LIHEAP: Program and Funding

Changes from September 18, 2008 to October 21, 2008

This page shows textual changes in the document between the two versions indicated in the dates above. Textual matter removed in the later version is indicated with ~~red strikethrough~~ and textual matter added in the later version is indicated with blue.
Order Code RL31865

The Low-Income Home Energy Assistance
Program (LIHEAP): Program and Funding

Updated September 18October 21, 2008

Libby Perl
Analyst in Housing Policy
Domestic Social Policy Division

 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
makes annual grants to states, territories, and tribestribes, and territories to operate home energy assistance
programs for low-income households. The LIHEAP statute authorizes two types of
funds: regular funds, which are allocated to all states using a statutory formula, and
contingency funds, which are allocated to one or more states at the discretion of the
Administration.
In the FY2008 Consolidated Appropriations Act (P.L. 110-161), Congress
appropriated $1.98 billion in regular LIHEAP funds, the same amount that was
allocated for regular funds in FY2007. For contingency funds, Congress appropriated
approximately $590 million in FY2008. This amount exceeds the FY2007
appropriation of $181 million by more than $400 million. On February 5, 2008, the
President released his FY2009 budget in which he requested a total of $2 billion for
LIHEAP, $1.7 billion in regular funds, and $300 million in contingency funds. The
budget proposal would provide $570 million less for LIHEAP than was provided in
FY2008.
The Administration has released FY2008 contingency funds on three occasions.
First, on January 16, 2008, it released $450 million to all states, tribes, and territories.
Of the amount distributed, $150 million was allocated to all grantees according to
their percentage allocation under the LIHEAP formula, $50 million was allocated to
11 states based on the percentage of low-income households that use heating oil, and
the remaining $250 million was distributed to 26 states on the basis of both the
percentage of low-income households that use heating oil, natural gas, or propane for
heat, and on the average temperature between November 1, 2006, and March 1, 2007.
The second distribution occurred on February 22, 2008, when the Administration
released $40 million to Alaska, Connecticut, Delaware, Maine, Massachusetts, New
Hampshire, New Jersey, New York, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, and Vermont.
States received funds if at least 20% of their low-income households use heating oil
as their primary heating fuel. Finally, on September 17, 2008, nearly $121 million
in contingency funds was distributed to all states, tribes, and territories. Of the total,
$96 million was distributed to all grantees according to their percentage allocations
under the LIHEAP formula, while the remainder was distributed to seven states
where at least 30% of low-income households use heating oil: Alaska, Connecticut,
Maine, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, Rhode Island, and Vermont.
In the 110th Congress, several bills have been introduced that would appropriate
additional funds for LIHEAP. These include identical bills introduced in the Senate
and the House entitled the Warm in Winter and Cool in Summer Act (S. 3186 and
H.R. 6427). Both bills would appropriate additional funds to LIHEAP for FY2008:
$1.265 billion for regular funds and $1.265 billion for contingency funds. In
addition, a number of bills have been introduced that would provide additional funds
for LIHEAP through various means, including penalties collected from energy
suppliers and profits from carbon allowance trading.

 Contents
Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
Recent Developments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
FY2009 LIHEAP Funding . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
FY2008 LIHEAP Funding . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
Consolidated Appropriations Act (P.L. 110-161) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
Additional LIHEAP Funding Legislation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
FY2007 LIHEAP Funding . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
Distribution of LIHEAP Contingency Funds . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
FY2008 Contingency Funds . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
FY2007 The formula by which regular funds are distributed was changed by
Congress in 1984 and is sometimes referred to as the new LIHEAP formula. The
implementation of the new formula effectively depends on the level of funds
appropriated by Congress. As a result, if appropriations for regular funds do not
exceed a certain level (about $2 billion) funds are distributed according to the
proportion of funds that each state received in FY1984; this is sometimes referred to
as the old LIHEAP formula.
States may use LIHEAP funds to help households pay for heating and cooling
costs, for crisis assistance, weatherization assistance, and services (such as
counseling) to reduce the need for energy assistance. According to the most recent
data available from HHS (for FY2005), the majority of LIHEAP funds — 55.2% —
was used to pay for heating assistance, 2.8% of funds was used for cooling aid,
17.6% of funds went to crisis assistance, and 10.6% was used for weatherization.
The LIHEAP statute establishes eligibility for households with incomes at or below
150% of poverty or 60% of state median income, whichever is higher, although states
may set lower limits. In FY2005, an estimated 34.8 million households were eligible
for LIHEAP under the federal guidelines. According to HHS, 5.3 million households
received heating or winter crisis assistance and approximately 400,000 households
received cooling or summer crisis assistance that same year.
On September 27, 2008, Congress passed a continuing resolution for FY2009,
the Consolidated Security, Disaster Assistance, and Continuing Appropriations Act
(H.R. 2638), which the President signed into law on September 30, 2008 (P.L. 110329). The law appropriated $5.1 billion for LIHEAP in FY2009, exceeding by nearly
$2 billion the FY2006 appropriation of approximately $3.2 billion, which previously
had been the highest level of funding ever appropriated for the program. Of the $5.1
billion, approximately $4.5 billion was appropriated as regular funds and $590
million as contingency funds. However, P.L. 110-329 further specified that $840
million of the regular funds was to be distributed according to the new LIHEAP
formula, while the remainder — approximately $3.6 billion — was to be distributed
according to the old LIHEAP formula. In addition, P.L. 110-329 gave states the
discretion to serve households with incomes at or below 75% of state median
income. All funds, including the contingency funds, were to be released to states,
tribes, and territories within 30 days of enactment of P.L. 110-329. On October 16,
2008, HHS announced how the funds would be distributed (see Table 3).
This report describes LIHEAP funding, current issues, legislation, program
rules, and eligibility. It will be updated as events warrant.

 Contents
Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
LIHEAP Funding and Recent Developments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
FY2009 LIHEAP Funding . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
FY2008 LIHEAP Funding . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
Consolidated Appropriations Act (P.L. 110-161) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
Additional LIHEAP Funding Legislation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
Distribution of LIHEAP Contingency Funds . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
FY2009 Contingency Funds . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
FY2008 Contingency Funds . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
LIHEAP Legislation in the 110th Congress . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
Report to Congress on Preventing Loss of Life Because of 
Extreme Indoor
 Air Temperatures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
Program Rules and Benefits . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
Federal Eligibility Standards and Grantee Responsibility . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
Kinds of Energy Assistance Available . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
Use of Funds . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
Households Served . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1211
Benefit Levels . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1312
Funds and Their Distribution . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
Regular Funds . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
Tier I . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
Tier II . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
Tier III . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
Contingency Funds . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
Leveraging Incentive and REACH Funds . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
Other Funds . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
Legislative History . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17

List of Tables
Table 1. Final FY2006 - FY2008 LIHEAP Funding and Proposed
FY2009 Funding . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
Table 2. Recent LIHEAP Funding . . . .
Table 2.
Table 3.
Table 4.

Final FY2006-FY2009 LIHEAP Funding . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
Table 3. 5
LIHEAP Heating/Winter Crisis Aid, Selected Years . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
Table 4. LIHEAP Funding by State, FY2005 to FY2008FY2006 to FY2009 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
Table 5. LIHEAP Funding: FY1982 to FY2008FY2009 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21

 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 by
Title XXVI of the Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1981 (P.L. 97-35), is a
block grant program under which the federal
 government gives states, territories, and tribestribes, and
territories annual grants to operate home energy
 assistance programs for low-income 
households. The LIHEAP statute provides for
 two types of program funding: regular 
funds and contingency funds. Regular funds
 are allotted to states according to methodsa
formula prescribed by the LIHEAP statute.1 The
 second type of LIHEAP funding, 
called contingency funds, may be released and
 allotted to one or more states at the 
discretion of the President and the Secretary of
 Health and Human Services (HHS).
The first section of this report describes appropriations of LIHEAP funds for
FY2008 and FY2007FY2009 and FY2008. It also discusses current issues and legislation related to
LIHEAP. The second section of this report discusses LIHEAP rules, including
household eligibility and how funds may be used, and presents the most recent data
available from HHS regarding household characteristics and benefit levels. Finally,
the third section discusses how each category of LIHEAP funds is distributed to
states, as well as a breakdown of funds to the states during the last several fiscal
years.

LIHEAP Funding and Recent Developments
FY2009 LIHEAP Funding
The President’s FY2009 budget proposed to fund LIHEAP at a total of $2
billion. Of this amount, $1.7 billion was proposed for LIHEAP regular funds, to be
distributed via formula to the states, tribes, and territories, and $300 million was
proposed to be allocated to the contingency fund and distributed at the discretion of
the Administration. The President’s request is approximately $570 million less than
was appropriated for LIHEAP in FY2008 (P.L. 110-161). Under the amounts
proposed by the President, the regular funds would be reduced by $280 million in
FY2009 compared to FY2008, and the contingency funds would be reduced by about
$290 million. On July 8, 2008, the Senate Appropriations Committee approved its
In FY2009, Congress appropriated $5.1 billion for LIHEAP, the most funding
that has ever been provided for the program, as part of the Consolidated Security,
Disaster Assistance, and Continuing Appropriations Act (H.R. 2638), which the
President signed into law on September 30, 2008 (P.L. 110-329). The appropriation
exceeded the President’s FY2009 budget request by $3.1 billion; the President had
requested $1.7 billion in regular funds and $300 million in contingency funds. The
appropriation also nearly doubled the $2.57 billion that Congress had provided for
the program in FY2008. Previously, the highest level of funding for LIHEAP had

1

See Section 2604(a)-(d) of the Low Income Home Energy Assistance Act (Title XXVI of
P.L. 97-35), as amended. The section is codified at 42 U.S.C. §8623(a)-(d).

 CRS-2
version of the FY2009 Departments of Labor, Health and Human Services, and
Education Appropriations Act (S. 3230). The bill would appropriate the same
amounts for LIHEAP that were appropriated in FY2008 — $1.98 billion in regular
funds and $590 million in contingency funds.been $3.16 billion, appropriated in FY2006. In that year, Congress appropriated an
additional $1 billion for LIHEAP on top of the annual appropriation (see Table 1).
Of the total amount appropriated in FY2009, $4.51 billion was allocated to
LIHEAP regular funds. The appropriations law further specified the way in which
these regular funds were to be distributed:
!

Approximately $840 million was to be distributed according to the
new LIHEAP formula. The new formula was enacted in 1984 and
allocates funds to states on the basis of the heating and cooling costs
of low-income households. For more information about the
LIHEAP formula, see the section of this report entitled “Funds and
Their Distribution.”

!

The remaining $3.67 billion was to be distributed according to the
proportion of funds that states received under the old LIHEAP
formula, which existed prior to the enactment of the new formula in
1984.

Approximately $590 million of the total $5.1 billion appropriation was allocated to
contingency funds, the same amount that Congress appropriated in FY2008.
The FY2009 Continuing Appropriations Act further specified that states could
use these FY2009 funds to serve households with incomes at or below 75% of state
median income at their discretion.2 Ordinarily, states may set eligibility for LIHEAP
assistance at the greater of 60% of state median income or 150% of poverty.3
P.L. 110-329 also required HHS to obligate all FY2009 LIHEAP funds,
including the contingency funds, within 30 days of enactment of the law. On October
16, 2008, HHS released tables showing how both LIHEAP regular and contingency
funds would be distributed to the states, tribes, and territories. In addition, HHS
announced that it would distribute FY2009 leveraging incentive and Residential
Energy Assistance Challenge (REACH) grants on the basis of FY2008 applications
submitted by states and tribes. In FY2008, Congress did not authorize funds for
leveraging incentive and REACH grants in the appropriations law. As a result, no
awards were made to grantees. For more information about this issue, see the next
section of this report, “FY2008 LIHEAP Funding.”
To see how FY2009 LIHEAP funds were allocated to the states, see Table 3 at
the end of this report.

2

HHS annually publishes state median income data in the Federal Register. For FY2009
data, see Federal Register, vol. 73, no. 44, March 5, 2008, p. 11924.

3

42 U.S.C. §8624(b)(2)(B).

 CRS-3

FY2008 LIHEAP Funding
Consolidated Appropriations Act (P.L. 110-161). On December 26,
2007, the President signed the FY2008 Consolidated Appropriations Act (P.L. 110161). The funding bill provided a total of approximately $2.57 billion for LIHEAP
(see Division G of P.L. 110-161). Of this amount, $1.98 billion was for regular
funds, the same amount appropriated in FY2007; $590 million was allocated for
contingency funds.24 The regular fund appropriation exceeded the President’s
FY2008 budget request of $1.5 billion by $480 million and his contingency fund
request of $282 million by approximately $308 million. The regular fund
appropriation in P.L. 110-161 was the same amount that was requested in the
conference agreement for the FY2008 Departments of Labor, Health and Human
Services, and Education Appropriations bill (H.R. 3043, H.Rept. 110-424), which
was vetoed by the President on November 13, 2007. For contingency funds,
however, the Consolidated Appropriations Act provided $158 million more than
would have been provided in the House and Senate conference agreement, which
would have appropriated just under $432 million. The House-passed version of H.R.
3043 contained $682 million for contingency funds, while the Senate’s substitute
version of H.R. 3043 would have provided the same level appropriated in FY2007
— $181 million.
On June 26, 2008, HHS announced that it would distribute funds that were
thought to have been allocated to leveraging incentive and REACH grants in the
FY2008 Appropriations Act as part of the regular fund formula grants. Since the
early 1990s, leveraging incentive and REACH grants have been made to states and
tribes according to their ability to obtain non-LIHEAP resources for energy assistance
(leveraging incentive grants) and for increasing the energy efficiency of low-income
households (REACH grants). These funds are discussed later in this report. In recent
years, Congress has allocated around $27 million for these two funds, an amount that
is taken out of the LIHEAP regular fund appropriation. However, in FY2008, P.L.
110-161 did not appropriate funds for leveraging incentive and REACH grants.
When HHS discovered that language to appropriate the funds was missing from the
appropriations act, it released to the states the $26.7 million that would otherwise
have been distributed as leveraging incentive and REACH grants under the LIHEAP

2
formula.
Additional LIHEAP Funding Legislation. Some Members of the Senate
attempted to add funds to the FY2008 LIHEAP appropriation on three occasions in
FY2008. The first attempt was part of the economic stimulus package (H.R. 5140),
which was considered by the Senate in early February 2008. However, the LIHEAP

4

P.L. 110-161 contained an across the board rescission of 1.747% that reduced the stated
amounts appropriated for most Departments of Labor, Health and Human Services, and
Education programs. See P.L. 110-161, Division G, Section 528. After application of the
rescission, $1.98 billion is available for regular funds and $590 million for contingency
funds. Prior to application of the rescission, the stated appropriations levels in P.L. 110-161
are $2.015 billion for LIHEAP regular funds and $596 million to contingency funds. Of the
amount appropriated for contingency funds, $250 million is designated as emergency
spending; the rescission does not apply to the $250 million in emergency funds.

 CRS-3
formula. (For information on the distributions to each state, see CRS Report
RS21605, LIHEAP: Estimated Allocations, by Libby Perl.)
Additional LIHEAP Funding Legislation. Some Members of the Senate
have attempted to add funds to the FY2008 LIHEAP appropriation on three
occasions in FY2008. The first attempt was part of the economic stimulus package
(H.R. 5140), which was considered by the Senate in early February 2008. However,
the LIHEAP 4
provisions were ultimately removed from H.R. 5140 prior to the bill’s
 passage by the 
Senate. An early Senate version of H.R. 5140, which was eventually
 signed into law 
on February 13, 2008, as the Economic Stimulus Act of 2008 (P.L.
 110-185), 
contained an additional $1 billion for LIHEAP. The funds would have
 been divided 
evenly between regular and contingency funds. This would have
 brought the total 
regular fund allocation for FY2008 to $2.48 billion and contingency
 funds to over $1 
billion. The LIHEAP provisions would have required the
 contingency funds to be 
distributed within 30 days of the law’s enactment and to be
 distributed according to the “old”
the old LIHEAP formula (see a discussion of the LIHEAP
 formula later in this 
report).
The second attempt to provide funds for LIHEAP was part of the FY2008
Supplemental Appropriations Act (H.R. 2642). In the Senate Appropriations
Committee markup, an amendment was adopted that would have provided $1 billion
for LIHEAP, with $500 million allocated as formula funds and $500 million as
contingency funds. As with the provision in the economic stimulus package, the
amendment directed that the contingency funds be distributed according to the “old”old
LIHEAP formula. However, prior to Senate passage of the bill, the language
directing how the contingency funds should be distributed was removed. As passed
by the Senate on May 22, 2008, H.R. 2642 would have appropriated $1 billion for
LIHEAP, without specifying if or how the funds would be divided. However, the
House removed the funds for LIHEAP from its version of H.R. 2642 prior to
approving the bill on June 19, 2008.
The third attempt to appropriate additional funds for LIHEAP was made through
S. 3186, the Warm in Winter and Cool in Summer Act. The bill, introduced on June
24, 2008, proposed to add more than $2.5 billion to the amounts already appropriated
for LIHEAP in FY2008. Under S. 3186, funding would have been divided evenly
between LIHEAP regular funds and contingency funds, with $1.265 billion going to
each. The bill bypassed committee consideration and went directly to the Senate
floor for a cloture vote on July 26, 2008. The cloture vote on S. 3186 failed,
however, so the Senate did not consider the bill.

FY2007 LIHEAP Funding
For FY2007, Congress appropriated $1.98 billion in regular funds and $181
million in contingency funds for LIHEAP through a year-long continuing resolution
(P.L. 110-5). This is the same amount that was appropriated for LIHEAP in the
FY2006 Departments of Labor, Health and Human Services, and Education
Appropriations Act (P.L. 109-149) as reduced by a 1% across-the-board rescission
(P.L. 109-148). The total amount appropriated in FY2007 exceeded the President’s
budget request of $1.782 billion by $380 million. Prior to the enactment of the yearlong continuing resolution, the House Appropriations Committee would have

 CRS-4
provided $1.93 billion in regular LIHEAP funds and $181 million in contingency
funds in the Departments of Labor, Health and Human Services, and Education
Appropriations Act (H.R. 5647). The Senate Appropriations Committee would have
provided $1.98 billion in regular LIHEAP funds and $181 million in contingency
funds in its version of the spending bill (S. 3708). Prior to enactment of P.L. 110-5
on February 15, 2007, three continuing resolutions provided funding for LIHEAP.3
Three FY2007 supplemental appropriations bills, each entitled the U.S. Troop
Readiness, Veterans’ Care, Katrina Recovery, and Iraq Accountability
Appropriations Act, attempted to provide additional funds for LIHEAP. The first bill
(H.R. 1591), introduced on March 20, 2007, would have provided $400 million for
LIHEAP, $200 million for regular funds and $200 million for contingency funds.
The Senate’s version of the supplemental appropriations bill (S. 965), introduced on
March 22, 2007, would have provided $640 million for LIHEAP, $320 million in
regular funds, and $320 million in contingency funds. However, in conference with
the House, the LIHEAP provisions in H.R. 1591 prevailed. On May 1, 2007, the
President vetoed H.R. 1591, and the House failed to override the veto. On May 8,
2007, another supplemental appropriations bill was introduced in the House (H.R.
2206). Like H.R. 1591, it would have provided $400 million for LIHEAP, dividing
the amount equally between regular and contingency funds. However, on May 24,
funds for LIHEAP were removed from H.R. 2206 in conference with the Senate.

Table 1. Final FY2006 - FY2008 LIHEAP Funding
and Proposed FY2009

 CRS-5

Table 1. Final FY2006-FY2009 LIHEAP Funding

State
Formula
Grants

Regular
Set-Asides
(Approx. $300,000 for technical Contingency
assistance, which is permanently
authorized in the statute)

Total

Final FY2006 Appropriationa
P.L. 109-149

1.98 billion

— 27.225 million —
leveraging incentive fund

181 million

2.161
billion
1.000
billion
3.161
billion

P.L. 109-204b

500 million

None

500 million

Total

2.48 billion

— 27.225 million —
leveraging incentive fund

681 million

— 27.225 million —
leveraging incentive fund

181 million

2.161
billion

—dNot specifiedd

590 million

2.570
billion

— 27.225 million —
leveraging incentive fund

300 million

Not specifiedNot specifiedd

590 million

5.1
billion

Final FY2007 Appropriation
P.L. 110-5

1.98 billion

Final FY2008 Appropriation
P.L. 110-161c

1.98 billion

Proposed FY2009 Funding
President’s Request

1.7 billion

S. 3230 (Senate
1.98 billion
Approps. Committee)

3

These were P.L. 109-289, P.L. 109-369, and P.L. 109-383.

2.0
billion
2.570
billion

 CRS-5
Final FY2009 Appropriation
P.L. 110-329

4.51 billion

Source: Congressional Research Service on the basis of P.L. 109-148, P.L. 109-149, P.L. 109-171,
P.L. 109-204, P.L. 110-5, P.L. 110-161, the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS),
Administration for Children and Families (ACF) FY2009 Justification of Estimates for Appropriations
Committeesand P.L. 110-329.
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.
b. 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.
c. Amounts for Department of Labor, Health and Human Services, and Education programs were
subject to a 1.747% rescission. See P.L. 110-161, Division G, Section 528. Amounts in this
table represent the amounts available after the rescission.
d. The FY2008 Consolidated Appropriations Act (P.L. 110-161) did not specify funds for the leveraging incentive
grants.

Distribution of LIHEAP Contingency Fundsdid not authorize funds for leveraging incentive
grants. As a result, funds that would otherwise have been awarded as leveraging incentive
grants were distributed to the states as part of LIHEAP regular funds. In FY2009, HHS
determined that it would award $27 million in leveraging incentive grants on the basis of
FY2008 applications.

Distribution of LIHEAP Contingency Funds
FY2009 Contingency Funds. In FY2009, Congress appropriated
approximately $590 million in LIHEAP contingency funds as part of P.L. 110-329,
the Consolidated Security, Disaster Assistance, and Continuing Appropriations Act.
The law specified that HHS must obligate the funds to states within 30 days of the
law’s enactment (September 30, 2008). On October 16, 2008, HHS announced that
it would release the contingency funds to all states, tribes, and territories — of the
$590 million, $490 million would be released to all states according to the proportion

 CRS-6
of funds that states received under the old LIHEAP formula,5 and $100 million would
be released to seven states where at least 30% of low-income households use heating
oil to heat their homes. The seven states received funds according to the proportion
of funds they received under the old LIHEAP formula weighted by their share of lowincome heating oil users. These seven recipient states were Alaska, Connecticut,
Maine, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, Rhode Island, and Vermont. For the amount
of contingency funds received by each state in FY2009, see Table 3 at the end of this
report.
FY2008 Contingency Funds. Congress appropriated just over $590 million
in LIHEAP contingency funds for FY2008 to be released at the discretion of HHS to
states according to their energy needs. The Administration has distributed
contingency funds on three occasions in FY2008. (For the total amount of funds
distributed to each state in FY2008, see Table 43.) First, on January 16, 2008, the
Administration announced the release of $450 million to all states, tribes, and
territories. The total amount was distributed in three ways.

4


!

$150 million was distributed to all states tribes and territories on the
basis of the percentage of funds that each receives under the old
LIHEAP formula.46

!

$50 million was distributed to 11 states where the percentage of lowincome households that use heating oil is 20% or more. The
allocations were based on the percentage of funds each state receives
under the old LIHEAP formula, weighted by the percentage of lowincome heating oil users in the state. The states that received a
portion of the $50 million distribution were Alaska, Connecticut,
Delaware, Maine, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New
York, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, and Vermont.

!

$250 million was distributed to 26 states where at least 60% of lowincome households use either heating oil, natural gas, or propane for
heat, and the average temperature between November 1, 2006, and
March 1, 2007, was 39° Fahrenheit or lower. Funds were distributed
on the basis of the percentage of funds each state receives under the
old LIHEAP formula, weighted by the percentage of low-income
households using heating oil, natural gas, or propane to heat their
homes. Each of the states that received funds under the $50 million
distribution, with the exception of Delaware, received a portion of

5

In 1984, Congress changed the way in which LIHEAP funds are to be allocated to the
states. This is sometimes referred to as the new LIHEAP formula. The way in which funds
were distributed to the states prior to this change in the formula is sometimes referred to as
the old LIHEAP formula. The formula is discussed in greater detail in the section of this
report entitled “Funds and Their Distribution.”
6

In each case where HHS distributed contingency funds based on the LIHEAP formula in
FY2008, grantees received the percentage of funds they receive under the “old”old LIHEAP
formula. For a discussion of the formula, see the section “Funds and Their Distribution”
later in this report.

 CRS-6
homes. Each of the states that received funds under the $50 million
distribution, with the exception of Delaware, received a portion of7
the $250 million distribution. The remaining states that received
funds were Colorado, Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Michigan,
Minnesota, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, North Dakota, Ohio,
South Dakota, Utah, Wisconsin, and Wyoming.
The second FY2008 distribution of contingency funds occurred on February 22,
2008, when the Administration released $40 million to eleven states on the basis of
heating oil usage. States received funds if at least 20% of low-income households
use heating oil as their primary heating source. The following states received funds:
Alaska, Connecticut, Delaware, Maine, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, New Jersey,
New York, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, and Vermont.
Finally, onOn September 17, 2008, the Administration released the balance of the
FY2008  FY2008
contingency funds — approximately $101 million — together with $20
 million in 
contingency funds that remained available from the FY2005 appropriation.
 Of the 
total funds released, $96 million was distributed to all states, tribes, and
territories  territories
based on the proportions of the old LIHEAP formula. The remaining $25
million  million
was distributed to seven states where at least 30% of low-income households
use  use
heating oil as their primary heating source. Funds were allocated to those seven
states based on their share of LIHEAP formula funds under the old formula, weighted 
by the share of
 households in the state using heating oil. The states that received 
funds on this basis
 were Alaska, Connecticut, Maine, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, Rhode Island,
and Vermont.
FY2007 Contingency Funds. In FY2007, Congress appropriated $181
million in LIHEAP contingency funds, and HHS released the total amount through
two separate distributions. First, on August 29, 2007, HHS announced that it would
release $50 million in contingency funds to twelve states that experienced severe heat
during the month of August. These twelve states were Alabama, Arkansas, Georgia,
Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Mississippi, Missouri, North Carolina, Oklahoma,
South Carolina, and Tennessee. The distribution was based on two factors involving
cooling degree days. A cooling degree day measures the extent to which a day’s
average temperature rises above 65°F. For example, a day with an average
temperature of 80° F results in a measure of 15 cooling degree days. States qualified
for contingency funds if they experienced at least 341 cooling degree days during the
three-week period ending August 25, 2007, and if they experienced 61 or more
excess cooling degree days compared to their 30-year norm for the same time period.
Fund distributions were weighted on the basis of the number of low-income
households in each state.
The remaining $131 million in contingency funds was released on September
27, 2007. Of the $131 million, just over $106 million went to all states, tribes, and
territories for anticipated winter heating needs. The funds were allocated on the basis
of each grantee’s share of block grant funds. The remaining $25 million was
allocated to seven states according to the percentage of low-income households that
use heating oil and according to average temperature. States qualified if at least 30%
of low-income households use heating oil and if the average temperature between
October 1, 2006, and March 31, 2007 was at or below 47° F. The seven states that

 CRS-7
received funds were Alaska, Connecticut, Maine, Massachusetts, New Hampshire,
Rhode Island, and Vermont. (See Table 4 at the end of this report for the total
amount of contingency funds allocated to each state.) Table 2 shows recent federal
funding levels for LIHEAP, including the amount of contingency funds released.

Table 2. Recent LIHEAP Funding
(dollars in millions; sums may not equal totals due to rounding)

Fiscal
Year
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008

Funds
Appropriated
Regularc Contingency
1,700
1,788
1,789
1,885
2,480
1,980
1,980

300
0
99
298
681
181
590

Contingency Funds
Distributeda
To All
To Some
Subtotal
States
States
0
100
100
200
0
200
40
59
99
250
27
277
100
580
680
106
75
181
246
365
611

Total Funds
Distributedb
Subtotal (To
Total
All States)
1,700
1,800
1,988
1,988
1,829
1,889
2,135
2,162
2,580
3,160
2,086
2,161
2,226
2,591

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 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
Hampshire, Rhode Island, and Vermont.

LIHEAP Legislation in the 110th Congress
Bills that would affect aspects of LIHEAP have been introduced in the 110th
Congress. The following list discusses many of them, but is not an exhaustive list
of LIHEAP-related legislation.
!

Two bills, H.R. 4275 and S. 2405, both entitled the Keeping
Americans Warm Act, would appropriate $1 billion for LIHEAP
contingency funds in addition to amounts otherwise appropriated in
FY2008.

!

Versions of bills in both the House and Senate, entitled the Warm in
Winter and Cool in Summer Act (S. 3186 and H.R. 6427), would
appropriate additional funds for LIHEAP for FY2008. They would
add $1.265 billion to the formula grants, for a total of $3.245 billion

 CRS-8
in FY2008, and $1.265 billion to the contingency funds for a total of
$1.855 billion.


!

The LIHEAP Equity Act (H.R. 153), would mandate that no more
than 50% of the funding provided under LIHEAP be made available
for heating purposes.

!

S. 669, the LIHEAP Emergency Reform Act, concerns contingency
funds. The bill would allow a state governor to apply to the
Secretary of Health and Human Services for certification that there
is an emergency in his or her state (as defined by the LIHEAP

 CRS-8
statute), and for an allotment of contingency funds in response to the
emergency.


!

The Home Energy Assistance Targeted for Seniors Act (H.R. 2984)
would rename LIHEAP the “Low Income and Senior Home Energy
Assistance Act” and make eligible for benefits households with
incomes at or below state median income, as long as at least 50% of
the household’s income was attributable to persons age 65 and older.
(Currently households may not have incomes above 60% of state
median income and still be eligible for LIHEAP.)

!

The Federal Price Gouging Prevention Act (H.R. 1252) would make
it illegal to charge excessive prices for various types of fuel if an
“energy emergency” is declared by the President. The illegal
practices would include selling oil, gasoline, natural gas, or
petroleum at unconscionably excessive prices; intentionally
reporting false price information; or manipulating the market.
Penalties imposed for violations of these provisions would be used
to provide LIHEAP assistance. On May 23, 2007, the bill bypassed
committee consideration and went straight to the House floor, where
it passed under suspension of the rules. A similar bill with the same
title (H.R. 6346) was introduced by the same sponsor,
Representative Bart Stupak, on June 23, 2008. The next day, a
motion to pass H.R. 6346 under suspension of the rules failed.

!

Two other bills would similarly use penalties imposed on energy
providers to fund LIHEAP. The Federal Energy Price Protection Act
(H.R. 2460) would penalize oil, gas, and petroleum suppliers for
price gouging with the fees going to LIHEAP, while the Clean,
Reliable, Efficient and Secure Energy Act of 2007 (S. 1602) would
give a portion of penalties collected from energy suppliers to
LIHEAP.

!

The Low Carbon Economy Act (S. 1766) would set greenhouse gas
emissions targets for entities such as natural gas processing plants,
electric power plants, and refineries. Under the program, these
regulated entities would trade allowances that entitle them to emit a
certain amount of greenhouse gases. A portion of the proceeds from
the auction of these allowances would be allocated to fund LIHEAP.

 CRS-9
Another bill that would seek to cap carbon emissions and devote a
portion of proceeds from the sale of allowances is the Investing in
Climate Action and Protection Act (H.R. 6186).


!

America’s Climate Security Act (S. 2191) would set up a system
under which regulated entities would trade allowances to emit
greenhouse gases. During the years 2012 to 2050, a portion of
proceeds from the auctions (20%) would be allocated to an Energy
Assistance Fund, of which 50% would be available to the LIHEAP
program. On December 5, 2007, the Senate Committee on
Environment and Public Works reported S. 2191. On May 20, 2008,

 CRS-9
S. 3036, the Lieberman-Warner Climate Security Act was
introduced in the Senate. It is identical to S. 2191, but contains
provisions to make the bill deficit neutral. The Senate debated S.
3036 in early June 2008. However, after several days of
consideration, the Senate was not able to invoke cloture on June 6,
2008. (For more information about the cap-and-trade provisions of
these bills, as well as those in S. 1766 and H.R. 6186, see CRS
Report RL33846, Greenhouse Gas Reduction: Cap-and-Trade Bills
in the 110th Congress, by Larry Parker, Brent D. Yacobucci, and
Jonathan L. Ramseur.)


!

Another bill, the Energy Security and Corporate Accountability Act
(S. 1238) would not affect LIHEAP, but would create a program for
LIHEAP-eligible households called the Low-Income Transportation
Energy Assistance Fund. The program would give funds to families
to assist in purchasing gasoline or passes for public transportation.
A similar bill in the Senate, the Low Income Gasoline Assistance
Program Act (S. 2968) would make grants to states that would then
be used to assist low-income households with the purchase of
gasoline.

!

The Consumer Reasonable Energy Price Protection Act of 2008
(H.R. 5800) would impose a windfall profits tax on the sale of oil
and natural gas. A “windfall profit” is defined by the act as an
amount that exceeds a reasonable profit as determined by a
“Reasonable Profits Board,” to be established pursuant to H.R. 5800.
Proceeds under the windfall profits tax would be allocated to
LIHEAP. Another bill, the Renewable Investment and Consumer
Protection Act (H.R. 6155), would tax stock repurchase transactions
made by oil companies and give 40% of the proceeds to LIHEAP.

Report to Congress on Preventing Loss of Life
Because of Extreme Indoor Air Temperatures
The Energy Policy Act of 2005 (P.L. 109-58) required HHS to report to
Congress on how LIHEAP “could be used more effectively to prevent loss of life
from extreme temperatures.” On February 15, 2007, HHS released a report in which
it summarized state recommendations for ways to use LIHEAP funds to prevent heat-

 CRS-10
andheatand cold-related deaths due to indoor air temperature.57 Recommendations were in
five categories:
!
!
!
!
!

7

Education and outreach;
Weatherization and energy-related home repairs;
Special assistance for vulnerable populations;


U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Administration for Children and Families,
Low Income Home Energy Assistance Program Report to Congress on: Preventing Loss of
Life Due to Extreme Indoor Temperatures, February 15, 2007.

 CRS-10
!
!

Partnerships with other social services programs and energy
providers; and
Research on the needs of, and best practices for helping, vulnerable
households.

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. LIHEAP assistance does not reduce eligibility or benefits under
other aid programs.
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. The
LIHEAP definition of “energy crisis” leaves room for each state to define the term
slightly differently, although generally, crisis assistance is provided to households
that are in danger of losing their heating or cooling due to problems with equipment,

5

U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Administration for Children and Families,
Low Income Home Energy Assistance Program Report to Congress on: Preventing Loss of
Life Due to Extreme Indoor Temperatures, February 15, 2007.

 CRS-11
receipt of a utility shutoff notice, or exhaustion of a fuel supply.68 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

8

The LIHEAP statute defines an energy crisis as “weather-related and supply shortage
emergencies and other household energy-related emergencies.” 42 U.S.C. §8622(3). For
the state definitions of “crisis” see the HHS LIHEAP Networker FY2007 compilation of
definitions, available at [http://www.liheap.ncat.org/tables/FY2007/CrisisDef2007.doc].

 CRS-11
benefits, choose how benefits are provided, and decide what agencies will administer
the program.79

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
FY2005, the most recent year for which data regarding total obligations are available,
approximately 55.2% of all LIHEAP funds were used to provide heating assistance;
all states (including the District of Columbia) provided some heating assistance.810
Nearly all states also offered crisis assistance, most of which is used for heating
needs. In FY2005, 17.6% of LIHEAP funds were used to provide crisis assistance
in 47 states. Six of these 47 states provided summer as well as winter crisis
assistance, and one state — Hawaii — provided only summer crisis assistance.9 Also
11
Also in FY2005, 2.8% of funds were used for cooling aid (offered by 13 states); 
10.6% of
 total LIHEAP funds were used for weatherization services (provided by 44 
states);
 8.1% of available funds were used for administration and planning purposes (51

6

The LIHEAP statute defines an energy crisis as “weather-related and supply shortage
emergencies and other household energy-related emergencies.” 42 U.S.C. §8622(3). For
the state definitions of “crisis” see the HHS LIHEAP Networker FY2007 compilation of
definitions, available at [http://www.liheap.ncat.org/tables/FY2007/CrisisDef2007.doc].

7
(51 states), and 1.2% of the FY2005 funds were used to offer services to reduce the
need for energy assistance (provided by 24 states).12

Households Served
In FY2005, it is estimated that 5.3 million households received LIHEAP heating
or winter crisis assistance.13 This estimate attempts to remove duplication among

9

Information regarding state LIHEAP program characteristics and contacts is available at
[http://www.liheap.ncat.org/sp.htm].

8
10

Based on state-reported total LIHEAP obligations for FY2005 of $2.224 billion. U.S.
Department of Health and Human Services, Administration for Children and Families, Low
Income Home Energy Assistance Program Report to Congress for Fiscal Year 2005, April
24, 2008, p. 14 (hereafter FY2005 LIHEAP Report to Congress).

9

Ibid., Table C-3, pp. 57-58.

 CRS-12
states), and 1.2% of the FY2005 funds were used to offer services to reduce the need
for energy assistance (provided by 24 states).10

Households Served
In FY2005, it is estimated that 5.3 million households received LIHEAP heating
or winter crisis assistance.11 This estimate attempts to remove duplication among
11

Ibid., Table C-3, pp. 57-58.

12

Ibid., p. 14.

13

U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Administration for Children and
(continued...)

 CRS-12
households that received both heating and winter crisis assistance; the estimate is
derived from the 4.9 million households that received heating assistance and the 1.3
million that received winter or year round crisis assistance in FY2005. The number
of households receiving heating or winter crisis assistance in FY2005 increased from
FY2004, when an estimated 5.0 million households were served. When LIHEAP
began in FY1983, approximately 6.8 million households received heating or winter
crisis assistance. Since that time, the number of households receiving assistance
declined generally until FY2000, reaching a low of 3.6 million recipients in FY1999.
After FY2000, the number of recipient households began increasing again. (See
Table 3.)
The same trend can be seen in the percentage of federally eligible households
that receive heating or winter crisis assistance. In FY1983, the 6.8 million
households that received funds represented 31% of federally eligible households. By
FY1999, the number of federally eligible households receiving LIHEAP heating or
winter crisis assistance had dropped to 12%. In FY2004, 14% of federally eligible
households received assistance, and in FY2005, that number increased to 15%.
The number of households receiving cooling assistance reached its high point
in FY2002, with more than half a million recipients. In FY2005, approximately
400,000 households received cooling or summer crisis assistance.1214 This estimate of
de-duplicated households is derived from the 337,000 households that received
cooling aid and the 93,000 households that received summer crisis aid in FY2005.
Also in that year, 104,000 households received weatherization assistance.1315
HHS estimates that of all households receiving LIHEAP heating assistance,
about 32% had at least one member 60 years of age or older; about 31% had at least
one member with a disability; and some 22% included at least one child five years
of age or younger.14

10

Ibid., p. 14.

11

U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Administration for Children and
Families, FY2005 LIHEAP Home Energy Notebook, May 2007, p 28 (hereafter FY2005
LIHEAP Home Energy Notebook).
12

Ibid., p. 29.

13

FY2005 LIHEAP Report to Congress, p. 19.

14

Ibid., pp. 21-22.

 CRS-1316

Benefit Levels
The constant dollar value of LIHEAP heating and winter crisis benefits has
declined, generally, from the program’s beginning, as has the portion of home heating
bills covered by LIHEAP. In FY1983, the average heating and winter crisis benefit,
measured in constant 1981 dollars, was $209. By FY1998, it had declined to $117,
and although the value of benefits went up from FY1999 through FY2001, it declined
again thereafter, and in FY2005 the average constant dollar benefit was $140.1517 (See
Table 3.) In addition, the LIHEAP heating and winter crisis benefit now covers a

13

(...continued)
Families, FY2005 LIHEAP Home Energy Notebook, May 2007, p 28 (hereafter FY2005
LIHEAP Home Energy Notebook).
14

Ibid., p. 29.

15

FY2005 LIHEAP Report to Congress, p. 19.

16

Ibid., pp. 21-22.

17

FY2005 LIHEAP Home Energy Notebook, p. 30.

 CRS-13
smaller portion of home heating bills than in earlier years. In FY2005, the LIHEAP
benefit covered 8% of the combined home heating costs of all households federally
eligible for LIHEAP, compared to 18% in FY1983.1618 This estimate includes the
heating costs of households that were eligible for LIHEAP based on the federal
guidelines, but did not receive LIHEAP assistance.
The constant dollar value of the cooling and summer crisis benefit, which is
available to a more limited number of households in far fewer states, had largely
risen from the program’s beginning until FY2002. In FY1983, the constant dollar
value of LIHEAP cooling benefits (in 1981 dollars) was $57. By FY2000 and
FY2001, the average benefit had reached $107. However, by FY2004 and FY2005,
the average cooling or summer crisis benefit had declined to $91.1719
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.1820 These include the following:
!

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).

15

FY2005 LIHEAP Home Energy Notebook, p. 30.

1618

Ibid., p. 31.

1719

Ibid., p. 30.

1820

See also CRS Report RS20761, LIHEAP and Residential Energy Costs, by Bernard Gelb.

 CRS-14

Table 32. LIHEAP Heating/Winter Crisis Aid, Selected Years
Fiscal Year
1983 1990 1993 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005
Households
Number receiving aid ( millions)
Number federally eligible (millions)
Federally eligible and receiving aid
Benefit Levels
Average benefit (nominal $)
Average benefit (constant 1981 $)a
LIHEAP Coverage
Portion of winter heating bill
covered by LIHEAP (for all
federally eligible households)b

6.8 5.8 5.6 3.9 3.6 3.9 4.8 4.4 4.8 5.0 5.3
22.2 25.4 28.4 29.1 29.0 29.4 30.4 32.7 34.5 35.4 34.8
31% 23% 20% 13% 12% 13% 16% 13% 14% 14% 15%
$225 $209 $201 $213 $237 $270 $364 $291 $312 $277 $304
$209 $147 $129 $117 $128 $140 $187 $147 $154 $132 $140

18% 15% 11%

9%

9%

11% 14% 12% NAc

8%

8%

Source: Table compiled by Congressional Research Service (CRS) on the basis of 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, FY2004 and FY2005.
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.

Funds and Their Distribution
The LIHEAP statute authorizes regular funds appropriations, which are
allocated to all states on the basis of a statutory formula, and contingency fund
appropriations, which are allocated to one or more states at the discretion of the
Administration. The statute 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 three-tier formula in the
LIHEAP statute and based on the level of funds appropriated in a given fiscal year.1921
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

19

21

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.

 CRS-15
updated data, including population and energy costs. (For more information on the
history of the LIHEAP formula, see CRS Report RL33275, LIHEAP Allocation
Rates: Legislative History and Current Law, by Libby Perl.)with minimal consideration of cooling costs, and did not provide for the use of
updated data, including population and energy costs.
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
programs,”2022 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.
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.2123 According to HHS, then, the
LIHEAP statute requires use of the old allotment percentages when funding is less
than $1.975 billion.2224 Until FY2006, funding levels for LIHEAP only twice exceeded
the $1.975 billion level, in FY1985 and FY1986. Thus, 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.2325 State
20allotment percentages may be different, however. To ensure that states receive their
22

Report of the Committee on Energy and Commerce (H.Rept. 98-139, Part 2), to
accompany H.R. 2439, May 15, 1984, p. 13.
2123

42 U.S.C. §8623(a)(2)(A).

2224

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).
2325

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
(continued...)

 CRS-16
allotment percentages may be different, however. To ensure that states receive theirappropriation level of approximately $2.0028 billion.

 CRS-16
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.2426
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).2527
Appropriated contingency funds may only be released at the discretion of HHS and
may be allocated to one or more states according to 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.2628 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 on the basis of 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
23

(...continued)
appropriation level of approximately $2.0028 billion.
24

42 U.S.C. §8623(a)(3).

25

42 U.S.C. §8621(e).

26

42 U.S.C. §8621(d).

 CRS-17
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

26

42 U.S.C. §8623(a)(3).

27

42 U.S.C. §8621(e).

28

42 U.S.C. §8621(d).

 CRS-17
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.

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 by oil
companies.2729 In addition, the Social Services Block Grant program allows states to
transfer up to 10% of funds to provide low-income home energy assistance,2830 while
the Temporary Assistance for Needy Families program gives states the discretion to
use funds for home heating and cooling costs.2931

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
and 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

27
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

29

FY2004 LIHEAP Report to Congress, p. 11. For FY2004, $2 million in oil overcharge
funds was available to one state.
2830

42 U.S.C. §1397a(d).

2931

42 U.S.C. §604(a)(1).

 CRS-18
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, inIn 2005, the Energy Policy Act (P.L. 109-58) reauthorized the program
and  and
raised the LIHEAP regular funds authorization level for FY2005 through
 FY2007 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; and 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
. The law also allowed
the Secretary of the Interior, when disposing of royalty-in-kind oil and gas royalties taken from
oil and gas leasestaken as
payment from lessees using federal land, to grant a preference for the purpose of 
providing additional
 resources to support federal low-income energy assistance programs.

 CRS-19

Table 4. LIHEAP Funding by State, FY2005 to FY2008
(dollars in millions)

State

Total Funds Distributeda
(Regular and Contingency)
FY2005
programs. (Lessees of federal land may pay royalties to the U.S. government in oil
and natural gas rather than cash payments.) However, the Government
Accountability Office issued a decision determining that the law did not give the
Interior Department sufficient authority to grant such a preference.32 Because of a
provision in existing law that the Interior Department cannot sell oil and gas obtained
as in-kind royalties for less than market price,33 the provision in P.L. 109-58 does not
allow a price preference.

32

U.S. Government Accountability Office, Department of Interior — Royalty-in-Kind Oil
and Gas Preferences, B-307767, November 13, 2006, available at
[http://www.gao.gov/decisions/appro/307767.pdf].
33

42 U.S.C. §15902(b)(3)(A).

 CRS-19

Table 3. LIHEAP Funding by State, FY2006 to FY2009
(Funding Shown for Each State Does Not Include Distributions to Tribes)
(dollars in millions)

State

Total Funds Distributeda
(Regular and Contingency)
FY2006

Alabama
Alaska
Arizona
Arkansas
California
Colorado
Connecticut
Delaware
District of Columbia
Florida
Georgia
Hawaii
Idaho
Illinois
Indiana
Iowa
Kansas
Kentucky
Louisiana
Maine
Maryland
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

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
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

FY2006


31.787
12.839
14.230
23.336
156.441
44.806
71.106
10.954
8.165
49.785
40.026
2.567
14.055
193.814
75.327
52.054
27.709
45.320
32.671
43.496
61.889
126.425
153.615
110.849
27.415
78.220
19.259
28.634
7.247
27.740
114.759
11.555
381.719
71.125
19.272
164.226
26.921
24.575
202.324
23.066
25.279
16.540

Regular Contingency
Allotment Distributed

FY2007
22.077
8.631
7.856
15.749
94.089
33.073
48.102
5.727
6.700
27.970
28.564
2.228
12.275
119.418
54.062
38.319
19.727
32.010
22.499
32.487
33.036
93.757
112.509
81.681
17.838
52.645
12.487
18.940
4.016
18.769
79.920
9.867
261.178
45.156
13.446
105.643
17.517
25.035
140.520
15.428
17.636
10.977

Total

FY2008
16.994
7.504
7.648
13.057
91.023
31.729
41.754
5.542
6.484
27.068
21.407
2.137
11.776
114.565
51.865
36.762
16.989
27.230
17.494
25.835
31.971
82.764
107.943
78.363
14.643
45.762
11.979
18.165
3.887
15.672
76.865
9.535
250.569
37.059
12.542
101.350
14.286
24.022
134.810
13.590
13.590
10.531

2.096
4.177
0.943
1.610
11.227
9.597
23.864
1.387
0.800
3.338
2.640
0.266
1.465
34.650
15.687
11.119
5.094
3.358
2.157
19.000
3.942
43.677
32.646
23.701
1.806
13.841
3.623
5.494
0.479
9.963
31.843
1.176
108.477
4.570
3.884
30.653
1.762
2.988
56.948
7.226
1.676
3.185

19.090
11.681
8.591
14.667
102.250
41.326
65.618
6.929
7.284
30.406
24.047
2.403
13.241
149.216
67.552
47.881
22.083
30.588
19.651
44.835
35.913
126.442
140.589
102.063
16.448
59.603
15.602
23.660
4.366
25.635
108.707
10.711
359.046
41.629
16.426
132.004
16.048
27.010
191.759
20.816
15.266
13.715

 CRS-20
Total Funds Distributeda
(Regular and Contingency)

State

FY2005
Tennessee
Texas
Utah
Vermont
Virginia
Washington
West Virginia
Wisconsin
Wyoming
Subtotal
b

Tribes
Territoriesc
Leveraging/REACHd
Training/Tech. Asst.e
Total

FY2006

Regular Contingency
Allotment Distributed

FY2007

Total

FY2008

28.3
46.2
14.7
13.8
41.7
39.9
18.5
75.3
5.9

47.139
84.005
22.848
20.903
75.053
39.631
24.543
99.837
8.987

33.568
46.545
15.062
14.162
40.241
40.443
18.621
73.525
5.932

27.584
45.044
14.452
11.747
38.944
38.800
17.935
70.538
5.693

3.401
5.555
4.371
7.624
4.802
4.826
2.222
21.334
1.721

30.985
50.599
18.823
19.370
43.746
43.626
20.157
91.872
7.415

2,111
20.1
2.9
27.3
0.3

3,096
32.897
3.456
27.225
0.297

2,108
23.201
2.788
27.225
0.297

1,955.498
21.530
2.681
—f
0.292

603.892 2,559.390
6.453
27.983
0.333
3.014
—
—f
—
0.292

2,162

3,160

2,161

1,980

610.678 2,590.679

Regular Contingency
Allotment Distributed

FY2008
19.090
11.681
8.591
14.667
102.250
41.326
65.618
6.929
7.284
30.406
24.047
2.403
13.241
149.216
67.552
47.881
22.083
30.588
19.651
44.835
35.913
126.442
140.589
102.063
16.448
59.603
15.602
23.660
4.366
25.635
108.707
10.711
359.046
41.629
16.426
132.004
16.048
27.010
191.759
20.816
15.266

Total

FY2009
59.649
16.333
26.844
36.497
223.989
63.474
95.783
17.384
14.653
95.013
75.141
4.652
25.632
237.236
103.602
67.803
45.308
68.353
57.196
47.649
101.296
162.916
221.244
144.528
38.937
103.541
26.075
39.558
13.643
34.112
166.690
22.919
475.409
121.051
27.299
220.588
44.572
44.640
274.925
30.123
47.702

4.182
5.100
1.882
3.213
22.402
7.877
30.104
1.364
1.596
6.662
5.269
0.531
2.924
28.443
12.877
9.127
4.188
6.702
4.305
28.644
7.868
50.499
26.862
19.455
3.604
11.361
2.974
4.512
0.957
13.624
19.083
2.347
62.240
9.121
3.114
25.162
3.521
6.009
33.469
8.420
3.345

63.832
21.433
28.726
39.711
246.391
71.352
125.887
18.748
16.249
101.675
80.410
5.182
28.556
265.679
116.479
76.929
49.496
75.055
61.502
76.293
109.164
213.414
248.106
163.982
42.541
114.902
29.049
44.070
14.599
47.737
185.773
25.266
537.649
130.172
30.413
245.750
48.092
50.650
308.394
38.544
51.047

 CRS-20
Total Funds Distributeda
(Regular and Contingency)

State

FY2006

FY2007

Regular Contingency
Allotment Distributed

FY2008

Total

FY2009

South Dakota
Tennessee
Texas
Utah
Vermont
Virginia
Washington
West Virginia
Wisconsin
Wyoming

16.540
47.139
84.005
22.848
20.903
75.053
39.631
24.543
99.837
8.987

10.977
33.568
46.545
15.062
14.162
40.241
40.443
18.621
73.525
5.932

13.715
30.985
50.599
18.823
19.370
43.746
43.626
20.157
91.872
7.415

22.921
73.723
158.110
31.646
25.568
118.084
71.568
40.584
130.096
12.640

Subtotal
Tribesb
Territoriesc
Leveraging/REACHd
Training/Tech. Asst.e

3,096
32.897
3.456
27.225
0.297

2,108
23.201
2.788
27.225
0.297

2,559
27.983
3.014
—f
0.292

4,428.898
47.403
6.070
27.000
0.300

582.230 5,011.128
7.434
54.837
0.664
6.734
—
27.000
—
0.300

3,160

2,161

2,591

4,509.672

590.328

Total

2.614
6.789
11.086
3.609
10.587
9.585
9.634
4.435
17.512
1.442

25.536
80.512
169.196
35.255
36.156
127.668
81.201
45.019
147.608
14.081

5,100

Source: Table compiled by the Congressional Research Service (CRS) using 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.
b. 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.
c. 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).
d. 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). 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.
e. 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.
f. The FY2008 Appropriations Act (P.L. 110-161) did not specify funds for leveraging incentive and
REACH grants.

 CRS-21

Table 54. LIHEAP Funding: FY1982 to FY2008FY2009
(dollars in thousands)

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
2008
2009

Regular Fundsa
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
925,000
1,065,000
1,507,408
1,475,000
1,319,204
1,000,000
1,000,000
1,000,000
1,100,000
1,100,000
1,400,000
1,400,000
1,700,000
1,900,500g, h
1,800,000g
1,782,000
1,500,000
1,700,000

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
—i
—i

Contingency Fundsa
Appropriated

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
1,980,000
1,980,000
4,509,672

—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
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
181,000
590,328
590,328

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
181,000
610,678j
590,328

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
1,800,000
1,988,300
1,888,790
2,162,050
3,160,000
2,161,000
2,590,678
5,100,000

Source: Table prepared by the Congressional Research Service (CRS) on the basis of HHS data.
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 September 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).
g. Of this amount, the President requested that $500,000 be set aside the amounts requested by the President in FY2005 and FY2006, $500,000 was to be set aside
for a national evaluation.

 CRS-22
h. In FY2005, the President’s initial budget request for LIHEAP regular funds was $1,800,000,500.
However, on November 14, 2004, the President submitted a budget amendment to Congress,
requesting $1,900,000,500 for LIHEAP regular funds.

 CRS-22
i. LIHEAP is unauthorized in FY2008 and FY2009.
j. Of the contingency funds distributed in FY2008, $20 million came from funds appropriated in the
FY2005 Departments of Labor, Health and Human Services, and Education Appropriations Act
(P.L. 108-447). Contingency funds in P.L. 108-447 were made available until expended.

 