.

Older Americans Act: Funding Formulas
Kirsten J. Colello
Specialist in Health and Aging Policy
March 19, 2015
Congressional Research Service
7-5700
www.crs.gov
RS22549

c11173008

.
Older Americans Act: Funding Formulas

Summary
The Older Americans Act (OAA) is the major vehicle for the delivery of social and nutrition
services for older persons. The act’s statutory funding formulas determine allotments to states and
other entities under the following OAA Titles: Title III, Grants for State and Community
Programs; Title V, the Community Service Senior Opportunities Act; Title VI, Grants for Older
Native Americans; and Title VII, Vulnerable Elder Rights Protection Activities.
Title III accounts for 71% of the act’s total FY2015 appropriations ($1.328 billion out of $1.878
billion). States receive separate allotments of funds for the following six programs authorized
under Title III: (1) supportive services and centers, (2) congregate nutrition services, (3) home-
delivered nutrition services, (4) the Nutrition Services Incentive Program (NSIP), (5) disease
prevention and health promotion services, and (6) the National Family Caregiver Support
Program (NFCSP). Formula grants are allotted from the Administration on Aging (AOA), within
the Administration for Community Living (ACL) in the Department of Health and Human
Services (HHS), to State Units on Aging (SUAs) in all 50 states, the District of Columbia, Puerto
Rico, and the U.S. territories. The states, in turn, award funds to approximately 618 Area
Agencies on Aging (AAAs).
Title V authorizes the Community Service Employment for Older Americans Program (CSEOA).
Administered by the Department of Labor (DOL), Title V is OAA’s second-largest program and is
the only federally subsidized employment program for low-income older persons (defined in the
law as those aged 55 and older). Its FY2015 funding of $434.4 million represents 23% of the act’s
total funding. DOL allocates Title V funds for grants to state agencies in all 50 states, the District
of Columbia, Puerto Rico, and the U.S. territories, and to national organizations. The total Title V
state allotment is the sum of its respective state agency grantee allotment and national
organization grantee allotment.
Title VI authorizes funds for supportive and nutrition services to older Native Americans to
promote the delivery of home and community-based supportive services, nutrition services, and
family caregiver support. Funds are awarded directly to Indian tribal organizations, Alaskan
Native organizations, and non-profit groups representing Native Hawaiians.
Title VII authorizes the Long-Term Care (LTC) Ombudsman Program and elder abuse, neglect,
and exploitation prevention programs. Most Title VII funding is directed at the LTC Ombudsman
Program, the purpose of which is to investigate and resolve complaints of residents of nursing
facilities and other long-term care facilities. Funds for LTC ombudsman and elder abuse
prevention activities are allotted to states.
The OAA Amendments of 2006 (P.L. 109-365) reauthorized all programs under the act through
FY2011. Among other things, P.L. 109-365 changed the formula allocation for most Title III
programs. No changes were made to Title V, VI, or VII formulas. While the authorizations of
appropriations under the OAA expired at the end of FY2011, Congress has continued to
appropriate funding for OAA-authorized activities. The 114th Congress may consider
reauthorization of the OAA and, in doing so, may modify existing authorities, including statutory
funding formulas. This report describes the current debate surrounding changes to the Title III
funding formula under S. 192, the Older Americans Act Reauthorization Act of 2015, and during
the OAA reauthorizations of 2000 and 2006. It then summarizes the OAA statutory provisions
that allocate funds to states and other entities under current law.

Congressional Research Service
c11173008

.
Older Americans Act: Funding Formulas

Contents
Background ...................................................................................................................................... 1
Older Americans Act Reauthorization ....................................................................................... 1
Title III: Grants for State and Community Programs on Aging ....................................................... 3
Legislative History .................................................................................................................... 3
The OAA Amendments of 2000 and 2006 .......................................................................... 4
Allocation for Supportive Services and Centers, Congregate and Home-Delivered
Nutrition Services, and Disease Prevention and Health Promotion ....................................... 6
Analysis of Current Law Funding Formula ........................................................................ 6
Allocation for Nutrition Services Incentive Program ................................................................ 8
Allocation for the National Family Caregiver Support Program ............................................... 8
Title V: Community Service Employment for Older Americans ..................................................... 9
Title VI: Grants for Older Native Americans ................................................................................. 10
Title VII: Vulnerable Elder Rights Protection Activities ............................................................... 11

Tables
Table 1. OAA Title III Programs: FY2006 and FY2015 Allotted Funding ..................................... 7
Table A-1. Older Americans Act, Title III Part B: Comparison of FY2006 Hold Harmless
(HH) and FY2015 Funding Allotment Amounts for States and U.S. Territories ........................ 13
Table A-2. Older Americans Act, Title III Part C1: Comparison of FY2006 Hold
Harmless (HH) and FY2015 Funding Allotment Amounts for States and U.S. Territories ........ 15
Table A-3. Older Americans Act, Title III Part C2: Comparison of FY2006 Hold
Harmless (HH) and FY2015 Funding Allotment Amounts for States and U.S. Territories ........ 17
Table A-4. Older Americans Act, Title III Part D: Comparison of FY2006 Hold Harmless
(HH) and FY2015 Funding Allotment Amounts for States and U.S. Territories ........................ 19
Table A-5. Population Formula Factor: Proportion of the State/U.S. Territory Population
Aged 60+ Relative to Total U.S. Population Aged 60+ .............................................................. 21
Table B-1. Comparison of FY2015 Older Americans Act (OAA) Title III Allotments to
Simulated Population Aged 60+ with 99% of FY2015 Allotments for FY2016 ........................ 25
Table B-2. Comparison of FY2015 Older Americans Act (OAA) Title III Allotments to
Simulated Population Aged 60+ with 99% of FY2016 Allotments for FY2017 ........................ 27
Table B-3. Comparison of FY2015 Older Americans Act (OAA) Title III Allotments to
Simulated Population Aged 60+ with 99% of FY2017 Allotments for FY2018 ........................ 29

Appendixes
Appendix A. Current Law: OAA Title III, Parts B, C, and D FY2015 Allotments and
Population Trends ....................................................................................................................... 12
Appendix B. The Older Americans Act Reauthorization Act of 2015 (S. 192): Analysis of
Formula Change ......................................................................................................................... 23
Congressional Research Service
c11173008

.
Older Americans Act: Funding Formulas


Contacts
Author Contact Information........................................................................................................... 31

Congressional Research Service
c11173008

.
Older Americans Act: Funding Formulas

Background
First enacted in 1965, the Older Americans Act (OAA, P.L. 89-73, as amended) is the primary
federal vehicle for the delivery of social and nutrition services for older persons. The majority of
OAA grant funds are provided to states and other entities based on statutory formulas that exist in
the following titles:
• Title III, Grants for State and Community Programs on Aging;
• Title V, Community Service Employment for Older Americans;
• Title VI, Grants for Older Native Americans; and
• Title VII, Vulnerable Elder Rights Protection Activities.
These formula grants fund programs that assist older Americans with supportive services;
congregate nutrition services (meals served at group sites such as senior centers, community
centers, schools, churches, or senior housing complexes); home-delivered nutrition services;
family caregiver support; community service employment; the long-term care ombudsman
program; and services to prevent the abuse, neglect, and exploitation of older persons. The OAA
also supports grants to older Native Americans.1,2
Since enactment of OAA, Congress has reauthorized and amended the act numerous times. In the
past, OAA reauthorization has included extending the act’s authorizations of appropriations for a
five-year period. The last OAA reauthorization occurred in 2006, when Congress enacted the
Older Americans Act Amendments of 2006 (P.L. 109-365), which extended the act’s
authorizations of appropriations through FY2011. P.L. 109-365 also changed the Title III formula
for supportive services, congregate nutrition services, home-delivered nutrition services, and
disease prevention and health promotion services to ensure that every state receives at least its
FY2006 amount (also known as the “hold harmless” provision), while phasing out the provision
that guarantees every state a share of any increase in total funding above FY2006. No changes
were made to the other formula grants in the act. While the authorizations of appropriations under
the OAA expired at the end of FY2011, Congress has continued to appropriate funding for OAA-
authorized activities. The 114th Congress may consider reauthorization of the OAA and, in doing
so, may modify existing authorities, including statutory funding formulas.
Older Americans Act Reauthorization
In the 113th Congress, comprehensive OAA reauthorization legislation was introduced in the
Senate (S. 1028 and S. 1562) which would have extended through FY2018 the authorizations of

1 For information regarding funding allocations to states, U.S. territories, and tribal organizations under Titles III, VI,
and VII, see http://www.aoa.gov/AoARoot/AoA_Programs/OAA/Aging_Network/State_Allocations/index.aspx. For
information regarding funding allocations to states and national organizations under Title V, see http://wdr.doleta.gov/
directives/corr_doc.cfm?DOCN=8481.
2 OAA Title I sets out broad policy objectives and defines various terms under the act; OAA Title II establishes the
Administration on Aging (AOA) and sets forth responsibilities for AOA and the Assistant Secretary for Aging; OAA
Title IV authorizes funding for training, research, and demonstration projects in the field of aging. For information on
the historical development of OAA and a brief description of the act’s titles, see CRS Report R43414, Older Americans
Act (OAA): In Brief
, by Kirsten J. Colello and Angela Napili.
Congressional Research Service
1
c11173008

.
Older Americans Act: Funding Formulas

appropriations for most OAA programs and would have made various amendments to existing
OAA authorities. The Older Americans Act Amendments of 2013 (S. 1028) was first introduced
by Senator Sanders. It was referred to the Senate Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions (HELP)
Committee’s Subcommittee on Primary Health and Aging. Subsequently, Senator Sanders
introduced a separate bipartisan reauthorization bill, S. 1562, the Older Americans Act
Reauthorization Act of 2013, which was also originally co-sponsored by Senators Harkin and
Alexander. The Senate HELP Committee ordered S. 1562 reported favorably with an amendment
in the nature of a substitute. In the House of Representatives, two OAA reauthorization bills were
introduced (H.R. 3850 and H.R. 4122). These bills were referred to the Committee on Education
and the Workforce, but saw no further legislative action.
S. 1562 did not contain provisions that would amend OAA statutory funding formulas. However,
during the Senate HELP Committee consideration of the OAA reauthorization bill Senator Burr
introduced an amendment that would have removed the Title III B, C, and D FY2006 hold
harmless provision which was rejected. Senator Harkin stated there would be additional
examination of the OAA funding formula by a Senate bipartisan workgroup with a possible
solution prior to Senate floor consideration. The bill was subsequently reported out of committee
and placed on the Senate Legislative Calendar, but did not receive consideration by the Senate.
In the 114th Congress, the Older Americans Act Reauthorization Act of 2015 (S. 192) was
introduced January 20, 2015. The bill would authorize appropriations for most OAA programs
through FY2018. It also would make various amendments to existing OAA authorities, including
changes to the statutory funding formula for supportive services and centers, congregate nutrition,
home-delivered nutrition, and disease prevention and health promotion services under Title III of
the act for discussion of the statutory funding formula change proposed in S. 192. On January 28,
2015, the Senate HELP Committee ordered S. 192, the Older Americans Act Reauthorization Act
of 2015, reported favorably. The bill has been placed on the Senate Legislative Calendar.
The topic of OAA statutory funding formulas was also examined by GAO in an analysis of the
OAA Title III and VII statutory funding formulas that focused on formula modifications that
would capture state differences with respect to need by including factors that measure the needs
of the elderly population, costs of services in addressing those needs, as well as the capacity of
states to finance needed services.3 GAO found that the current formulas could better meet
generally accepted equity standards in targeting OAA services to those with “greatest economic
need” and “greatest social need.” For example, GAO found that the need for OAA services can be
better estimated using data on older individuals’ functional limitations. GAO also noted that while
revisions to the OAA statutory formula may pose challenges, options to ease the transition such as
phasing in implementation over several years and/or instituting funding floors or ceilings may be
further provisions for policy makers to consider in any statutory revisions.
This report describes the OAA statutory provisions for each title that allocate funds to states and
other entities under current law. Given legislative interest in changing OAA Title III funding
formulas for certain programs, Appendix A provides further information about current law OAA
Title III funding formulas under Parts B, C, and D; Appendix B analyzes the Title III funding
formula changes as proposed under S. 192.

3 U.S. Government Accountability Office, Older Americans Act: Options to Better Target Need and Improve Equity,
GAO/13-74, December 2012.
Congressional Research Service
2
c11173008

.
Older Americans Act: Funding Formulas

Title III: Grants for State and Community Programs
on Aging

Title III authorizes grants to State Units on Aging (SUAs) and Area Agencies on Aging (AAAs)
in all 50 states, the District of Columbia, Puerto Rico, and the U.S. territories to act as advocates
on behalf of, and to coordinate programs for, older persons (defined in the law as those aged 60
and older). The Administration on Aging (AOA) within the Administration for Community
Living (ACL) in the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), allocates Title III funds
to SUAs. The states, in turn, award funds to approximately 618 AAAs, which are designated by
states to operate within specified planning and service areas. States must develop an intrastate
funding formula for distribution of Title III funding within the state that takes into account the
geographical distribution of older individuals in the state as well as the distribution of older
individuals with greatest economic and social need (with particular attention to low-income
minority older individuals) among specified planning and service areas. The state formula for
distribution of Title III funding must be developed in accordance with AOA guidelines and
approved by the Assistant Secretary for Aging.
As the OAA’s largest component, spending under Title III accounts for 71% of the act’s total
FY2015 appropriations ($1.328 billion out of $1.871 billion).4 States receive separate allotments
of funds for the following six programs authorized under Title III: (1) supportive services and
centers, (2) congregate nutrition services, (3) home-delivered nutrition services, (4) the Nutrition
Services Incentive Program (NSIP), (5) disease prevention and health promotion services, and
(6) the National Family Caregiver Support Program (NFCSP). States are required to provide a
matching share of 15% in order to receive funds for supportive services and congregate and
home-delivered nutrition programs. A matching share of 25% is required for the NFCSP; no
match is required for disease prevention and health promotion services. To determine state
allotments, a separate allocation is calculated for each of the six grant programs. The same
formula is used to determine state allocations for supportive services and centers, congregate
nutrition services, home-delivered nutrition services, and disease prevention and health promotion
services. The formulas for the NSIP and NFCSP use different factors. This section describes the
debate surrounding changes to the Title III funding formula during the OAA reauthorizations of
2000 and 2006, followed by a brief description of the different Title III allocation formulas under
current law.
Legislative History
When the OAA was enacted in 1965, Title III funds were allocated to states based on their
relative share of the population aged 65 and over.5 The law also set certain minimum grant
amounts for states and territories. For states, the minimum allotment was 1% of total funds
appropriated, and for the U.S. Virgin Islands, Guam, and American Samoa, the minimum

4 FY2015 funding data in this report is from Division G of the joint explanatory text to Rules Committee Print 113-59,
cited in “Explanatory Statement Submitted by Mr. Rogers of Kentucky, Chairman of the House Committee on
Appropriations Regarding Amendment to the Senate Amendment on H.R. 83, Consolidated and Further Continuing
Appropriations Act, 2015,” House of Representatives, Congressional Record, vol. 160, no. 151 Book II (December 11,
2014), pp. H9838, H9878-H9880.
5 Section 302, Older Americans Act of 1965, P.L. 89-73.
Congressional Research Service
3
c11173008

.
Older Americans Act: Funding Formulas

allotment was 0.5% (one-half of 1%) of funds appropriated. These provisions remained in effect
until 1973.
The first significant change to the OAA Title III funding formula occurred in 1973. The 1973
amendments to the act based the formula on the states’ relative share of the population aged 60
and over, rather than as under prior law, aged 65 and over.6 The 1973 amendments also changed
the minimum allotments states and territories were to receive, as follows: states were to receive
no less than 0.5% of the total appropriation; and Guam, American Samoa, the U.S. Virgin Islands,
and the Trust Territories of the Pacific Islands7 were to receive no less than 0.25% (one-fourth of
1%) of total funds. In addition, the 1973 amendments specified that states were to receive no less
than they received in FY1973 (the hold harmless amount).8
These provisions remained in effect until the 1978 amendments, which changed the minimum
amounts for American Samoa to one-sixteenth of 1% of the appropriation, and added a minimum
funding amount for the Northern Marianas (also one-sixteenth of 1%).9 These amendments also
changed the year for the hold harmless amount. The law stipulated that for fiscal years after 1978,
states were to receive no less than they received in FY1978, rather than as in prior law, FY1973.
Successive amendments subsequently changed the hold harmless year. Amendments in 1984
required that for fiscal years after FY1984, states be allotted no less than they received for
services in FY1984.10 The 1987 amendments made no change in the formula provisions.11 The
1992 amendments moved the hold harmless reference year to FY1987.12 No further changes were
made to these funding formulas until the 2000 amendments.
The OAA Amendments of 2000 and 2006
The Title III funding formula for supportive services and centers and the congregate and home-
delivered nutrition programs has been a point of controversy in recent congressional attempts to
reauthorize the Older Americans Act. Initially, Congress was concerned that the method AOA
used to distribute Title III funds was inconsistent with statutory requirements thereby negatively
affecting states experiencing faster growth in their older population. However, more recently,
congressional debate has focused on whether or not the statutory formula itself accurately reflects
trends in the aging of the U.S. population. The following provides a brief overview of the debate
and legislative changes to the Title III funding formula in the OAA reauthorizations of 2000 and
2006.
After unsuccessful attempts to reauthorize the OAA by the 104th and 105th Congresses, the 106th
Congress approved the Older Americans Act Amendments of 2000 (P.L. 106-501). The Title III
funding formula was a controversial issue during the six years of congressional debate on the
2000 OAA reauthorization.13 Prior to the reauthorization, a 1994 U.S. General Accounting Office

6 P.L. 93-29.
7 The minimum allotment for the trust territories was added by the 1969 amendments to the OAA (P.L. 91-69).
8 The 1973 amendments (P.L. 93-29) stipulated a different allotment formula which was in effect for only the fiscal
year ending June 30, 1973.
9 P.L. 95-478.
10 P.L. 98-459.
11 P.L. 100-175.
12 P.L. 102-375.
13 For further information, see nondistributable CRS Report RL30055, Older Americans Act: 2000 Reauthorization
(continued...)
Congressional Research Service
4
c11173008

.
Older Americans Act: Funding Formulas

(now the Government Accountability Office, or GAO) report found that the method AOA used
did not distribute funds among states proportionately to their older population to the maximum
extent possible.14 Instead, AOA allotted funds to states, first according to an amount equal to their
FY1987 “hold harmless” allocation, with the remainder of the appropriations allotted to states
based on their relative share of the population aged 60 and over. This methodology negatively
affected states with faster-growing older populations, since the majority of funds were being
distributed according to population estimates that did not reflect the most recent trends. The GAO
report recommended that AOA revise its methodology for distributing funds to states.
In response to these concerns, the 2000 OAA reauthorization resulted in the following changes to
the law: (1) Congress clarified the law to ensure that, first, funds were allotted to states based on
the most recent population data; (2) Congress created an FY2000 “hold harmless” requirement,
thereby ensuring that no state would receive less than it received in FY2000; and (3) Congress
created the “guaranteed growth” provision, ensuring that all states would receive a share of any
appropriations increase over the FY2000 level.
The Title III funding formula also became a major point of contention during the 2006 OAA
reauthorization debate.15 Congress revisited the FY2000 “hold harmless” requirement and
“guaranteed growth” provision. At the time, the “hold harmless” requirement ensured that,
provided sufficient funds, every state and U.S. territory received at least its FY2000 amount. The
“guaranteed growth” provision guaranteed that all states received a certain share of any increase
above the FY2000 appropriation. These issues divided Members from states with relatively
faster-growing older populations from lawmakers representing states with relatively slower
growth in their older populations. High-growth states argued that the “hold harmless” provisions
in current law provided protections to states whose populations were not increasing as quickly as
others’, resulting in an inequitable distribution of funds that disadvantages high-growth states.
The OAA 2006 Amendments ultimately resulted in changes to the law as follows: (1) Congress
changed the formula to ensure that, provided sufficient funds, every state receives at least its
FY2006 amount (creating a new fiscal year “hold harmless” amount); and (2) Congress phased
out the “guaranteed growth” provision, reducing the share of any increase in appropriations from
20% to 0 by five percentage points annually beginning in FY2008. For FY2007 through FY2010,
the guaranteed growth provisions were as follows:
• 20% of the percentage increase in appropriations from FY2006 to FY2007;
• 15% of the percentage increase in appropriations from FY2006 to FY2008;
• 10% of the percentage increase in appropriations from FY2006 to FY2009; and
• 5% of the percentage increase in appropriations from FY2006 to FY2010.
Under current law, for FY2011 and any succeeding fiscal years, the formula does not include the
guaranteed growth provision.

(...continued)
Legislation, by Carol O'Shaughnessy, available from author.
14 U.S. General Accounting Office, Older Americans Act: Title III Funds Not Distributed According to Statute,
GAO/HEHS-94-37, January 1994.
15 For further information, see CRS Report RL31336, The Older Americans Act: Programs, Funding, and 2006
Reauthorization (P.L. 109-365)
, by Carol O'Shaughnessy and Angela Napili.
Congressional Research Service
5
c11173008

.
Older Americans Act: Funding Formulas

Allocation for Supportive Services and Centers, Congregate and
Home-Delivered Nutrition Services, and Disease Prevention and
Health Promotion

Separate state allotments for (1) supportive services and centers, (2) congregate nutrition services,
(3) home-delivered nutrition services, and (4) disease prevention and health promotion services
are based on a population formula factor that is defined as each state’s relative share of the total
U.S. population aged 60 years and older. For the purposes of this calculation, the total U.S.
population aged 60 and older includes all 50 states, the District of Columbia, Puerto Rico, and the
U.S. territories. Population data are from annual population estimates published by the U.S.
Census; the reference date for estimates is July 1. There is a two-year time lag between the
reference year of the population estimates and the respective appropriation year. For example,
FY2015 state allotments are calculated using 2013 estimates of the population aged 60 and older.
For the purpose of determining state allotments, the law requires that allotments meet two criteria.
The first criterion is the “small state minimum.” This ensures that all states (including the District
of Columbia and Puerto Rico) receive a minimum amount of funds, which is defined as 0.5%
(one-half of 1%) of the total grant appropriation for the respective fiscal year. Guam and the U.S.
Virgin Islands each are allotted no less than 0.25% (one-quarter of 1%) of the total grant amount,
and American Samoa and the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands are each allotted
no less than 0.0625% (one-sixteenth of 1%) of the total grant amount.
The second criterion is the “hold harmless” provision, which ensures that, provided sufficient
funds, every state and U.S. territory receives at least its FY2006 amount. If funding for a given
year is equal to or less than FY2006 program amount, states receive an allotment in proportion to
their respective FY2006 allotments. If funding exceeds the FY2006 program amount, states
receive no less than their FY2006 allotment.
The OAA 2006 Amendments phased out the “guaranteed growth” provision beginning in
FY2008. This provision guaranteed that all states would receive a certain share of any increase
above the FY2006 appropriation. For example, states’ FY2010 allotments were at least their
FY2006 amount plus an amount equal to 5% of the percentage increase in FY2010 program
amount above FY2006 levels.
Under current law, the formula does not include the guaranteed growth provision.16 Thus, states
and U.S. territories receive an allotment based on their population formula factor, which takes
into account the following two criteria: (1) states will receive a minimum grant amount of at least
0.5% of the total grant appropriation (the same minimum grant amounts apply to U.S. territories),
and (2) states and U.S. territories will receive no less than their FY2006 allotments, provided
sufficient funding.
Analysis of Current Law Funding Formula
Under current law, the effect of the FY2006 hold harmless criterion is to maintain funding in
states that would otherwise see their allocations decrease due to changing population

16 Current law applies to FY2011 and subsequent fiscal years.
Congressional Research Service
6
c11173008

.
Older Americans Act: Funding Formulas

demographics; this effect is different for each program based on that program’s current funding
level in relation to its FY2006 funding level. Table 1compares FY2006 to FY2015 enacted
funding amounts for each program. (See Appendix A for state and U.S. territory FY2015
allotments under current law and trends in the population formula factor aged 60 and over.)
If increases in appropriated funding for grant programs are relatively large compared to
FY2006-appropriated levels, states will generally receive an allotment based on their population.
Thus, the FY2006 hold harmless provision becomes less of a factor. Conversely, when
appropriations increases are relatively small or non-existent, states will generally receive an
allotment based on the FY2006 hold harmless provision. Thus, absent such increases in funding,
states with a stagnant or declining proportion of the nation’s population aged 60 and over would
see their funding reduced over time. They would, effectively, receive a smaller piece of the
funding pie.
Table 1. OAA Title III Programs: FY2006 and FY2015 Allotted Funding
($ in millions, nominal)
FY2006-FY2015
OAA Title III Programs
FY2006
FY2015
Difference
Part B: Supportive services and centers
$349.3
$344.3
-$5.0
-1.4%
Part C1: Congregate nutrition
$383.9
$433.8
$49.9
13.0%
Part C2: Home-delivered nutrition
$181.2
$214.2
$33.0
18.2%
Part D: Disease prevention/health promotion
$21.3
$19.6
-$1.7
-7.8%
Source: FY2006 funding allotments from ACL, “Title III Grants for State and Community Programs on Aging,
FY2006 Final Allocation,” August 28, 2006, http://www.aoa.acl.gov/AoA_Programs/OAA/Aging_Network/
State_Al ocations/docs/T3_2006.pdf; FY2015 funding levels from ACL, “Title III Grants for State and Community
Programs on Aging, FY2015 Annual Allocations,” January 30, 2015, http://www.acl.gov/About_ACL/Allocations/
docs/OAA/T3-2015.pdf.
Notes: Total allotment amounts are adjusted down from a program’s enacted funding level to account for
program support, evaluation, oversight, and other statutory-related activities.
Table 1 shows that for two programs, the supportive services and preventive services programs,
FY2015-enacted funding is below FY2006 funding levels (-1.4% and -7.8%, respectively). Thus,
for these two programs, state and U.S. territory allotments for FY2015 are proportionately
reduced from their FY2006 hold harmless amounts. That is, for FY2015 all states and U.S.
territories will receive an allotment that is below their FY2006 hold harmless amount. See Table
A-1
(supportive services) and Table A-4 (preventive services) for comparisons of the FY2006
hold harmless amount and FY2015 allotment amount, as well as the FY2015 allotment type for
states and U.S. territories.
For the congregate nutrition program, FY2015-enacted funding is 13.0% above the FY2006 hold
harmless funding level. This increase is not enough to remove the entire effect of the FY2006
hold harmless provision. Thus, for FY2015 states and U.S. territories receive a program allotment
that is either based on (1) the minimum allotment amount (0.5% of total program funding); (2)
the entities’ FY2006 hold harmless amount; or (3) an amount that is determined based on the
entities’ population formula factor. Note that entities receiving an allotment based on their
Congressional Research Service
7
c11173008

.
Older Americans Act: Funding Formulas

population formula factor receive a reduced amount to compensate for the increased amounts
allotted to states and U.S. territories that receive funding based on either a minimum or FY2006
hold harmless allotment in order to satisfy all statutory formula conditions. See Table A-2
(congregate nutrition) for comparisons of the FY2006 hold harmless amount and FY2015
allotment amount as well as the FY2015 allotment type for states and U.S. territories.
For the home-delivered nutrition program, FY2015-enacted funding is 19% above the FY2006
hold harmless funding level. Unlike the congregate nutrition program, this increase in home-
delivered nutrition is enough of an increase to eliminate the effect of the FY2006 hold harmless
provision. Thus, all entities receive their FY2015 funding based on either (1) the minimum
allotment amount, or (2) an amount that is determined based on the entities’ population formula
factor. The effect of the FY2006 hold harmless statutory condition has been entirely eliminated
with funding enough above FY2006 levels, which allows funding to be allocated based on the
population aged 60 and older subject to the state minimum allotment criterion. See Table A-3
(home-delivered nutrition) for comparisons of the FY2006 hold harmless amount and FY2015
allotment amount, as well as the FY2015 allotment type for states and U.S. territories.
Allocation for Nutrition Services Incentive Program
The Nutrition Services Incentives Program (NSIP) provides funds to states, territories, and Indian
tribal organizations to purchase food or to cover the costs of food commodities provided by the
U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) for the congregate and home-delivered nutrition
programs. NSIP funds are allotted to states and other entities based on a formula that takes into
account each state’s share of total meals served by the nutrition services program (both
congregate and home-delivered meals) in all states and tribes during the prior year.17
Allocation for the National Family Caregiver Support Program
The National Family Caregiver Support Program (NFCSP) provides direct services for caregivers
in five core service areas:
• Information about health conditions, resources, and community-based services.
• Assistance with accessing available services.
• Individual counseling, support groups, and caregiver training.
• Respite care services to provide families temporary relief from caregiving
responsibilities.
• Supplemental services on a limited basis that would complement care provided
by family and other caregivers (e.g., adult day health care, home care, home
modifications, and assistive devices).
Funds for NFCSP are allotted to states based on each state’s relative share of the population aged
70 years and older. States receive a minimum grant amount, which is defined as 0.5% (one-half of
1%) of the total grant appropriation for the respective fiscal year. Guam and the U.S. Virgin

17 For further information, see CRS Report RS21202, Older Americans Act: Title III Nutrition Services Program, by
Kirsten J. Colello.
Congressional Research Service
8
c11173008

.
Older Americans Act: Funding Formulas

Islands are allotted no less than 0.25% (one-quarter of 1%) of the total grant appropriation, and
American Samoa and the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands are allotted no less
than 0.0625% (one-sixteenth of 1%) of the total grant appropriation. There is no hold harmless or
guaranteed growth provision in the formula allocation for this grant program.
Title V: Community Service Employment for
Older Americans

Title V authorizes the Community Service Employment for Older Americans Program
(CSEOA).18 Administered by the Department of Labor (DOL), Title V is OAA’s second-largest
program and is the only federally subsidized employment program for low-income older persons
(defined in the law as those aged 55 and older with incomes up to 125% of the federal poverty
level). Its FY2015 funding of $434.4 million represents 23% of the act’s total funding. There is a
10% nonfederal match requirement for Title V grant activities.
DOL allocates Title V funds for grants to state agencies in all 50 states, the District of Columbia,
Puerto Rico, and the U.S. territories, and to national organizations. The total Title V state
allotment is the sum of its respective state agency grantee allotment and national organization
grantee allotment. To determine grant allotments for each state, a separate allocation is calculated
for each grant type.
In the past, the Title V funding formula has been an issue for Congress.19 During the 2006 OAA
reauthorization, the original House bill (H.R. 5293) included a provision to update the “hold
harmless” year in the Title V formula from FY2000 to FY2006; however, the Senate bill (S.
3570) did not include this provision. The compromise bill (H.R. 6197) enacted into law made no
changes to the Title V formula. The following describes the Title V formula allocation.20
Before allocation of funds to states, DOL is required to reserve funds as follows:
• up to 1.5% of the total appropriation for Section 502(e) demonstration projects,
pilot projects, and evaluation projects;
• 0.75% of the total appropriation for Guam, the U.S. Virgin Islands, American
Samoa, and the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands; and
• “such amount as may be necessary” for national grants to public or private
organizations serving eligible Indians and Pacific Island and Asian Americans.

18 Title V is also referred to as the Senior Community Service Employment Program (SCSEP).
19 For further information on the legislative history of the Title V funding formula, see nondistributable CRS Report
RL30055, Older Americans Act: 2000 Reauthorization Legislation, by Carol O’Shaughnessy, available from author.
20 Current law requires that funds be distributed at their FY2000 level of activities, defined as the FY2000 number of
authorized positions multiplied by the cost per enrollee position. To convert funds to authorized positions, funds are
divided by the DOL-determined cost per participant. The CSEOA program operates on a program year (PY) basis from
July 1 through June 30. For PY2012 (ending June 30, 2013), the CSEOA program supported 46,221 job slots, serving
70,718 participants, at a cost of $6,339 per participant, Fiscal Year 2015 Congressional Budget Justification,
Employment and Training Administration, Community Service Employment for Older Americans
, p. CSEOA-12,
http://www.dol.gov/dol/budget/2015/PDF/CBJ-2015-V1-07.pdf.
Congressional Research Service
9
c11173008

.
Older Americans Act: Funding Formulas

After these reservations, the remaining funds are divided into two amounts, one for all state
agency grantees and the other for all national organization grantees. The allocation for these
amounts is dependent on program funding. If funds for a given year are equal to their FY2000
level, then amounts set aside for all state agencies and all national organization grantees are in
proportion to their respective FY2000 levels. If funds for a given year are less than their FY2000
levels, then total amounts for the state and national grantees are reduced proportionately. If funds
for a given year exceed the FY2000 level, up to $35 million of the excess is to be distributed as
follows: 75% of the excess is to be provided for all state agency grantees and 25% of the excess is
to be provided to all national organization grantees. Any funding amount over $35 million that
remains is to be distributed 50/50 to all state agency and national organization grantees,
respectively.
Once the national totals for state agency and national organization grantees have been
determined, the same formula is used to determine the state agency allotment and the national
organization allotment for each state. Each allotment is distributed to states based on a formula
factor that takes into account (1) a state’s relative share of the total U.S. population aged 55 years
and older (includes the District of Columbia and Puerto Rico), and (2) the relative state per capita
income. The formula factor is the number of persons aged 55 and older in the state multiplied by
the inverse of the state’s per capita income index. Thus, this formula favors states with a lower
per capita income and a higher proportion of the population aged 55 and older relative to other
states. The inverse per capita income index cannot be less than 33% or greater than 75%; the
index for the District of Columbia and Puerto Rico is 75%. Population data are from the annual
population estimates published by the U.S. Census; the reference date for estimates is July 1. Per
capita income data are from the Bureau of Economic Analysis (BEA) within the U.S. Department
of Commerce (DOC). There is a two-year time lag between the data (reference year of the
population estimates and per capita income) and the respective appropriation year.
For the purpose of determining state allotments to state agency and national organization
grantees, the law requires that allotments meet two criteria. The first criterion is that states
(including the District of Columbia and Puerto Rico) are to receive at least a minimum grant
allotment, which is defined as 0.5% (one-half of 1%) of the respective grant amount for the given
fiscal year. The second criterion is the “hold harmless” provision. If grant amounts for a given
year are equal to, or less than, their FY2000 level, states are to receive an allotment in proportion
to their respective FY2000 levels. If grant amounts exceed their FY2000 levels, states are to
receive no less than their FY2000 level plus a “guaranteed growth” of at least 30% of the
percentage increase above the FY2000 level.
Title VI: Grants for Older Native Americans
Title VI authorizes funds for supportive and nutrition services to older Native Americans to
promote the delivery of home and community-based supportive services, nutrition services, and
family caregiver support.21 Funds are awarded directly to Indian tribal organizations, Alaskan
Native organizations, and non-profit groups representing Native Hawaiians. To be eligible for
funding, a tribal organization must represent at least 50 Native American elders aged 60 or
older.22 In FY2012, the most recent year for which data are available, grants were awarded to 246

21 For further information, see http://www.aoa.gov/AoARoot/AoA_Programs/HCLTC/Native_Americans/index.aspx.
22 In order to establish eligibility, a tribal organization may develop its own population statistics with approval from the
(continued...)
Congressional Research Service
10
c11173008

.
Older Americans Act: Funding Formulas

tribal organizations representing approximately 400 Indian tribes, including two organizations
serving Native Hawaiian elders.23 FY2015 funding for supportive and nutrition services grants is
$26.2 million, while FY2015 funding for the Native American caregiver program is $6.0 million.
There is no requirement for tribal organizations to match these grant funds.
Separate formula grant awards are made for (1) nutrition and supportive services and (2) family
caregiver support services. Formula grants for services to older Native Americans are allocated to
tribal and other representing organizations based on their share of the American Indian, Alaskan
Native, and Native Hawaiian population aged 60 and over in their services area. Tribal
organization allotments must meet a FY1991 “hold harmless” provision. If funds for a given year
exceed the FY1991 amount, then the grant amount is either (1) increased to equal or approximate
the amount the organization received in 1980 or (2) determined based on what the Assistant
Secretary considers sufficient if the tribal organization did not receive a grant for either FY1980
or FY1991. For Native Hawaiian programs, formula allotments for services to representing
organizations are only required to meet a FY1991 “hold harmless” provision.
Title VII: Vulnerable Elder Rights Protection
Activities

Title VII authorizes the Long-Term Care (LTC) Ombudsman Program and elder abuse, neglect,
and exploitation prevention programs. Most Title VII funding is directed at the LTC Ombudsman
Program, the purpose of which is to investigate and resolve complaints of residents of nursing
facilities and other long-term care facilities. For FY2015, funding for the LTC Ombudsman and
elder abuse, neglect, and exploitation prevention programs is $20.7 million. There is no
requirement for states to match these grant funds.
Funds for LTC ombudsman and elder abuse prevention activities are allotted to states based on
each state’s relative share of the population aged 60 years and older. For the purpose of
determining state allotments, the law requires that states (including the District of Columbia and
Puerto Rico) receive a minimum amount of funds, which is defined as 0.5% (one-half of 1%) of
the total grant appropriation for the respective fiscal year. Guam and the U.S. Virgin Islands are
allotted no less than 0.25% (one-quarter of 1%) of the total grant appropriation, and American
Samoa and the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands are allotted no less than 0.0625%
(one-sixteenth of 1%) of the total grant appropriation.
State allotments must also meet a FY2000 “hold harmless” provision. SUAs may award funds for
these activities to a variety of organizations for administration, including other state agencies,
AAAs, county governments, nonprofit service providers, and volunteer organizations.

(...continued)
Bureau of Indian Affairs (42 U.S.C. 3057e-1).
23 U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Administration for Community Living, Fiscal Year 2015
Justification of Estimates for Appropriations Committees
, p. 86, http://www.acl.gov/About_ACL/Budget/docs/
FY_2015_ACL_CJ.pdf.
Congressional Research Service
11
c11173008

.
Older Americans Act: Funding Formulas

Appendix A. Current Law: OAA Title III, Parts B, C,
and D FY2015 Allotments and Population Trends

Table A-1, Table A-2, Table A-3, and Table A-4 compare the FY2006 hold harmless amounts
and the FY2015 allotment amounts for states and U.S. territories for each of the four programs
authorized under OAA Title III, Parts B, C, and D. The final column in each table provides
information about the entities’ FY2015 allotment type, where “M” refers to an entity that receives
a minimum allotment amount; “HH” refers to an entity that receives an allotment amount based
on the FY2006 hold harmless funding amount or a proportionately reduced allotment from the
FY2006 hold harmless amount; and “P” refers to an entity that receives an allotment amount
based on the entities’ population formula factor.
Table A-5 shows the population aged 60 and older by state or U.S. territory and the proportion of
the entity’s population aged 60 and older relative to the total U.S. population aged 60 and over for
selected years. U.S. Census data shown are for the 2000 and 2010 Decennial Censuses, as well as
the 2013 Intercensal state population estimates, which is the most recent year for which data are
available. The column labeled “% Age 60+” is the entities’ population-based formula factor used
to determine state allotments under OAA Title III, Parts B, C, and D.
The final column of Table A-5 calculates the percentage point change in the population formula
factor for each state and U.S. territory. Among all states (which includes the District of Columbia
and Puerto Rico), half saw a proportionate increase in the population formula factor from 2000 to
2013, while the other half saw a decline over this time period. The top five states that experienced
the greatest proportionate increase were Texas, California, Georgia, North Carolina, and Arizona.
The bottom five states that experienced the greatest decline were New Jersey, Ohio, Illinois, New
York, and Pennsylvania.
Congressional Research Service
12
c11173008

.
Older Americans Act: Funding Formulas

Table A-1. Older Americans Act, Title III Part B:
Comparison of FY2006 Hold Harmless (HH) and FY2015 Funding Allotment
Amounts for States and U.S. Territories

Part B:
Supportive Services
FY2015
State/
FY2006 HH
FY2015
%
Amount
U.S. Territory
Amount
Amount
Change
Typea
Alabama
$5,403,560
$5,325,874
-1.44%
HH
Alaska
$1,746,341
$1,721,234
-1.44%
HH
Arizona
$6,573,030
$6,478,530
-1.44%
HH
Arkansas
$3,500,996
$3,450,663
-1.44%
HH
California
$34,578,882
$34,081,746
-1.44%
HH
Colorado
$4,154,787
$4,095,054
-1.44%
HH
Connecticut
$4,404,337
$4,341,017
-1.44%
HH
Delaware
$1,746,341
$1,721,234
-1.44%
HH
District of Columbia
$1,746,341
$1,721,234
-1.44%
HH
Florida
$25,261,848
$24,898,663
-1.44%
HH
Georgia
$7,909,229
$7,795,519
-1.44%
HH
Hawaii
$1,746,341
$1,721,234
-1.44%
HH
Idaho
$1,746,341
$1,721,234
-1.44%
HH
Illinois
$14,524,890
$14,316,068
-1.44%
HH
Indiana
$6,927,395
$6,827,801
-1.44%
HH
Iowa
$4,260,878
$4,199,620
-1.44%
HH
Kansas
$3,432,908
$3,383,554
-1.44%
HH
Kentucky
$4,741,271
$4,673,107
-1.44%
HH
Louisiana
$4,795,898
$4,726,948
-1.44%
HH
Maine
$1,746,341
$1,721,234
-1.44%
HH
Maryland
$5,857,438
$5,773,227
-1.44%
HH
Massachusetts
$8,209,095
$8,091,074
-1.44%
HH
Michigan
$11,255,715
$11,093,893
-1.44%
HH
Minnesota
$5,499,667
$5,420,599
-1.44%
HH
Mississippi
$3,272,711
$3,225,660
-1.44%
HH
Missouri
$7,118,429
$7,016,089
-1.44%
HH
Montana
$1,746,341
$1,721,234
-1.44%
HH
Nebraska
$2,294,938
$2,261,944
-1.44%
HH
Nevada
$2,461,387
$2,426,000
-1.44%
HH
New Hampshire
$1,746,341
$1,721,234
-1.44%
HH
Congressional Research Service
13
c11173008

.
Older Americans Act: Funding Formulas

Part B:
Supportive Services
FY2015
State/
FY2006 HH
FY2015
%
Amount
U.S. Territory
Amount
Amount
Change
Typea
New Jersey
$10,262,972
$10,115,423
-1.44%
HH
New Mexico
$2,066,188
$2,036,483
-1.44%
HH
New York
$24,283,431
$23,934,312
-1.44%
HH
North Carolina
$9,368,926
$9,234,231
-1.44%
HH
North Dakota
$1,746,341
$1,721,234
-1.44%
HH
Ohio
$13,816,810
$13,618,168
-1.44%
HH
Oklahoma
$4,278,286
$4,216,778
-1.44%
HH
Oregon
$4,134,370
$4,074,931
-1.44%
HH
Pennsylvania
$17,879,977
$17,622,920
-1.44%
HH
Puerto Rico
$4,374,950
$4,312,052
-1.44%
HH
Rhode Island
$1,746,341
$1,721,234
-1.44%
HH
South Carolina
$4,791,543
$4,722,656
-1.44%
HH
South Dakota
$1,746,341
$1,721,234
-1.44%
HH
Tennessee
$6,760,219
$6,663,028
-1.44%
HH
Texas
$20,326,073
$20,033,849
-1.44%
HH
Utah
$1,866,772
$1,839,934
-1.44%
HH
Vermont
$1,746,341
$1,721,234
-1.44%
HH
Virginia
$7,864,960
$7,751,887
-1.44%
HH
Washington
$6,450,052
$6,357,321
-1.44%
HH
West Virginia
$2,773,538
$2,733,663
-1.44%
HH
Wisconsin
$6,390,390
$6,298,516
-1.44%
HH
Wyoming
$1,746,341
$1,721,234
-1.44%
HH
American Samoa
$472,317
$465,527
-1.44%
HH
Guam
$873,170
$860,617
-1.44%
HH
Northern Marianas
$218,293
$215,155
-1.44%
HH
Virgin Islands
$873,170
$860,617
-1.44%
HH
Total $349,268,129
$344,246,760
-1.44%

Source: FY2015 funding levels from ACL, “Title III Grants for State and Community Programs on Aging, FY2015
Annual Allocations,” January 30, 2015, http://www.acl.gov/About_ACL/Allocations/docs/OAA/T3-2015.pdf. Total
amounts are adjusted down from a program’s enacted funding level to account for program support, evaluation,
oversight, and other statutory-related activities.
Notes: HH = state receives a grant amount based on its FY2006 hold harmless amount or an amount reduced
from its FY2006 hold harmless amount; M = state receives a minimum grant amount; P = state receives a grant
amount based on its population aged 60+.
a. FY2015 funding for Supportive Services is below FY2006 funding levels, thus al states and U.S. territories
receive an al otment that is proportionately reduced from their FY2006 hold harmless amount.
Congressional Research Service
14
c11173008

.
Older Americans Act: Funding Formulas

Table A-2. Older Americans Act, Title III Part C1:
Comparison of FY2006 Hold Harmless (HH) and FY2015 Funding Allotment
Amounts for States and U.S. Territories

Part C1:
Congregate Nutrition
FY2015
State /
FY2006 HH
FY2015
%
Amount
U.S. Territory
Amount
Amount
Change
Type
Alabama
$6,068,408
$6,448,535
6.26%
P
Alaska
$1,919,299
$2,169,045
13.01%
M
Arizona
$6,567,487
$8,927,511
35.93%
P
Arkansas
$4,163,564
$4,163,564
0.00%
HH
California
$34,919,214
$43,329,545
24.09%
P
Colorado
$4,151,035
$6,058,702
45.96%
P
Connecticut
$5,241,452
$5,241,452
0.00%
HH
Delaware
$1,919,299
$2,169,045
13.01%
M
District of Columbia
$1,919,299
$2,169,045
13.01%
M
Florida
$25,239,035
$30,882,211
22.36%
P
Georgia
$7,902,087
$11,007,936
39.30%
P
Hawaii
$1,940,597
$2,169,045
11.77%
M
Idaho
$1,930,797
$2,169,045
12.34%
M
Illinois
$17,286,541
$17,286,541
0.00%
HH
Indiana
$8,105,861
$8,266,359
1.98%
P
Iowa
$5,081,501
$5,081,501
0.00%
HH
Kansas
$4,089,903
$4,089,903
0.00%
HH
Kentucky
$5,570,252
$5,744,377
3.13%
P
Louisiana
$5,645,998
$5,645,998
0.00%
HH
Maine
$1,996,153
$2,169,045
8.66%
M
Maryland
$5,893,683
$7,240,922
22.86%
P
Massachusetts
$9,780,267
$9,780,267
0.00%
HH
Michigan
$12,926,499
$13,443,686
4.00%
P
Minnesota
$6,398,439
$6,846,987
7.01%
P
Mississippi
$3,891,114
$3,891,114
0.00%
HH
Missouri
$8,467,047
$8,467,047
0.00%
HH
Montana
$1,919,299
$2,169,045
13.01%
M
Nebraska
$2,738,802
$2,738,802
0.00%
HH
Nevada
$2,459,165
$3,446,533
40.15%
P
New Hampshire
$1,932,677
$2,169,045
12.23%
M
Congressional Research Service
15
c11173008

.
Older Americans Act: Funding Formulas

Part C1:
Congregate Nutrition
FY2015
State /
FY2006 HH
FY2015
%
Amount
U.S. Territory
Amount
Amount
Change
Type
New Jersey
$12,190,488
$12,190,488
0.00%
HH
New Mexico
$2,064,322
$2,718,255
31.68%
P
New York
$28,963,855
$28,963,855
0.00%
HH
North Carolina
$9,360,466
$12,624,403
34.87%
P
North Dakota
$1,919,299
$2,169,045
13.01%
M
Ohio
$16,393,785
$16,393,785
0.00%
HH
Oklahoma
$5,080,736
$5,080,736
0.00%
HH
Oregon
$4,301,949
$5,533,521
28.63%
P
Pennsylvania
$21,279,716
$21,279,716
0.00%
HH
Puerto Rico
$4,370,999
$5,158,961
18.03%
P
Rhode Island
$1,950,184
$2,169,045
11.22%
M
South Carolina
$4,787,216
$6,536,987
36.55%
P
South Dakota
$1,919,299
$2,169,045
13.01%
M
Tennessee
$7,154,118
$8,555,440
19.59%
P
Texas
$20,307,718
$27,192,651
33.90%
P
Utah
$1,962,783
$2,581,502
31.52%
P
Vermont
$1,919,299
$2,169,045
13.01%
M
Virginia
$7,857,858
$10,031,513
27.66%
P
Washington
$6,444,227
$8,734,066
35.53%
P
West Virginia
$3,305,947
$3,305,947
0.00%
HH
Wisconsin
$7,586,993
$7,665,166
1.03%
P
Wyoming
$1,919,299
$2,169,045
13.01%
M
American Samoa
$594,843
$594,843
0.00%
HH
Guam
$959,650
$1,084,523
13.01%
M
Northern Marianas
$240,408
$271,131
12.78%
M
Virgin Islands
$959,650
$1,084,523
13.01%
M
Total $383,859,881
$433,809,090
13.01%

Source: FY2015 funding levels from ACL, “Title III Grants for State and Community Programs on Aging, FY2015
Annual Allocations,” January 30, 2015, http://www.acl.gov/About_ACL/Allocations/docs/OAA/T3-2015.pdf. Total
amounts are adjusted down from a program’s enacted funding level to account for program support, evaluation,
oversight, and other statutory-related activities.
Notes: HH = state receives a grant amount based on its FY2006 hold harmless amount or an amount reduced
from its FY2006 hold harmless amount; M = state receives a minimum grant amount; P = state receives a grant
amount based on its population aged 60+.
Congressional Research Service
16
c11173008

.
Older Americans Act: Funding Formulas

Table A-3. Older Americans Act, Title III Part C2:
Comparison of FY2006 Hold Harmless (HH) and FY2015 Funding Allotment
Amounts for States and U.S. Territories

Part C2:
Home-Delivered Nutrition
FY2015
State /
FY2006 HH
FY2015
%
Amount
U.S. Territory
Amount
Amount
Change
Type
Alabama
$2,871,070
$3,300,791
14.97%
P
Alaska
$906,082
$1,071,165
18.22%
M
Arizona
$3,492,443
$4,569,698
30.85%
P
Arkansas
$1,823,332
$2,048,767
12.36%
P
California
$18,372,773
$22,178,956
20.72%
P
Colorado
$2,207,560
$3,101,249
40.48%
P
Connecticut
$2,250,669
$2,477,235
10.07%
P
Delaware
$906,082
$1,071,165
18.22%
M
District of Columbia
$906,082
$1,071,165
18.22%
M
Florida
$13,422,360
$15,807,579
17.77%
P
Georgia
$4,202,405
$5,634,597
34.08%
P
Hawaii
$906,082
$1,071,165
18.22%
M
Idaho
$906,082
$1,071,165
18.22%
M
Illinois
$7,248,698
$8,052,146
11.08%
P
Indiana
$3,680,728
$4,231,275
14.96%
P
Iowa
$2,001,426
$2,180,137
8.93%
P
Kansas
$1,651,950
$1,856,324
12.37%
P
Kentucky
$2,519,176
$2,940,356
16.72%
P
Louisiana
$2,548,201
$2,865,596
12.46%
P
Maine
$907,706
$1,082,445
19.25%
P
Maryland
$3,112,229
$3,706,388
19.09%
P
Massachusetts
$4,011,142
$4,526,417
12.85%
P
Michigan
$5,980,491
$6,881,377
15.06%
P
Minnesota
$2,922,134
$3,504,745
19.94%
P
Mississippi
$1,691,196
$1,914,158
13.18%
P
Missouri
$3,647,365
$4,134,686
13.36%
P
Montana
$906,082
$1,071,165
18.22%
M
Nebraska
$1,076,330
$1,211,914
12.60%
P
Nevada
$1,307,807
$1,764,166
34.89%
P
New Hampshire
$906,082
$1,071,165
18.22%
M
Congressional Research Service
17
c11173008

.
Older Americans Act: Funding Formulas

Part C2:
Home-Delivered Nutrition
FY2015
State /
FY2006 HH
FY2015
%
Amount
U.S. Territory
Amount
Amount
Change
Type
New Jersey
$5,350,993
$5,839,280
9.13%
P
New Mexico
$1,097,826
$1,391,385
26.74%
P
New York
$11,862,865
$12,931,863
9.01%
P
North Carolina
$4,977,985
$6,462,013
29.81%
P
North Dakota
$906,082
$1,071,165
18.22%
M
Ohio
$7,203,180
$8,056,613
11.85%
P
Oklahoma
$2,218,398
$2,499,780
12.68%
P
Oregon
$2,196,712
$2,832,426
28.94%
P
Pennsylvania
$8,777,372
$9,442,665
7.58%
P
Puerto Rico
$2,324,539
$2,640,701
13.60%
P
Rhode Island
$906,082
$1,071,165
18.22%
M
South Carolina
$2,545,887
$3,346,067
31.43%
P
South Dakota
$906,082
$1,071,165
18.22%
M
Tennessee
$3,591,903
$4,379,246
21.92%
P
Texas
$10,799,838
$13,919,016
28.88%
P
Utah
$991,871
$1,321,385
33.22%
P
Vermont
$906,082
$1,071,165
18.22%
M
Virginia
$4,178,884
$5,134,799
22.87%
P
Washington
$3,427,102
$4,470,679
30.45%
P
West Virginia
$1,319,658
$1,475,026
11.77%
P
Wisconsin
$3,373,301
$3,923,544
16.31%
P
Wyoming
$906,082
$1,071,165
18.22%
M
American Samoa
$136,498
$136,498
0.00%
HH
Guam
$453,041
$535,583
18.22%
M
Northern Marianas
$113,260
$133,896
18.22%
M
Virgin Islands
$453,041
$535,583
18.22%
M
Total $181,216,329
$214,233,030
18.22%

Source: FY2015 funding levels from ACL, “Title III Grants for State and Community Programs on Aging, FY2015
Annual Allocations,” January 30, 2015, http://www.acl.gov/About_ACL/Allocations/docs/OAA/T3-2015.pdf. Total
amounts are adjusted down from a program’s enacted funding level to account for program support, evaluation,
oversight, and other statutory related activities.
Notes: HH = state receives a grant amount based on its FY2006 hold harmless amount or an amount reduced
from its FY2006 hold harmless amount; M = state receives a minimum grant amount; P = state receives a grant
amount based on its population aged 60+.
Congressional Research Service
18
c11173008

.
Older Americans Act: Funding Formulas

Table A-4. Older Americans Act, Title III Part D:
Comparison of FY2006 Hold Harmless (HH) and FY2015 Funding Allotment
Amounts for States and U.S. Territories

Part D:
Preventive Services
FY2015
State /
FY2006 HH
FY2015
%
Amount
U.S. Territory
Amount
Amount
Change
Typea
Alabama
$337,809
$311,357
-7.83%
HH
Alaska
$106,594
$98,248
-7.83%
HH
Arizona
$410,919
$378,742
-7.83%
HH
Arkansas
$214,532
$197,733
-7.83%
HH
California
$2,161,730
$1,992,449
-7.83%
HH
Colorado
$259,740
$239,401
-7.83%
HH
Connecticut
$264,812
$244,076
-7.83%
HH
Delaware
$106,594
$98,248
-7.83%
HH
District of Columbia
$106,594
$98,248
-7.83%
HH
Florida
$1,579,267
$1,455,604
-7.83%
HH
Georgia
$494,452
$455,734
-7.83%
HH
Hawaii
$106,594
$98,248
-7.83%
HH
Idaho
$106,594
$98,248
-7.83%
HH
Illinois
$852,878
$786,094
-7.83%
HH
Indiana
$433,072
$399,161
-7.83%
HH
Iowa
$235,487
$217,047
-7.83%
HH
Kansas
$194,367
$179,147
-7.83%
HH
Kentucky
$296,405
$273,195
-7.83%
HH
Louisiana
$299,820
$276,343
-7.83%
HH
Maine
$106,800
$98,437
-7.83%
HH
Maryland
$366,183
$337,509
-7.83%
HH
Massachusetts
$471,949
$434,993
-7.83%
HH
Michigan
$703,661
$648,562
-7.83%
HH
Minnesota
$343,817
$316,895
-7.83%
HH
Mississippi
$198,985
$183,404
-7.83%
HH
Missouri
$429,147
$395,543
-7.83%
HH
Montana
$106,594
$98,248
-7.83%
HH
Nebraska
$126,640
$116,724
-7.83%
HH
Nevada
$153,876
$141,827
-7.83%
HH
New Hampshire
$106,594
$98,248
-7.83%
HH
Congressional Research Service
19
c11173008

.
Older Americans Act: Funding Formulas

Part D:
Preventive Services
FY2015
State /
FY2006 HH
FY2015
%
Amount
U.S. Territory
Amount
Amount
Change
Typea
New Jersey
$629,595
$580,295
-7.83%
HH
New Mexico
$129,169
$119,055
-7.83%
HH
New York
$1,395,778
$1,286,483
-7.83%
HH
North Carolina
$585,707
$539,844
-7.83%
HH
North Dakota
$106,594
$98,248
-7.83%
HH
Ohio
$847,522
$781,158
-7.83%
HH
Oklahoma
$261,015
$240,576
-7.83%
HH
Oregon
$258,464
$238,225
-7.83%
HH
Pennsylvania
$1,032,740
$951,872
-7.83%
HH
Puerto Rico
$273,504
$252,088
-7.83%
HH
Rhode Island
$106,594
$98,248
-7.83%
HH
South Carolina
$299,548
$276,092
-7.83%
HH
South Dakota
$106,594
$98,248
-7.83%
HH
Tennessee
$422,621
$389,528
-7.83%
HH
Texas
$1,270,703
$1,171,202
-7.83%
HH
Utah
$116,703
$107,565
-7.83%
HH
Vermont
$106,594
$98,248
-7.83%
HH
Virginia
$491,685
$453,184
-7.83%
HH
Washington
$403,231
$371,656
-7.83%
HH
West Virginia
$155,270
$143,112
-7.83%
HH
Wisconsin
$396,901
$365,822
-7.83%
HH
Wyoming
$106,594
$98,248
-7.83%
HH
American Samoa
$13,324
$12,281
-7.83%
HH
Guam
$53,297
$49,124
-7.83%
HH
Northern Marianas
$13,324
$12,281
-7.83%
HH
Virgin Islands
$53,297
$49,124
-7.83%
HH
Total $21,318,874
$19,649,520
-7.83%

Source: FY2015 funding levels from ACL, “Title III Grants for State and Community Programs on Aging, FY2015
Annual Allocations,” January 30, 2015, http://www.acl.gov/About_ACL/Allocations/docs/OAA/T3-2015.pdf. Total
amounts are adjusted down from a program’s enacted funding level to account for program support, evaluation,
oversight, and other statutory related activities.
Notes: HH = state receives a grant amount based on its FY2006 hold harmless amount or an amount reduced
from its FY2006 hold harmless amount; M = state receives a minimum grant amount; P = state receives a grant
amount based on its population aged 60+.
a. FY2015 funding for Preventive Services is below FY2006 funding levels, thus al states and U.S. territories
receive an al otment that is proportionately reduced from their FY2006 hold harmless amount.
Congressional Research Service
20
c11173008

.
Older Americans Act: Funding Formulas

Table A-5. Population Formula Factor: Proportion of the State/U.S. Territory
Population Aged 60+ Relative to Total U.S. Population Aged 60+
Selected Years and Difference from 2000 to 2013
Difference
2000
2010
2013
2000 to 2013
Percentage
State or
Pop. Age
% Age
Pop. Age
% Age
Pop. Age
% Age
Point
U.S. Territory
60+
60+
60+
60+
60+
60+
Change
Alabama

769,880 1.66% 933,919 1.61%
1,010,819 1.59% -0.07%
Alaska

53,026 0.11% 90,876 0.16% 107,234 0.17% 0.05%
Arizona

871,536 1.88%
1,232,791 2.13%
1,389,835 2.18% 0.30%
Arkansas

491,409 1.06% 587,012 1.01% 627,405 0.99% -0.07%
California

4,742,499 10.22% 6,078,711 10.50% 6,791,981 10.66%
0.45%
Colorado

560,658 1.21% 818,905 1.41% 949,712 1.49% 0.28%
Connecticut

601,835 1.30% 709,854 1.23% 758,617 1.19% -0.11%
Delaware

133,925 0.29% 182,390 0.32% 204,213 0.32% 0.03%
District of Columbia
91,878
0.20%
98,512
0.17%
105,487
0.17%
-0.03%
Florida

3,545,093 7.64%
4,394,852 7.59%
4,840,840 7.60% -0.04%
Georgia

1,071,080 2.31%
1,528,041 2.64%
1,725,513 2.71% 0.40%
Hawai

207,001 0.45% 277,360 0.48% 306,031 0.48% 0.03%
Idaho

193,421 0.42% 277,984 0.48% 316,037 0.50% 0.08%
Illinois

1,962,911 4.23%
2,274,642 3.93%
2,465,852 3.87% -0.36%
Indiana

988,506 2.13%
1,191,736 2.06%
1,295,766 2.03% -0.10%
Iowa

554,573 1.19% 621,245 1.07% 667,635 1.05% -0.15%
Kansas

454,837 0.98% 524,851 0.91% 568,472 0.89% -0.09%
Kentucky

672,905 1.45% 829,193 1.43% 900,441 1.41% -0.04%
Louisiana

687,216 1.48% 800,852 1.38% 877,547 1.38% -0.10%
Maine

238,099 0.51% 300,740 0.52% 331,483 0.52% 0.01%
Maryland

801,036 1.73%
1,025,421 1.77%
1,135,027 1.78% 0.06%
Massachusetts

1,096,567 2.36%
1,273,271 2.20%
1,386,149 2.18% -0.19%
Michigan

1,596,162 3.44%
1,930,341 3.33%
2,107,321 3.31% -0.13%
Minnesota

772,278 1.66% 962,896 1.66%
1,073,277 1.69% 0.02%
Mississippi

457,144 0.98% 541,163 0.93% 586,183 0.92% -0.06%
Missouri

983,704 2.12%
1,171,587 2.02%
1,266,187 1.99% -0.13%
Montana

158,894 0.34% 209,685 0.36% 235,808 0.37% 0.03%
Nebraska

296,151 0.64% 342,167 0.59% 371,131 0.58% -0.06%
Nevada

304,071 0.66% 475,283 0.82% 540,250 0.85% 0.19%
New
Hampshire

194,965 0.42% 260,222 0.45% 291,173 0.46% 0.04%
Congressional Research Service
21
c11173008

.
Older Americans Act: Funding Formulas

Difference
2000
2010
2013
2000 to 2013
Percentage
State or
Pop. Age
% Age
Pop. Age
% Age
Pop. Age
% Age
Point
U.S. Territory
60+
60+
60+
60+
60+
60+
Change
New
Jersey

1,443,782 3.11%
1,666,535 2.88%
1,788,194 2.81% -0.30%
New Mexico
283,837
0.61%
392,392
0.68%
434,034
0.68%
0.07%
New
York

3,204,331 6.90%
3,684,203 6.36%
3,960,194 6.22% -0.69%
North
Carolina

1,292,553 2.78%
1,772,118 3.06%
1,978,897 3.11% 0.32%
North
Dakota

118,985 0.26% 133,350 0.23% 143,835 0.23% -0.03%
Ohio

1,963,489 4.23%
2,287,424 3.95%
2,467,220 3.87% -0.36%
Oklahoma

599,080 1.29% 711,227 1.23% 765,521 1.20% -0.09%
Oregon

569,557 1.23% 769,676 1.33% 867,389 1.36% 0.13%
Pennsylvania

2,430,821 5.24%
2,702,603 4.67%
2,891,678 4.54% -0.70%
Puerto Rico
585,701
1.26%
760,075
1.31%
808,676
1.27%
0.01%
Rhode Island
191,409
0.41%
211,836
0.37%
226,112
0.36%
-0.06%
South Carolina
651,482
1.40%
912,429
1.58%
1,024,684
1.61%
0.21%
South Dakota
136,869
0.29%
160,154
0.28%
177,385
0.28%
-0.02%
Tennessee

942,620 2.03%
1,224,186 2.11%
1,341,080 2.11% 0.07%
Texas

2,774,201 5.98%
3,776,653 6.52%
4,262,495 6.69% 0.72%
Utah

252,677 0.54% 356,581 0.62% 406,280 0.64% 0.09%
Vermont

101,827 0.22% 132,312 0.23% 147,126 0.23% 0.01%
Virginia

1,065,502 2.30%
1,419,306 2.45%
1,572,457 2.47% 0.17%
Washington

873,223 1.88%
1,209,764 2.09%
1,369,080 2.15% 0.27%
West Virginia
362,795
0.78%
422,861
0.73%
451,705
0.71%
-0.07%
Wisconsin

907,552 1.96%
1,091,139 1.88%
1,201,528 1.89% -0.07%
Wyoming

77,348 0.17% 102,657 0.18% 115,755 0.18% 0.02%
American Samoa
3,091
0.01%
4,454
0.01%
4,271
0.01%
0.00%
Guam

12,894 0.03% 20,099 0.03% 19,797 0.03% 0.00%
Northern Marianas
1,887
0.00%a 3,044 0.01% 3,925 0.01% 0.00%
Virgin Islands
14,045
0.03%
23,423
0.04%
25,761
0.04%
0.01%
Total
46,414,818 100.0% 57,897,003 100.00% 63,688,505 100.00%

Source: State data for 2000 and 2010 are U.S. Census Bureau decennial census data compiled by the
Administration on Aging at http://www.aoa.acl.gov/Aging_Statistics/Census_Population/census2010/docs/
Pop_Age_60_Alpha_List.xls; U.S. territory census information for 2000 and 2010 obtained from U.S. Census
Bureau International Data Base, at http://www.census.gov/population/international/data/idb/
informationGateway.php; state and U.S. territory data for 2013 are U.S. Census Bureau state population
estimates compiled by the Administration on Aging and obtained through personal communication, January 12,
2015.
a. Population is less than 0.01%.
Congressional Research Service
22
c11173008

.
Older Americans Act: Funding Formulas

Appendix B. The Older Americans Act
Reauthorization Act of 2015 (S. 192): Analysis of
Formula Change

Section 4(b) of S. 192 would change the statutory funding allocations for OAA Title III, Parts B,
C, and D, which allocate funding to supportive services, congregate nutrition, home-delivered
nutrition, and preventive services. This provision would retain the same state and territory
minimum amounts allotted under current law and the same population-based formula factor (aged
60 and over), but would reduce state and U.S. territory hold harmless amounts (currently
referenced to FY2006 funding levels) by 1% from the previous fiscal year as follows:
• For FY2016, no state would receive less than 99% of the annual amount allotted
to the state in FY2015.
• For FY2017, no state would receive less than 99% of the annual amount allotted
to the state in FY2016.
• For FY2018, no state would receive less than 99% of the annual amount allotted
to the state in FY2017.
• For FY2019 and each subsequent fiscal year, no state would receive less than
100% of the annual amount allotted to the state in FY2018.
If enacted, S. 192 would reduce the effect of the FY2006 hold harmless provision. Specifically, it
would reduce state and U.S. territory hold harmless amounts by 1% for each of three years, and
then freeze this reduction in place for FY2019 and future fiscal years, unless or until such
language is amended. Effectively, for those states that receive an annual program allotment based
on their FY2006 hold harmless amount the proposed policy change would minimize any
reduction in funding to no more than 1% from the previous fiscal year, assuming a program’s
total funding level in fiscal years 2016 to 2018 is at or above the previous fiscal year’s level.
Analysis of S. 192 Funding Formula Change
The following analysis compares FY2015 allotment amounts with simulated allotment amounts
under the S. 192 proposed statutory funding formula change. For the purposes of this analysis,
CRS separately simulated allotment amounts to states and U.S. territories for each of the four
programs for which the formula change would apply: Part B, supportive services and centers; Part
C, subpart 1, congregate nutrition services; Part C, subpart 2, home-delivered nutrition services;
and Part D, disease prevention and health promotion services programs. For each fiscal year
simulation, state and U.S. territory allotments for each of these programs were then totaled.
Simulated allotment amounts for FY2016 through FY2018 assume no changes to total program
funding levels or the population formula factor. Thus, the analysis assumes funding is constant at
FY2015 funding levels for future fiscal years and also assumes no change to each entity’s relative
share of the total U.S. population aged 60 and over (the most recent U.S. Census data available is
2013, which is used in this analysis). Thus, simulated allotment amounts analyze the effect of the
proposed policy change, holding other variables that are unknown, such as future funding levels
and population, constant. Caution should be used in interpreting these results as these
assumptions do not reflect actual increases or decreases in allotments; rather, the results from this
Congressional Research Service
23
c11173008

.
Older Americans Act: Funding Formulas

analysis should be used to understand potential changes to allotments as a result of the proposed
policy change and any distributional changes that might occur.
Table B-1, Table B-2, and Table B-3 compare FY2015 allotment amounts with the proposed
hold harmless adjustment for each state and territory for the four Title III programs combined for
FY2016 through FY2018, respectively.
Congressional Research Service
24
c11173008

.
Older Americans Act: Funding Formulas

Table B-1. Comparison of FY2015 Older Americans Act (OAA) Title III Allotments
to Simulated Population Aged 60+ with 99% of FY2015 Allotments for FY2016

FY2016 Simulated
Amount
Difference from FY2015
FY2015
Title III Allotment
99% of FY2015
State
Amount
Annual Allotment
Amount
Percent
Alabama $15,386,557
$15,369,043
-$17,514
-0.1%
Alaska $5,059,692
$5,059,692
$0
0.0%
Arizona $20,354,481
$20,645,729
$291,248
1.4%
Arkansas $9,860,727
$9,782,622
-$78,105
-0.8%
California $101,582,696
$101,483,056
-$99,640
-0.1%
Colorado $13,494,406
$14,011,330
$516,924
3.8%
Connecticut $12,303,780
$12,205,532
-$98,248
-0.8%
Delaware $5,059,692
$5,059,692
$0
0.0%
District of Columbia
$5,059,692
$5,059,692
$0
0.0%
Florida $73,044,057
$72,966,610
-$77,447
-0.1%
Georgia $24,893,786
$25,456,909
$563,123
2.3%
Hawaii $5,059,692
$5,059,692
$0
0.0%
Idaho $5,059,692
$5,059,692
$0
0.0%
Illinois $40,440,849
$40,117,017
-$323,832
-0.8%
Indiana $19,724,596
$19,702,139
-$22,457
-0.1%
Iowa $11,678,305
$11,583,338
-$94,967
-0.8%
Kansas $9,508,928
$9,432,414
-$76,514
-0.8%
Kentucky $13,631,035
$13,616,187
-$14,848
-0.1%
Louisiana $13,514,885
$13,450,914
-$63,971
-0.5%
Maine $5,071,161
$5,070,979
-$182
0.0%
Maryland $17,058,046
$17,040,572
-$17,474
-0.1%
Massachusetts $22,832,751
$22,649,719
-$183,032
-0.8%
Michigan $32,067,518
$32,031,104
-$36,414
-0.1%
Minnesota $16,089,226
$16,073,111
-$16,115
-0.1%
Mississippi $9,214,336
$9,141,348
-$72,988
-0.8%
Missouri $20,013,365
$19,854,606
-$158,759
-0.8%
Montana $5,059,692
$5,059,692
$0
0.0%
Nebraska $6,329,384
$6,278,218
-$51,166
-0.8%
Nevada $7,778,526
$7,970,439
$191,913
2.5%
New Hampshire
$5,059,692
$5,059,692
$0
0.0%
Congressional Research Service
25
c11173008

.
Older Americans Act: Funding Formulas

FY2016 Simulated
Amount
Difference from FY2015
FY2015
Title III Allotment
99% of FY2015
State
Amount
Annual Allotment
Amount
Percent
New Jersey
$28,725,486
$28,496,664
-$228,822
-0.8%
New Mexico
$6,265,178
$6,286,226
$21,048
0.3%
New York
$67,116,513
$66,574,755
-$541,758
-0.8%
North Carolina
$28,860,491
$29,195,145
$334,654
1.2%
North Dakota
$5,059,692
$5,059,692
$0
0.0%
Ohio $38,849,724
$38,541,848
-$307,876
-0.8%
Oklahoma $12,037,870
$11,942,506
-$95,364
-0.8%
Oregon $12,679,103
$12,796,799
$117,696
0.9%
Pennsylvania $49,297,173
$48,898,692
-$398,481
-0.8%
Puerto Rico
$12,363,802
$12,349,248
-$14,554
-0.1%
Rhode Island
$5,059,692
$5,059,692
$0
0.0%
South Carolina
$14,881,802
$15,117,410
$235,608
1.6%
South Dakota
$5,059,692
$5,059,692
$0
0.0%
Tennessee $19,987,242
$19,968,271
-$18,971
-0.1%
Texas $62,316,718
$62,885,617
$568,899
0.9%
Utah $5,850,386
$5,969,971
$119,585
2.0%
Vermont $5,059,692
$5,059,692
$0
0.0%
Virginia $23,371,383
$23,349,782
-$21,601
-0.1%
Washington $19,933,722
$20,198,367
$264,645
1.3%
West Virginia
$7,657,748
$7,595,930
-$61,818
-0.8%
Wisconsin $18,253,048
$18,232,595
-$20,453
-0.1%
Wyoming $5,059,692
$5,059,692
$0
0.0%
American Samoa
$1,209,149
$1,197,180
-$11,969
-1.0%
Guam $2,529,847
$2,529,846
-$1
0.0%
Northern Marianas
$632,463
$632,462
-$2
0.0%
Virgin Islands
$2,529,847
$2,529,846
-$1
0.0%
TOTAL $1,011,938,400
$1,011,938,400
$0
100.0%
Source: CRS analysis of S. 192; FY2015 funding levels from ACL, “Title III Grants for State and Community
Programs on Aging, FY2015 Annual Allocations,” January 30, 2015, http://www.acl.gov/About_ACL/Allocations/
docs/OAA/T3-2015.pdf.
Notes: OAA Title III allotment amounts include funding for programs authorized under Part B, supportive
services and centers; Part C, subpart 1, congregate nutrition services; Part C, subpart 2, home-delivered
nutrition services; and Part D, disease prevention and health promotion services programs. FY2016 simulated
al otment amounts assume FY2015 funding levels and 2013 U.S. Census state population data for the population
aged 60 and over.
Congressional Research Service
26
c11173008

.
Older Americans Act: Funding Formulas

Table B-2. Comparison of FY2015 Older Americans Act (OAA) Title III Allotments
to Simulated Population Aged 60+ with 99% of FY2016 Allotments for FY2017

FY2017 Simulated
Amount
Difference from FY2015
FY2015
Title III Allotment
99% of FY2016
State
Amount
Annual Allotment
Amount
Percent
Alabama $15,386,557
$15,350,508
-$36,049
-0.2%
Alaska $5,059,692
$5,059,692
$0
0.0%
Arizona
$20,354,481 $20,909,001 $554,520 2.7%
Arkansas
$9,860,727
$9,705,296 -$155,431 -1.6%
California
$101,582,696 $101,481,522 -$101,174 -0.1%
Colorado
$13,494,406 $14,190,001 $695,595 5.2%
Connecticut
$12,303,780 $12,108,264 -$195,516 -1.6%
Delaware $5,059,692
$5,059,692
$0
0.0%
District of Columbia
$5,059,692
$5,059,692
$0
0.0%
Florida
$73,044,057 $72,884,203 -$159,854 -0.2%
Georgia
$24,893,786 $25,781,533 $887,747 3.6%
Hawaii $5,059,692
$5,059,692
$0
0.0%
Idaho $5,059,692
$5,059,692
$0
0.0%
Illinois
$40,440,849 $39,796,419 -$644,430 -1.6%
Indiana $19,724,596
$19,678,371
-$46,225
-0.2%
Iowa
$11,678,305 $11,489,320 -$188,985 -1.6%
Kansas
$9,508,928
$9,356,665 -$152,263 -1.6%
Kentucky $13,631,035
$13,600,421
-$30,614
-0.2%
Louisiana $13,514,885
$13,433,740
-$81,145
-0.6%
Maine $5,071,161
$5,070,986
-$175
0.0%
Maryland $17,058,046
$17,021,928
-$36,118
-0.2%
Massachusetts
$22,832,751 $22,468,514 -$364,237 -1.6%
Michigan $32,067,518
$31,992,559
-$74,959
-0.2%
Minnesota $16,089,226
$16,055,885
-$33,341
-0.2%
Mississippi
$9,214,336
$9,069,088 -$145,248 -1.6%
Missouri
$20,013,365 $19,697,433 -$315,932 -1.6%
Montana $5,059,692
$5,059,692
$0
0.0%
Nebraska
$6,329,384
$6,227,562 -$101,822 -1.6%
Nevada
$7,778,526 $8,072,077 $293,551 3.8%
New Hampshire
$5,059,692
$5,059,692
$0
0.0%
Congressional Research Service
27
c11173008

.
Older Americans Act: Funding Formulas

FY2017 Simulated
Amount
Difference from FY2015
FY2015
Title III Allotment
99% of FY2016
State
Amount
Annual Allotment
Amount
Percent
New
Jersey
$28,725,486 $28,270,126 -$455,360 -1.6%
New
Mexico
$6,265,178 $6,366,387 $101,209 1.6%
New York
$67,116,513
$66,038,407
-$1,078,106
-1.6%
North
Carolina
$28,860,491 $29,567,438 $706,947 2.4%
North Dakota
$5,059,692
$5,059,692
$0
0.0%
Ohio
$38,849,724 $38,237,046 -$612,678 -1.6%
Oklahoma
$12,037,870 $11,848,094 -$189,776 -1.6%
Oregon
$12,679,103 $12,959,983 $280,880 2.2%
Pennsylvania
$49,297,173 $48,504,191 -$792,982 -1.6%
Puerto Rico
$12,363,802
$12,333,882
-$29,920
-0.2%
Rhode Island
$5,059,692
$5,059,692
$0
0.0%
South
Carolina
$14,881,802 $15,310,186 $428,384 2.9%
South Dakota
$5,059,692
$5,059,692
$0
0.0%
Tennessee $19,987,242
$20,037,577
$50,335
0.3%
Texas $62,316,718
$63,687,528
$1,370,810
2.2%
Utah
$5,850,386 $6,046,100 $195,714 3.3%
Vermont $5,059,692
$5,059,692
$0
0.0%
Virginia
$23,371,383 $23,494,667 $123,284 0.5%
Washington
$19,933,722 $20,455,935 $522,213 2.6%
West
Virginia
$7,657,748
$7,534,731 -$123,017 -1.6%
Wisconsin $18,253,048
$18,210,923
-$42,125
-0.2%
Wyoming $5,059,692
$5,059,692
$0
0.0%
American Samoa
$1,209,149
$1,185,445
-$23,704
-2.0%
Guam $2,529,847
$2,529,846
-$1
0.0%
Northern Marianas
$632,463
$632,462
-$2
0.0%
Virgin Islands
$2,529,847
$2,529,846
-$1
0.0%
TOTAL $1,011,938,400
$1,011,938,400
$0
0.00%
Source: CRS analysis of S. 192; FY2015 funding levels from ACL, “Title III Grants for State and Community
Programs on Aging, FY2015 Annual Allocations,” January 30, 2015, http://www.acl.gov/About_ACL/Allocations/
docs/OAA/T3-2015.pdf.
Notes: OAA Title III allotment amounts include funding for programs authorized under Part B, supportive
services and centers; Part C, subpart 1, congregate nutrition services; Part C, subpart 2, home-delivered
nutrition services; and Part D, disease prevention and health promotion services programs. FY2017 simulated
al otment amounts assume FY2015 funding levels and 2013 U.S. Census state population data for the population
aged 60 and over.
Congressional Research Service
28
c11173008

.
Older Americans Act: Funding Formulas

Table B-3. Comparison of FY2015 Older Americans Act (OAA) Title III Allotments
to Simulated Population Aged 60+ with 99% of FY2017 Allotments for FY2018

FY2018 Simulated
Amount
Difference from FY2015
FY2015
Title III Allotment
99% of FY2017
State
Amount
Annual Allotment
Amount
Percent
Alabama $15,386,557
$15,327,346
-$59,211
-0.4%
Alaska $5,059,692
$5,059,692
$0
0.0%
Arizona $20,354,481
$21,057,527
$703,046
3.5%
Arkansas $9,860,727
$9,658,513
-$202,214
-2.1%
California $101,582,696
$102,202,391
$619,695
0.6%
Colorado $13,494,406
$14,290,799
$796,393
5.9%
Connecticut $12,303,780
$12,011,954
-$291,826
-2.4%
Delaware $5,059,692
$5,059,692
$0
0.0%
District of Columbia
$5,059,692
$5,059,692
$0
0.0%
Florida $73,044,057
$72,842,580
-$201,477
-0.3%
Georgia $24,893,786
$25,964,671
$1,070,885
4.3%
Hawaii $5,059,692
$5,059,692
$0
0.0%
Idaho $5,059,692
$5,059,692
$0
0.0%
Illinois $40,440,849
$39,478,977
-$961,872
-2.4%
Indiana $19,724,596
$19,648,675
-$75,921
-0.4%
Iowa $11,678,305
$11,396,228
-$282,077
-2.4%
Kansas $9,508,928
$9,281,662
-$227,266
-2.4%
Kentucky $13,631,035
$13,580,528
-$50,507
-0.4%
Louisiana $13,514,885
$13,412,561
-$102,324
-0.8%
Maine $5,071,161
$5,070,986
-$175
0.0%
Maryland $17,058,046
$17,079,328
$21,282
0.1%
Massachusetts $22,832,751
$22,289,093
-$543,658
-2.4%
Michigan $32,067,518
$31,944,370
-$123,148
-0.4%
Minnesota $16,089,226
$16,150,145
$60,919
0.4%
Mississippi $9,214,336
$9,024,291
-$190,045
-2.1%
Missouri $20,013,365
$19,541,806
-$471,559
-2.4%
Montana $5,059,692
$5,059,692
$0
0.0%
Nebraska $6,329,384
$6,177,406
-$151,978
-2.4%
Nevada $7,778,526
$8,129,416
$350,890
4.5%
New Hampshire
$5,059,692
$5,059,692
$0
0.0%
Congressional Research Service
29
c11173008

.
Older Americans Act: Funding Formulas

FY2018 Simulated
Amount
Difference from FY2015
FY2015
Title III Allotment
99% of FY2017
State
Amount
Annual Allotment
Amount
Percent
New Jersey
$28,725,486
$28,045,818
-$679,668
-2.4%
New Mexico
$6,265,178
$6,411,611
$146,433
2.3%
New York
$67,116,513
$65,507,343
-$1,609,170
-2.4%
North Carolina
$28,860,491
$29,777,469
$916,978
3.2%
North Dakota
$5,059,692
$5,059,692
$0
0.0%
Ohio $38,849,724
$38,032,079
-$817,645
-2.1%
Oklahoma $12,037,870
$11,790,357
-$247,513
-2.1%
Oregon $12,679,103
$13,052,043
$372,940
2.9%
Pennsylvania $49,297,173
$48,113,577
-$1,183,596
-2.4%
Puerto Rico
$12,363,802
$12,314,821
-$48,981
-0.4%
Rhode Island
$5,059,692
$5,059,692
$0
0.0%
South Carolina
$14,881,802
$15,418,941
$537,139
3.6%
South Dakota
$5,059,692
$5,059,692
$0
0.0%
Tennessee $19,987,242
$20,179,912
$192,670
1.0%
Texas $62,316,718
$64,139,929
$1,823,211
2.9%
Utah $5,850,386
$6,089,048
$238,662
4.1%
Vermont $5,059,692
$5,059,692
$0
0.0%
Virginia $23,371,383
$23,661,560
$290,177
1.2%
Washington $19,933,722
$20,601,243
$667,521
3.3%
West Virginia
$7,657,748
$7,474,134
-$183,614
-2.4%
Wisconsin $18,253,048
$18,183,749
-$69,299
-0.4%
Wyoming $5,059,692
$5,059,692
$0
0.0%
American Samoa
$1,209,149
$1,175,053
-$34,096
-2.8%
Guam $2,529,847
$2,529,846
-$1
0.0%
Northern
Marianas
$632,463 $632,462 -$2
0.0%
Virgin Islands
$2,529,847
$2,529,846
-$1
0.0%
TOTAL $1,011,938,400
$1,011,938,400
$0
0.00%
Source: CRS analysis of S. 192; FY2015 funding levels from ACL, “Title III Grants for State and Community
Programs on Aging, FY2015 Annual Allocations,” January 30, 2015, http://www.acl.gov/About_ACL/Allocations/
docs/OAA/T3-2015.pdf.
Notes: OAA Title III allotment amounts include funding for programs authorized under Part B, supportive
services and centers; Part C, subpart 1, congregate nutrition services; Part C, subpart 2, home-delivered
nutrition services; and Part D, disease prevention and health promotion services programs. FY2018 simulated
al otment amounts assume FY2015 funding levels and 2013 U.S. Census state population data for the population
aged 60 and over.
Congressional Research Service
30
c11173008

.
Older Americans Act: Funding Formulas


Author Contact Information

Kirsten J. Colello

Specialist in Health and Aging Policy
kcolello@crs.loc.gov, 7-7839


Congressional Research Service
31
c11173008