2012 Farm Bill:
Changing the Treatment of LIHEAP Receipt
in the Calculation of SNAP Benefits
Randy Alison Aussenberg
Analyst in Nutrition Assistance Policy
Libby Perl
Specialist in Housing Policy
July 10, 2012
Congressional Research Service
7-5700
www.crs.gov
R42591
CRS Report for Congress
Pr
epared for Members and Committees of Congress
2012 Farm Bill: Changing the Treatment of LIHEAP in the Calculation of SNAP Benefits
Summary
As Congress formulates the 2012 farm bill—an omnibus bill that reauthorizes a range of
agriculture and nutrition programs—program integrity and deficit reduction have been leading
themes. One of the cost-saving measures in the farm bill would address the way in which
Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) benefits are calculated. The SNAP statute
allows for certain deductions from income when calculating a household’s benefit level, including
a deduction for excess shelter expenses, which includes utility costs. If a family receives benefits
through another federal program, the Low Income Home Energy Assistance Program (LIHEAP),
this deduction from income can be higher, allowing for a higher SNAP benefit for the household.
Both the Senate-passed 2012 farm bill (S. 3240) and the House Agriculture Committee
Chairman’s mark limit the deduction associated with LIHEAP, seeking to end a practice that has
been referred to as “Heat and Eat.”
Under current law, a SNAP household can use a LIHEAP payment (regardless of the amount of
that payment) to document that the household has incurred heating and cooling costs. This
documentation triggers a standard utility allowance (SUA), a figure that enters into the SNAP
benefit calculation equation. Unless the household is getting the maximum SNAP benefit already,
a household’s monthly benefit can increase if the SUA calculation results in an excess shelter
deduction.
In addition to current law, current practice also affects the interaction between these benefit
programs. While virtually all SNAP states consider LIHEAP in their calculation, approximately
16 states have implemented the so-called “Heat and Eat” policy. “Heat and Eat” is a phrase that
the low-income and anti-hunger advocacy community has used to describe state and program
policies that leverage nominal (as little as $1) LIHEAP payments into an increase in households’
SNAP benefits that is larger than the initial LIHEAP payment.
As of the date of the report, two policies have been voted on in Congress that would change
current law to limit or eliminate this practice:
• Under Section 4002 of the Senate-passed 2012 farm bill, S. 3240, only LIHEAP
payments above $10 would confer this potential advantage. Payments of $10 and
below would no longer entitle a household to earn an SUA during the benefit
calculation process. If a household received less than $10 in energy assistance,
households would have to present alternate documentation of utility costs in
order to have utilities factored into calculating their excess shelter deduction.
• Under Section 104 of the Sequester Replacement Reconciliation Act, H.R. 5652,
no amount of LIHEAP benefits would garner additional SNAP benefits.
Households would have to present alternative documentation of utility costs.
The July 5, 2012, release of the House Agriculture Committee Chairs’ farm bill, scheduled to be
marked up on July 11, 2012, also contains the S. 3240 version of this policy.
This report discusses the policy background, details, and context associated with these bills’
changes to the current law of LIHEAP and SNAP SUAs, focusing primarily on S. 3240’s
language. The report will be revised to reflect congressional action in this area.
Congressional Research Service
2012 Farm Bill: Changing the Treatment of LIHEAP in the Calculation of SNAP Benefits
Contents
Introduction...................................................................................................................................... 1
Current Law and Background.......................................................................................................... 2
Brief Overview of SNAP Benefit Calculation........................................................................... 2
LIHEAP’s Role in SNAP Deductions and Benefit Calculation................................................. 3
Background on LIHEAP ........................................................................................................... 5
What Is “Heat and Eat”?............................................................................................................ 6
Are Recipients of These Nominal Payments Ineligible for LIHEAP?................................ 7
How Would the Senate’s 2012 Farm Bill Change Current Law? .................................................... 7
What May Be the Impact of the Senate-Passed Farm Bill’s Change to the Treatment of
LIHEAP in the Calculation of SNAP Benefits? ........................................................................... 8
Impact on Households ............................................................................................................... 8
Impact on Program Administration ........................................................................................... 9
Has This Change Been Included in Other 112th Congress Legislative Proposals?........................ 11
Figures
Figure 1. Calculating the Monthly Benefit for a Hypothetical Household in FY2012.................... 3
Figure 2. LIHEAP’s Impact in the SNAP Benefit Calculation Process........................................... 4
Tables
Table 1. SNAP Households with SUAs Due to LIHEAP Benefits, FY2010................................. 10
Contacts
Author Contact Information........................................................................................................... 11
Acknowledgments ......................................................................................................................... 11
Congressional Research Service
2012 Farm Bill: Changing the Treatment of LIHEAP in the Calculation of SNAP Benefits
Introduction
In light of proposals in the 112th Congress, particularly the Senate-passed 2012 farm bill, this
report was prepared to explain the interrelationship of policies and practices in the Low Income
Home Energy Assistance Program (LIHEAP) and the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program
(SNAP). Section 4002 of the Agriculture Reform, Food and Jobs Act of 2012, S. 3240, addresses
this issue. While under current law SNAP recipients who also receive benefits from LIHEAP may
see increased SNAP benefits, no matter the amount of LIHEAP received, S. 3240 would attempt
to limit this relationship. Similarly the House Agriculture Committee chairman’s mark, released
on July 5, 2012, proposes the same change.1 The House Committee on Agriculture has scheduled
a mark-up for July 11, 2012.
Because SNAP benefits are 100% federally funded and because SNAP is an open-ended
entitlement, policy changes to benefits or eligibility can generate substantial changes in spending.
The Congressional Budget Office has estimated that the policy change in S. 3240, addressing the
treatment of LIHEAP in determining SNAP benefits, would garner $4.5 billion in savings over 10
years, and that the savings would come from reductions in benefits for 500,000 households.2 This
policy constitutes approximately 98% of the reductions in spending in the nutrition title of S.
3240 as passed by the Senate. 3
This Senate-passed policy comes at a time when 2012 farm bill development has focused on
deficit reduction as well as agricultural program reforms.4 Supporters of this Senate-proposed
farm bill policy frame it as a tightening of SNAP, ensuring that LIHEAP is treated uniformly and
according to congressional intent. Detractors argue that by ending the so-called “Heat and Eat”
practice, it reduces benefits for those in need.
In addition to the significance of this provision for S. 3240’s nutrition title cost estimate, the
current law policy is complex and it can be difficult to untangle how the farm bill change would
work and what states and households may be affected. This report provides current law
background on the interaction between SNAP and LIHEAP, an explanation of proposed changes,
and the potential impact of this change on households and administration of SNAP. This report
first begins with the background topics and terminology that contribute to the state of current law:
a brief overview of benefit calculation, LIHEAP’s role in SNAP deductions and benefit
calculation, background on LIHEAP, and the practice of so-called “Heat and Eat.” Next, it
explains how Section 4002 of S. 3240 would change current law. Finally, the report discusses
1 Section 4005 of language posted on Committee website July 5, 2012, http://agriculture.house.gov/pdf/legislation/
FARRMDiscussionDraft.pdf.
2 Congressional Budget Office, Cost Estimate: S. 3240 Agriculture Reform, Food, and Jobs Act of 2012, May 24, 2012,
http://cbo.gov/sites/default/files/cbofiles/attachments/s3240.pdf.
3 Congressional Budget Office, Cost Estimate: S. 3240 Agriculture Reform, Food, and Jobs Act of 2012 As Passed by
the United States Senate on June 21, 2012, July 6, 2012, http://cbo.gov/sites/default/files/cbofiles/attachments/
s3240Passed.pdf. For S. 3240’s nutrition title, which also includes provisions estimated to increase direct spending,
CBO estimates a net cost savings of $4.0 billion over 10 years.
4 See, for example, U.S. Senate Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry, “Chairwoman Stabenow, Ranking
Member Roberts Highlight Reforms of Farm Bill, Call for Swift Senate Passage,” press release, June 6, 2012,
http://www.ag.senate.gov/newsroom/press/release/chairwoman-stabenow-ranking-member-roberts-highlight-reforms-
of-farm-bill-call-for-swift-senate-passage.
Congressional Research Service
1
2012 Farm Bill: Changing the Treatment of LIHEAP in the Calculation of SNAP Benefits
how those changes could affect SNAP households and states’ administration, but also
acknowledges the ways in which CRS is limited in gauging the policy’s true impact.5
For further information on the farm bill and SNAP in general, please see
• CRS Report R42552, The Senate-Passed 2012 Farm Bill (S. 3240): A
Comparison with Current Law
• CRS Report R42353, Domestic Food Assistance: Summary of Programs
• CRS Report R42505, Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP): A
Primer on Eligibility and Benefits
• CRS Report R42357, Previewing the Next Farm Bill
• CRS Report R42442, Possible Extension or Expiration of the 2008 Farm Bill
Current Law and Background
Brief Overview of SNAP Benefit Calculation6
SNAP benefits are a function of a household’s size, its net (counted) monthly income, and
inflation-indexed maximum monthly benefit levels (in some cases, adjusted for geographic
location). An eligible household’s net income is determined (i.e., certain deductions are subtracted
from gross income), its maximum benefit level is established, and a benefit is calculated by
subtracting its expected contribution (by law, 30% of its net income) from its maximum
allotment. This equation is illustrated in Figure 1. Thus, in most states, a three-person household
with $400 in counted net income (after deductions) would receive a monthly allotment of $406 in
FY2012 (i.e., the 2012 maximum three-person benefit in the 48 states or DC,7 $526, less 30% of
the household’s net income, $120). A three-person household with no counted income would
receive the maximum allotment.
5 Note that the territories Guam and Virgin Islands also operate SNAP. This report consistently uses terms like “states”
and “state agencies” with the assumption that such phrases include Guam and Virgin Islands in the context of SNAP.
6 See CRS Report R42505, Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP): A Primer on Eligibility and Benefits,
by Randy Alison Aussenberg, for greater discussion of these and other basic SNAP concepts.
7 The basis for calculating the maximum benefit, the thrifty food plan (and its adjustment for inflation), is slightly
different for Alaska, Hawaii, Guam, and the Virgin Islands, which means that the maximum benefit in these
jurisdictions is not $526 for a family of three (http://www.fns.usda.gov/SNAP/government/
FY12_Allot_Deduct_AKHIGUVI.htm).
Congressional Research Service
2
2012 Farm Bill: Changing the Treatment of LIHEAP in the Calculation of SNAP Benefits
Figure 1. Calculating the Monthly Benefit for a Hypothetical Household in FY2012
This Illustration Depicts a Three-Person Household in the 48 States with Net Income of $400
Maxim
M
u
axim m Monthly
u
m Monthly Be
B nefit
ne
($526
($
)
526
30% of
30
Net M
Ne
ont
t M
hly I
hl
n
y I come
-
n
- (.(30 x $400 = $120)0
SNAP Mont
SNAP M
hly Be
hl
ne
y Be
f
ne it
i ($
t 406
($
)
406
Source: Figure generated by CRS, based on benefit calculation rules.
LIHEAP’s Role in SNAP Deductions and Benefit Calculation
Under current law, if a SNAP household receives a LIHEAP payment, then that household may
receive a higher SNAP benefit than if the household had not received LIHEAP.8
Figure 2 depicts an overview of LIHEAP’s role in the SNAP benefit calculation. The discussion
after Figure 2 elaborates on the definitions of various deductions used in calculating SNAP
benefits, potentially including LIHEAP receipt, and how they interact in the benefit calculation
process.
8 For more information about LIHEAP, see CRS Report RL31865, The Low Income Home Energy Assistance Program
(LIHEAP): Program and Funding, by Libby Perl.
Congressional Research Service
3
2012 Farm Bill: Changing the Treatment of LIHEAP in the Calculation of SNAP Benefits
Figure 2. LIHEAP’s Impact in the SNAP Benefit Calculation Process
Source: Figure generated by CRS, based on SNAP law.
Notes: This figure focuses on the excess shelter deduction, which is conducted after the deduction of other
non-shelter deductible expenses such as the standard deduction, dependent care, and earned income.
As shown earlier in Figure 1, the amount of SNAP benefits that an eligible household receives is
based, in part, on the maximum benefit and also in part on the household’s net income. The SNAP
agency computes net monthly income by subtracting certain “deductions” from a household’s
basic (or gross) monthly income. This calculation is based on the recognition that not all of a
household’s income is available for food purchases. Thus, a standard portion of income, plus
amounts representing costs such as work expenses or high non-food living expenses, is deducted
from the gross income.
For households without an elderly or disabled member, net monthly income equals gross monthly
income minus the following deductions,9 if applicable:
• Standard deduction: A “standard” monthly deduction that varies by household
size and is indexed for inflation. Every applicant household gets this deduction.
• Earned income deduction: 20% of any earned income, in recognition of taxes
and work expenses.
• Child support deduction: Any amounts paid out as legally obligated child
support.
9 Tables that list the FY2012 amounts of the standard deduction (and other deduction amounts set in the Food and
Nutrition Act) can be found in CRS Report R42505, Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP): A Primer on
Eligibility and Benefits, by Randy Alison Aussenberg.
Congressional Research Service
4
2012 Farm Bill: Changing the Treatment of LIHEAP in the Calculation of SNAP Benefits
• Dependent care deduction: Out-of-pocket dependent care expenses, when
related to work or training.10
• Excess shelter deduction: The amount of shelter expenses (including utility
costs, which states may standardize with a “standard utility allowance” [SUA]
calculation) that exceed 50% of net income after all other deductions. This
deduction is capped for households that do not contain an elderly or disabled
member.
• Note: Households that receive LIHEAP may automatically qualify for a
higher SUA, no matter the amount of LIHEAP received.
For households with an elderly or disabled member, net monthly income equals gross monthly
income minus:
• The same standard, child support, earned income, and dependent care
deductions noted above;
• an uncapped excess shelter deduction, to the extent such expenses exceed 50%
of counted income after all other deductions; and
• any out-of-pocket medical expenses (other than those for special diets) that are
incurred by an elderly or disabled household member, to the extent they exceed a
threshold of $35 a month.
Key points for understanding SNAP’s current LIHEAP policy and its impact are
• A standard utility allowance (SUA) is not something tangible and is a number
that states use in place of gathering all of an applicant’s utility cost and usage
information. The methodology and the amounts of an SUA vary by state, and
many states have several different utility allowances based upon whether a
household incurs heating/cooling costs or not. An SUA often “tips the scale”
toward enabling an applicant household to qualify for an excess shelter
deduction.
• Households with elderly or disabled members have no limit on the amount of
their excess shelter deduction, whereas those without an elderly or disabled
member have a cap (that adjusts for inflation) on their excess shelter expenses.
Background on LIHEAP
LIHEAP is a block grant program under which the federal government gives annual grants to
states, tribes, and territories (collectively referred to in this report as “states”) to operate home
energy assistance programs for low-income households.11 States may use funds to help eligible
households pay for heating and cooling costs, for crisis assistance, and to weatherize their
homes.12 Both renters and homeowners are eligible for LIHEAP.13 Federal LIHEAP requirements
10 Limits on SNAP deductions for dependent care were lifted under the 2008 farm bill (P.L. 110-246).
11 LIHEAP is codified at 42 U.S.C. §§8621-8630.
12 42 U.S.C. §8624(b)(1).
13 42 U.S.C. §8624(b)(8).
Congressional Research Service
5
2012 Farm Bill: Changing the Treatment of LIHEAP in the Calculation of SNAP Benefits
are minimal and leave most important program decisions to the states, including eligibility
guidelines, types of assistance provided, and benefit levels.14
• Regarding eligibility, states may set maximum LIHEAP eligibility for
households up to 150% of the federal poverty income guidelines (or, if greater,
60% of the state median income), but they may not go below 110% of the
poverty guidelines.15 States may also 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), benefits through the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program
(SNAP), or certain needs-tested veterans’ programs.16
• In terms of benefits, states decide the types of assistance that households receive
and the amount. For example, while all states provide heating assistance, only a
portion provide assistance for cooling. The amount of benefits also varies; in
FY2008, the most recent year for which information is available from the
Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), the average LIHEAP benefit
for heating assistance was $293, with a range of $73 to $1,172.17
Unlike SNAP, LIHEAP is not an entitlement, and funding is not sufficient to assist every
household that is eligible for the program. In FY2009, 7.4 million households received heating
and/or winter crisis assistance and 900,000 received cooling assistance.18 The number of
households assisted may now be lower. FY2009 was a year in which states received a total of
$5.1 billion for LIHEAP, compared to $4.7 billion in FY2011 and about $3.5 billion in FY2012.
What Is “Heat and Eat”?
“Heat and Eat” is a phrase that the low-income and hunger advocacy community has used to
describe state and program policies that leverage nominal (as low as $1) LIHEAP payments into
an increase in households’ SNAP benefits that is larger than the initial LIHEAP payment.19
Certain states have implemented or are scheduled to implement this policy. In June 2012, the U.S.
Department of Agriculture’s Food and Nutrition Service (USDA-FNS) surveyed states and
determined that 16 states (including the District of Columbia) implement or will soon implement
“Heat and Eat.”20
14 The LIHEAP Clearinghouse, a website administered by the National Center for Appropriate Technology through a
contract with the Department of Health and Human Services, contains a good deal of information about how states
operate their programs. See http://www.liheap.ncat.org/.
15 42 U.S.C. §8624(b)(2).
16 Ibid.
17 U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, FY2008 LIHEAP Report to Congress, September 6, 2011, p. 36,
http://www.acf.hhs.gov/programs/ocs/liheap/publications/liheap08rc.pdf.
18 There is likely some overlap in these numbers, and HHS does not de-duplicate. U.S. Department of Health and
Human Services, Administration for Children and Families, LIHEAP Home Energy Notebook for Fiscal Year 2009,
September 2011, pp. 30-31.
19 Food Research and Action Center, Heat and Eat: Using Federal Nutrition Programs to Soften Low-Income
Households’ Food/Fuel Dilemma, March 2009, http://frac.org/newsite/wp-content/uploads/2009/09/
heat_and_eat09.pdf. See also, “SNAP cuts = Cuts in Meals for Americans Struggling to Heat and Eat,” http://frac.org/
pdf/snap_cuts_and_heat_and_eat.pdf.
20 California (which passed a law requiring implementation by October 2013), Connecticut, Delaware (although no
(continued...)
Congressional Research Service
6
2012 Farm Bill: Changing the Treatment of LIHEAP in the Calculation of SNAP Benefits
Part of the rationale for the nominal LIHEAP benefits (versus more substantive benefits) is that
LIHEAP is not an entitlement, and states may not be able to assist every household that is eligible
for the program, particularly because the statute requires that states prioritize “households with
the highest home energy costs or needs in relation to household income.”21 On the other hand,
SNAP is open-ended and the benefits are financed 100% by the federal government, so “Heat and
Eat” policies are a net gain for states in times of limited state and LIHEAP resources.
Criticism for this practice arises, as some say that it broadens the connection between SNAP and
LIHEAP beyond congressional intent.22 When state law makes all SNAP participants eligible for
LIHEAP, such participants receive LIHEAP assistance legally, but the logical result is that some
households are receiving energy assistance (and therefore the potentially higher levels of nutrition
assistance that may go with it) who might not otherwise have the highest energy need in the state.
Are Recipients of These Nominal Payments Ineligible for LIHEAP?
States implementing a so-called “Heat and Eat” policy may only provide LIHEAP to households
that are eligible for the program under the LIHEAP statute, either through income eligibility or
eligibility based on enrollment in another means-tested program. In other words, there are no
separate eligibility criteria for recipients of nominal LIHEAP benefits. Therefore, a household
would not receive LIHEAP benefits unless they are eligible for the program. In states that use
receipt of SNAP to determine eligibility,23 SNAP participants are automatically eligible for
LIHEAP. Otherwise, households would have to meet LIHEAP income eligibility requirements.
How Would the Senate’s 2012 Farm Bill Change
Current Law?
The Senate bill’s policy would require that LIHEAP payments be in amounts larger than $10 in
order to trigger a standard utility allowance in the SNAP benefit calculation process. This
provision would not take effect until October 1, 2013 (one year later than most other aspects of
Title IV of the bill). Section 4002 also includes a provision that would give states the option to
protect affected households from a change in benefits due to this policy for as long as 180 days.
(...continued)
nominal payment has been issued in FY2012), District of Columbia, Maine, Massachusetts, Michigan, Montana (issues
a $50 payment every five years to those living in subsidized housing with rent included), New Jersey, New York,
Oregon, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Vermont, Washington, and Wisconsin.
21 42 U.S.C. §8624(b)(2).
22 Sen. Stabenow, “Agriculture Reform, Food, and Jobs Act,” Senate debate, Congressional Record, June 19, 2012, p.
S4278 (“In a handful of States, they have found a way to increase the SNAP benefits for people in their States by
sending $1 checks in heating assistance to everyone who gets food assistance. Now, it is important to consider what a
family’s heating bill is when determining how much help they need, which is why the two programs are linked. But
sending out $1 checks to everyone is not the intent of Congress. For the small number of States that are doing that, it is
undermining the integrity of the program, in my judgment. I appreciate we have turned down those amendments that
would, in fact, change this structure and lower benefits. But this is about accountability and integrity within the
program, and I must oppose the amendment [striking Section 4002].”). Sen. Roberts, “Agriculture Reform, Food, and
Jobs Act,” Senate debate, Congressional Record, June 19, 2012, p. S4278 (“... closing the LIHEAP loophole”).
23 See http://liheap.ncat.org/tables/FY2012/subsidize.htm.
Congressional Research Service
7
2012 Farm Bill: Changing the Treatment of LIHEAP in the Calculation of SNAP Benefits
The House Agriculture Committee Chairman’s mark released on July 5, in advance of the
scheduled July 11 markup, mirrors the S. 3240 language.24
Section 4002 of S. 3240 was included in the bill that passed the Senate (64-35) on June 20, 2012.
On June 19, 2012, during floor consideration, Section 4002 survived a proposal to strike this
section, when S.Amdt. 2156 was voted down (33-66). This policy had also been included in the
version of the farm bill voted out of the Senate Agriculture Committee on April 26, 2012.25
What May Be the Impact of the Senate-Passed Farm
Bill’s Change to the Treatment of LIHEAP in the
Calculation of SNAP Benefits?
The Congressional Budget Office (CBO) estimates that the change in S. 3240 would reduce direct
spending for SNAP by $1.74 billion over 5 years and $4.49 billion over 10 years.26 CBO has also
estimated that the change would reduce nearly 500,000 households’ SNAP benefits by an average
of $90 per household.27
Impact on Households
This policy change could result in a reduction of benefits for some households that either
currently receive the excess shelter deduction or receive a higher excess shelter deduction due to
LIHEAP payments that are $10 or lower. However, under this proposed change, some households
might still qualify for the standard utility allowance, and then the excess shelter deduction, by
documenting their utility costs in other ways. Applicants would have to be aware of the need to
present utility bills or other documentation.
Error! Reference source not found. shows a state-by-state estimate of the percentage of FY2010
SNAP households that received their heating and cooling SUA due to receipt of LIHEAP. This
table does not reflect the amount of LIHEAP that these households received because collected
data do not include this information. If a state adopted a “Heat and Eat” policy after FY2010, that
impact will not be reflected in this table. It is expected that the Senate-passed farm bill would
most affect households in the so-called “Heat and Eat” states (see footnote 20), but it should be
said that the states ultimately affected would also depend upon state choices (states might choose
to transmit $11 payments, for instance) as well as the details of USDA-FNS implementation of
the policy. In addition, these data do not capture the extent to which households would be able to
provide alternative utility cost documentation and therefore have their benefit amounts
unchanged.
24 Section 4005 of language posted on Committee website July 5, 2012, http://agriculture.house.gov/pdf/legislation/
FARRMDiscussionDraft.pdf.
25 See http://www.ag.senate.gov/issues/farm-bill.
26 Congressional Budget Office, Cost Estimate: S. 3240 Agriculture Reform, Food, and Jobs Act of 2012, May 24,
2012, http://cbo.gov/sites/default/files/cbofiles/attachments/s3240.pdf.
27 Ibid., at 8.
Congressional Research Service
8
2012 Farm Bill: Changing the Treatment of LIHEAP in the Calculation of SNAP Benefits
Section 4002 of S. 3240 gives states the option for “grandfathering” those households that would
be affected for as long as 180 days after October 1, 2013 (the provision’s effective date). This
would appear to possibly protect those who would experience a reduction in benefits due to this
change of LIHEAP treatment. It is anticipated that after this period, the household would then
experience the reduction.
Impact on Program Administration
Modifying the treatment of LIHEAP in SNAP would appear to create changes in the program
application process, but it is difficult to know just what the results would be. The so-called “Heat
and Eat” states would appear to no longer have any reason to issue LIHEAP payments below $10
to SNAP participants, since such sums would neither substantially assist with utility costs nor
generate larger SNAP benefits. In addition, compared to a $1 payment, a payment greater than
$10 to multiple recipients could strain state LIHEAP budgets. Under this provision, state
agencies, applicants, and participants would seem to have an added burden of determining (and
documenting) all utility costs for the households that had previously received nominal LIHEAP
payments; this can be more complicated where utility costs are included in rent. Further,
advocates contend that presenting LIHEAP documentation is an administrative simplification that
makes sure that eligible households are getting all of the deductions—or at least credit for all the
deductions—that such households are due, especially in “Heat and Eat” states where the LIHEAP
payment may be communicated to SNAP computer systems through a data-matching process.28
28 Food Research and Action Center, Heat and Eat: Using Federal Nutrition Programs to Soften Low-Income
Households’ Food/Fuel Dilemma, March 2009, http://frac.org/newsite/wp-content/uploads/2009/09/
heat_and_eat09.pdf, p. 11 (“even if this [heating and cooling cost] information is reported, advocates report many
SNAP/Food Stamp workers are too busy to record the information in the case record. By providing this special
LIHEAP-funded benefit through an automated data exchange and direct mailing, states like Massachusetts have been
able to apply the heating/cooling SUA to increase the SNAP/Food Stamp benefit for thousands of needy households.”).
Congressional Research Service
9
2012 Farm Bill: Changing the Treatment of LIHEAP in the Calculation of SNAP Benefits
Table 1. SNAP Households with SUAs Due to LIHEAP Benefits, FY2010
According to SNAP Quality Control Data Sample
# Households
% of State’s
# Households
% of State’s
with SUA Due
SNAP
with SUA Due
SNAP
State
to LIHEAP
Households State to LIHEAP
Households
Alabama 0
0.0%
Nebraska
28,295
40.8%
Alaska 6,962
23.0%
Nevada 13,239
10.6%
Arizona 0
0.0%
New
Hampshire
32,996
67.6%
Arkansas 623
0.3%
New
Jersey
260,515
86.9%
California 55,281 4.0%
New
Mexico 43,250 29.3%
Colorado 52,370 29.8%
New
York 798,117 55.9%
Connecticut 72,647 41.5%
North
Carolina
177,485 29.4%
Delaware 0
0.0%
North
Dakota
10,499
39.2%
District of
4,841 7.5%
Ohio
148,572 20.0%
Columbia
Florida 0
0.0%
Oklahoma
76,057
30.8%
Georgia 1,520
0.2%
Oregon 69,947
19.0%
Hawai 138
0.2%
Pennsylvania
308,704
42.0%
Idaho 20,615
26.7%
Rhode
Island
41,976
58.2%
Illinois
101,362 13.2%
South
Carolina 260 0.1%
Indiana 30,186
8.8%
South
Dakota
15,104
37.9%
Iowa 20,477
13.3%
Tennessee
7,785
1.4%
Kansas 34,505
28.6%
Texas
4,350
0.3%
Kentucky 98,051 28.3%
Utah
20,958 21.5%
Louisiana 1,893 0.5%
Vermont 24,307
58.3%
Maine 47,797
42.1%
Virginia 103,616
29.3%
Maryland 41,866 16.2%
Washington
337,662 71.8%
Massachusetts 171,454
42.9% West
Virginia
40,674
27.0%
Michigan 257,607 30.0%
Wisconsin 313,025 99.3%
Minnesota 25,032 12.0%
Wyoming
4,422 31.2%
Mississippi 610 0.2%
Guam
0 0.0%
Missouri 71,670 17.9%
Virgin
Islands
0 0.0%
Montana
10,547 21.1%
ALL STATES
4,009,872 21.8%
TOTAL
Source: SNAP Quality Control Data from FY2010. Data analysis conducted by Gene Falk, CRS Specialist in
Social Policy.
Notes: Because these data are from FY2010, they will not reflect the impact from state so-called “Heat and Eat”
policies implemented in subsequent fiscal years. If LIHEAP benefits were to no longer qualify households for a
standard utility allowance, some portion of these households would be able to document utility costs by another
means that would qualify them for the SUA.
Congressional Research Service
10
2012 Farm Bill: Changing the Treatment of LIHEAP in the Calculation of SNAP Benefits
Has This Change Been Included in Other
112th Congress Legislative Proposals?
The Agriculture Reconciliation Act (included in the House-passed Sequester Replacement
Reconciliation Act, H.R. 5652) would end a benefit calculation relationship between LIHEAP and
SNAP entirely. Presentation of LIHEAP documentation during the SNAP application process
would not trigger the inclusion of a Standard Utility Allowance in the benefit calculation process
under this legislation. During floor consideration of S. 3240, the Senate-passed farm bill, several
amendments29 were introduced that mirror the House’s H.R. 5652 language, but none of those
received votes during the floor consideration. This is a broader change than the S. 3240 change; it
would affect more households, and CBO estimated it to save close to $14 billion over 10 years.30
Author Contact Information
Randy Alison Aussenberg
Libby Perl
Analyst in Nutrition Assistance Policy
Specialist in Housing Policy
raussenberg@crs.loc.gov, 7-8641
eperl@crs.loc.gov, 7-7806
Acknowledgments
The authors would like to thank Gene Falk, Specialist in Social Policy, and Amber Wilhelm, Graphic
Specialist, for their assistance with this report.
29 S.Amdt. 2173; S.Amdt. 2376; S.Amdt. 2377.
30 Congressional Budget Office, Cost Estimate: Agriculture Reconciliation Act, April 23, 2012, http://cbo.gov/sites/
default/files/cbofiles/attachments/HouseAgricultureReconciliation.pdf.
Congressional Research Service
11