Order Code RL31865.
The Low-Income Home Energy Assistance
Program (LIHEAP): Program and Funding
Updated October 21, 2008
Libby Perl
Analyst in Housing Policy
Domestic Social Policy Division
May 6, 2009
Congressional Research Service
7-5700
www.crs.gov
RL31865
CRS Report for Congress
Prepared for Members and Committees of Congress
c11173008
.
The Low-Income Home Energy Assistance Program
(LIHEAP): Program and Funding
Summary
The Low- Income Home Energy Assistance program (LIHEAP), established in
1981 as part of the
Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1981 (P.L. 97-35), is a block grant program under which
the federal government
makes annual grants to states, tribes, 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. 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 in cases of emergency as defined by the LIHEAP statute.
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 usedthe Department of Health and
Human Services (HHS), in FY2006, 49.6% of funds went to pay for heating assistance, 2.83.6% of
funds was used for cooling aid,
17.68% of funds went to crisis assistance, and 10.60% was used for
weatherization.
The LIHEAP statute establishes federal 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 FY2005FY2006, an estimated 34.84 million households were eligible
for LIHEAP
under the federal guidelines. According to HHS, 5.35 million households
received heating or
winter crisis assistance and approximately 400500,000 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. 110329110-329). 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 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
Benefit Levels . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
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.
Table 2.
Table 3.
Table 4.
Final FY2006-FY2009 LIHEAP Funding . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
LIHEAP Heating/Winter Crisis Aid, Selected Years . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
LIHEAP Funding by State, FY2006 to FY2009 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
LIHEAP Funding: FY1982 to FY2009 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
The Low-Income Home Energy
Assistance Program (LIHEAP):
Program and Funding
Introduction
The Low-Income Home Energy Assistance program (LIHEAP), established 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, tribes, 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 a
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
FY2009 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
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
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.4 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
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-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 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
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.
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
Not specifiedd
590 million
2.570
billion
Not 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
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, and 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 did 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 3.) 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.
!
$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.6
!
$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 LIHEAP
formula. For a discussion of the formula, see the section “Funds and Their Distribution”
later in this report.
CRS-7
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.
On September 17, 2008, the Administration released the balance of the 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
based on the proportions of the old LIHEAP formula. The remaining $25 million
was distributed to seven states where at least 30% of low-income households 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.
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
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.
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 heatand cold-related deaths due to indoor air temperature.7 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,
receipt of a utility shutoff notice, or exhaustion of a fuel supply.8 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.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
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.10
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.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 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].
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).
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.14 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.15
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.16
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 $140.17 (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 FY1983.18 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 $91.19
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.20 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).
18
Ibid., p. 31.
19
Ibid., p. 30.
20
See also CRS Report RS20761, LIHEAP and Residential Energy Costs, by Bernard Gelb.
CRS-14
Table 2. 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.21
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
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
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,”22 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.23 According to HHS, then, the
LIHEAP statute requires use of the old allotment percentages when funding is less
than $1.975 billion.24 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.25 State
allotment 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.
23
42 U.S.C. §8623(a)(2)(A).
24
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).
25
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-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.26
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).27
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.28 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
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.29 In addition, the Social Services Block Grant program allows states to
transfer up to 10% of funds to provide low-income home energy assistance,30 while
the Temporary Assistance for Needy Families program gives states the discretion to
use funds for home heating and cooling costs.31
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
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.
30
42 U.S.C. §1397a(d).
31
42 U.S.C. §604(a)(1).
CRS-18
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.
In 2005, the Energy Policy Act (P.L. 109-58) reauthorized the program 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. The law also allowed
the Secretary of the Interior, when disposing of royalty-in-kind oil and gas taken 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. (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
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
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
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 4. LIHEAP Funding: FY1982 to FY2009
(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 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.
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.In addition, P.L. 110-329 gave states the discretion to serve households with
incomes at or below 75% of state median income in FY2009.
For FY2010, the President has proposed to provide $3.2 billion for LIHEAP. In addition,
according to preliminary budget materials, released on February 26, 2009, the Administration
would create a trigger for additional LIHEAP funds to be released when energy prices increase
above a certain level. This trigger is estimated to result in mandatory spending of $329 million in
FY2010. On April 29, 2009, the House and Senate agreed to the FY2010 Budget Resolution
(S.Con.Res. 13). The Resolution assumes funding of $3.2 billion for LIHEAP, but leaves open the
possibility of additional funds for the program.
This report describes LIHEAP funding, current issues, legislation, program rules, and eligibility.
It will be updated as events warrant.
Congressional Research Service
.
The Low-Income Home Energy Assistance Program (LIHEAP): Program and Funding
Contents
Introduction ................................................................................................................................1
LIHEAP Funding and Recent Developments ...............................................................................1
Proposed FY2010 Funding....................................................................................................1
FY2009 LIHEAP Funding.....................................................................................................2
Distribution of LIHEAP Contingency Funds .........................................................................4
FY2009 Contingency Funds............................................................................................4
LIHEAP Legislation in the 111th Congress.............................................................................4
Climate Change Legislation and LIHEAP .............................................................................5
Program Rules and Benefits ........................................................................................................5
Federal Eligibility Standards and Grantee Responsibility.......................................................5
Kinds of Energy Assistance Available....................................................................................6
Use of Funds.........................................................................................................................6
Households Served................................................................................................................7
Benefit Levels.......................................................................................................................7
Funds and Their Distribution.......................................................................................................9
Regular Funds.......................................................................................................................9
Tier I............................................................................................................................. 10
Tier II ........................................................................................................................... 10
Tier III .......................................................................................................................... 11
Contingency Funds ............................................................................................................. 11
Leveraging Incentive and REACH Funds ............................................................................ 11
Other Funds ........................................................................................................................ 12
Legislative History.................................................................................................................... 12
Tables
Table 1. Final FY2006-FY2009 LIHEAP Funding.......................................................................3
Table 2. LIHEAP Heating/Winter Crisis Aid, Selected Years .......................................................9
Table 3. LIHEAP Funding by State, FY2006 to FY2009............................................................ 13
Table 4. LIHEAP Funding: FY1982 to FY2009......................................................................... 15
Contacts
Author Contact Information ...................................................................................................... 17
Congressional Research Service
.
The Low-Income Home Energy Assistance Program (LIHEAP): Program and Funding
Introduction
The Low-Income Home Energy Assistance program (LIHEAP), established 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, tribes, 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 a 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 proposed funding for LIHEAP in FY2010 as well as
FY2009 appropriations. 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
Proposed FY2010 Funding
On February 26, 2009, President Obama released his FY2010 budget. Although the budget
appendix was not released on that date, the budget included some details regarding the
Administration’s proposal for LIHEAP funding in FY2010. The Administration proposed to fund
LIHEAP at $3.2 billion, although it did not specify whether the entire amount would be for
regular funds or if a portion would be allocated to contingency funds. In addition, the budget
proposed to create a new mechanism for releasing LIHEAP funds—a trigger whereby additional
funds would be released “whenever there is a spike in energy costs.”2 The budget proposal
estimated that the trigger would result in mandatory spending of $329 million in FY2010.3
The FY2010 Budget Resolution (S.Con.Res. 13), which was agreed to by the House and Senate
on April 29, 2009, assumes the same level of funding for LIHEAP that was proposed by the
President—$3.2 billion. In addition, S.Con.Res. 13 creates a reserve fund for LIHEAP that allows
the House or Senate Budget Committees to adjust aggregate spending levels if additional funding
were to be approved for the program.4 Specifically, the House Budget Committee may adjust the
aggregate spending levels and allocations to committees in order to accommodate the creation of
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).
2
Office of Management and Budget, A New Era of Responsibility, Renewing America’s Promise, p. 70,
http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/assets/fy2010_new_era/A_New_Era_of_Responsibility2.pdf.
3
Ibid., p. 124.
4
For more information about reserve funds in budget resolutions, see CRS Report RL33122, Congressional Budget
Resolutions: Revisions and Adjustments, by Robert Keith.
Congressional Research Service
1
.
The Low-Income Home Energy Assistance Program (LIHEAP): Program and Funding
a LIHEAP trigger to respond to increased energy prices. However, any trigger would have to be
deficit neutral to satisfy the pay-as-you-go rule. 5 Alternatively, in lieu of the trigger, S.Con.Res.
13 allows for LIHEAP appropriations to be increased to $5.1 billion. Specifically, the House and
Senate Budget Committees may adjust aggregate spending levels, discretionary spending limits,
and the allocations to their respective appropriations committees to allow for an additional
appropriation of $1.9 billion for LIHEAP.
FY2009 LIHEAP Funding
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 President Bush signed into law on September
30, 2008 (P.L. 110-329). The appropriation exceeded President Bush’s FY2009 budget request by
$3.1 billion. 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 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 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 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.6 Ordinarily, states may set eligibility for LIHEAP assistance at the greater of 60% of
state median income or 150% of poverty.7
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
5
For more information on pay-as-you-go rules, see CRS Report RL34300, Pay-As-You-Go Procedures for Budget
Enforcement, by Robert Keith.
6
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.
7
42 U.S.C. §8624(b)(2)(B).
Congressional Research Service
2
.
The Low-Income Home Energy Assistance Program (LIHEAP): Program and Funding
incentive and Residential Energy Assistance Challenge (REACH) grants8 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. 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 according to the LIHEAP formula.
To see how FY2009 LIHEAP funds were allocated to the states, see Table 3 at the end of this
report.
Table 1. Final FY2006-FY2009 LIHEAP Funding
Regular Funds
Fiscal
Year
Public Laws
FY2006
FY2007
FY2008
FY2009
State
Formula
Grants
Contingency
Funds
Total
Set-Asides
(Approx. $300,000 for technical
assistance, which is permanently
authorized in the statute)
P.L. 109-149a
1.98 billion
—27.225 million—
leveraging incentive fund
181 million
2.161
billion
P.L. 109-204b
500 million
None
500 million
1.0
billion
Total
2.48 billion
—27.225 million—
leveraging incentive fund
681 million
3.161
billion
P.L. 110-5
1.98 billion
—27.225 million—
leveraging incentive fund
181 million
2.161
billion
P.L. 110-161c
1.98 billion
Not specifiedd
590 million
2.57
billion
P.L. 110-329
4.51 billion
Not specifiedd
590 million
5.1
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, and 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. 109-149 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 did 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.
8
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.
Congressional Research Service
3
.
The Low-Income Home Energy Assistance Program (LIHEAP): Program and Funding
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 was released to all states according to the proportion of funds that states received
under the old LIHEAP formula, and $100 million was 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 low-income 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.
LIHEAP Legislation in the 111th Congress
Bills that would affect aspects of LIHEAP have been introduced in the 111th Congress. This is not
necessarily an exhaustive list of LIHEAP-related legislation.
•
The LIHEAP Equity Act (H.R. 252), would mandate that no more than 50% of
the funding provided for LIHEAP regular funds be made available for heating
purposes.
•
The Home Energy Assistance Targeted for Seniors Act (H.R. 1140) 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 Consumer Reasonable Price Protection Act (H.R. 1482) would impose a
windfall profits tax on sellers of crude oil and natural gas, with the proceeds
going to LIHEAP. The bill would establish a reasonable profits board to
determine what constitutes a reasonable profit from the sale of these products. A
windfall profits tax would be imposed when profits exceed reasonable profits by
100% or more.
•
The Federal Price Gouging Prevention Act (H.R. 2129) would make it illegal to
charge excessive prices for gasoline and other petroleum distillate products if an
“energy emergency” is declared by the President. Specifically, it would be illegal
to sell those products at unconscionably excessive prices that indicate the seller is
taking unfair advantage of an energy emergency. Penalties imposed for violations
of these provisions would be deposited in a Consumer Relief Trust Fund which
could be used to provide LIHEAP assistance.
Congressional Research Service
4
.
The Low-Income Home Energy Assistance Program (LIHEAP): Program and Funding
Climate Change Legislation and LIHEAP
The 111th Congress is likely to consider legislation that would aim to reduce levels of greenhouse
gas emissions produced by various industrial processes. This is sometimes referred to as climate
change legislation. Among those industries that would likely be targeted by a greenhouse gas
reduction policy are power plants that generate electricity, oil refineries, and natural gas suppliers.
The details of a plan to regulate greenhouse gases could take different forms, although the
primary models that have been discussed are a direct tax on emissions (sometimes referred to as a
carbon tax) or a cap-and-trade system in which regulated entities would buy allowances that
permit them to emit carbon and other greenhouse gases. Depending on the details of a greenhouse
gas reduction plan, energy prices paid by consumers could increase. 9 In addition, the effects of
such a system could be regressive—that is, lower-income households could pay a larger
percentage of their income toward increased energy prices than higher-income households. 10
In the 110th Congress, numerous bills to curb greenhouse gas emissions were introduced. At least
four of these bills would have allocated a portion of the proceeds from the sale of allowances to
LIHEAP in order to mitigate the effects of price increases on low-income households. These
included the Low Carbon Economy Act of 2007 (S. 1766), the Lieberman-Warner Climate
Security Act of 2008 (S. 3036), the Investing in Climate Action and Protection Act (H.R. 6186),
and the Climate MATTERS Act of 2008 (H.R. 6316). It is possible that climate change legislation
in the 111th Congress could also include funds for LIHEAP.
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.
9
See, for example, Terry Dinan and Diane Lim Rogers, “Distributional Effects of Carbon Allowance Trading: How
Government Decisions Determine Winners and Losers,” National Tax Journal, vol. 55, no. 2 (June 2002), pp. 199-221.
10
See Terry Dinan, Trade-Offs in Allocating Allowances for CO2 Emissions, Congressional Budget Office, April 25,
2007, http://www.cbo.gov/ftpdocs/89xx/doc8946/04-25-Cap_Trade.pdf; and Dallas Burtraw, Rich Sweeney, and
Margaret Walls, The Incidence of U.S. Climate Policy: Where You Stand Depends on Where You Sit, Resources for the
Future, September 2008, http://www.rff.org/RFF/Documents/RFF-DP-08-28.pdf.
Congressional Research Service
5
.
The Low-Income Home Energy Assistance Program (LIHEAP): Program and Funding
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, receipt of a utility shutoff notice, or
exhaustion of a fuel supply. 11 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. 12
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 homeenergy 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 greatest share of LIHEAP funding is used to offset home heating costs. In FY2006,
approximately 49.6% of all LIHEAP funds were used to provide heating assistance; all states
(including the District of Columbia) provided some heating assistance.13 Nearly all states also
offered crisis assistance, most of which is used for heating needs. In FY2006, 17.8% of LIHEAP
funds was used to provide crisis assistance in 48 states. Seven of these 48 states provided summer
as well as winter crisis assistance, and one state—Hawaii—provided only summer crisis
assistance. 14 Also in FY2006, 3.6% of funds went for cooling aid (offered by 13 states); 10.0% of
11
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.
12
Information regarding state LIHEAP program characteristics and contacts is available at http://www.liheap.ncat.org/
sp.htm.
13
Based on state-reported total LIHEAP obligations for FY2006 of $3.2 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 2006, April 22, 2009, p. 16 (hereafter FY2006 LIHEAP Report to Congress).
14
Ibid., Table C-3, pp. 61-62.
Congressional Research Service
6
.
The Low-Income Home Energy Assistance Program (LIHEAP): Program and Funding
total LIHEAP funds was used for weatherization services (provided by 45 states); 7.7% of
available funds went for administration and planning purposes (51 states), and 1.2% of the
FY2006 funds was used to offer services to reduce the need for energy assistance (provided by 24
states).15
Households Served
In FY2006, it is estimated that 5.5 million households received LIHEAP heating or winter crisis
assistance. 16 This estimate attempts to remove duplication among households that received both
heating and winter crisis assistance; the estimate is derived from the 5.0 million households that
received heating assistance and the 1.5 million that received winter or year round crisis assistance
in FY2006. The number of households receiving heating or winter crisis assistance in FY2006
increased from FY2005, when an estimated 5.3 million households were served. Shortly after
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 to the current level. (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, which grew to 15% in FY2005, and in FY2006,
that number increased to 16%.
The number of households receiving cooling assistance reached a high point in FY2002, with
570,000 recipients. However, in FY2006, cooling assistance nearly reached this level, with
approximately 519,000 beneficiaries.17 This was an increase over FY2005, when 337,000
households received cooling aid. Also in FY2006, HHS reported that 157,000 households
received summer crisis assistance; it is not known to what extent these recipients overlapped with
those receiving cooling assistance. In FY2006, nearly 125,000 households received
weatherization assistance, up from 104,000 in FY2005.
HHS estimates that of all households receiving LIHEAP heating assistance, about 31% had at
least one member 60 years of age or older; about 30% had at least one member with a disability;
and some 21% included at least one child five years of age or younger. 18
Benefit Levels
In FY2006, the constant dollar value of the average LIHEAP heating and winter crisis benefit
increased more than thirty dollars from the previous year, FY2005. Measured in constant 1981
dollars (the year in which LIHEAP was enacted), the average LIHEAP benefit per household in
15
Ibid., p. 16.
Ibid., p. 21.
17
Ibid., p. 20.
18
Ibid., pp. 23.
16
Congressional Research Service
7
.
The Low-Income Home Energy Assistance Program (LIHEAP): Program and Funding
FY2006 was $171, up from $140.19 The general trend in the constant dollar value of LIHEAP
benefits since the program’s beginning has been a decline. 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 average benefit reached $187 in FY2001, it declined again thereafter, and
in FY2005 the average constant dollar benefit was $140. (See Table 3.)
LIHEAP also covers a smaller portion of home heating bills than in earlier years. In FY2006, the
LIHEAP benefit covered 10% of the combined home heating costs of all households federally
eligible for LIHEAP, compared to 23% in 1981.20 (This estimate includes the heating costs of
households that were eligible for LIHEAP based on the federal guidelines, but did not receive
LIHEAP assistance.) Between FY1990 and FY2006, the percentage of home heating bills
covered has ranged between 8% and 15% compared to the 18% to 19% range covered in the
1980s.
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, has largely risen in recent years. While the
average benefit in 1981 was $129, in the years that followed, the average benefit in constant 1981
dollars declined as low as $57 in FY1983, and $49 in FY1990. However, from FY1990 levels the
average benefit grew, and by FY2000 and FY2001, the average benefit had reached $107. After a
recent decline in FY2004 and FY2005 when the average cooling or summer crisis benefit had
dropped to $91, in FY2006, the average benefit was $105.21
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. 22 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).
19
U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Administration for Children and Families, LIHEAP Home Energy
Notebook for Fiscal Year 2006, August 2008, p. 32 (hereinafter FY2006 LIHEAP Home Energy Notebook).
20
Ibid., p. 33.
21
Ibid., p. 32.
22
See also CRS Report RS20761, LIHEAP and Residential Energy Costs, by Bernard A. Gelb.
Congressional Research Service
8
.
The Low-Income Home Energy Assistance Program (LIHEAP): Program and Funding
Table 2. LIHEAP Heating/Winter Crisis Aid, Selected Years
Fiscal Years
1983
1990
1993
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
6.8
5.8
5.6
3.9
3.6
3.9
4.8
4.4
4.8
5.0
5.3
5.5
Number federally
eligible (millions)
22.2
25.4
28.4
29.1
29.0
29.4
30.4
32.7
34.5
35.4
34.8
34.4
Federally eligible and
receiving aid
31%
23%
20%
13%
12%
13%
16%
13%
14%
14%
15%
16%
Average benefit
(nominal $)
$225
$209
$201
$213
$237
$270
$364
$291
$312
$277
$304
$385
Average benefit
(constant 1981 $)a
$209
$147
$129
$117
$128
$140
$187
$147
$154
$132
$140
$171
18%
15%
11%
9%
9%
11%
14%
12%
NAc
8%
8%
10%
Households
Number receiving aid
(millions)
Benefit Levels
LIHEAP Coverage
Portion of winter
heating bill covered by
LIHEAP (for all
federally eligible
households)b
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 and LIHEAP
Reports to Congress for FY1998, FY2000, FY2001, FY2002, FY2003, FY2004, FY2005, and FY2006.
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.23 The three-tier formula is the
23
States are defined to include the District of Columbia. Indian tribes receive funds out of state allotments that are
(continued...)
Congressional Research Service
9
.
The Low-Income Home Energy Assistance Program (LIHEAP): Program and Funding
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.
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,”24 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. 25 According to HHS, then, the LIHEAP statute requires use of the old
allotment percentages when funding is less than $1.975 billion.26 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.27 State allotment percentages may be different, however. To ensure that states
(...continued)
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.
24
Report of the Committee on Energy and Commerce (H.Rept. 98-139, Part 2), to accompany H.R. 2439, May 15,
1984, p. 13.
25
42 U.S.C. §8623(a)(2)(A).
26
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).
27
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. 103-252)—both of which it generally funds out of regular LIHEAP funds.
(continued...)
Congressional Research Service
10
.
The Low-Income Home Energy Assistance Program (LIHEAP): Program and Funding
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. 28
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).29 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.30 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 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.
(...continued)
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.
28
42 U.S.C. §8623(a)(3).
29
42 U.S.C. §8621(e).
30
42 U.S.C. §8621(d).
Congressional Research Service
11
.
The Low-Income Home Energy Assistance Program (LIHEAP): Program and Funding
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.
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. 31 In addition, the Social Services Block Grant
program allows states to transfer up to 10% of funds to provide low-income home energy
assistance, 32 while the Temporary Assistance for Needy Families program gives states the
discretion to use funds for home heating and cooling costs.33
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 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.
In 2005, the Energy Policy Act (P.L. 109-58) reauthorized the program and raised the LIHEAP
regular funds authorization level for FY2005 through FY2007 to $5.1 billion. It also explicitly
31
FY2004 LIHEAP Report to Congress, p. 11. For FY2004, $2 million in oil overcharge funds was available to one
state.
32
42 U.S.C. §1397a(d).
33
42 U.S.C. §604(a)(1).
Congressional Research Service
12
.
The Low-Income Home Energy Assistance Program (LIHEAP): Program and Funding
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. The law also allowed the
Secretary of the Interior, when disposing of royalty-in-kind oil and gas taken 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. (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. 34 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,35 the provision in P.L. 109-58 does not allow a price preference.
Table 3. LIHEAP Funding by State, FY2006 to FY2009
(Funding Shown for Each State Does Not Include Distributions to Tribes)
(dollars in millions)
Total Funds Distributeda
(Regular and Contingency)
State
FY2006
FY2007
Regular
Allotment
FY2008
Contingency
Distributed
Total
FY2009
Alabama
31.787
22.077
19.090
59.649
4.182
63.832
Alaska
12.839
8.631
11.681
16.333
5.100
21.433
Arizona
14.230
7.856
8.591
26.844
1.882
28.726
Arkansas
23.336
15.749
14.667
36.497
3.213
39.711
California
156.441
94.089
102.250
223.989
22.402
246.391
Colorado
44.806
33.073
41.326
63.474
7.877
71.352
Connecticut
71.106
48.102
65.618
95.783
30.104
125.887
Delaware
10.954
5.727
6.929
17.384
1.364
18.748
District of
Columbia
8.165
6.700
7.284
14.653
1.596
16.249
Florida
49.785
27.970
30.406
95.013
6.662
101.675
Georgia
40.026
28.564
24.047
75.141
5.269
80.410
Hawaii
2.567
2.228
2.403
4.652
0.531
5.182
Idaho
14.055
12.275
13.241
25.632
2.924
28.556
Illinois
193.814
119.418
149.216
237.236
28.443
265.679
Indiana
75.327
54.062
67.552
103.602
12.877
116.479
Iowa
52.054
38.319
47.881
67.803
9.127
76.929
Kansas
27.709
19.727
22.083
45.308
4.188
49.496
34
U.S. Government Accountability Office, Department of Interior—Royalty-in-Kind Oil and Gas Preferences, B307767, November 13, 2006, available at http://www.gao.gov/decisions/appro/307767.pdf.
35
42 U.S.C. §15902(b)(3)(A).
Congressional Research Service
13
.
The Low-Income Home Energy Assistance Program (LIHEAP): Program and Funding
Total Funds Distributeda
(Regular and Contingency)
State
FY2006
FY2007
Regular
Allotment
FY2008
Contingency
Distributed
Total
FY2009
Kentucky
45.320
32.010
30.588
68.353
6.702
75.055
Louisiana
32.671
22.499
19.651
57.196
4.305
61.502
Maine
43.496
32.487
44.835
47.649
28.644
76.293
Maryland
61.889
33.036
35.913
101.296
7.868
109.164
Massachusetts
126.425
93.757
126.442
162.916
50.499
213.414
Michigan
153.615
112.509
140.589
221.244
26.862
248.106
Minnesota
110.849
81.681
102.063
144.528
19.455
163.982
Mississippi
27.415
17.838
16.448
38.937
3.604
42.541
Missouri
78.220
52.645
59.603
103.541
11.361
114.902
Montana
19.259
12.487
15.602
26.075
2.974
29.049
Nebraska
28.634
18.940
23.660
39.558
4.512
44.070
7.247
4.016
4.366
13.643
0.957
14.599
27.740
18.769
25.635
34.112
13.624
47.737
New Jersey
114.759
79.920
108.707
166.690
19.083
185.773
New Mexico
11.555
9.867
10.711
22.919
2.347
25.266
381.719
261.178
359.046
475.409
62.240
537.649
North Carolina
71.125
45.156
41.629
121.051
9.121
130.172
North Dakota
19.272
13.446
16.426
27.299
3.114
30.413
164.226
105.643
132.004
220.588
25.162
245.750
Oklahoma
26.921
17.517
16.048
44.572
3.521
48.092
Oregon
24.575
25.035
27.010
44.640
6.009
50.650
Pennsylvania
202.324
140.520
191.759
274.925
33.469
308.394
Rhode Island
23.066
15.428
20.816
30.123
8.420
38.544
South Carolina
25.279
17.636
15.266
47.702
3.345
51.047
South Dakota
16.540
10.977
13.715
22.921
2.614
25.536
Tennessee
47.139
33.568
30.985
73.723
6.789
80.512
Texas
84.005
46.545
50.599
158.110
11.086
169.196
Utah
22.848
15.062
18.823
31.646
3.609
35.255
Vermont
20.903
14.162
19.370
25.568
10.587
36.156
Virginia
75.053
40.241
43.746
118.084
9.585
127.668
Washington
39.631
40.443
43.626
71.568
9.634
81.201
West Virginia
24.543
18.621
20.157
40.584
4.435
45.019
Wisconsin
99.837
73.525
91.872
130.096
17.512
147.608
Wyoming
8.987
5.932
7.415
12.640
1.442
14.081
4,428.898
582.230
5,011.128
Nevada
New Hampshire
New York
Ohio
Subtotal
3,096
Congressional Research Service
2,108
2,559
14
.
The Low-Income Home Energy Assistance Program (LIHEAP): Program and Funding
Total Funds Distributeda
(Regular and Contingency)
State
FY2006
Tribesb
Territoriesc
Leveraging/REACHd
Training/Tech.
Asst.e
Total
FY2007
Regular
Allotment
Contingency
Distributed
FY2008
Total
FY2009
32.897
23.201
27.983
47.403
7.434
54.837
3.456
2.788
3.014
6.070
0.664
6.734
27.225
27.225
0.297
0.297
3,160
2,161
—f
0.292
2,591
27.000
—
27.000
0.300
—
0.300
4,509.672
590.328
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 one-half 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.
Table 4. LIHEAP Funding: FY1982 to FY2009
(dollars in thousands)
Regular Fundsa
Contingency Fundsa
Fiscal
Year
President’s
Request
Authorized
Appropriated
Appropriated
Distributed
Total
Distributed
1982
1,400,000
1,875,000
1,875,000
—
—
1,875,000
1983
1,300,000
1,875,000
1,975,000
—
—
1,975,000
1984
1,300,000
1,875,000
2,075,000
—
—
2,075,000
1985
1,875,000
2,140,000
2,100,000
—
—
2,100,000
1986
2,097,765
2,275,000
2,100,000
—
—
2,100,000
1987
2,097,642
2,050,000
1,825,000
—
—
1,825,000
1988
1,237,000
2,132,000
1,531,840
—
—
1,531,840
Congressional Research Service
15
.
The Low-Income Home Energy Assistance Program (LIHEAP): Program and Funding
Regular Fundsa
Contingency Fundsa
Fiscal
Year
President’s
Request
Authorized
Appropriated
Appropriated
Distributed
Total
Distributed
1989
1,187,000
2,218,000
1,383,200
—
—
1,383,200
1990
1,100,000
2,307,000
1,443,000
—
—
1,443,000
1991
1,050,000
2,150,000
1,415,055
195,180
195,180
1,610,235
1992
925,000
2,230,000
1,500,000
300,000
0
1,500,000
1993
1,065,000
ssanb
1,346,030
595,200
0
1,346,030
1994
1,507,408
ssanb
1,437,402
600,000
300,000
1,737,402
1995
1,475,000
2,000,000
1,319,202
600,000
100,000
1,419,202
1996
1,319,204
2,000,000
900,000
180,000
180,000
1,080,000
1997
1,000,000
2,000,000
1,000,000
420,000
215,000
1,215,000
1998
1,000,000
2,000,000
1,000,000
300,000
160,000
1,160,000
1999
1,000,000
2,000,000
1,100,000
300,000
175,299
1,275,299
2000
1,100,000
ssanb
1,100,000
900,000
744,350c
1,844350c
2001
1,100,000
ssanb
1,400,000
600,000
455,650
1,855,650
2002
1,400,000
2,000,000
1,700,000
300,000
100,000d
1,800,000
2003
1,400,000
2,000,000
1,788,300e
0
200,000f
1,988,300
2004
1,700,000
2,000,000
1,789,380
99,410
99,410
1,888,790
2005
1,900,500g,h
5,100,000
1,884,799
297,600
277,250
2,162,050
2006
1,800,000g
5,100,000
2,480,000
681,000
679,960
3,160,000
2007
1,782,000
5,100,000
1,980,000
181,000
181,000
2,161,000
1,500,000
—i
1,980,000
590,328
610,678j
2,590,678
1,700,000
—i
4,509,672
590,328
590,328
5,100,000
2008
2009
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. 10720).
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 the amounts requested by the President in FY2005 and FY2006, $500,000 was to be set aside for a
national evaluation.
Congressional Research Service
16
.
The Low-Income Home Energy Assistance Program (LIHEAP): Program and Funding
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.
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.
Author Contact Information
Libby Perl
Analyst in Housing Policy
eperl@crs.loc.gov, 7-7806
Congressional Research Service
17