrant.
Contents
Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
Recent Developments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
FY2006 LIHEAP Funding . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
FY2007 Funding . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
LIHEAP Contingency Funds . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
Energy Act Reauthorizes LIHEAP Through FY2007 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 67
LIHEAP Legislation in the 109th Congress . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 78
Program Rules and Benefits . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
Federal Eligibility Standards and Grantee Responsibility . . . . . . . . . . . 8
Kinds of Energy Assistance Available . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 89
Use of Funds . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 89
Households Served . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
Benefit Levels . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 910
Funds and Their Distribution . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1112
Regular Funds . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1112
Contingency Funds . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1314
Leveraging Incentive and REACH Funds . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1314
Other Funds . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
Legislative History . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1415
Issues . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1516
LIHEAP Formula . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1516
List of Tables
Table 1. Final FY2005 and FY2006 LIHEAP Funding,
and Proposed FY2007 Funding . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45
Table 2. Recent LIHEAP Funding . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 67
Table 3. LIHEAP Heating/Winter Crisis Aid, Selected Years . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1011
Table 4. LIHEAP Funding by State, FY2003 to FY2006 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1516
Table 5. LIHEAP Funding: FY1982 to FY2007 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1718
The Low-Income Home Energy
Assistance Program (LIHEAP):
Program and Funding
Introduction
The Low-Income Home Energy Assistance program (LIHEAP), established in
1981 by Title XXVI of P.L. 97-35, is a block grant program under which the federal
government gives states, territories, and tribes annual grants to operate home energy
assistance programs for low-income households. For FY2006, Congress first
appropriated $2.161 billion to the program, which includesincluded a 1% across-the-board
rescission as mandated by the Department of Defense Appropriations Act (P.L. 109148). On March 20, 2006, the President signed P.L. 109-204, which made an
additional $1 billion available for LIHEAP in FY2006, $500 million for regular
funds, and $500 million for contingency funds.
In FY2003FY2004, the most current year for which data could be obtained from the
U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), an estimated 4.85.0 million
households received help meeting heating costs (i.e., heating assistance and/or
winter/year-round crisis assistance).1 In FY2003 more than 493FY2004, approximately 308,000 households
received cooling assistance, and over 7188,000 received summer crisis aid.2
Approximately 111 Approximately
112,000 households received weatherization assistance through
LIHEAP in FY2003FY2004.
Recent Developments
FY2006 LIHEAP Funding. Congress appropriated a total of $3.161 billion
to LIHEAP for FY2006 in two separate laws. The Departments of Labor, Health and
Human Services, and Education Appropriations Act, P.L. 109-149, allocated $2
billion for regular funds to be distributed to all states, and $183 million as emergency
contingency funds, which may be distributed at the discretion of the Secretary of
HHS. After a 1% across-the-board rescission in the Department of Defense
Appropriations Act, P.L. 109-148, these amounts were reduced to $1.98 billion and
1
U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Low Income Home Energy Assistance
Program: Report to Congress for FY2003. (Hereafter referred to as LIHEAP Report to
Congress for FY2003.)
$181 million.3 The contingency funds remain available through September 30, 2006.
Because funds were not appropriated until the end of December 2005, Congress
1
U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, LIHEAP Office.
2
The amount of overlap between households that received cooling aid and summer crisis
aid is not known; thus an estimated number of households that received aid related to
cooling (comparable to those receiving aid with heating costs) is not available.
CRS-2
$181 million.3 The contingency funds remain available through September 30, 2006.
Because funds were not appropriated until the end of December 2005, Congress
3
HHS makes proportionate cuts in the individual budget authorities within LIHEAP —
regular funds, contingency funds, Leveraging Incentive and REACH grants, and training and
technical assistance — in order to comply with rescission requests.
CRS-2
passed three continuing resolutions to fund LIHEAP prior to the passage of P.L. 109149.4
Congress made available an additional $1 billion for LIHEAP in S. 2320, which
the President signed into law on March 20, 2006 (P.L. 109-204). Senator Olympia
Snowe introduced S. 2320 on February 16, 2006. It proposed to shift funds originally
appropriated to LIHEAP for FY2007, in the Deficit Reduction Act of 2005 (P.L. 109171), to FY2006. P.L. 109-171 had appropriated $1 billion for LIHEAP for FY2007
— $250 million for regular funds and $750 million for contingency funds. On March
March 2, 2006, the Senate began to debate S. 2320, and voted 66 to 31 to waive the Budget
Budget Act. The Senate then passed an amendment by Senator John Kyl (S.Amdt.
2899) to
distribute the entire $1 billion as regular block grant funds. The bill was further
further amended on March 7, when the Senate voted in favor of Senator Snowe’s
amendment to allocate $500 million to regular funds and $500 million to contingency
funds (S.Amdt. 2913). The Senate voted in favor of the bill that same day. Then, on
March 16, the House also voted in favor of S. 2320, and the President signed the bill
on March 20. On March 24, the Administration distributed the entire $500 million
in contingency funds to 25 states based on average temperature and the energy
sources used by low-income households.
Due to high anticipated heating costs for the winter of 2005-2006,5 Congress
made a number of efforts to appropriate additional funds to LIHEAP for FY2006.
Initially, the President’s FY2006 budget proposed a total of $2 billion for LIHEAP,
of which $1.8 billion was requested for regular funds. Out of the regular fund
amount, $500,000 would have been reserved for a “feasibility study” to “identify
options for a thorough and objective evaluation” of the program.6
3
In previous years, HHS has made proportionate cuts in the individual budget authorities
within LIHEAP — regular funds, contingency funds, Leveraging Incentive and REACH
grants, and training and technical assistance — in order to comply with rescission requests.
In the Departments of Labor, Health and Human Services and Education
appropriations bill (H.R. 3010), the House Appropriations Committee (H.Rept. 109143) recommended $1.985 billion in LIHEAP funding. However, this proposal was
amended on the House floor to add $22 million, bringing the House-approved
FY2006 LIHEAP funding level in H.R. 3010 to $2.007 billion. All of these funds
would have been made available for regular funds. The Senate Appropriations
4
P.L. 109-77 funded programs through November 18, 2005, P.L. 109-105 provided funding
through December 17, 2005, and P.L. 109-128 provided funding through December 31,
2005.
5
Energy Information Administration, “Short-Term Energy Outlook at Winter Fuels
Outlook,” December 6, 2005, available at [http://www.eia.doe.gov/pub/forecasting/steo/
oldsteos/dec05.pdf]. The Short-Term Energy Outlook is updated monthly.
6
The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Administration for Children and
Families (ACF) Justification of Estimates for Appropriations Committees, FY2006, p. B16B-18) also appears to assume that $27.5 million of these regular funds will be set aside for
Leveraging Incentive and REACH Option grants. Although the statute [42 U.S.C. 8621(d)]
provides a separate authorization for Leveraging Incentive funds, Congress has not used this
authority to appropriate funds. Instead, as instructed by Congress (typically in the
conference report), HHS has set aside leveraging money from the regular funds
appropriation and, as permitted in the statute out of this set-aside, it has reserved 25% for
REACH grants [42 U.S.C. 8626b(b)- authority for FY1996-FY1999].
CRS-3
In the Departments of Labor, Health and Human Services and Education
appropriations bill (H.R. 3010), the House Appropriations Committee (H.Rept. 109143) recommended $1.985 billion in LIHEAP funding. However, this proposal was
amended on the House floor to add $22 million, bringing the House-approved
FY2006 LIHEAP funding level in H.R. 3010 to $2.007 billion. All of these funds
would have been made available for regular funds. The Senate Appropriations
Committee (S.Rept. 109-103) recommended a total of $2.183 billion in LIHEAP
funds. Of this amount, $1.883 billion would have been available for regular funds,
out of which $500,000 would have been made available for the program evaluation
feasibility study (as requested by the President), and $27.5 million would have been
set-aside for Leveraging Incentive grants. The remaining $300 million would have
been available for contingency purposes.
When H.R. 3010 reached the Senate floor, four Senators proposed amendments
that would have added funds to LIHEAP in addition to the amounts provided in
S.Rept. 109-103. Senator Judd Gregg introduced two amendments to increase the
regular funds appropriation to $3.159 billion (S.Amdt. 2290 and S.Amdt. 2253).
Senator Jack Reed proposed to increase total LIHEAP funding to $5.1 billion
(S.Amdt. 2194). Finally, Senators Ben Nelson and Thomas Carper proposed to
increase the regular funds appropriation to $3.483 billion (S.Amdt. 2274). None of
the amendments passed, and the Senate approved the amounts in S.Rept. 109-103 in
a vote on October 27, 2005.
The first conference report for H.R. 3010 allocated a total of $2.183 billion for
LIHEAP (H.Rept. 109-300), of which $2 billion was allocated for regular funds and
$183 million for contingency funds. Of the $2 billion in regular funds, $27.5 million
was provided for Leveraging Incentive grants. On November 17, 2005, the House
failed to pass H.Rept. 109-300. After another conference, the second conference
report (H.Rept. 109-337) contained the identical amount of funding for LIHEAP.
The House approved H.Rept. 109-337 on December 14, 2005; the Senate approved
it on December 21, 2005. On December 30, the President signed the bill into law as
P.L. 109-149.
Two additional bills contained provisions that would have provided funding for
LIHEAP in FY2006. First, the conference report for the Department of Defense
appropriations bill (H.R. 2863, H.Rept. 109-359) would have appropriated an
additional $2 billion for LIHEAP for FY2006, of which $1.5 billion would have gone
to contingency funds, and $500 million would have gone to regular funds. However,
the additional LIHEAP funds were removed from H.Rept. 109-359 along with a
provision to allow drilling for oil in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge (ANWR),
when, on December 21, 2005, the Senate failed to vote in favor of cloture on H.Rept.
109-359. The provision to allow for oil drilling prevented the cloture vote, and,
according to the sponsor of the ANWR provision, Senator Ted Stevens, LIHEAP
funding was tied to oil drilling. He stated that future proceeds from ANWR would
have paid for the $2 billion allocation to LIHEAP, and “unless ANWR is back in [the
bill], there is not money for LIHEAP....”7 As a result, when the Senate removed the
7
Congressional Record, December 19, 2005, pp. S13991-S13992.
CRS-4
ANWR provision in order to ensure the bill’s passage, funding for LIHEAP was also
removed from the bill (S.Con.Res. 74).
A second provision to fund LIHEAP was present in the Emergency
Supplemental Appropriations Act for Defense, the Global War on Terror, and
Hurricane Recovery, H.R. 4939. The House Appropriations Committee adopted an
amendment by Representative David Obey, as modified by Representative Ralph
7
Congressional Record, December 19, 2005, pp. S13991-S13992.
CRS-4
Regula, that would have made available in FY2006 funds for LIHEAP that were
appropriated for FY2007 in the Deficit Reduction Act of 2005 (P.L. 109-171).
Representative Obey’s amendment would have made the entire $1 billion in the
Deficit Reduction Act available for FY2006, while Representative Regula’s
amendment made only the $750 million in contingency funds available for FY2006.
The House passed H.R. 4939, with the LIHEAP provision, on March 16. The Senate
Appropriations Committee subsequently struck the LIHEAP language due to the
enactment of P.L. 109-204 (S.Rept. 109-230).
FY2007 Funding. In his FY2007 budget, the President would provide $1.782
billion for LIHEAP, all of which would be allocated to regular funds. On March 16,
2006, the Senate voted in favor of the FY2007 Budget Resolution, S.Con.Res. 83.
As part of the Budget Resolution, Senator Jack Reed introduced an amendment,
S.Amdt. 3074, to add $3.318 billion to LIHEAP funds, bringing the total amount
assumed in the resolution for LIHEAP in FY2007 to $5.1 billion. The amendment
passed by a vote of 51-49.
Table 1 On June 20, 2006, the House Appropriations Committee
reported H.R. 5647, the Departments of Labor, Health and Human Services, and
Education Appropriations Act for FY2007, which would provide $1.93 billion in
regular LIHEAP funds and $181 million in contingency funds. The Senate
Appropriations Committee reported its version of the spending bill (S. 3708) on July
20, 2006. The Senate bill would provide $1.98 billion in regular LIHEAP funds and
$181 million in contingency funds.
Table 1, below, shows LIHEAP funding for FY2005 and FY2006, and proposed
funding for FY2007.
CRS-5
Table 1. Final FY2005 and FY2006 LIHEAP Funding,
and Proposed FY2007 Funding
Regular
State formula
grants
Set-asides
Contingencya
TOTAL
— $27.5 million —
leveraging incentive
(authorized by conference
report language)
$298 million
$2.182
billion
— $27.5 million —
leveraging incentive
(authorized by conference
report language)
$181 million
$2.161
billion
($300,000 for technical
assistance, which is permanently
authorized in the statute)
Final FY2005 Appropriation
P.L. 108-447
$1.885Contingency
TOTAL
$181 million
$2.161
billion
Final FY2006 AppropriationbAppropriationa
P.L. 109-149
$1.98 billion
CRS-5
P.L. 109-204c
— $27.5 million —
leveraging incentive
(authorized by conference
report language)
P.L. 109-204b
$500 million
None
$500 million
$1.0
billion
Total
$2.48 billion
— $27.5 million —
$681 million
$3.161
billion
Proposed FY2007
President’s
Request
$1.782
billion
— $27.225 million —
leveraging incentive (this
amount is assumed in
Administration budget
documents)
$0
1.782
billion
House
Appropriations
Committee
$1.93 billion
None
$181 million
$2.111
billion
Senate
Appropriations
Committee
$1.98 billion
— $27.225 million —
leveraging incentive fund
$181 million
$2.161
Source: Congressional Research Service based on P.L. 108-447109-148, P.L. 109-148149, P.L. 109-149171, P.L.
109-171, P.L. 109-204, and 204, H.R. 5647, S. 3708, and the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), Administration
Administration for Children and Families (ACF) FY2007 Justification of Estimates for Appropriations Committees.
a. Contingency funds appropriated in FY2005 received the formal budget designation of “emergency”
funds. For FY2006, only the Senate recommended this formal designation for $300 million of
its total funding.
b
Committees.
a. Under the Department of Defense Appropriations Act (P.L. 109-148), discretionary spending in
FY2006 was reduced by 1% through an across-the-board rescission. The amounts in P.L. 109149 include the rescission.
cb. The funds made available for FY2006 in P.L. 109-204 were originally appropriated for FY2007 in
the Deficit Reduction Act of 2005, P.L. 109-171. Congress shifted the funds to FY2006 in P.L.
109-204.
LIHEAP Contingency Funds. On January 5, 2006, the Administration
released $100 million in contingency funds, its first distribution for FY2006. The
The Administration released contingency
funds on three occasions in FY2006. In its first distribution, on January 5, 2006, the
Administration released $100 million. The funds were disbursed to all states, the
District of Columbia, and the territories using
the regular block grant allocation,
weighted by the percentage of low-income
households in each state that use natural
gas, heating oil, and propane for heat. On
March 24, 2006, the Administration
CRS-6
released an additional $500 million in
contingency funds to 25 states. States
receiving funds must have experienced an
average winter temperature of 40 degrees
Fahrenheit or lower, and at least 60% of
low-income households in the state must
have used natural gas, heating oil, or
propane to heat their homes. The
Administration then distributed funds to those
states that met these threshold
requirements using the percentage of low-income
households heating their homes
with natural gas, heating oil, and propane, the
percentage of funds received under the
block grant allocation, and average
temperature. (For a breakdown of funds, see Table 5.) Approximately $81 million
in FY2006 contingency funds remains available for distribution. In addition,
approximately $21 million in FY2005 contingency funds remain available until
temperature. The third distribution of funds
occurred on September 12, 2006, when the Administration released $80 million to
14 states to help pay heating costs for the upcoming winter. States were eligible if
they experienced an average temperature of 47 degrees Fahrenheit or lower between
October 5, 2005, and March 31, 2006, and at least 15% of low-income households
used heating oil as their primary heating source. (For a breakdown of funds, see
Table 5.) Approximately $21 million from the FY2005 contingency fund
appropriation remains available until expended (P.L. 108-447).
In FY2005 the Administration released contingency funds four times. On three
occasions, December 23, 2004, January 31, 2005, and March 1, 2005, the
Administration distributed a total of $250 million to all states in response to higher
home energy costs, especially for heating oil and propane. The first two distributions
totaled $100 million each, and the third totaled $50 million. In each case, half of the
contingency amount was distributed to the states based on the same formula used to
distribute regular LIHEAP funds, and the remaining half was distributed based
CRS-6
primarily on that formula but with certain adjustments made to ensure that extra
funds would be received by states with the greatest share of low-income households
using heating oil or propane. In early September, the Administration released $27.25
million to states affected by Hurricane Katrina. Alabama received $2 million,
Florida received $1.5 million, Louisiana received $12 million, and Mississippi
received $11.5 million. The funds may be used to pay for energy costs, the costs of
transportation to shelters for those whose health is endangered due to lack of access
to cooling, utility reconnections, and repairs to furnaces, insulation, and air
conditioners.
Table 2, below, shows recent federal funding levels for LIHEAP, including the amount
amount of contingency funds released.
CRS-7
Table 2. Recent LIHEAP Funding
(Dollars in millions; sums may not equal totals due to rounding)
Fiscal
year
Funds appropriated
Regularc
Contingency funds
distributeda
Contingency
To
all
states
To
some
states
Total funds
distributedb
Subtotal
Subtotal
(to all
states)
TOTAL
2002
1,700
300
0
100
100
1,700
1,800
2003
1,788
0
200
0
200
1,988
1,988
2004
1,789
99
40
59
99
1,829
1,889
c
2,162c
3,080160
2005
1,885
298
250
27.25
277.25
2,135
2006
2,480
681
100
500
600580
680
2,580
Source: Tables prepared by the Congressional Research Service (CRS).
a. The amount of contingency funds appropriated in a fiscal year may differ from the amount of
contingency funds that are distributed in that fiscal year for two reasons: First, the LIHEAP
statute gives the Administration discretion to release (or not release) any of the available
contingency funding. Further, these funds, as directed by the Congress in its appropriations
language, may be available for release in one or more years.
b. Regular funds, all of which are included in both of the Total Funds Distributed columns, include
all regular funding distributed by formula to the states, the tribes, and the District of Columbia,
as well as set-asides for the territories, leveraging incentive grants, REACH grants, and technical
assistance (with total set-asides of approximately $30 million). The “Subtotal to all states”
column includes all regular funds plus any contingency funds that were distributed to all states;
the “Total” column includes all regular funds plus any contingency funds that were distributed
to one or more states.
c. Regular LIHEAP funds are made available to states on a quarterly basis (October, January, April,
and July). However, states may specify what percentage of their total allotment they wish to
receive in each quarter, and many states receive all, or the great majority of, their LIHEAP funds
in the first two quarterly disbursements.
Energy Act Reauthorizes LIHEAP Through FY2007. The Energy Policy
Act of 2005 (P.L. 109-58) reauthorized LIHEAP for FY2005-FY2007. The law was
signed by the President on August 8, 2005. With regard to LIHEAP, P.L. 109-58:
CRS-7
!
sets the regular funds authorization level for the program at $5.1
billion in each of FY2005-FY2007 (LIHEAP regular funding
authorization was set at $2 billion for FY2004);
!
allows the Secretary of the Interior, when disposing of in-kind oil
and gas royalties taken from oil and gas leases, to grant a preference
for the purpose of providing additional resources to support federal
low-income energy assistance programs;
!
authorizes state energy assistance offices, or those they contract
with, to provideuse LIHEAP assistance to purchase renewable fuels as
part part
of providing this aid;
CRS-8
!
requires the Department of Energy to report to Congress on the use
of renewable fuels in providing aid under LIHEAP; and
!
requires HHS (within one year of the bill’s enactment) to report to
Congress on how LIHEAP “could be more effectively used to
prevent loss of life from extreme temperatures.”
LIHEAP Legislation in the 109th Congress. At least ten House and
Senate bills introduced in the 109th Congress would provide funding for LIHEAP by
increasing federal revenues from the oil and natural gas industries. The methods of
obtaining funds include imposing windfall profits taxes on the oil and/or natural gas
industries, suspending oil and natural gas royalty relief, repealing tax subsidies to the
oil and gas industries, and imposing fines and penalties on those companies and
individuals who participate in price gouging in the sale of fuels.8 Another bill, H.R.
4318, would allow federal funds to be used for natural gas leasing on the outer
continental shelf, with a portion of royalty proceeds to fund LIHEAP. As of March
September 2006, each of these eleven bills remains in committee.
Two bills introduced in the House propose to amend certain aspects of LIHEAP.
H.R. 1210, introduced by Representative Anthony Weiner, seeks to expand access
to the program for seniors by raising the maximum federal income eligibility limit
to 100% of the state median income — provided that at least 50% of that household’s
income was attributable to an individual aged 65 or older. (Current law sets the
maximum federal income eligibility for households at 60% of the state median
income, or 150% of the federal poverty level, whichever is greater.) H.R. 108,
introduced by Representative Gene Green, would mandate that no more than 50% of
the funding provided under LIHEAP could be made available for heating purposes.
Both bills were referred to the Committees on Energy and Commerce, and Education
and the Workforce.
8
Among those bills introduced are H.R. 3664, H.R. 3710, H.R. 3936, H.R. 4248, H.R.4263,
H.R. 4276, H.R. 4420, H.R. 4449, H.R. 4479, and S. 1981.
CRS-8
Program Rules and Benefits
Federal LIHEAP requirements are minimal and leave most important program
decisions to the states, the District of Columbia, the territories, and Indian tribes and
tribal organizations (collectively referred to as grantees) who receive federal funds.
The federal government (HHS) may not dictate how grantees implement
“assurances” that they will comply with general federal guidelines.
Federal Eligibility Standards and Grantee Responsibility. Federal law
limits LIHEAP eligibility to households with incomes up to 150% of the federal
poverty income guidelines (or, if greater, 60% of the state median income). States
may adopt lower income limits, but no household with income below 110% of the
poverty guidelines may be considered ineligible. States may separately choose to
make eligible for LIHEAP assistance any household of which at least one member
is a recipient of Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF), Supplemental
Security Income (SSI), Food Stamps, or certain needs-tested veterans’ programs.
8
Among those bills introduced are H.R. 3664, H.R. 3710, H.R. 3936, H.R. 4248, H.R.4263,
H.R. 4276, H.R. 4420, H.R. 4449, H.R. 4479, and S. 1981.
CRS-9
Within these limits, grantees decide which, if any, assistance categories to
include, what income limits to use, and whether to impose other eligibility tests. The
statute gives priority for aid to households with the greatest energy needs or cost
burdens, especially those that include disabled individuals, frail older individuals, or
young children. Federal standards require grantees to treat owners and renters
“equitably,” to adjust benefits for household income and home energy costs, and to
have a system of “crisis intervention” assistance for those in immediate need.
LIHEAP assistance does not reduce eligibility or benefits under other aid programs.
Federal rules also require outreach activities, coordination with the Department of
Energy’s Weatherization Assistance Program, annual audits and appropriate fiscal
controls, and fair hearings for those aggrieved. Grantees decide the mix and dollar
range of benefits, choose how benefits are provided, and decide what agencies will
administer the program.9
Kinds of Energy Assistance Available. Funds are available for four types
of energy assistance to eligible households:
!
!
!
!
help paying heating or cooling bills;
low-cost weatherization projects (e.g., window replacement or other
home-energy related repair; limited to 15% of allotment unless a
grantee has a waiver for up to 25%);
services to reduce need for energy assistance (e.g., needs assessment,
counseling on how to reduce energy consumption; limited to 5% of
allotment); and
help with energy-related emergencies (winter or summer crisis aid).
Use of Funds. The majority of LIHEAP funding is used to offset home
heating costs. In FY2003, the most recent year in which data regarding total spending
is available, approximately 72% of all LIHEAP funds were used to
provide heating
assistance or crisis aid related primarily to heating needs; all states
9
Information regarding state LIHEAP program characteristics and contacts is available at
[http://www.liheap.ncat.org/sp.htm].
CRS-9
(including the
District of Columbia) provided some heating assistance, and nearly all
also offered
crisis aid related to heating needs. In that same year, 3.5% of funds were
used for
cooling/summer crisis aid; just 15 states offered cooling assistance and only
six six
offered summer crisis aid. Also in FY2003 10.5% of total LIHEAP funds were
used used
for weatherization services (provided by 46 states); 8.2% of available funds
were were
used for administration and planning purposes (51 states), and 1% of the
FY2003 FY2003
funds were used to offer services to reduce the need for energy assistance
(provided
by 21 states).10
Households Served. Since the LIHEAP program began in the early 1980s,
both the percentage of eligible households served and the absolute number of households
households receiving heating/winter crisis assistance have generally declined.
However, in
FY2001 FY2003 and FY2004 both figures increased somewhat before dropping again in FY2002. (See
Table 3 below.) In FY2002, the number of households receiving cooling aid appears
to have risen well above the half-million mark for the first time in program history.
States reported that in FY2003 approximately 4.4 million households received
assistance with heating payments; 493,694, to 4.8 million
9
Information regarding state LIHEAP program characteristics and contacts is available at
[http://www.liheap.ncat.org/sp.htm].
10
Based on state-reported total LIHEAP expenditures for FY2003 (including federal and any
supplemental non-federal funding) of $2.112 billion. LIHEAP Report to Congress for
FY2003, p. 14.
CRS-10
and 5.0 million recipients. (See Table 3 below.) The number of households
receiving cooling assistance reached its high point in FY2002, with more than half
a million recipients. However, in FY2003 and FY2004, the number of recipients fell
below that number.
States reported that in FY2004, approximately 4.6 million households received
assistance with heating payments; 308,000 received cooling aid; approximately 1.1
million received winter/year-round crisis aid; 71,36088,000 received summer crisis aid; and
111112,000 received weatherization assistance. Because many households may receive
more than one kind of LIHEAP assistance, a total, unduplicated number of
households assisted is not available. However, these data are used to estimate that
some 4.85.0 million households received heating assistance or heat-related crisis aid in
FY2003FY2004.11
The Census Bureau’s 2003 Annual Social and Economic Supplement indicates
that among all households receiving LIHEAP heating assistance, about 36% had at
least one member 60 years of age or older; about 48% had at least one disabled
member; and some 23% included at least one child five years of age or younger.
These same census data showed that a minority of households receiving LIHEAP
heating assistance also received other kinds of federal aid: an estimated 12%
received TANF; 24% received SSI; and 26% lived in rent-subsidized or public
housing.12
Benefit Levels. The constant dollar value of LIHEAP heating/winter crisis
benefits declined from the program’s beginning through FY2000. In FY2001 it
peaked sharply, before declining again in FY2002. In FY2002 the average household
LIHEAP heating/winter crisis benefit was $291 (compared to $364 in FY2001), and
in FY2003, it rose to $312. The average cooling benefit, which is available to a more
limited number of households in far fewer states, had largely risen, until FY2002,
10
Based on state-reported total LIHEAP expenditures for FY2003 (including federal and any
supplemental non-federal funding) of $2.112 billion. LIHEAP Report to Congress for
FY2003, p. 14.
11
LIHEAP Report to Congress for FY2003, p. 19.
12
Ibid., pp. 19-21.
CRS-10
when it fell sharply. In FY2003 the average cooling aid benefit was $148, compared
to $136 in FY2002, and down from $219 in FY2001 and $228 in FY2000.13until FY1998 — in FY1983, the
average benefit was $209 dollars, and by FY1998 it was $117. Although the value
of benefits went up from FY1999 through FY2001, in FY2004 the average constant
dollar benefit was down to $132. In nominal dollars, the average heating/winter
crisis benefit fell from $312 in FY2003 to $277 in FY2004. The average nominal
cooling/summer crisis benefit, which is available to a more limited number of
households in far fewer states, had largely risen until FY2002, when it fell sharply
to $145 from $211 in FY2001. In FY2003, this benefit stayed approximately the
same, at $148, and in FY2004 it increased to $192.13
11
Department of Health and Human Services, LIHEAP Office.
12
LIHEAP Report to Congress, FY2003., pp. 19-21.
13
Department of Health and Human Services, FY2004 LIHEAP Home Energy Notebook, p.
30. In constant (1981 dollars) the average cooling/summer crisis benefit was worth $57 in
FY1983, $107 in both FY2000 and FY2001, $70 in FY2002, $80 in FY2003, and $91 in
FY2004.
CRS-11
Table 3. LIHEAP Heating/Winter Crisis Aid, Selected Years
Fiscal year
Households
Number receiving
aid (in millions)
Number federally
eligible (in millions)
Federally eligible
and receiving aid
Benefit Levels
Average benefit
(nominal dollars)
Average benefit
(constant 1981
dollars)a
Costs Offset
Portion of winter
heating bill covered
by LIHEAP (for all
federally eligible
households)b
Portion of
household income
required for home
heating (for
LIHEAP-recipient
households)
1983
1990
1993
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
6.8
5.8
5.6
3.9
3.6
3.9
4.8
4.4
4.8
5.0
22.2
25.4
28.4
29.1
29.0
29.4
30.4
32.7
34.5
35.4
31%
23%
20%
13%
12%
13%
16%
13%
14%
14%
$225
$209
$201
$213
$237
$270
$364
$291
$312
$277
$209
$147
$129
$117
$128
$140
$187
$147
$154
$132
18%
15%
11%
9%
9%
11%
14%
12%
NAc
3.3%
3.3%
4.7%
3.6%
4.9%
1.1%
1.0%
1.7%
1.3%
NAc
Before receiving LIHEAP benefit
8.3%
4.5%
4.7%
3.4%
8%
Before receiving LIHEAP benefit
8.3% 4.5% 4.7% 3.4% 3.3% 3.3% 4.7% 3.6% 4.9% 4.8%
After receiving LIHEAP benefit
2.6%
2.0%
2.4%
1.3 2.4% 1.3% 1.1% 1.0% 1.7% 1.3%
NAc
2.7%
Source: Table compiled by Congressional Research Service (CRS) based on information provided
by or included in the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Administration for Children and
Families, Office of Community Services, Division of Energy Assistance, LIHEAP Home Energy
Assistance Notebooks for FY1998, FY2000, FY2001, FY2002, FY2003, and FY2004 and FY2003.
a. The constant dollars are based on the 1981 value of the benefit (using the CPI-U index).
b. These percentages represent the estimated portion of combined home heating costs for all
households federally eligible for LIHEAP that was offset by LIHEAP heating/winter crisis
assistance.
c. HHS did not make FY2003 data for these trends available.
The LIHEAP benefit now covers a smaller portion of home heating bills than
in earlier years, 8% in FY2004 compared to 18% in FY1983. And while the portion
of household income required for home heating by LIHEAP-recipient households
before receiving the LIHEAP benefit is less than when the program began, the
portion of a recipient household’s budget required for home heating after receiving
the LIHEAP benefit is slightly more in FY2004 than it was in FY1983 (2.7%
compared to 2.6%). In recent years, leading up to FY2004, the percentage of a
household’s budget required to pay for heating post-benefit had been in the single
digits. (See Table 3.)
CRS-12FY2003 data for these trends are not yet available.
13
Ibid., pp. 21-22. The combined average cooling/summer crisis benefit level for FY2003
was $163, up from $145 in FY2002. However, for FY2001 this average benefit amount was
$211, and for FY2000 it was $206. In constant (1981 dollars) the average cooling/summer
crisis benefit was worth $57 in FY1983, $107 in both FY2000 and FY2001, $70 in FY2002,
and approximately $80 in FY2003.
CRS-11
Although LIHEAP benefits now cover a smaller portion of home heating bills
than in earlier years, the portion of household income required for home heating by
LIHEAP-recipient households is less than when the program began. LIHEAP
recipient households also spend less of their income on heating needs than they did
when the program began. After taking into account their LIHEAP benefit, LIHEAPrecipient households spent an average of 1.3% of their total income for heating in
FY2002 compared to 2.6% in FY1983. (See Table 3.)
Apart from federal funding levels, a variety of factors help determine to what
extent LIHEAP is able to meet its stated goal of assisting low-income households in
meeting their home energy needs.14 These include —
!
!
!
the cost of energy for a given household (influenced by energy price
fluctuations and variation in kinds of fuels used);
the amount of energy consumed (influenced by severity of the
weather, energy efficiency of housing, and expected standards of
comfort); and
the number of eligible households (influenced by population size
and health of the economy).
Funds and Their Distribution
The LIHEAP statute authorizes regular funds appropriations, which are
allocated to all states based on a statutory formula, and contingency fund
appropriations, which are allocated to one or more states at the discretion of the
Administration. It also authorizes a smaller amount of funds for incentive grants to
states that leverage non-federal resources for their energy assistance programs.
Regular Funds. Regular funds are distributed to states according to a threetier formula in the LIHEAP statute and based on the level of funds appropriated in
a given fiscal year.15 The three-tier formula is the result of changes to the LIHEAP
statute in 1984 through the Human Services Reauthorization Act (P.L. 98-558). Prior
to the changes in P.L. 98-558, LIHEAP allotments to the states were based largely
on home heating needs with minimal consideration of cooling costs, and did not
provide for the use of updated data, including population and energy costs.16
The new distribution formula provides that in determining state allotments the
Department of Health and Human Services shall use “the most recent satisfactory
data available” and consider home energy costs of low-income households (not
simply all households, as was previously the case). These changes to the calculation
of state allotments mean that some states will receive a smaller percentage share of
regular funds, while some will receive a larger share. In order to offset the losses to
certain states resulting from the formula change, and “prevent severe disruption to
14
See also CRS Report RS20761, LIHEAP and Residential Energy Costs, by Bernard Gelb.
15
States are defined to include the District of Columbia. Indian tribes receive funds out of
state allotments that are proportionate to their share of LIHEAP-eligible households in the
state. Before state allotments are made, the statute provides that at least one-tenth (but not
more than one-half) of 1% of the total appropriation must be set aside for energy assistance
in American Samoa, Guam, the Northern Mariana Islands, Puerto Rico, and the U.S. Virgin
Islands.
16
For more information on the history of the LIHEAP formula, see CRS Report RL33275,
Low-Income Home Energy Assistance Program (LIHEAP) Allocation Rates: Legislative
History and Current Law, by Julie Whittaker and Libby Perl.
CRS-12
data available” and consider home energy costs of low-income households (not
simply all households, as was previously the case). These changes to the calculation
of state allotments mean that some states will receive a smaller percentage share of
regular funds, while some will receive a larger share. In order to offset the losses to
certain states resulting from the formula change, and “prevent severe disruption to13
programs,”17 Congress implemented two “hold harmless” provisions in P.L. 98-558
to prevent states from losing too much funding. This resulted in the three-tier current
law formula, which is described in more detail below.18
Tier I. The Tier I formula is used to allocate funds when the total LIHEAP
regular fund appropriation is less than $1.975 billion. Neither hold harmless
provision applies at the Tier I level, and HHS allocates funds according to the
allotment percentages used under the pre-1984 formula. The old formula is used
because the amount of appropriated funds required to trigger the new formula is
$1.975 billion. The LIHEAP statute stipulates that for FY1986 and succeeding years,
no state shall receive less money than it would have received in FY1984 had the
LIHEAP funding in that year been $1.975 billion.19 According to HHS, then, the
LIHEAP statute requires use of the old allotment percentages when funding is less
than $1.975 billion.20 FundingUntil FY2006, funding levels for LIHEAP have only twice exceeded the
the $1.975 billion level, in FY1985 and FY1986. Thus, since 1987, states have
from FY1987 through
FY2005, states continued to receive the same allotment percentages they received
under the previous
LIHEAP formula.
Tier II. For appropriations above $1.975 billion and up to $2.25 billion, the Tier
II rate applies, and HHS uses the formula enacted in 1984 to calculate state
allotments. Under the Tier II formula, a hold harmless level applies, and no state may
receive less funding than it would have received under the Tier I distribution rate as
it was in effect for FY1984, assuming a $1.975 billion appropriation.21 State
allotment percentages may be different, however. To ensure that states receive their
hold harmless levels of funding, those states that gain the most funding under the
new formula must have their percentage share of funds ratably reduced to bring other
states up to the hold harmless level.22
17
Report of the Committee on Energy and Commerce (H.Rept. 98-139, Part 2), to
accompany H.R. 2439, May 15, 1984, p. 13.
18
For more information on the formula and the percentage share of funds a state would
receive at various levels of funding, see CRS Report RS21605, Low-Income Home Energy
Assistance Program (LIHEAP): Formula and Estimated Allocation Rates, by Julie
Whittaker and Libby Perl.
19
42 U.S.C. §8623(a)(2)(A) (2003).
20
U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Low Income Home Energy Assistance
Program: Report to Congress for FY1987, p. 133. The statutory provision that provides
for use of the old formula is 42 U.S.C. §8623(a)(3) (2003).
21
Since this language was enacted, Congress further provided that HHS could use regular
LIHEAP funds appropriations for Training and Technical Assistance (P.L. 99-425). It also
authorized Leveraging Incentive Grants (P.L. 101-501) and the REACH option (P.L. 103252) — both of which it generally funds out of regular LIHEAP funds. These debits on the
regular funds account were not in place for FY1984. Because they affect the level of regular
funds available for state grant allotments by a little more than $25 million, it is possible but
not certain that HHS would not implement the newer formula before a regular funds
appropriation level of approximately $2.0028 billion.
CRS-13
new formula must have their percentage share of funds ratably reduced to bring other
states up to the hold harmless level.22
22
42 U.S.C. §8623(a)(3) (2003).
CRS-14
Tier III. The Tier III formula applies to funding levels at or above $2.25 billion.
The Tier III rate uses the Tier II methodology to distribute funds, but adds a second
hold-harmless requirement, a hold harmless rate. States that would receive less than
1% of a $2.25 billion appropriation must have their funds allocated using the rate that
would have been used at a hypothetical $2.14 billion appropriation (if this rate is
greater than the calculated rate at $2.25 billion). In both the Tier II and Tier III rates,
a state will not be allocated less funds than the state received under the Tier I
distribution as it was in effect in FY1984 (had the appropriation level been $1.975
billion).
Contingency Funds. The statute currently provides an annual authorization
of $600 million for LIHEAP contingency funds (contingency funds are authorized
indefinitely).23 Appropriated contingency funds may only be released at the
discretion of HHS and may be allocated to one or more states based on their needs.
The statute authorizes the appropriation of contingency funds “to meet the additional
home energy assistance needs of one or more States arising from a natural disaster
or other emergency.” The term “emergency” is defined in the LIHEAP statute to
include a natural disaster; a significant home energy supply shortage or disruption;
significant increases in the cost of home energy, home energy disconnections,
participation in public benefit programs, or unemployment; or an “event meeting
such criteria as the [HHS] Secretary may determine to be appropriate.”
Leveraging Incentive and REACH Funds. In 1990, P.L. 101-501 amended
the program statute to provide a separate funding authorization of $50 million ($30
million if regular funds appropriated are under $1.4 billion) for incentive grants to
states that leverage non-federal resources for their LIHEAP programs.24 Such
resources might include negotiated lower energy rates for low-income households or
separate state funds. States are awarded incentive funds in a given fiscal year based
on a formula that takes into account their previous fiscal year success in securing
non-federal resources for their energy assistance program. In 1994 (P.L. 103-252) the
statute was further amended to provide that of any incentive funds appropriated, up
to 25% may be set aside for the Residential Energy Assistance Challenge Option
(REACH). Under the REACH option states may be awarded competitive grants for
their efforts to increase efficiency of energy usage among low-income families and
to reduce those families’ vulnerability to homelessness and other health and safety
risks due to high energy costs. The funding authorization for Leveraging Incentive
and REACH grants is separate from regular funds, and the programs were not
reauthorized in P.L. 109-58. In practice, however, Congress has funded these
initiatives at $22 million to $30 million with dollars set-aside out of annual regular
fund appropriations.
22
42 U.S.C. §8623(a)(3) (2003).
23
42 U.S.C. §8621(e) (2003).
24
42 U.S.C. §8621(d) (2003).
CRS-14
Other Funds. States are allowed to carry over unused funds from a previous
fiscal year (limited to 10% of funds awarded a state). A diminishing amount of
money may also be available from previously settled claims of price control violation
23
42 U.S.C. §8621(e) (2003).
24
42 U.S.C. §8621(d) (2003).
CRS-15
by oil companies.25 Finally states have the authority to transfer funds to LIHEAP
from certain other federal block grants (including TANF).
Legislative History
Since it was created by the Low Income Home Energy Assistance Act of 1981
(Title XXVI of P.L. 97-35), the LIHEAP program has been reauthorized or amended
seven times. The legislation and some of the significant changes made are briefly
discussed in the following paragraphs.
In 1984, P.L. 98-558, established a new formula by which regular LIHEAP
funds are to be distributed in every year (after FY1985) in which regular
appropriations exceed $1.975 billion. This level of funding was exceeded in FY1986
but has not been reached in any year since thenand again in FY2006.
In 1986, P.L. 99-425 extended the program with few changes. In 1990, P.L.
101-501 created the Incentive Program for Leveraging Non-Federal Resources and
authorized a July to June program year (or forward funding) for LIHEAP to allow
state program directors to plan for the fall/winter heating season with knowledge of
available money. This program year language was subsequently removed, although
the statute now states that money appropriated in a given fiscal year is to be made
available for obligation in the following fiscal year. Congress last provided advance
appropriations for LIHEAP in the FY2000 appropriations cycle.
In 1993, P.L. 103-43 extended the authorization of LIHEAP for one year but
made no other changes. In 1994 (P.L. 103-252) Congress stipulated that LIHEAP
benefits and outreach activities target households with the greatest home energy
needs (and costs), and it enacted a separate and permanent contingency funding
authorization of $600 million for each fiscal year. The 1994 law also established the
competitive REACH grant option. In 1998, P.L. 105-285 authorized annual regular
funding for each of FY2002-FY2004 at $2 billion and made explicit a wide variety
of situations under which HHS is authorized to release LIHEAP contingency funds.
Finally, in 2005 the Energy Policy Act (P.L. 109-58) reauthorized the program
and raised the LIHEAP regular funds authorization level to $5.1 billion. It also
explicitly permitted the purchase of renewable fuels as part of providing LIHEAP
assistance; required the Department of Energy to report on use of renewable fuels in
provision of LIHEAP aid; required HHS to report (within one year of the
legislation’s enactment) on ways that the program could more effectively prevent loss
of life due to extreme temperatures; and allowed the Secretary of the Interior, when
disposing of in-kind oil and gas royalties taken from oil and gas leases, to grant a
preference for the purpose of providing additional resources to support federal lowincome energy assistance programs.
25
LIHEAP Report to Congress, FY2003, p. 11. For FY2002, $3.3 million in oil overcharge
funds was available to two states.
CRS-1516
Issues
LIHEAP Formula. The Energy Policy Act of 2005 requires HHS to report to
Congress on how LIHEAP “could be used more effectively to prevent loss of life
from extreme temperatures.” Neither the act nor the conference report directs how
HHS should fulfill this requirement. The requirement that such a report be made was
first included in House legislation (H.R. 1644) in the 108th Congress and, according
to the accompanying committee report, was intended to “assist the [HHS] Secretary
in developing a more accurate formula allocation methodology” to better meet the
home energy assistance needs of “vulnerable populations.” At the time, the House
Energy Committee report asserted that any formula developed should use the best
statistical data and models now available; be a simple, easy-to-understand sciencebased mechanism that considers state-level expenditures for low-income home
heating and cooling needs; and include annually updated, state-level heating and
cooling degree day and fuel price information.26
Table 4. LIHEAP Funding by State, FY2003 to FY2006
(Dollars in millions)
State
TOTAL funds distributeda
(regular and contingency)
FY2003
Alabama
Alaska
Arizona
Arkansas
California
Colorado
Connecticut
Delaware
District of Columbia
Florida
Georgia
Hawaii
Idaho
Illinois
Indiana
Iowa
Kansas
Kentucky
Louisiana
Maine
Maryland
Massachusetts
26
$16.1
7.8
7.2
12.3
86.1
30.2
43.8
5.8
6.3
25.9
20.3
2.0
11.8
109.6
50.2
35.5
16.1
26.1
16.5
28.6
32.1
86.1
FY2004
$15.4
7.5
6.9
11.8
82.4
28.9
40.2
5.3
6.2
24.5
19.4
1.9
11.1
104.5
47.3
33.5
15.4
24.6
15.8
25.1
30.8
80.4
Regular Contingency
TOTAL
allotmentb distributedc
FY2005
$19.9
10.1
7.7
13.5
91.7
32.4
46.8
6.2
6.7
29.6
22.5
2.2
12.2
117.2
53.9
38.9
17.4
28.1
29.8
30.6
34.2
91.9
FY2006
$31.129
8.738
13.994
22.765
152.032
31.704
47.809
10.141
7.852
49.529
39.170
2.555
13.673
145.959
53.980
36.762
26.786
44.347
32.010
25.835
58.499
82.764
$0.658
3.1074.101
0.236
0.571
4.409
13.102
17.224
0.27223.297
0.813
0.314
0.256
0.856
0.012
0.382
47.855
21.347
15.291
0.923
0.972
0.661
10.852
1.51217.661
3.390
43.661
$31.787
11.84412.839
14.230
23.336
156.441
44.806
65.033
10.41371.106
10.954
8.165
49.785
40.026
2.567
14.055
193.814
75.327
52.054
27.709
45.320
32.671
36.687
60.01143.496
61.889
126.425
U.S. Congress, House Energy and Commerce Committee, Energy Policy Act of 2003:
Report to Accompany H.R. 1644, 108th Congress, 1st sess., H.Rept. 108-65, Part 1, p. 145.
CRS-1617
TOTAL funds distributeda
(regular and contingency)
State
FY2003
Massachusetts
Michigan
Minnesota
Mississippi
Missouri
Montana
Nebraska
Nevada
New Hampshire
New Jersey
New Mexico
New York
North Carolina
North Dakota
Ohio
Oklahoma
Oregon
Pennsylvania
Rhode Island
South Carolina
South Dakota
Tennessee
Texas
Utah
Vermont
Virginia
Washington
West Virginia
Wisconsin
Wyoming
Subtotal
d
Tribes
Territoriese
Leveraging/REACHf
Training/Tech. Asst.g
TOTAL
FY2004
Regular Contingency
TOTAL
allotmentb distributedc
FY2005
FY2006
86.1
104.9
77.5
13.8
43.8
11.9
17.4
3.7
16.9
78.7
9.1
260.1
37.5
12.6
98.1
13.6
23.8
136.7
14.2
13.4
10.4
26.4
42.5
13.8
12.6
39.1
37.7
17.4
69.5
5.5
80.4
105.0
71.5
13.2
41.7
11.2
16.6
3.5
15.2
74.5
8.7
243.4
33.6
12.4
98.4
13.0
21.8
130.9
13.2
12.3
9.6
24.9
40.7
14.0
11.4
37.5
35.4
17.4
64.3
5.2
91.9
112.5
84.0
27.4
48.1
12.8
19.0
4.0
18.3
83.9
9.9
277.9
40.6
14.0
104.7
14.7
25.0
145.5
15.1
14.6
11.6
28.3
46.2
14.7
13.8
41.7
39.9
18.5
75.3
5.9
82.764
108.028
78.363
26.793
59.541
14.224
21.102
7.112
18.197
77.346
11.031
250.543
67.810
14.298
122.259
26.228
24.059
134.810
15.780
24.867
12.227
46.363
82.421
16.806
13.639
71.259
38.885
23.818
70.538
6.644
34.487
45.587
32.487
0.622
18.679
5.035
7.532
0.135
6.562
32.154
0.524
105.399
1.2539.543
37.413
0.524
131.176
3.315
4.974
41.967
0.693
0.516
56.245
5.74067.514
7.286
0.412
4.313
0.776
1.584
6.042
4.914
1.3467.264
3.794
0.745
0.725
29.300
2.342
117.251
153.615
110.849
27.415
78.220
19.259
28.634
7.247
24.759
109.500
11.555
355.942
69.06327.740
114.759
11.555
381.719
71.125
19.272
164.226
26.921
24.575
191.055
21.520202.324
23.066
25.279
16.540
47.139
84.005
22.848
18.553
72.60520.903
75.053
39.631
24.543
99.837
8.987
Subtotal
Tribesd
Territoriese
Leveraging/REACHf
Training/Tech. Asst.g
$1,939
19.3
2.5
27.3
0.3
$1,840
19.0
2.5
27.3
0.3
$2,111
20.1
2.9
27.3
0.3
$2,423
26.135
3.321
27.225
.297
$593.901
5.964673.063
6.762
0.135
0.0
0.0
$3,017
32.099096
32.897
3.456
27.225
.297
TOTAL
$1,988
$1,889
$2,162
$2,480
$600
$3,080679.96
$3,160
Source: Table compiled by the Congressional Research Service (CRS) based on U.S. Department
of Health and Human Services (HHS) data.
a. The totals shown in these columns include regular fund allocations to states (net of the direct
awards to tribes) and any contingency funds awarded to the state in that year. In FY2003 the
regular funds appropriation was $1.788 billion and HHS distributed $200 million in
contingency funds to all states (for higher fuel costs). In FY2004 the regular funds
appropriation was $1.789 billion and HHS distributed $99.4 million in contingency funds to
CRS-17
b.
c.
d.
e.
f.
g.
all states (because of higher fuel costs — with a greater share of the funding awarded to 19
states, including the District of Columbia, that also experienced extreme cold). In FY2005,
the regular funds appropriation was $1.885 billion, and HHS distributed $250 million to all
states, and $27.25 million to four states (Alabama, Florida, Louisiana and Mississippi) after
Hurricane Katrina.
b. Includes 1% rescission in P.L. 109-148. LIHEAP funds are released on a quarterly basis.
c. This column shows the amount of FY2006 contingency funds released. The total available
contingency funds includes $20.75 million in FY2005 contingency funds, $181 million
appropriated in P.L. 109-149, and $500 million in P.L. 109-204.
CRS-18
d. This funding is made directly available to or for tribes but is reserved out of a given state’s
allotment amount. As prescribed in the statute, the tribal set-aside from a state gross
allotment is based on tribal households in that state.
e. The statute provides that HHS must set-aside not less then one-tenth of 1% and not more than onehalf of 1% for use in the territories (American Samoa, Guam, Puerto Rico, Northern Mariana
Islands, and the U.S. Virgin Islands).
f. The statute provides a separate funding authorization for competitive grants under the leveraging
incentive program (designed to encourage states to increase non-federal support for energy
assistance). It also provides that up to 25% of any leveraging funds made available may be
reserved for competitive REACH grants (for state efforts to increase efficient use of energy
among low-income households and to reduce their vulnerability to homelessness and other
problems due to high energy costs). The Congress has in recent years stipulated that a certain
portion of the LIHEAP regular funds be set aside for leveraging grants and, of this amount,
HHS has reserved 25% for REACH grants.
g. The statute provides that HHS may reserve up to $300,000 for making grants or entering into
contracts with states, public agencies, or private nonprofits that provide training and technical
assistance related to achieving the purposes of the LIHEAP program.
Table 5. LIHEAP Funding: FY1982 to FY2007
(Dollars in thousands)
Regular Fundsa
Fiscal
year
1982
1983
1984
1985
1986
1987
1988
1989
1990
1991
1992
1993
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
President’s
request
$1,400,000
1,300,000
1,300,000
1,875,000
2,097,765
2,097,642
1,237,000
1,187,000
1,100,000
1,050,000
1,025,000
1,065,000
1,507,408
1,475,000
1,319,204
1,000,000
1,000,000
1,300,000
1,400,000
1,400,000
1,400,000
1,400,000
1,700,000
1,800,500g
1,800,000g
1,782,000
Authorized
$1,875,000
1,875,000
1,875,000
2,140,000
2,275,000
2,050,000
2,132,000
2,218,000
2,307,000
2,150,000
2,230,000
ssanb
ssanb
2,000,000
2,000,000
2,000,000
2,000,000
2,000,000
ssanb
ssanb
2,000,000
2,000,000
2,000,000
5,100,000
5,100,000
5,100,000
Contingency Fundsa
Appropriated
$1,875,000
1,975,000
2,075,000
2,100,000
2,100,000
1,825,000
1,531,840
1,383,200
1,443,000
1,415,055
1,500,000
1,346,030
1,437,402
1,319,202
900,000
1,000,000
1,000,000
1,100,000
1,100,000
1,400,000
1,700,000
1,788,300e
1,789,380
1,884,799
2,480,000
—
Appropriated
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
195,180
300,000
595,200
600,000
600,000
180,000
420,000
300,000
300,000
900,000
600,000
300,000
0
99,410
297,600
681,000
—
Distributed
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
195,180
0
0
300,000
100,000
180,000
215,000
160,000
175,299
744,350c
455,650
100,000d
200,000f
99,410
277,250
679,960
—
TOTAL
Distributed
$1,875,000
1,975,000
2,075,000
2,100,000
2,100,000
1,825,000
1,531,840
1,383,200
1,443,000
1,610,235
1,500,000
1,346,030
1,737,402
1,419,202
1,080,000
1,215,000
1,160,000
1,275,299
1,844350c
1,855,650
CRS-18
Regular Fundsa
Fiscal
year
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
President’s
request
1,400,000
1,400,000
1,700,000
1,800,500g
1,800,000g
1,782,000
Authorized
2,000,000
2,000,000
2,000,000
5,100,000
5,100,000
5,100,000
Contingency Fundsa
Appropriated
1,700,000
1,788,300e
1,789,380
1,884,799
2,480,000
—
Appropriated
300,000
0
99,410
297,600
681,000
—
Distributed
100,000d
200,000f
99,410
277,250
600,000
—
TOTAL
Distributed
1,800,000
1,988,300
1,888,790
2,162,050
3,080
1,800,000
1,988,300
1,888,790
2,162,050
3,160,000
—
Source: Table prepared by the Congressional Research Service (CRS) based on HHS data.
CRS-19
a. Amounts listed under the Regular Funds heading are for regular funding only. In 1994, Congress
enacted a permanent $600 million annual authorization for contingency funding. As shown,
however, before this authorization contingency funds were sometimes made available.
b. Such sums as necessary.
c. President Clinton released $400 million of these FY2000 contingency funds in late Sept. 2000
making it effectively available to states in FY2001.
d. These funds were distributed out of the total FY2002 contingency appropriation (P.L. 107-116).
With the end of FY2002, the remaining $200 million of these contingency funds expired.
e. The final FY2003 appropriations act (P.L. 108-7) included $1.688 billion in new regular funds and
converted into regular funds $100 million of remaining contingency funds originally
appropriated in FY2001 (P.L. 107-20).
f. These funds were distributed out of contingency dollars appropriated as part of the FY2001
supplemental (P.L. 107-20). That law provided that the funds were “available until
expended.” Congress subsequently converted some of these dollars into regular funds (see
tablenote e).
g. Of this amount, the President requested that $500,000 be set aside for a national evaluation.