LIHEAP: Program and Funding

Changes from January 13, 2011 to February 4, 2011

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

The Low Income Home Energy Assistance
Program (LIHEAP): Program and Funding
Libby Perl
Specialist in Housing Policy
January 13February 4, 2011

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 (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 (sometimes referred to as formula funds), which are allocated to all states 
using a statutory formula, and emergency
 contingency funds, which are allocated to one or more 
states at the discretion of the
 Administration 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 the Department of Health and
Human Services (HHS), in FY2006, 49.6FY2007, 52.8% of funds went to pay for heating assistance, 3.6% of
funds was 4% was
used for cooling aid, 17.89% of funds went to crisis assistance, and 10.01% 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. However, in both the FY2009 and FY2010 appropriations acts, Congress
gave states the authority to raise their LIHEAP eligibility standards to 75% of state median
income. In FY2008, the most recent year for which HHS data are available, an estimated 33.5
million households were eligible for LIHEAP under the federal statutory guidelines. According to
HHS, 5.4 million households received heating or winter crisis assistance and approximately
600,000 households received cooling assistance that same year.
For FY2011, LIHEAP is funded through March 4, 2011, as part of the Continuing Appropriations
and Surface Transportation Extensions Act (P.L. 111-322), which was enacted on December 22,
2010, and amends the Continuing Appropriations Act enacted on September 30, 2010 (P.L. 111242). Pursuant to P.L. 111-322 (the CR), HHS is required to obligate to states, tribes, and
territories the same amount of LIHEAP regular funds as werewas obligated during the comparable
time period in FY2010 (i.e., through March 4, 2010). States request their share of LIHEAP
formula grants quarterly, and may request as much as 100% of their grants in the first quarter of
the fiscal year. State allocations under the CR therefore depend on the amount of funds that each
state requested in the first two quarters of FY2010, when the total amount appropriated for
regular funds was $4.5 billion. On January 13, 2011, HHS issued a press release announcing how
formula funds would be distributed, and on January 24, 2011, it announced the distribution of
$200 million in emergency contingency funds to all states, tribes, and territories. See columns (a)
and (b) of Table A-1 for these distributions.
This report describes LIHEAP funding, program rules, and eligibility. It will be updated as events
warrant.

Congressional Research Service

 .
funds would be distributed to the states. See column (c) of Table A-1 for this distribution.
In FY2010, Congress appropriated $5.1 billion for LIHEAP (P.L. 111-117), the same amount that
was appropriated in FY2009. Of this amount, approximately $4.5 billion was appropriated as
regular funds and $590 million as emergency contingency funds. The FY2010 appropriation also
maintained the distribution of regular funds set out in the FY2009 appropriations act, with
approximately $840 million allocated according to the “new” LIHEAP formula and the
remainder—approximately $3.67 billion—distributed according to the proportions of the “old”
formula. Three distributions of emergency contingency funds were made during FY2010 (see
Table A-2).
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 ........................................................................................................................1
LIHEAP Funding Under the FY2011 Continuing Resolutions ...............................................1
Regular Funds.................................................................................................................1
Emergency Contingency Funds .......................................................................................3
Proposals to Fund LIHEAP in FY2011 Prior to Enactment of the Continuing
Resolutions ........................................................................................................................3
FY2010 Funding ...................................................................................................................5
Distribution of FY2010 LIHEAP Contingency Funds ......................................................6
Program Rules and Benefits ........................................................................................................7
Federal Eligibility Standards and Grantee Responsibility.......................................................7
Kinds of Energy Assistance Available....................................................................................8
Use of Funds.........................................................................................................................8
Households Served................................................................................................................98
Benefit Levels.......................................................................................................................9
Funds and Their Distribution..................................................................................................... 12
Regular Funds..................................................................................................................... 12
Tier I............................................................................................................................. 12
Tier II ........................................................................................................................... 13
Tier III .......................................................................................................................... 13
Contingency Funds ............................................................................................................. 13
Leveraging Incentive and REACH Funds ............................................................................ 14
Other Funds ........................................................................................................................ 14
Legislative History.................................................................................................................... 14

Tables
Table 1. FY2011 Proposed LIHEAP Funding ..............................................................................5
Table 2. LIHEAP Heating/Winter Crisis Aid for Select Years..................................................... 11
Table A-1. Net State LIHEAP Formula Grant Funding (Less Tribes) Under the FY2011
Continuing Resolutions (CRs)....................................................FY2011 LIHEAP Regular and Contingency Fund Allotments to States, Tribes,
and Territories Under the FY2011 Continuing Resolution (P.L. 111-322) ............................................ 18
Table A-2. FY2010 LIHEAP Regular and Contingency Fund Allotments to States, Tribes,
and Territories ........................................................................................................................ 20
Table A-3. LIHEAP Funding by State FY2006 to FY2010......................................................... 23
Table A-4. LIHEAP Funding: FY1982 to FY2011 ..................................................................... 26

Appendixes
Appendix. Tables Showing LIHEAP Funding Levels................................................................. 16

Congressional Research Service

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

Contacts
Author Contact Information ...................................................................................................... 28

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 (sometimes referred to in this report as “formula funds”) and
emergency contingency funds (sometimes referred to in this report as “contingency funds”).
Regular funds are allotted to states according to a formula prescribed by the LIHEAP statute.1
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 FY2011 and enacted
funding in FY2010. 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
LIHEAP Funding Under the FY2011 Continuing Resolutions
In FY2011, LIHEAP has been funded by a series of continuing resolutions (CRs), each of which
funded most government programs at FY2010 levels—in the case of LIHEAP, this means $4.5
billion in regular funds. However, due to language in the CRs, combined with the proposed
funding level in the Senate Appropriations Committee-passed bill for FY2011 (S. 3686), as of the 
date of this
 report states have not received the exact allocations that they would receive at an 
appropriation of
 $4.5 billion. This is explained below. See Table A-1 in the Appendix of this report to see how
funds have been distributed pursuant to the CRs.



Regular Funds
The First Three Continuing Resolutions (Through December 21, 2010)
Pursuant to the first three CRs (P.L. 111-242, P.L. 111-290, and P.L. 111-317), which extended
funding for most federal programs at FY2010 levels through December 21, 2010, LIHEAP
grantees were not able to receive their full allocations of regular funds at the $4.5 billion level.
This was due to a standard provision in continuing resolutions that states the following:
For those programs that would otherwise have high initial rates of operation or complete
distribution of appropriations at the beginning of fiscal year 2011 because of distributions of
funding to States, foreign countries, grantees, or others, such high initial rates of operation or

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).

Congressional Research Service

1

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

complete distribution shall not be made, and no grants shall be awarded for such programs
funded by this Act that would impinge on final funding prerogatives.2

The provision is meant to ensure that funds for a program that are released under a CR do not
exceed the amount that Congress ultimately appropriates for it. Typically, states are eligible to
receive their entire LIHEAP formula allocations in the first quarter of the fiscal year if they so
choose, qualifying as a “high initial rate of operation” as stipulated in the CR. Further, the Senate
program “that would otherwise have high initial rate of operation or
complete distribution of appropriations” at the beginning of FY2011 as stipulated in the CR.
Further, the Senate Appropriations Committee-passed FY2011 Departments of Labor, Health and 
Human Services,
 and Education Appropriations bill (S. 3686) raised the possibility that Congress 
might appropriate
 less funding for LIHEAP in FY2011 than it did in FY2010 (S. 3686 would 
have appropriated $2.7
 billion in LIHEAP regular funds). If HHS had released regular fund 
allocations at the $4.5 billion
 level, and the appropriation level in the Senate Committee proposal 
of $2.7 billion had ultimately
 been enacted, then states would have received higher allocations 
than the amount to which they
 would have been entitled under the final appropriation, impinging 
on “final funding
 prerogatives.”
As a result, due to the difference in the level of formula funding for LIHEAP in FY2010
compared to the amount proposed by the Senate Appropriations Committee bill for FY2011, until
mid-December 2010 HHS limited LIHEAP state allocations to 75% of the amount they would
have received if the Senate Committee-passed appropriations bill was enacted. 3 On December 10,
2010, due to concerns that states did not have sufficient funds to assist applicants, HHS
announced that states could receive 100% of their allocations at this $2.7 billion regular fund
level. 4

The Fourth Continuing Resolution
Most recently, a fourth CR, the Continuing Appropriations and Surface Transportation Extensions
Act (P.L. 111-322), was enacted on December 22, 2010, and increased the amount of LIHEAP
regular funds that states may receive for FY2011. P.L. 111-322, which amends P.L. 111-242, is
effective through March 4, 2010, and requires that HHS “obligate the same amount during the
period covered by this continuing resolution as was obligated for such purpose during the
comparable period during fiscal year 2010.”5 The amount that each state receives pursuant to this
provision therefore depends on the amount of funding that each state requested in the first two
quarters of FY2010 based on a regular fund level of $4.5 billion.
On January 12, 2011, HHS announced the distribution of funds under the fourth CR.6 Most states
did not receive exactly the amount that was obligated to them in FY2010 because funds had to be
prorated to account for three states (California, North Carolina, and Tennessee) that had requested
greater percentage allocations in the first quarter of FY2011 than they had in FY2010 and had
therefore already received more in FY2011 under the first three CRs than was obligated to them
in the first two quarters of FY2010. For example, in FY2010 California requested 25% of its
2

See Section 109 of P.L. 111-242.
For state allocations at this rate, see http://www.acf.hhs.gov/programs/ocs/liheap/2011_cr_state_allocations.xls.
4
U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, “HHS Makes Available More Than $670 Million in Additional
LIHEAP Funding,” press release, December 10, 2010, http://www.hhs.gov/news/press/2010pres/12/20101210b.html.
5
See Section 162 of P.L. 111-322.
6
U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, “HHS increases total LIHEAP funding available to help low-income
families to $3.9 billion,” press release, January 12, 2011, http://www.hhs.gov/news/press/2011pres/01/20110112a.html.
3

Congressional Research Service

2

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

in the first two quarters of FY2010. For example, in FY2010 California requested 25% of its
regular fund allocation in the first quarter; in the first quarter of FY2011, it requested 100% of its
allocation at $2.7 billion, or $119 million, which exceeded the amount obligated through March
4, 2010 (approximately $100 million). For the distribution of regular funds to states under the 
fourth CR,
see see Table A-1, column (a).

Emergency Contingency Funds
On January 24, 2011, HHS announced that it would release $200 million in FY2011 emergency
contingency funds. All states, the District of Columbia, tribes, and territories received funding.
HHS based allocations on each state’s “old” LIHEAP formula percentage (84% of the
distribution) as well as the percentage of low-income households in each state that use heating oil
or propane to heat their homes (16% of the distribution). For the distributions of funds to the
states, see column (b) of Table A-1.

Proposals to Fund LIHEAP in FY2011 Prior to Enactment of the
Continuing Resolutions
The President’s budget proposed to provide $2.51 billion for LIHEAP regular funds and $790
million in emergency contingency funds, for a total of $3.3 billion in discretionary spending.
While this represented an increase over the President’s FY2010 request for regular and
contingency funds (by $100 million), it would have been a decrease from FY2010 funding levels,
in which Congress provided a total of $5.1 billion for LIHEAP—$4.51 billion in regular funds
and $590 million in contingency funds. However, as in FY2010, the President proposed a new
trigger mechanism for releasing LIHEAP funds. According to the budget, additional funds were
to be released “in response to energy price spikes as well as changes in the number of households
in poverty.”7 The budget estimated that the trigger would have resulted in mandatory budget
authority of $2 billion in FY2011. The proposal in the FY2011 budget differed from the FY2010
proposal, which would have triggered increased assistance only in response to energy price
increases and did not include an increase in the number of households in poverty as a basis for
additional funds to be released.
According to HHS budget documents, FY2011 fund releases would have been triggered if certain
benchmarks were met:8
•

For oil and natural gas, if quarterly prices were at least 15% higher than in the
previous year’s quarter in either the third or fourth quarters of the calendar year
(from July through September and October through December, respectively).
Specifically, (1) at a 15% price increase, funds would have been distributed by
multiplying the percentage change in price by the greater of $250 million or 10%
of the previous year’s regular fund appropriation; (2) at a price increase of 30%
or greater, funds would have been distributed by multiplying the percentage


7

U.S. Office of Management and Budget, FY2011 Budget Appendix, February 2010, p. 494,
http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/budget/fy2011/assets/hhs.pdf.
8

U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Administration for Children and Families, FY2011 Congressional
Justification, pp. 31-32, http://www.acf.hhs.gov/programs/olab/budget/2011/LIHEAP.pdf.

Congressional Research Service

3

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

increase in price by the greater of $300 million or 15% of the previous year’s
regular fund appropriation.


•

For electricity, if quarterly prices were at least 10% higher than in the previous
year’s quarter for any of the four quarters of the calendar year. The amount of
funds released would have been the product of the percentage increase in price
multiplied by the greater of $250 million or 10% of the previous year’s regular
fund appropriation.

•

In the case of poverty, if the ratio of the average number of participants in the
Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP, formerly known as Food
Stamps) to the U.S. population in a fiscal year was at least 30% greater than the

7

U.S. Office of Management and Budget, FY2011 Budget Appendix, February 2010, p. 494,
http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/budget/fy2011/assets/hhs.pdf.
8
U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Administration for Children and Families, FY2011 Congressional
Justification, pp. 31-32, http://www.acf.hhs.gov/programs/olab/budget/2011/LIHEAP.pdf.

Congressional Research Service

3

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


ratio of participants for FY2008. The amount of funds released would have been
the product of any percentage increase over 30% and $6.25 billion. For example,
an increase of 50% would have resulted in the release of $1.25 billion (20% *
$6.25 billion).


Under the proposal, funds would have been distributed within 30 days of the time when the
requirements of the applicable trigger were met unless there were extenuating circumstances.9 In
determining how funds would be distributed to states, the Administration would have been
required to take into account the price increases or SNAP participation that caused the funds to be
released as well as the number of low-income households in each state. In addition, the
Administration would have had the discretion to use funds to respond to “extreme heat or cold,
energy supply disruptions, or a variety of other energy-related emergencies.”10
The Senate Appropriations Committee proposed to appropriate $3.3 billion for LIHEAP in
FY2011. The bill, S. 3686, was reported on August 2, 2010, and would have provided $2.7 billion
in regular funds. It would have maintained the proportional split between “old” and “new”
formula funds that was implemented in FY2009. Specifically, approximately 20% of regular
funds, $505 million, would have been distributed according to the “new” LIHEAP formula. The
remaining $2.2 billion would have been distributed according to the proportions of the “old”
formula. S. 3686 would have appropriated the same level of funding for emergency contingency
funds as was appropriated in FY2009 and FY2010—$590 million. In addition, the Senate
Appropriations Committee Report, S.Rept. 111-243, stated that “[t]he Committee
recommendation assumes enactment of [the President’s trigger] proposal.” However, neither S.
3686 nor S.Rept. 111-243 contained language to authorize the trigger.
The House Appropriations Subcommittee for the Departments of Labor, Health and Human
Services, and Education recommended $5.1 billion for LIHEAP in FY2011; however, the
specifics of the proposal were not provided. 11

9

Ibid., p. 32.
Ibid.
11
See the Subcommittee Summary Table, available on its website at http://appropriations.house.gov/images/stories/pdf/
lhhse/FY2011_LHHS_Summary_Tabel-07.15.2010.pdf.
10

Congressional Research Service

4

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

Table 1. FY2011 Proposed LIHEAP Funding
(dollars in millions)

Type of Funding
LIHEAP Regular Fundsb
Leveraging Incentive/
REACH Grants
Contingency Funds
Total Discretionary Funds
LIHEAP

“Trigger”e

Total

FY2011
House
Subcommittee
Passed Billa

FY2011
Senate
CommitteePassed Bill:
S. 3686

FY2010
Enacted:
P.L. 111-117

FY2011
President’s
Request

4,510

2,510

—

2,710

27c

—

not specified

590

790

—

590

5,100

3,300

—

3,300

0

2,000

—

f

5,100

5,300

5,100

3,300

27d

Sources: The FY2010 Consolidated Appropriations Act (P.L. 111-117), the FY2011 budget appendix, the
FY2011 Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) Congressional Budget Justifications, the FY2011
Departments of Labor, Health and Human Services, and Education (LHE) appropriations bill (S. 3686), and the
House LHE Appropriations Subcommittee Summary Table.
a.

As of the date of this report, details about the House Appropriations Subcommittee-passed bill had not
been released.

b.

In addition to the set-aside for Leveraging Incentive and REACH grants, the LIHEAP statute gives the HHS
Secretary authority to set aside up to $300,000 from the regular fund appropriation for training and
technical assistance. 42 U.S.C. § 8628a.

c.

The amount proposed to be set aside for leveraging incentive grants in FY2011 was noted in the HHS
Congressional Budget Justifications and did not appear in the budget appendix.

d.

P.L. 111-117 specified that not more than $27 million be used for leveraging incentive grants in FY2010.

e.

In FY2010 and FY2011, the President’s budget proposed that a trigger mechanism be created whereby funds
would be released if energy price increases were to exceed certain levels or, as proposed in FY2011, if
participation in the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program was to increase above a specified level. In
each case, the additional budget authority under the trigger would be mandatory funding.

f.

Regarding the President’s proposed LIHEAP trigger, S.Rept. 111-243 stated that the “Committee
recommendation assumes enactment of this proposal.” However, neither S. 3686 nor S.Rept. 111-243
contained language that would authorize the trigger proposal.

FY2010 Funding
The FY2010 Consolidated Appropriations Act (P.L. 111-117), enacted on December 16, 2009,
provided $5.1 billion for LIHEAP, the same amount that was appropriated in FY2009.12 The law
also maintained the same division of funds as in FY2009, with $4.51 billion allocated to LIHEAP
regular funds and approximately $590 million to emergency contingency funds. However, unlike
the FY2009 appropriation, which specified that the contingency funds be released within 30 days
of the law’s enactment, under the FY2010 law there was no time frame for releasing the
12
Prior to enactment of P.L. 111-117, LIHEAP was funded under two continuing resolutions (CRs): P.L. 111-68 and
P.L. 111-88. Under the two CRs, states were eligible to receive up to 75% of their regular fund allocations at an
appropriation of $4.51 billion (the FY2009 level).

Congressional Research Service

5

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

contingency funds. Regarding the regular funds, P.L. 111-117 distributed funds to the states in the
same way as FY2009, as follows:
•

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” or, for greater detail, see CRS Report RL33275,
The LIHEAP Formula: Legislative History and Current Law, by Libby Perl.

•

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.

See column (a) of Table A-2, at the end of this report, for the distribution of FY2010 LIHEAP
regular funds to the states, tribes, and territories and tribes.
In addition, P.L. 111-117 gave states the authority to raise eligibility guidelines for LIHEAP to
75% of state median income, a provision that was also included in the FY2009 appropriations act.
Ordinarily, states may set eligibility for LIHEAP assistance at the greater of 60% of state median
income or 150% of poverty.13
The amount for LIHEAP in P.L. 111-117 exceeded the President’s request for LIHEAP regular
and contingency funds by $1.9 billion; the President had proposed to provide $2.41 billion for
regular funds and $790 million for emergency contingency funds. In addition, P.L. 111-117 did
not include the President’s proposal for a new LIHEAP trigger whereby additional funds would
have been released “whenever there is a spike in energy costs.”14 The budget estimated that the
trigger would have resulted in mandatory budget authority of $450 million in FY2010.

Distribution of FY2010 LIHEAP Contingency Funds
The FY2010 Consolidated Appropriations Act (P.L. 111-117) provided $590 million for LIHEAP
contingency funds, the same amount that was appropriated in FY2009. However, unlike FY2009,
where the appropriations act required funds to be released within 30 days of the law’s enactment,
FY2010 did not require the release of contingency funds within a certain time frame.
The Administration distributed FY2010 contingency funds on two occasions. First, the
Administration announced the release of approximately $490 million of the FY2010 contingency
funds on January 20, 2010.
•

Of the total, $450 million was released to all states, tribes, and territories. Each
state’s allocation was based on their share of formula funds received in FY2010
weighted by their three-month unemployment rate from September 2009 through
November 2009. The allotment to territories was based on their share of formula
grants.

13

42 U.S.C. § 8624(b)(2)(B).
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.
14

Congressional Research Service

6

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

•

The remaining $40 million was released to 14 states where the number of heating
degree days (HDDs) from November 1, 2009, through January 9, 2010, exceeded
the 30-year norm for the same time period by at least 5%. (HDDs measure the
extent to which a day’s average temperature falls below 65° Fahrenheit. For
example, a day with an average temperature of 50° F results in a measure of 15
heating degree days.) These states then received amounts based on a ratio of the
product of total HDDs, the number of households at or below 125% of poverty,
and the unemployment rate to the sum of the products for all 14 states.

The second contingency fund distribution was announced on September 20, 2010. The remaining
funds—approximately $101 million—were distributed to all fifty50 states, the District of Columbia,
and the territories based on the proportions of the “old” LIHEAP formula.
Columns (b), (c), and (dc) of Table A-2,  (at the end of this report), show the amount of funds that
states received under each of the contingency fund distributionsemergency
contingency funds distributed to each state in FY2010.

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. 15 Federal rules also require outreach activities, coordination with the
15

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
(continued...)

Congressional Research Service

7

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

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. 16

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 FY2006FY2007,
approximately 49.652.8% of all LIHEAP funds werewas used to provide heating assistance; all states
(including the District of Columbia) provided some heating assistance.17 Nearly all states also
offered crisis assistance, most of which is used for heating needs. In FY2006FY2007, 17.89% of LIHEAP
funds was used to provide winter/year-round 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. 18 Also in FY2006, 3.6 and summer crisis
assistance in six states.18 Also in FY2007, 3.4% of funds went for cooling aid (offered by 13 15
states); 10.01% of
 total LIHEAP funds was used for weatherization services (provided by 45 
states); 7.78% of
 available funds went for administration and planning purposes (51 states), and 1.2
1.3% of the
FY2006 FY2007 funds was used to offer services to reduce the need for energy assistance 
(provided by 24
states).19

 states).19

Households Served
In FY2008, it is estimated that 5.4 million households received LIHEAP heating and/or winter
crisis assistance. 20 This estimate attempts to remove duplication among households that received
(...continued)
Networker FY2007 compilation of definitions, available at http://www.liheap.ncat.org/tables/FY2007/
CrisisDef2007.doc.
16
Information regarding state LIHEAP program characteristics and contacts is available at http://www.liheap.ncat.org/
sp.htm.
17


Based on state-reported total LIHEAP obligations for FY2006 of $3.2FY2007 of $2.5 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. 162007, November 22, 2010, p. 19 (hereinafter, FY2006FY2007 LIHEAP Report to Congress).
18
Ibid., Table C-3III-5, pp. 61-62.
19
Ibid., p. 16.

Congressional Research Service

8

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

Households Served
In FY2008, it is estimated that 5.4 million households received LIHEAP heating and/or winter
crisis assistance. 20 This estimate attempts to remove duplication among households that received
40-41.
19
Ibid., p. 19.
20
U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Administration for Children and Families, LIHEAP Home Energy
Notebook for Fiscal Year 2008, May 2010, p. 30 (hereinafter, FY2008 LIHEAP Home Energy Notebook).

Congressional Research Service

8

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

both heating and winter crisis assistance. The number of households receiving heating and/or
winter crisis assistance in FY2008 increased from FY2007, when an estimated 5.3 million
households were served. Shortly after LIHEAP began, in FY1983, approximately 6.8 million
households received heating and/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 2.)
The same trend can be seen in the percentage of federally eligible households that receive heating
and/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 and/or winter crisis assistance had dropped to 12%. Since
FY2003, the percentage of federally eligible households receiving assistance has hovered
between 14% and 16%, settling at 16% for the last three fiscal years for which data are available
(FY2006 through FY2008).
The number of households receiving cooling and/or summer crisis assistance reached a high point
of 700,000 recipients in both FY2002 and FY2006. However, in FY2007 and FY2008,
cooling/summer crisis assistance nearly reached this level, with approximately 600,000
beneficiaries in each year.21
HHS estimates that of all households receiving LIHEAP heating assistance, about 3132% had at
least one member 60 years of age or older; about 3031% had at least one member with a disability;
and some 2122% included at least one child five years of age or younger. 22

Benefit Levels
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. 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).

20
U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Administration for Children and Families, LIHEAP Home Energy
Notebook for Fiscal Year 2008, May 2010, p. 30 (hereinafter, FY2008 LIHEAP Home Energy Notebook).
21
See the FY2008 LIHEAP Home Energy Notebook, p. 30 and the FY2007 Home Energy Notebook, p. 30.
22
FY2006 LIHEAP Report to Congress, p. 23.

Congressional Research Service

9

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

In FY2008, the constant dollar value of the average LIHEAP heating and winter crisis benefit
increased by about $12 from the previous year, FY2007. Measured in constant 1981 dollars (the
year in which LIHEAP was enacted), the average LIHEAP benefit per household in FY2008 was
$151, up from $139.23 However, 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,
21

See the FY2008 LIHEAP Home Energy Notebook, p. 30 and the FY2007 LIHEAP Home Energy Notebook, p. 30.
FY2007 LIHEAP Report to Congress, p. 55.
23
FY2008 LIHEAP Home Energy Notebook, p. 32.
22

Congressional Research Service

9

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

and although the average benefit reached $187 in FY2001, it generally declined again thereafter,
with the exception of $171 in FY2006, when funding was higher than in the immediately
preceding and subsequent years. (See Table 2.)
LIHEAP also covers a smaller portion of home heating bills than in earlier years. In FY2006 (the
most recent year in which data are available), the FY2007, the
LIHEAP benefit covered 4245% of the heating
 costs of LIHEAP-recipient households, compared to 
54% in 1981.24 Between FY1990 and
FY2006 FY2007, the percentage of home heating bills covered by 
the average LIHEAP benefit has ranged
 from 40% to 73%.
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 fluctuated over the 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, the average benefit grew from
FY1990 levels, and by FY2000 and FY2001 the average benefit had reached $107. In recent
years, between FY2004 and FY2008, the constant dollar value has ranged from $91 (in FY2004
and FY2005) up to $105 in FY2006, and then down to $74 and $72 in FY2007 and FY2008
respectively. 25

23

FY2008 LIHEAP Home Energy Notebook, p. 32.
FY200624
25

FY2007 LIHEAP Report to Congress, p. 24.
25
42.
For the most recent constant dollar value funding levels, see the FY2008 LIHEAP Home Energy Notebook, p. 32.
24

Congressional Research Service

10

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

Table 2. LIHEAP Heating/Winter Crisis Aid for Select Years
Fiscal Years
1983

1990

1993

1998

1999 2000 2001

2002

2003 2004

2005

2006 2007

2008

6.8

5.8

5.6

3.9

3.6

3.9

4.8

4.4

4.8

5.0

5.3

5.5

5.3

5.4

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

33.6

33.5

Federally
eligible and
receiving aid

31%

23%

20%

13%

12%

13%

16%

13%

14%

14%

15%

16%

16%

16%

Households
Number
receiving aid
(millions)

Benefit Levels
Average
benefit
(nominal $)

$225

$209

$201

$213

$237

$270

$364

$291

$312

$277

$304

$385

$320

$362

Average
benefit
(constant
1981 $)a

$209

$147

$129

$117

$128

$140

$187

$147

$154

$132

$140

$171

$139

$151

LIHEAP
household
heating
expenditures 7.0%
as a
percentage
of income

5.2%

7.1%

5.2%

5.2%

5.2%

7.4%

6.2%

8.6%

8.4%

9.4% 11.2%

6.5%

7.1%

Percentage
of heating
costs offset
by LIHEAP
benefit

51%

49%

—b

—b

73%

68%

64%

48%

43%

40%

—c45%

—c

LIHEAP Coverage

54%

42%

Source: Data on the percentage of heating costs offset and the annual heating costs of LIHEAP households for
FY1983, FY1990, and FY1993 come from the LIHEAP Reports to Congress for FY1983 through FY2006FY2007. Data
regarding benefit levels, average heating expenditures, and annual heating expenditures for FY2000 to the
present are drawn from the LIHEAP Home Energy Notebooks for FY1998 through FY2008. As of the date of
this report, the FY2007 LIHEAP Report to Congress was not yet available.
a.

The constant dollars are based on the 1981 value of the benefit (using the CPI-U index).

b.

CRS does not have data for heating costs offset in FY1998 and FY1999.

c.

HHS has not yet released reportsa report to Congress for FY2006 and FY2007FY2008.

Congressional Research Service

11

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

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.26 The three-tier formula is the
result of changes to the LIHEAP statute in 1984 through the Human Services Reauthorization Act
(P.L. 98-558). Prior to the changes in P.L. 98-558, LIHEAP allotments to the states were based
largely on home heating needs with minimal consideration of cooling costs, and did not provide
for the use of updated data, including population and energy costs.
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,”27 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. 28 According to HHS, then, the LIHEAP statute requires use of the old
allotment percentages when funding is less than $1.975 billion.29 Until FY2006, funding levels
26

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.
27
Report of the Committee on Energy and Commerce (H.Rept. 98-139, Part 2), to accompany H.R. 2439, May 15,
1984, p. 13.
28
42 U.S.C. § 8623(a)(2)(A).
29
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).

Congressional Research Service

12

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

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.30 State allotment percentages may be different, however. To ensure that states
receive their hold harmless levels of funding, those states that gain the most funding under the
new formula must have their percentage share of funds ratably reduced to bring other states up to
the hold harmless level. 31

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).32 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.”

30

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.
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.
31
42 U.S.C. § 8623(a)(3).
32
42 U.S.C. § 8621(e).

Congressional Research Service

13

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

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.33 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 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. 34 In addition, the Social Services Block Grant
program allows states to transfer up to 10% of funds to provide low-income home energy
assistance, 35 while the Temporary Assistance for Needy Families program gives states the
discretion to use funds for home heating and cooling costs.36

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
33

42 U.S.C. § 8621(d).
FY2004 LIHEAP Report to Congress, p. 11. For FY2004, $2 million in oil overcharge funds was available to one
state.
35
42 U.S.C. § 1397a(d).
36
42 U.S.C. § 604(a)(1).
34

Congressional Research Service

14

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

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
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. 37 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,38 the provision in P.L. 109-58 does not allow a price preference.

37
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.
38
42 U.S.C. § 15902(b)(3)(A).

Congressional Research Service

15

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

Appendix. Tables Showing LIHEAP Funding Levels
In this Appendix are four tables that show how LIHEAP funds have been distributed to the states,
tribes, and territories during the last several fiscal years, as well as historical funding levels from
the time the program was created to the present.
Table A-1 shows how LIHEAP regular funds have been distributed thus far under a series of
FY2011 Continuing Resolutions (CRs). The table shows net funding to the states, which means
that funds provided to tribes (if any) within each state are not included in the total. Instead, a
separate row at the end of the table shows the total amount of funds distributed to all tribes that
choose to receive LIHEAP funds separately. This is due to the fact that HHS did not provide a
separate breakout of tribal funding by state for the two FY2011 LIHEAP distributions shown in
columns (b) and (c). For a more comprehensive discussion of FY2011 funding levels, see the
For a more comprehensive discussion of FY2011 funding
levels, see the section of this report entitled “LIHEAP Funding Under the FY2011 Continuing 
Resolutions.”
•

Column (a) of Table A-1 shows the amount of regular funds that states received
in FY2010 for comparison purposes.

•

Column (b) shows the amount of funds that states received under the first three
Continuing Resolutions (P.L. 111-242, P.L. 111-290, and P.L. 111-317). Initially,
states were eligible to receive up to 75% of their allocation at a total funding
level of $2.7 billion. However, in mid-December HHS allowed states to receive
100% of their allocation at $2.7 billion if they chose. Column (b) shows this
latter funding level.

•

The fourth Continuing Resolution (P.L. 111-322) directs that HHS obligate to
states the same amount of funds that were obligated in FY2010 through the date
of the CR. So the amounts states receive depend on the percentage that each
requested during the first two quarters of FY2010. Column (c) shows the
amounts that HHS distributed to states under the terms of the fourth CR.

Table A-2 provides a specific breakdown of LIHEAP funds distributed in FY2010.
•

In column (a), the first number shows the total amount of regular funds
distributed to each state and the tribes within the state, while the second number,
in parenthesis and italics, breaks out the amount set aside for tribes within each
state. Tribes may operate their own LIHEAP programs if they wish. Their
allotments are taken from the state’s award of LIHEAP regular and contingency
funds based on the number of LIHEAP-eligible households in the tribe. Not all
states have funds set aside for tribes.

•

Columns (b) and (c) show the two January 2010 contingency fund distributions
of $450 million and $40 million; in columns (b) and (c), tribal funds are not
broken out separately because HHS did not make the separate breakdowns
available.

•

In column (d), the first number shows the total amount of contingency funds
distributed to states and tribes in January 2010 ($490 million), while the second
number, in parenthesis and italics, breaks out the total amount of contingency
funds (from both January distributions) set aside for tribes in each state.

Congressional Research Service

16

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

•

Column (e) shows the total amount of contingency funds distributed to states and
tribes in September 2010—approximately $101 million. As of the date of this
report, HHS had not released a breakdown of funds between states and tribes.

•

Column (f) shows total funds, regular and contingency, distributed to the states in
and tribes
received as of January 2011. In column (a), the first number shows the total
amount of regular funds distributed to each state and the tribes within the state,
while the second number, in parenthesis and italics, breaks out the amount set
aside for tribes within each state. Tribes may operate their own LIHEAP
programs if they wish. Their allotments are taken from the state’s award of
LIHEAP regular and contingency funds based on the number of LIHEAP-eligible
households in the tribe. Not all states have funds set aside for tribes.

•

Column (b) shows the amount of emergency contingency funds allocated to each
state and tribe on January 24, 2011, when HHS announced the release of $200
million.

•

Column (c) shows total FY2011 funding to the states as of the date of this report.

•

Finally, allocations to the territories are in the next-to-last row, after the states.

Table A-2 provides a specific breakdown of LIHEAP funds distributed in FY2010.
•

As described for Table A-1, column (a) of Table A-2 shows the FY2010 regular
fund distributions to states and to tribes within those states. The first number
represents total funds distributed to the state (including tribal funds), while the
second number breaks out the amount set aside for the tribes within the states
(if any).

•

Columns (b) shows the January 2010 contingency fund distribution of $490
million to states and tribes. The first number shows the total amount of
contingency funds distributed to states and the tribes within the states, while the
second number, in parenthesis and italics, breaks out the total amount of
contingency funds set aside for tribes in each state.

•

Column (c) shows the total amount of contingency funds distributed to states and
tribes in September 2010—approximately $101 million.

•

Column (d) shows total funds, regular and contingency, distributed to the states
in FY2010.

•

Finally, allocations to the territories are in the next-to-last row, after the states.

Table A-3 shows the total amount of LIHEAP regular and contingency funds distributed to each
state from FY2006 through FY2010; the totals include funds distributed to tribes within the
states.


Congressional Research Service

16

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

Table A-4 provides historic funding levels for LIHEAP from the time the program was initially
funded, in FY1982, through FY2011. The table shows authorization levels for LIHEAP regular
funds, Administration budget requests for both regular and contingency funds, the total amount of
regular and contingency funds appropriated in each fiscal year, and the total amount of
contingency funds distributed.

Congressional Research Service

17

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

Table A-1. Net State LIHEAP Formula Grant Funding (Less Tribes) Under the
FY2011 Continuing Resolutions (CRs)
(dollars in millions)

FY2010 Formula
Funding:
$4.5 Billion
(a)

FY2011 Formula
Funding Under the
First Three CRs:
$2.7 Billion
(b)

FY2011 Formula
Funding Under the
Fourth CR:
Based on Obligations
Through 3/4/10
(c)

Alabama

58.394

18.471

51.908

Alaska

16.293

4.196

13.670

Arizona

31.171

4.903

15.393

Arkansas

35.773

15.692

35.333

California

201.024

118.597

118.597

Colorado

64.257

31.488

50.773

Connecticut

96.942

38.795

95.749

Delaware

15.189

7.839

13.502

District of Columbia

13.992

8.108

13.820

Florida

110.326

62.470

98.071

Georgia

87.252

49.405

86.178

Hawaii

6.023

0.981

3.026

Idaho

25.632

8.912

22.785

Illinois

232.865

135.916

229.999

Indiana

104.144

40.034

82.290

Iowa

67.803

36.483

66.968

Kansas

41.678

26.248

41.165

Kentucky

57.742

30.478

57.032

Louisiana

51.870

32.018

46.109

Maine

52.324

28.668

51.680

Maryland

82.002

41.074

76.943

Massachusetts

175.454

100.529

173.294

Michigan

232.323

84.245

183.570

Minnesota

144.528

86.408

142.749

Mississippi

39.586

22.250

39.098

Missouri

95.257

32.703

70.563

Montana

26.075

12.844

25.754

Nebraska

39.533

20.603

39.046

Nevada

15.841

9.967

15.646

New Hampshire

34.112

19.768

33.692

177.196

109.542

175.015

State

New Jersey

Congressional Research Service

18

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

FY2010 Formula
Funding:
$4.5 Billion
(a)

FY2011 Formula
Funding Under the
First Three CRs:
$2.7 Billion
(b)

FY2011 Formula
Funding Under the
Fourth CR:
Based on Obligations
Through 3/4/10
(c)

20.575

11.923

20.322

New York

479.270

276.595

473.102

North Carolina

107.395

72.422

72.422

North Dakota

27.299

15.595

26.963

223.108

99.575

110.181

Oklahoma

43.484

26.064

38.692

Oregon

44.640

23.876

44.091

Pennsylvania

282.279

135.631

267.652

Rhode Island

29.582

12.857

29.217

South Carolina

47.311

16.289

23.364

South Dakota

22.921

11.955

22.187

Tennessee

72.092

40.787

40.787

Texas

183.593

98.181

181.333

Utah

31.596

10.962

28.086

Vermont

25.568

14.372

22.728

100.856

22.936

75.707

Washington

71.568

42.784

70.687

West Virginia

38.884

18.026

38.405

Wisconsin

130.096

77.780

128.494

Wyoming

12.527

6.490

12.372

4,427.245

2,220.418

3,896.213

49.057

30.085

48.776

6.070

3.633

5.573

4,482.372

2,254.136

3,950.562

State
New Mexico

Ohio

Virginia

Subtotal to states
Tribes
Territories
Total

Source: Funding levels for FY2010 and under the Continuing Resolutions for FY2011 are from the U.S.
Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), Administration for Children and Families.

Congressional Research Service

19

 FY2011 LIHEAP Regular and Contingency Fund Allotments to
States,Tribes, and Territories Under the FY2011 Continuing Resolution
(P.L. 111-322)
(dollars in millions)

State

Regular Funds

Emergency Contingency Funds

Total State & Tribal Regular
Fund Allotments:
$3.95 billion
(tribal set-aside, if any)
(a)

January 2011:
Total State & Tribal
Contingency Fund Allotments:
$200 million
(tribal set-aside, if any)
(b)

Total
Funds
Distributed:
$4.15 Billion
(c)

Alabama

52.352

(0.360)

2.151

(0.015)

54.503

Alaska

22.463

(8.771)

1.060

(0.414)

23.524

Arizona

16.789

(1.371)

0.923

(0.075)

17.712

Arkansas

34.868

California

119.615

Colorado

50.855

2.896

53.751

Connecticut

95.903

4.665

100.569

Delaware

13.524

0.682

14.206

District of
Columbia

13.842

0.590

14.433

Florida

98.255

Georgia

84.971

2.697

87.668

Hawaii

3.031

0.208

3.239

Idaho

23.986

Illinois

230.370

Indiana

82.429

Iowa

67.076

3.452

70.528

Kansas

41.310

1.597

42.908

Kentucky

57.124

2.776

59.900

Louisiana

46.183

1.731

47.914

Maine

53.294

Maryland

77.067

Massachusetts

173.644

Michigan

1.416
(1.018)

(0.025)

(1.164)

8.711

3.069

1.147

36.283
(0.074)

(0.001)

(0.056)

10.228
(0.007)

(1.948)

4.834

3.002

101.324

25.132
240.599

a

(0.110)

3.403

87.264

56.297
80.470

8.676

(0.003)

182.320

184.922

10.131

(0.058)

195.054

Minnesota

142.979

7.318

Mississippi

38.702

Missouri

70.677

Montana

31.260

Nebraska

39.149

Congressional Research Service

(0.069)

128.326

(0.073)

1.801

150.297
(0.003)

4.597
(5.464)

1.342
1.708

40.503
75.275

(0.235)

32.601
40.858

18

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

State

Regular Funds

Emergency Contingency Funds

Total State & Tribal Regular
Fund Allotments:
$3.95 billion
(tribal set-aside, if any)
(a)

January 2011:
Total State & Tribal
Contingency Fund Allotments:
$200 million
(tribal set-aside, if any)
(b)

Total
Funds
Distributed:
$4.15 Billion
(c)

Nevada

15.427

0.406

15.833

New
Hampshire

33.747

1.795

35.542

New Jersey

175.298

7.801

183.098

New Mexico

22.115

(1.761)

1.094

(0.087)

23.210

474.119

(0.253)

26.125

(0.014)

500.243

North
Carolina

73.733

(1.311)

4.942

(0.088)

78.675

North Dakota

34.325

(7.414)

1.467

(0.317)

35.792

New York

Ohio

110.359

9.477

119.836

Oklahoma

42.696

(3.910)

1.661

(0.152)

44.357

Oregon

44.873

(0.711)

2.282

(0.036)

47.156

Pennsylvania

268.085

14.008

Rhode Island

29.348

South Carolina

23.402

South Dakota

27.028

Tennessee

40.787

2.796

43.582

Texas

178.793

5.001

183.795

Utah

28.603

Vermont

22.765

1.284

24.049

Virginia

75.830

4.375

80.205

Washington

73.804

West Virginia

38.467

1.739

40.207

Wisconsin

128.702

6.652

135.354

Wyoming

12.804

(0.083)

1.484

282.093
(0.004)

1.740
(4.806)

(0.472)

(3.003)

(0.411)

1.265

1.309

3.717

30.832
25.142

(0.225)

(0.022)

(0.151)

28.293

29.912

77.521

0.540

(0.018)

13.344

199.772

(2.158)

4,141.525

Subtotal to
states

3,941.753

Territories

5.573

0.211

5.784

3,947.326

200.000

4,147.310

Total

(45.461)

Source: Funding levels are from the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), Administration for
Children and Families.
a.

The tribal allotment for Indiana was less than $1,000.

Congressional Research Service

19

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

Table A-2. FY2010 LIHEAP Regular and Contingency Fund Allotments to
States,Tribes, and Territories
(dollars in millions)
Contingency Funds

Regular Funds

State

Total State & Tribal
Regular Fund
Allotments:
$4.48 Billion
(tribal set-aside,
if any)ba
(a)

State

January 2010:
Two Contingency Fund
Distributions to
States & Tribes
(tribes not broken out
separately)

January 2010:
Breakdown of
State & Tribal
Contingency
Funds

September
2010:
State &
Tribal
Contingency
Fundsa

$450
Millionc
(b)

$40
Milliond
(c)

$490 Million
(tribal set-aside,
if any)
(d)

$101
Millione
(e)

2.639

Alabama

58.799

(0.340)

6.714

Alaska

25.308

(9.025)

Arizona

33.729

(2.558)

Arkansas

35.773

California

202.749

9.353

(0.064)

0.865

69.016

2.322

2.322

(0.828)

0.552

28.182

3.275

3.275

(0.248)

0.418

37.422

0.660

40.000

4.639

234.215

Colorado

2.825

0.743

3.568

26.827

26.827

64.257

4.800

4.800

1.617

70.675

Connecticut

96.942

8.793

8.793

2.110

107.845

Delaware

15.189

1.378

1.378

0.280

16.847

District of
Columbia

13.992

1.747

1.747

0.328

16.067

1.368

129.014

Florida

110.354

Georgia

(1.720)

Total
Funds
Distributed
$5.073
Billion
(f)

13.307

3.985

17.292

87.252

9.404

4.354

13.758

1.082

102.091

Hawaii

6.023

0.456

0.456

0.109

6.589

Idaho

26.939

2.587

2.587

0.631

30.158

Illinois

232.865

26.837

26.837

5.840

265.542

Indiana

104.151

10.780

10.780

2.644

117.575

4.848

4.848

1.874

74.524

0.861

46.262

Iowa

67.803

Kansas

41.757

Kentucky

(0.028)

(0.228)

(1.307)
(0.007)
(0.079)

(0.004)

(0.126)
(0.001)

2.941

0.703

3.644

57.742

6.716

1.998

8.714

1.376

67.832

Louisiana

51.870

3.985

2.314

6.299

0.884

59.054

Maine

54.309

1.367

60.428

Maryland

82.002

1.616

90.005

(1.985)

4.752

4.752

6.388

6.388

(0.007)

(0.174)

Massachusetts

175.524

(0.070)

16.857

16.857

(0.007)

4.221

196.602

Michigan

233.524

(1.202)

37.379

37.379

(0.192)

5.545

276.447

Minnesota

144.528

11.567

11.567

3.995

160.089

Mississippi

39.661

0.741

46.650

Missouri

95.257

2.333

107.145

(0.075)

Congressional Research Service

4.021
9.555

2.228

6.248
9.555

(0.012)

20

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

Contingency Funds

Regular Funds

Total State & Tribal
Regular Fund
Allotments
$4.48 Billion
(tribal set-aside,
if any)b
(a)

State

January 2010:
Two Contingency Fund
Distributions to
States & Tribes
(tribes not broken out
separately)

January 2010:
Breakdown of
State & Tribal
Contingency
Funds

September
2010:
State &
Tribal
Contingency
Fundsa

$450
Millionc
(b)

$490 Million
(tribal set-aside,
if any)
(d)

$101
Millione
(e)

Montana

31.598

(5.524)

2.192

Nebraska

39.573

(0.040)

2.027

Nevada

15.841

2.181

New Hampshire

34.112

New Jersey

177.196

New Mexico

22.355

New York

$40
Milliond
(c)

Total
Funds
Distributed
$5.073
Billion
(f)

2.192

(0.383)

0.740

34.530

2.393

(0.002)

0.927

42.893

2.181

0.196

18.218

2.512

2.512

0.799

37.423

18.341

18.341

3.918

199.455

(1.780)

1.861

1.861

(0.148)

0.524

24.739

479.526

(0.255)

45.029

45.029

(0.024)

12.794

537.348

North Carolina

109.339

(1.945)

12.601

15.893

(0.283)

1.907

127.139

North Dakota

34.325

(7.026)

1.538

1.538

(0.315)

0.804

36.668

24.760

24.760

5.166

253.035

Ohio

223.108

Oklahoma

47.902

(4.336)

3.578

Oregon

45.355

(0.715)

0.367

3.292

0.915

4.493

(0.414)

0.795

53.190

5.421

5.421

(0.085)

1.254

52.029

26.206

26.206

6.872

315.357

4.084

4.084

0.695

34.444

0.687

56.232

0.653

29.989

Pennsylvania

282.279

Rhode Island

29.666

South Carolina

47.311

South Dakota

27.878

Tennessee

72.092

8.001

3.412

11.413

1.394

84.899

Texas

183.593

16.065

10.873

26.938

2.276

212.807

Utah

32.094

0.752

35.003

Vermont
Virginia

(0.084)

6.058
(4.957)

(0.499)

2.176

1.458

(0.012)

8.234
1.458

(0.259)

2.158

2.158

25.568

1.773

1.773

0.599

27.941

100.856

7.103

7.103

1.968

109.927

7.324

7.324

2.062

83.989

Washington

74.603

West Virginia

38.884

3.568

3.568

0.911

43.363

Wisconsin

130.096

11.522

11.522

3.596

145.214

Wyoming

12.850

(0.210)

0.974

0.974

(0.219)

0.301

14.124

4,476.302

(48.800)

449.391

40.000

489.391

(4.367)

100.542

5,066.234

6.070

0.609

—

0.609

0.136

6.816

4,482.372

450.000

40.000

490.000

100.678

5,073.050

Subtotal to States
and Tribes
Territories
Total

(3.035)

(0.034)

Congressional Research Service

(0.298)

21

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

Source: Compiled by the Congressional Research Service (CRS) using U.S. Department of Health and Human
Services (HHS) data.
a.

As of the date of this report, CRS had not received a breakout of tribal emergency contingency funds.

b.

Tribes may operate their own LIHEAP programs if they wish. Their allotments are taken from the state’s
award of LIHEAP regular and contingency funds based on the number of LIHEAP-eligible household in the
tribe. In columns (a) and (d) of this table, the first number represents the total amount of regular or
contingency funds awarded to each state, including any amounts for tribes, while the number in parenthesis
is the total amount allotted to a tribe or tribes within the state.

c.

In January 2010, HHS awarded $450 million in contingency funds to all states, tribes, and territories based
on their share of FY2010 formula grants weighted by the unemployment rate.

d.

In January 2010, HHS awarded $40 million in contingency funds to 14 states where the number of heating
degree days (HDDs) from November 1, 2009, through January 9, 2010, exceeded the 30-year norm by at
least 5%. These states then received amounts based on the ratio of the product of total HDDs, the number
of households at or below 125% of poverty, and the unemployment rate to the sum of the products for all
14 states.

e.

In September 2010, HHS awarded $101 million to all states, tribes, and territories based on the proportions
of the “old” LIHEAP formula.

Congressional Research Service

22

 January 2010:
State & Tribal
Contingency Funds:
$490 Millionb
(tribal set-aside,
if any)
(b)

September 2010:
State & Tribal
Contingency Funds:
$101 Millionc
(tribal set-aside,
if any)
(c)

Total
Funds
Distributed:
$5.073 Billion
(d)

Alabama

58.799

(0.340)

9.353

(0.064)

0.865

(0.006)

69.016

Alaska

25.308

(9.025)

2.322

(0.828)

0.552

(0.197)

28.182

Arizona

33.729

(2.558)

3.275

(0.248)

0.418

(0.032)

37.422

Arkansas

35.773

California

202.749

Colorado

64.257

4.800

1.617

70.675

Connecticut

96.942

8.793

2.110

107.845

Delaware

15.189

1.378

0.280

16.847

District of
Columbia

13.992

1.747

0.328

16.067

3.568
(1.720)

(0.028)

26.827

(0.228)

234.215

129.014

Georgia

87.252

13.758

1.082

102.091

Hawaii

6.023

0.456

0.109

6.589

Idaho

26.939

Illinois

232.865

Indiana

104.151

(0.126)

26.837
(0.007)

10.780

1.368

(0.039)

110.354

2.587

(0.004)

4.639

40.000

Florida

(1.307)

17.292

0.660

0.631

d

(0.031)

5.840
(0.001)

4.848

2.644

30.158
265.542

d

Iowa

67.803

Kansas

41.757

Kentucky

57.742

8.714

1.376

67.832

Louisiana

51.870

6.299

0.884

59.054

Maine

54.309

Maryland

82.002

(0.079)

(1.985)

3.644

4.752

1.874

117.575

(0.007)

(0.174)

6.388

0.861

1.367

74.524
(0.002)

(0.050)

1.616

46.262

60.428
90.005

Massachusetts

175.524

(0.070)

16.857

(0.007)

4.221

(0.002)

196.602

Michigan

233.524

(1.202)

37.379

(0.192)

5.545

(0.029)

276.447

Minnesota

144.528

Mississippi

39.661

Missouri

95.257

Montana

31.598

(5.524)

2.192

(0.383)

0.740

(0.129)

34.530

Nebraska

39.573

(0.040)

2.393

(0.002)

0.927

(0.001)

42.893

Nevada

15.841

11.567
(0.075)

6.248

3.995
(0.012)

9.555

Congressional Research Service

2.181

0.741

160.089
(0.001)

2.333

0.196

46.650
107.145

18.218

20

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

Regular Funds
Total State & Tribal
Regular Fund
Allotments:
$4.48 Billion
(tribal set-aside,
if any)a
(a)

State
New Hampshire

Contingency Funds
January 2010:
State & Tribal
Contingency Funds:
$490 Millionb
(tribal set-aside,
if any)
(b)

September 2010:
State & Tribal
Contingency Funds:
$101 Millionc
(tribal set-aside,
if any)
(c)

Total
Funds
Distributed:
$5.073 Billion
(d)

34.112

2.512

0.799

37.423

New Jersey

177.196

18.341

3.918

199.455

New Mexico

22.355

(1.780)

1.861

(0.148)

0.524

(0.042)

24.739

New York

479.526

(0.255)

45.029

(0.024)

12.794

(0.014)

537.348

North Carolina

109.339

(1.945)

15.893

(0.283)

1.907

(0.034)

127.139

North Dakota

34.325

(7.026)

1.538

(0.315)

0.804

(0.165)

36.668

Ohio

223.108

24.760

5.166

253.035

Oklahoma

47.902

(4.336)

4.493

(0.414)

0.795

(0.073)

53.190

Oregon

45.355

(0.715)

5.421

(0.085)

1.254

(0.020)

52.029

Pennsylvania

282.279

Rhode Island

29.666

South Carolina

47.311

South Dakota

27.878

Tennessee

72.092

11.413

1.394

84.899

Texas

183.593

26.938

2.276

212.807

Utah

32.094

Vermont

25.568

1.773

0.599

27.941

100.856

7.103

1.968

109.927

Virginia

26.206
(0.084)

4.084

6.872
(0.012)

8.234
(4.957)

(0.499)

2.158

0.687
(0.259)

(0.034)

0.752

(0.116)

(0.012)

35.003

3.568

0.911

43.363

Wisconsin

130.096

11.522

3.596

145.214

Wyoming

12.850

Territories
Total

0.974

(0.219)

0.301

489.391

(4.367)

100.542

(0.084)

29.989

38.884

(48.800)

2.062

56.232

West Virginia

4,476.302

(0.298)

0.653

34.444

74.603

(0.210)

7.324

(0.002)

Washington

Subtotal to States
and Tribes

(3.035)

1.458

0.695

315.357

(0.003)
1.082

83.989

14.124
5,066.234

6.070

0.609

0.136

6.816

4,482.372

490.000

100.678

5,073.050

Source: Compiled by the Congressional Research Service (CRS) using U.S. Department of Health and Human
Services (HHS) data.
a.

Tribes may operate their own LIHEAP programs if they wish. Their allotments are taken from the state’s
award of LIHEAP regular and contingency funds based on the number of LIHEAP-eligible household in the
tribe. In columns (a), (b), and (c) of this table, the first number represents the total amount of regular or
contingency funds awarded to each state, including any amounts for tribes, while the number in parenthesis
is the total amount allotted to a tribe or tribes within the state.

b.

In January 2010, HHS awarded $450 million in contingency funds to all states, tribes, and territories based
on their share of FY2010 formula grants weighted by the unemployment rate. Also in January 2010, HHS

Congressional Research Service

21

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

awarded $40 million in contingency funds to 14 states where the number of heating degree days (HDDs)
from November 1, 2009, through January 9, 2010, exceeded the 30-year norm by at least 5%. These states
then received amounts based on the ratio of the product of total HDDs, the number of households at or
below 125% of poverty, and the unemployment rate to the sum of the products for all 14 states.
c.

In September 2010, HHS awarded $101 million to all states, tribes, and territories based on the proportions
of the “old” LIHEAP formula.

d.

Tribes in Florida and Indiana received funding of less than $1,000.

Congressional Research Service

22

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

Table A-3. LIHEAP Funding by State FY2006 to FY2010
(dollars in millions)
State
(includes tribal
allotments)

Total Funds Distributeda
(regular and contingency)
FY2006

FY2007

FY2008

FY2009

FY2010

Alabama

31.972

22.205

19.221

64.274

69.016

Alaska

18.473

12.454

16.856

30.928

28.182

Arizona

15.399

8.551

9.296

31.084

37.422

Arkansas

23.336

15.749

14.667

39.711

40.000

California

157.626

94.855

103.117

248.487

234.215

Colorado

44.842

33.073

41.326

71.352

70.675

Connecticut

71.106

48.102

65.618

125.887

107.845

Delaware

10.954

5.727

6.929

18.748

16.847

8.165

6.700

7.284

16.249

16.067

Florida

49.798

27.977

30.414

101.701

129.014

Georgia

40.026

28.564

24.047

80.410

102.091

Hawaii

2.567

2.228

2.403

5.182

6.589

Idaho

14.772

12.901

13.916

30.012

30.158

Illinois

193.814

119.418

149.216

265.679

265.542

Indiana

75.336

54.069

67.561

116.487

117.575

Iowa

52.054

38.319

47.881

76.929

74.524

Kansas

27.722

19.746

22.137

49.541

46.262

Kentucky

45.320

32.010

30.588

75.055

67.832

Louisiana

32.671

22.499

19.651

61.502

59.054

Maine

45.146

33.719

46.536

79.187

60.428

Maryland

61.889

33.036

35.913

109.164

90.005

Massachusetts

126.476

93.795

126.492

213.500

196.602

Michigan

154.671

113.377

141.667

249.416

276.447

Minnesota

110.849

81.681

102.063

163.982

160.089

Mississippi

27.467

17.871

16.479

42.622

46.650

Missouri

78.220

52.645

59.603

114.902

107.145

Montana

22.789

15.132

18.907

35.202

34.530

Nebraska

28.643

18.950

23.679

44.086

42.893

7.247

4.016

4.366

14.599

18.218

27.740

18.769

25.635

47.737

37.423

New Jersey

115.046

80.120

108.707

185.773

199.455

New Mexico

12.491

10.705

11.638

27.451

24.739

District of Columbia

Nevada
New Hampshire

Congressional Research Service

23

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

State
(includes tribal
allotments)

Total Funds Distributeda
(regular and contingency)
FY2006

FY2007

FY2008

FY2009

FY2010

382.251

261.604

359.628

538.243

537.348

North Carolina

72.413

45.974

42.383

132.528

127.139

North Dakota

24.680

16.438

20.539

38.240

36.668

164.226

105.643

132.004

245.750

253.035

Oklahoma

29.543

19.282

17.668

52.878

53.190

Oregon

25.116

25.633

27.650

51.460

52.029

Pennsylvania

202.324

140.520

191.759

308.394

315.357

Rhode Island

23.131

15.471

20.875

38.653

34.444

South Carolina

25.279

17.636

15.266

51.047

56.232

South Dakota

20.117

13.350

16.681

31.058

29.989

Tennessee

47.139

33.568

30.985

80.512

84.899

Texas

84.005

46.545

50.599

169.196

212.807

Utah

23.285

15.369

19.204

35.755

35.003

Vermont

20.903

14.162

19.370

36.156

27.941

Virginia

75.053

40.241

43.746

127.668

109.927

Washington

41.226

42.163

45.481

84.645

83.989

West Virginia

24.543

18.621

20.157

45.019

43.363

Wisconsin

99.837

73.525

91.872

147.608

145.214

Wyoming

9.284

6.153

7.689

14.315

14.124

3,128.981

2,130.860

2,587.373

5,065.966

5,066.234

3.456

2.788

3.014

6.734

6.816

Leveraging/REACHc

27.225

27.225

—d

27.000

27.000

Training/tech. asst.e

0.297

0.297

0.292

0.300

0.300

Total

3,160

2,161

2,591

5,100

5,100.350

New York

Ohio

Subtotal to states and
tribes
Territoriesb

Source: 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 and tribes, and any contingency
funds awarded to states and tribes in that year.

b.

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).

c.

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.

Congressional Research Service

24

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

d.

The FY2008 Consolidated Appropriations Act (P.L. 110-161) did not specify funds for leveraging incentive
and 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.

Congressional Research Service

25

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

Table A-4. LIHEAP Funding: FY1982 to FY2011
(dollars in thousands)
Regular Funds

Contingency Fundsa

Fiscal
Year

Authorized

President’s
Request

Appropriated

President’s
Request

Appropriated

Distributed

Total
Distributed

1982

1,875,000

1,400,000

1,875,000

—

—

—

1,875,000

1983

1,875,000

1,300,000

1,975,000

—

—

—

1,975,000

1984

1,875,000

1,300,000

2,075,000

—

—

—

2,075,000

1985

2,140,000

1,875,000

2,100,000

—

—

—

2,100,000

1986

2,275,000

2,097,765

2,100,000

—

—

—

2,100,000

1987

2,050,000

2,097,642

1,825,000

—

—

—

1,825,000

1988

2,132,000

1,237,000

1,531,840

—

—

—

1,531,840

1989

2,218,000

1,187,000

1,383,200

—

—

—

1,383,200

1990

2,307,000

1,100,000

1,443,000

—

—

—

1,443,000

1991

2,150,000

1,050,000

1,415,055

NAb

195,180

195,180

1,610,235

1992

2,230,000

925,000

1,500,000

100,000

300,000

0

1,500,000

1993

ssanc

1,065,000

1,346,030

0

595,200

0

1,346,030

1994

ssanc

1,507,408

1,437,402

0

600,000

300,000

1,737,402

1995

2,000,000

1,475,000

1,319,202

d

600,000

100,000

1,419,202

1996

2,000,000

1,319,204

900,000

e

180,000

180,000

1,080,000

1997

2,000,000

1,000,000

1,000,000

300,000

420,000

215,000

1,215,000

1998

2,000,000

1,000,000

1,000,000

300,000

300,000

160,000

1,160,000

1999

2,000,000

1,000,000

1,100,000

300,000

300,000

175,299

1,275,299

2000

ssanc

1,100,000

1,100,000

300,000

900,000

744,350f

1,844350f

2001

ssanc

1,100,000

1,400,000

300,000

600,000g

455,650h

1,855,650

2002

2,000,000

1,400,000

1,700,000

300,000

300,000

100,000i

1,800,000

300,000

0

200,000k

1,988,300

2003

2,000,000

1,400,000

1,788,300j

2004

2,000,000

1,700,000

1,789,380

300,000

99,410

99,410

1,888,790

2005

5,100,000

1,900,500l,m

1,884,799

200,000

297,600

277,250

2,162,050

2006

5,100,000

1,800,000l

2,480,000

200,000

681,000

679,960

3,160,000

2007

5,100,000

1,782,000

1,980,000

0

181,000

181,000

2,161,000

2008

—n

1,500,000

1,980,000

282,000

590,328

610,678o

2,590,678

2009

—n

1,700,000

4,509,672

300,000

590,328

590,328

5,100,000

2010

—n

2,410,000p

4,509,672

790,000

590,328

590,678

5,100,350

2011

—n

2,510,000q

—

790,000

—

—

—200,000r

4,147,310r

Source: Prepared by the Congressional Research Service (CRS) on the basis of HHS data.
a.

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.

Congressional Research Service

26

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

b.

Congress first allocated emergency contingency funds in January of 1991 due to the price of home heating
oil (P.L. 101-517). Funds were not requested in the President’s budget until FY1992.

c.

Such sums as necessary.

d.

The President’s FY1995 request would have made the unallocated contingency funds that were
appropriated in FY1994 (P.L. 103-112) available until expended.

e.

The President’s FY1996 request would have made the unallocated contingency funds that were
appropriated in FY1995 (P.L. 103-333) available until expended.

f.

The Administration released $400 million of the FY2000 contingency funds in late September 2000, making
them effectively available to states in FY2001.

g.

The initial contingency fund appropriation for FY2001was $300 million (P.L. 106-554). The Administration
released the entire amount by December 30, 2000. On July 24, 2001, the 2001 Supplemental
Appropriations Act (P.L. 107-20) provided an additional $300 million in contingency funds.

h.

The distributed contingency funds in FY2001 included the $300 million appropriated in P.L. 106-554 and the
amount remaining from FY2000 (approximately $156 million). The $300 million that was appropriated as
part of P.L. 107-20 was made available until expended; a portion was distributed in FY2003 and the
remainder was converted to regular funds that same year.

i.

The FY2002 contingency funds were distributed out of the total FY2002 contingency appropriation (P.L.
107-116). With the end of FY2002, the remainder of the contingency funds expired ($200 million).

j.

The 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).

k.

FY2003 contingency funds were distributed out of contingency dollars appropriated as part of the FY2001
supplemental (P.L. 107-20).

l.

Of the amounts requested by the President in FY2005 and FY2006, $500,000 was to be set aside for a
national evaluation.

m. 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.
n.

LIHEAP has not been authorized in FY2008, FY2009, FY2010, and FY2011and FY2010.

o.

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.

p.

In FY2010, the President proposed that a mechanism be created whereby additional LIHEAP funds would be
released when energy price increases reached certain levels; the proposal was not adopted by Congress.
The Administration estimated that this “trigger” would have resulted in mandatory budget authority of
$450 million. This estimate is not included in the table.

q.

In FY2011, the President again proposed a trigger to release additional LIHEAP funds. In addition to
proposing that funds be released when energy prices increase, the FY2011 proposal would release funds
when participation in SNAP (formerly known as Food Stamps) increases above a certain level. The
Administration estimates that this trigger would result in mandatory budget authority of $2 billion. This
estimate is not included in the table.

r.

As of the date of this report, Congress had not enacted a year-long appropriation bill for LIHEAP (or most
federal programs). However, under the continuing resolutions HHS has distributed $200 million in
emergency contingency funds and approximately $3.95 billion in regular funds.

Congressional Research Service

27

 .
.

Congressional Research Service

27

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

Author Contact Information
Libby Perl
Specialist in Housing Policy
eperl@crs.loc.gov, 7-7806

Congressional Research Service

28

 