The Weatherization Assistance Program Formula

The Weatherization Assistance Program
June 16, 2020
Formula
Corrie E. Clark
The Department of Energy’s (DOE’s) Weatherization Assistance Program (WAP) enables low-
Analyst in Energy Policy
income families to reduce their energy consumption by making their dwellings more energy

efficient. The WAP was authorized in Title IV of the Energy Conservation and Production Act
Lynn J. Cunningham
(ECPA, P.L. 94-385) and established in 1976. This act authorized the Administrator of the
Senior Research Librarian
Federal Energy Administration (and later the Secretary of Energy) to provide weatherization

assistance.

The WAP is a formula grant program: funding flows from DOE to state and territorial
governments and then to local governments and weatherization agencies. DOE program guidelines specify that a variety of
energy efficiency measures are eligible for support under the program. The measures include insulation, space-heating
equipment, energy-efficient windows, water heaters, and efficient air conditioners.
Program funds are allocated to the states and territories according to a formula that has a long and complicated history.
Initially WAP funds were distributed in a manner that was more favorable to colder-weather states. This focus was in part the
result of high heating oil prices throughout the 1970s. As WAP was reauthorized, Congress amended the factors that were
considered by DOE to inform the distribution of funds.
The current procedure dates to 1990, when Congress reauthorized WAP. The reauthorization required that the Secretary of
DOE amend the formula allocation to use more recent data and to account for factors such as the cost of heating and cooling.
The effect of these changes was that, in general, some funding would be shifted from colder-weather states to warmer-
weather states. To prevent a dramatic shift of funds, the “new” formula, which DOE developed in 1995, is used to calculate
state allotments only when appropriations for the WAP program exceed approximately $209.7 million. When funds are at or
above the threshold, DOE determines program allocations for states and territories according to a base allocation and a
formula allocation. The base allocation is a set amount for each state and territory and reflects historical program allocations.
The formula allocation is composed of three factors: a population factor, a climatic factor (which is derived from heating and
cooling degree days), and a residential energy expenditure factor by low-income households (which approximates the
financial burden to low-income households of energy use). For total program allocations below $209,724,761, DOE
determines allocations for states and territories according to a base allocation of $209,724,761 less the percentage decrease of
the total program allocation from the threshold.
Under the current procedure, the method of funding allocation is dependent upon whether WAP’s annual appropriation by
Congress is at or exceeds the monetary threshold, as noted. In FY2020, the threshold for the formula allocation was exceeded
with WAP funding at $305 million.
Issues for Congress center on whether to amend the current allocation procedure to account for changes in the energy
consumption of heating or cooling, or to include other factors in the formula. In the 116th Congress, several bills would make
changes to the WAP. These include directing DOE to take into consideration “improvements in the health and safety of
occupants” of weatherized dwellings, reauthorizing WAP, increasing the authorized annual appropriation for the program,
and establishing a timeline for disbursement of allocated funds to states, among other proposals.


Congressional Research Service


link to page 4 link to page 4 link to page 5 link to page 6 link to page 6 link to page 6 link to page 7 link to page 8 link to page 8 link to page 8 link to page 9 link to page 10 link to page 10 link to page 13 link to page 13 link to page 17 link to page 17 link to page 21 link to page 13 link to page 21 link to page 22 The Weatherization Assistance Program Formula

Contents
Introduction to the Weatherization Assistance Program .................................................................. 1
Statutory Authority for Allocation............................................................................................. 1
WAP’s Program Allocation ............................................................................................................. 2
Development of the Program Allocation Procedures ................................................................ 3
1984 Formula Allocation .................................................................................................... 3
1995 Formula Allocation .................................................................................................... 3

FY2020 Allocation .................................................................................................................... 4
The Base Allocation ........................................................................................................................ 5
The Formula Allocation ................................................................................................................... 5

Factor 1: Population .................................................................................................................. 5
Factor 2: Climate ....................................................................................................................... 6
Factor 3: Residential Energy Expenditure................................................................................. 7
Potential Issues for Congress........................................................................................................... 7

Tables

Table A-1. Weatherization Assistance Program (WAP): State Allocations: FY2010-
FY2020 ....................................................................................................................................... 10
Table A-2. Weatherization Assistance Program (WAP): State Allocations: FY2001-
FY2009 ARRA ........................................................................................................................... 14
Table B-1. Base Allocation Table from 10 C.F.R. §440.10 ........................................................... 18

Appendixes
Appendix A. State Total Allocations, FY2001-FY2020 ................................................................ 10
Appendix B. Base Allocation ........................................................................................................ 18

Contacts
Author Information ........................................................................................................................ 19

Congressional Research Service


The Weatherization Assistance Program Formula

Introduction to the Weatherization Assistance
Program
The Weatherization Assistance Program (WAP) was established in 1976 under Title IV of the
Energy Conservation and Production Act (ECPA, P.L. 94-385, 42 U.S.C. §6861 et seq.). The
WAP enables low-income families to permanently reduce their energy consumption by making
their households more energy efficient.1 It is a formula grant program: funding flows from the
Department of Energy (DOE) to state governments (including territories, beginning in 2007) and
then to local governments and weatherization agencies. DOE program guidelines specify that a
variety of energy efficiency measures are eligible for support under the program. The measures
include insulation, space-heating equipment, energy-efficient windows, water heaters, and
efficient air conditioners.
Currently, DOE employs a formula to allocate WAP funding to states, the District of Columbia,
and territories (hereinafter referred to as states and territories). Each state and territory, in turn,
decides how to allocate its share of the funding to local governments and jurisdictions.2 Funds
made available to the states are allocated to local governments and nonprofit agencies for
purchasing and installing energy efficiency materials, such as insulation, and for making energy-
related repairs.3 Funds for tribes are included in a state’s formula allocations. With a few
exceptions, funds for tribes are distributed at the state level.
This report discusses the formula that is used to allocate WAP funds to state governments. The
formula allocation has changed over time. The report begins with an introduction to WAP,
including the program’s statutory authority, current allocation procedure, and origin and
evolution. Next, the report discusses the specific methods and factors for distributing WAP funds
to the states, which involve a base allocation and a formula allocation. The report concludes with
a discussion of issues for Congress and identifies some related legislation introduced in the 116th
Congress.
Statutory Authority for Allocation
Under current law, DOE allocates weatherization assistance funds to states and territories, taking
into account several factors. Section 414 of ECPA (42 U.S.C. 6864(a)) mandates that the funding
allocation be based on “the relative need for weatherization assistance among low-income
persons.” Other factors specified in Section 414 include:
 “the number of dwelling units to be weatherized”;

1 The federal WAP statute states that the primary purpose of the program is “to increase the energy efficiency of
dwellings owned or occupied by low-income persons, reduce their total residential energy expenditures, and improve
their health and safety, especially low-income persons who are particularly vulnerable such as the elderly, the
handicapped, and children.” See 42 U.S.C. §6861.
2 Administrative rules, eligibility standards, the types of aid, and benefit levels are primarily decided at the state level.
Eligibility is automatically given to applicants receiving Temporary Assistance to Needy Families or Supplemental
Security Income. Also, if a state elects, program eligibility can extended to a household that meets Low Income Home
Energy Assistance Program eligibility criteria.
3 Most of the grantees are state-designated community action agencies, which administer multiple types of social
service grants for low-income persons. No more than 10% of grant funds allocated to states may be used for
administration according to 42 U.S.C. §6865.
Congressional Research Service
1

The Weatherization Assistance Program Formula

 “the climatic conditions in the state [or territory] respecting energy conservation,
which may include consideration of annual degree days”;
 “the type of weatherization work to be done in various settings”; and
 “such other factors as the Secretary [of DOE] may determine necessary, such as
the cost of heating and cooling, in order to carry out the purpose and provisions
of this part.”
DOE is required to annually update the data used in the allocation of funds.4
WAP’s Program Allocation
Funds for WAP are directed to several activities. DOE reserves some funds for national training
and technical assistance (T&TA) activities that benefit all states and territories. DOE allocates
funding for T&TA activities at both the state and local levels. The total funding for national, state,
and local T&TA is limited to 10% of an annual appropriation.5
The remaining funds comprise the total allocation to state programs. The program allocation
consists of two parts: the base allocation and the formula allocation. The base allocation for each
state is fixed, but the amount differs for each state. The fixed base was intended to prevent large
swings from previous allocations which could disrupt a state’s program operations.
A state or territory’s program allocation for a given year is determined using one of two methods
and is dependent upon WAP’s annual appropriation by Congress.6 If the total program allocation
is at or above $209,724,761 (referred to as the threshold amount),7 DOE determines program
allocations for states and territories according to a base allocation and a formula allocation, which
is expressed mathematically as:
Program Allocation = Base Allocation + Formula Allocation
For total program allocations below $209,724,761, DOE determines allocations for states and
territories according to an allocation of $209,724,761 less the percentage decrease of the total
program allocation from the threshold. For example, if the total program allocation were 10%
below $209,724,761, then the program allocation for each state or territory would be 10% less
than the program allocation as determined for $209,724,761. Both the base allocation and formula
allocation would be reduced by the same proportion (10%). According to DOE, “this approach
distributes the effect of lower appropriations equitably.”8

4 See 42 U.S.C. 6864(c).
5 The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (P.L. 111-5) allowed the T&TA share to increase temporarily
to 20%.
6 These methods are described in an interim rule that was published and later finalized in the Federal Register in 1995.
For interim rule, see Department of Energy, “Weatherization Assistance Program for Low-Income Persons,” 60
Federal Register
29469-29481, June 5, 1995. For final rule, see Department of Energy, “Weatherization Assistance
Program for Low-Income Persons,” 60 Federal Register 64314-64315, December 15, 1995.
7 See 10 C.F.R. §440.10. The threshold amount, $209,724,761, is based upon the appropriation of $226,800,000 for the
WAP in FY1995 under P.L. 103-332. After reserving funds for DOE and state and territory T&TA, total program
allocations were $209,724,761 for FY1995. The threshold amount is not adjusted for inflation.
8 See Department of Energy, “Weatherization Assistance Program for Low-Income Persons,” 60 Federal Register
29479, June 5, 1995; Testimony of Annamaria Garcia, Director of the Office of Weatherization and Intergovernmental
Programs at the U.S. Department of Energy, in U.S. Congress, House Appropriations Subcommittee on Energy and
Water Development, Department of Energy’s Weatherization Assistance Program, hearings, 116th Congress, 1st
session, February 12, 2019, p.3, http://docs.house.gov/meetings/AP/AP10/20190213/108877/HHRG-116-AP10-
Congressional Research Service
2

The Weatherization Assistance Program Formula

Development of the Program Allocation Procedures
As the WAP developed, DOE changed the procedures for state allocation of WAP funds. Two
formula allocation procedures are discussed—those developed in 1984 and in 1995. The 1995
procedures remain in effect today. The current state allocation consists of two parts: a fixed
amount of money derived from a state’s FY1993 allocation as determined by WAP, and an
additional amount of money—referred to as the formula allocation. The FY1993 allocation was
determined according to the formula allocation procedures developed in 1984.9
1984 Formula Allocation
In 1984, DOE developed and published standard procedures for allocating funds within the
WAP.10 DOE divided the first $5.1 million of appropriated funds equally among the states with an
additional $100,000 allocated to Alaska. The remaining funds available for allocation to the states
would be dispersed according to a formula. This formula allocation emphasized heating demand,
resulting in warmer weather states receiving less funds than colder weather states. In the formula,
the square of the number of heating degree days in a state and the square of the number of cooling
degree days in a state were each multiplied by the percentage of total residential energy used for
space heating or cooling, respectively, and then summed.11 As households typically use more
energy for heating than cooling, this formula tended to favor states in colder climates (with more
heating degree days). In addition, DOE retained the option to reduce or increase the allocation for
a state depending upon the likelihood of a state to expend funds.12
1995 Formula Allocation
The State Energy Efficiency Program Improvement Act of 1990 (P.L. 101-440) directed DOE to
review the formula allocation. Some were concerned that the formula favored northern states over
southern and western states. According to the Senate committee report for S. 247 (S.Rept. 101-
235), enacted as P.L. 101-440:13

Wstate-GarciaA-20190213.pdf.
9 According to Department of Energy (DOE), “the proposed formula as a whole balances congressional intent of
maintaining program capacity and apportioning funds more equitably among the States. Under the formula, no State
loses more than one-half of one percent of FY1994 funds unless total program allocations fall below $220 million. All
States gain when funds rise above this amount.” DOE, “Weatherization Assistance Program for Low-Income Persons,”
60 Federal Register 29471, June 5, 1995.
10 DOE, “Weatherization Assistance for Low-Income Persons,” 49 Federal Register 3441-3638, January 27, 1984.
11 A heating degree day (HDD) is a measurement designed to quantify the demand for energy needed to heat a building
and is typically determined as the number of degrees that a day’s average temperature is below 65o Fahrenheit. A
cooling degree day (CDD) is a measurement designed to quantify the demand for energy needed to cool a building and
is typically determined as the number of degrees that a day’s average temperature is above 65o Fahrenheit.
12 DOE stated that in determining whether funds should be reduced, “DOE will consider the amount of unexpended
financial assistance currently available to a grantee under this part and the number of dwelling units which remain to be
weatherized with the unexpended financial assistance.” For increased funds, DOE would determine the amount that
“the grantee can expend to weatherize additional dwelling units during the budget period for which financial assistance
is to be awarded.” See DOE, “Weatherization Assistance for Low-Income Persons,” 49 Federal Register 3631, January
27, 1984.
13 U.S. Congress, Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources, Subcommittee on Energy Regulation and
Conservation, State Energy Conservation Programs Improvement Act of 1989, hearing on S. 247, 101st Cong., 1st sess.,
May 2, 1989, pp. 156-158.
Congressional Research Service
3

The Weatherization Assistance Program Formula

The Committee intends that there be a more equitable distribution of Federal financial
assistance among the States than presently exists. The current formula’s squaring of heating
and cooling degree days does not appear to provide for an equitable national distribution
of available federal funds among low-income households. By requiring a repromulgation
of the formula, the Committee intends to achieve a more equitable distribution of such
WAP funds based on the nationwide low-income population.
In this regard, the Secretary shall determine whether, in fact, the current formula’s squaring
of heating and cooling degree days unfairly favors certain States, and, if so, shall take
immediate steps to change the allocation formula to reflect a more equitable national
distribution of funds among low-income households. In this regard, the Committee intends
that the Secretary, in consultation with the State Advisory Board established under the Act,
develop a new formula and criteria for determining the most equitable methods of
allocating weatherization funds based on low income population, number of heating and
cooling days, the relative costs of heating and cooling, and the annual costs incurred by
low-income households for heating and cooling.14
DOE undertook a rulemaking, and published the final rule in 1995.15 This formula allocation
remains in effect.
FY2020 Allocation
DOE determines the annual funding allocation or “total program allocation” for weatherization
assistance for each state and territory from “the annual appropriation [by Congress] less funds
reserved for training and technical assistance.”16 For fiscal year (FY) 2020, weatherization
received $308.5 million in total appropriations, of which $305.0 million went to WAP and $3.5
million for T&TA activities at DOE headquarters.17 Of the total appropriations, DOE was directed
to make $1 million available for a weatherization innovation pilot program. In addition, DOE
reserved $6.1 million to make funding available for Sustainable Energy Resources for Consumers
(SERC) Grants and allocated an additional $0.8 million for for formula grant performance
tracking.18 DOE also reallocated $5 million of prior year funds to the program. Altogether, $302.1
million was available to states and territories for FY2020, with $249.2 million available for the
total program allocation and nearly $52.9 million for T&TA activities.19 For FY2020, the total
program allocation was above the threshold.

14 U.S. Congress, Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources, State Energy Efficiency Improvement Act of
1989
, report to accompany S. 247, 101st Cong., 1st sess., January 10, 1988, S.Rept. 101-235, p. 19.
15 For the final rule, see Department of Energy, “Weatherization Assistance Program for Low-Income Persons,” 60
Federal Register
64314-64315, December 15, 1995. For the interim rule, which describes the formula allocation, see
Department of Energy, “Weatherization Assistance Program for Low-Income Persons,” 60 Federal Register 29469-
29481, June 5, 1995.
16 See definition for “total program allocation” under 10 C.F.R. §440.3.
17 See Explanatory Statement, Division C, Energy and Water Development and Related Agencies Appropriations Act,
2020 (P.L. 116-94), https://docs.house.gov/billsthisweek/20191216/BILLS-116HR1865SA-JES-DIVISION-C.pdf.
18 Section 411 of the Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007 (EISA 2007, P.L. 110-140) stipulates that WAP
funds may be used to award Sustainable Energy Resources for Consumers (SERC) grants only when WAP funding for
a given fiscal year is at or above $275 million. EISA 2007 also directs DOE to limit SERC grant funding to 2% of
WAP funds; therefore for FY2020, SERC funds are limited to no more than $6.1 million (or 2% of $305 million). In
addition, DOE also allocated $800,000 in FY2020 WAP funds to formula grant performance tracking. Communication
between the author and DOE’s Office of Congressional and Intergovernmental Affairs, May 11, 2020.
19 DOE reserved nearly $52.9 million for T&TA activities for states and territories, which is less than the 20% that
DOE may reserve for grantees per 42 U.S.C. §6866. See DOE, “Program Year 2020 Grantee Allocations,”
Weatherization Program Notice, February 10, 2020, https://www.energy.gov/eere/wipo/downloads/wpn-20-2-program-
Congressional Research Service
4

link to page 13 The Weatherization Assistance Program Formula

Appendix A provides annual allocation information for states, territories, and tribes for FY2001
through FY2020; the allocations vary from year to year and reflect changes in funding levels for
the WAP and DOE allocations for program funds and T&TA funds.
The Base Allocation
The base allocation is a fixed amount of annual funding that each state and territory receives
from appropriated sums for weatherization assistance from DOE.20 The fixed amount differs for
each state and territory and was based upon the allocations for FY1993 as determined by DOE
according to a previous formula.21 Base allocations, which total $171,858,000, are listed in Table
1 of 10 C.F.R. §440.10(b)(1). This table is included in the Error! Reference source not found. f
or reference.
The Formula Allocation
State and territory formula allocations are determined from the difference between the total
program allocation and the total base allocation of $171,858,000. This difference can be
considered to be the total available funds for formula allocation. For example, in FY2020, the
total available funds for formula allocation was $77,374,500 (the difference between the FY2020
total program allocation—$249,232,500—and the base allocation—$171,858,000). The formula
allocation
for each state or territory is determined by multiplying the total available funds for
formula allocation by a state or territory’s formula share. The state formula allocation is
expressed mathematically as:
State Formula Allocation = Total Funds for Formula Allocation × State Formula Share
The formula share is the product of three factors—population, climate, and residential energy
expenditures—normalized by the national total of the product of each state’s three factors.
Factor 1: Population
The population factor (Factor 1) is the percentage of the U.S. low-income households in each
state or territory. The formula gives equal weight to owners and renters. The American Recovery
and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (ARRA, P.L. 111-5 §407a) revised the program guidelines to raise
the low-income eligibility ceiling from 150% to 200% of the poverty level.22
The U.S. Energy Information Administration’s (EIA’s) 2009 Residential Energy Consumption
Survey (RECS) estimated that there were 113.6 million households in the United States.23 Of the

year-2020-grantee-allocations.
20 See 10 C.F.R. §440.10(b)(1).
21 In 1995, DOE issued an interim rule (which was later finalized) that established an updated allocation formula “to
provide warmer-weather States a greater share of the funding, while protecting the Program capacity developed over
the years by colder-weather States.” See Department of Energy, “Weatherization Assistance Program for Low-Income
Persons,” 60 Federal Register 29470, June 5, 1995.
22 At the time of the 1995 rulemaking for the formula allocation, the low-income eligibility ceiling was 125% of the
poverty level. The number of low-income households used in the rulemaking was obtained from a special tabulation of
Census data completed by the Bureau of the Census for the Department of Energy.
23 Of the 113.6 million households, EIA reported that 16.9 million households were below the poverty line in 2009.
EIA, “Table HC9.2 Household Demographics of U.S. Homes, by Owner/Renter Status, 2009,” 2009 RECS Survey
Data, https://www.eia.gov/consumption/residential/data/2009/#house.
Congressional Research Service
5

The Weatherization Assistance Program Formula

113.6 million households, approximately 39.5 million households (or nearly 35%) were federally
eligible for weatherization assistance. The distribution of low-income households in the United
States in 2009 was “in roughly the same proportions as the non-low-income population, with
approximately 16% in the Northeast, 23% in the Midwest, 41% in the South, and 20% in the
West.”24 EIA’s 2015 RECS—with the most recent survey data—estimated that the total number
of households has increased in the United States to 118.2 million.25 Although CRS did not
identify a source for the number of households that were eligible for weatherization assistance in
2015, EIA’s 2015 RECS did estimate that 37.0 million of the 118.2 million households in the
United States experienced energy insecurity.26
Factor 2: Climate
The climate factor (Factor 2) accounts for the variation in climatic conditions that can affect
household energy consumption (i.e., energy demand for heating and cooling). The factor accounts
for the energy needed for heating and cooling in a proportional manner. The factor relies upon 30-
year averages of heating degree days and cooling degree days as reported by the National
Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA). According to NOAA, the 30-year averages
are updated once every 10 years.27 A heating degree day (HDD) is a measurement designed to
quantify the demand for energy needed to heat a building and is typically determined as the
number of degrees that a day’s average temperature is below 65o Fahrenheit. A cooling degree
day (CDD) is a measurement designed to quantify the demand for energy needed to cool a
building and is typically determined as the number of degrees that a day’s average temperature is
above 65o Fahrenheit. Factor 2 is the sum of the HDD ratio (a state HDD divided by the national
median HDD) and the CDD ratio (a state CDD divided by the national median CDD multiplied
by 0.1) for each state or territory, treating the energy needed for heating and cooling in a
proportional manner. Mathematically, Factor 2 is expressed as:
State HDD
𝑆𝑡𝑎𝑡𝑒 𝐶𝐷𝐷
Factor 2=
+ (
× 0.1)
National Median HDD
𝑁𝑎𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛𝑎𝑙 𝑀𝑒𝑑𝑖𝑎𝑛 𝐶𝐷𝐷
Including 0.1 in the CDD ratio—according to the 1995 interim rule—accounted for the difference
in national energy consumption data between heating and cooling. According to 1990 data from
EIA, national heating consumption equaled 4.79 quadrillion Btu while air conditioning
consumption equaled 0.49 quadrillion Btu.28 At the time, heating consumed approximately 10
times more energy than air conditioning; however, according to the 2015 RECS, EIA estimates
national heating energy consumption has declined to 3.95 quadrillion Btu while national air

24 Eisenberg, Joel, Weatherization Assistance Program Technical Memorandum Background Data and Statistics On
Low-Income Energy Use and Burdens
, ORNL/TM-2014/133, Oak Ridge, Tennessee, April 2014, p. 3.
25 EIA updated the RECS in 2017 (with data from 2015); see https://www.eia.gov/consumption/residential/data/2015/
hc/php/hc9.5.php.
26 Household energy insecurity refers to those households that experienced at least one of the following issues collected
in the survey: (1) reducing or forgoing food or medicine to pay energy costs, (2) leaving the home at an unhealthy
temperature, (3) receiving a disconnect or delivery stop notice, (4) unable to use heating equipment, or (5) unable to use
cooling equipment. EIA, “Table HC11.1 Household Energy Insecurity, 2015,” 2015 RECS Survey Data,
https://www.eia.gov/consumption/residential/data/2015/hc/php/hc11.1.php.
27 The 1981–2010 U.S. Climate Normals dataset is the latest release of Climate Normals by the National Centers for
Environmental Information (NCEI); see https://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/cdo-web/datatools/normals.
28 Data from Table 28 of EIA’s Household Energy Consumption and Expenditures 1990.
Congressional Research Service
6

The Weatherization Assistance Program Formula

conditioning energy consumption has increased to 0.73 quadrillion Btu.29 Using the data within
the 2015 RECS, heating consumes approximately 5.4 times more energy than air conditioning.
Factor 3: Residential Energy Expenditure
The residential energy expenditure factor (Factor 3) is an estimate of the residential energy
expenditure (REE) for low-income households for a state or territory. Energy expenditures for
low-income households are not available at the state level. Further, EIA provides data for state
residential energy consumption including expenditure data, but EIA does not distinguish between
low-income households and other households. Therefore the factor is determined based on
publicly available data from the U.S. Census Bureau. At the Census division level, residential
energy expenditure data is available for the overall population and for low-income households
(referred to as “Division REE”).30 According to the 1995 interim rule, “the underlying assumption
in the calculation of State residential energy expenditures per low-income household is that the
relationship between a State’s residential energy expenditures per household and its respective
divisional residential energy expenditures per household is the same for its low-income
population as it is for its general population.”31 For example, if an average household in a state
spends 50% more on residential energy than the average household in its Census division, then it
is assumed that low-income households in the same state would also spend 50% more on
residential energy than the average low-income household in its Census division. To determine
Factor 3, the state or territory’s low-income household energy expenditures are normalized
according to a national median low-income household energy expenditure. Mathematically,
Factor 3 is expressed as:
State REE ⁄ State Households
× Division Low-Income REE
Division REE ⁄ Division Households
Factor 3 =

National Median REE
Potential Issues for Congress
Under the current procedure, the method of funding allocation is dependent upon whether WAP’s
annual appropriation is at or exceeds a monetary threshold, as discussed. An issue for Congress is
whether to maintain this approach and continue to direct the allocation procedure through annual
appropriations. Alternatively, Congress could amend the authorizing language to address concerns
regarding the current allocation procedure. They center on whether adjustments are needed to
account for changes in heating and cooling or to include other factors in the formula. Another
issue is sufficiency of appropriations for the program.
Congress could direct DOE to examine the current allocation formula and determine whether
revisions to the current approach should be undertaken. Congress previously directed DOE to
revise the weatherization allocation formula “in order to allow for a more equitable

29 Data from Table CE3.1, “Annual Household Site End-Use Consumption in the U.S.—Totals and Averages, 2015,”
RECS 2015. https://www.eia.gov/consumption/residential/data/2015/index.php?view=
consumption#by%20end%20uses.
30 The Census Bureau established nine divisions, which are geographic groupings of states for the presentation of
census data. The current divisions are New England, Middle Atlantic, East North Central, West North Central, South
Atlantic, East South Central, West South Central, Mountain, and Pacific. See https://factfinder.census.gov/help/en/
division.htm.
31 See Department of Energy, “Weatherization Assistance Program for Low-Income Persons,” 60 Federal Register
29477, June 5, 1995.
Congressional Research Service
7

link to page 9 The Weatherization Assistance Program Formula

apportionment of funds while not harming the existing capacity of any State to weatherize
homes.”32 The DOE examination resulted in the 1995 rulemaking and current allocation formula.
Congress may consider whether adjustments to the formula are merited to account for changes in
heating and cooling. As discussed in “Factor 2: Climate,” the energy consumption ratio of heating
to air conditioning has declined from approximately 10 to 5.4. Factor 2 also relies upon 30-year
averages of HDDs and CDDs as reported and updated by NOAA on a 10-year basis. As the U.S.
average annual temperature has increased, heating degree days have decreased and cooling
degree days have increased overall.33 The exception to this are states within the Southeast
(excluding Florida), which have seen more HDDs and fewer CDDs.34 Long-term averages may
not reflect present or future conditions or sufficiently capture the potential energy expenditure
burden associated with heating and cooling during extreme temperatures. According to the Fourth
National Climate Assessment (NCA4), extreme temperatures are projected to increase even more
than average temperatures in the contiguous United States.35 The EIA projects that delivered
energy for air conditioning of buildings will increase in the building sector through 2050 while
energy for space heating will decline during the same period.36 In addition, the HDD or CDD
determined for a state may not capture the actual HDD and CDD experienced in urban areas.
Studies have shown evidence of heat islands in urban areas and that low-income neighborhoods
within some urban areas experience additional elevated heat exposure.37
In addition to altering the existing factors within the WAP’s formula allocation, Congress may
include other factors. In the 116th Congress, several bills would make changes to the WAP. Some
bills would direct DOE to take into consideration “improvements in the health and safety of
occupants” of weatherized dwellings.38 In addition, these bills would reauthorize WAP and

32 In H.Rept. 103-740, the Conference Report on the Department of Interior and Related Agencies Appropriations Act,
1995, P.L. 103-332, the conference committee stated that sufficient funds would be made available to permit DOE to
revise the weatherization allocation formula “in order to allow for a more equitable apportionment of funds while not
harming the existing capacity of any State to weatherize homes.”
33 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), Climate Change Indicators in the United States, Fourth Edition,
2016, p. 64, https://www.epa.gov/climate-indicators/downloads-indicators-report.
34 EPA, “Climate Change Indicators: Heating and Cooling Degree Days,” https://www.epa.gov/climate-indicators/
climate-change-indicators-heating-and-cooling-degree-days.
35 “Extreme temperatures in the contiguous United States are projected to increase even more than average
temperatures. The temperatures of extremely cold days and extremely warm days are both expected to increase. Cold
waves are projected to become less intense while heat waves will become more intense. The number of days below
freezing is projected to decline while the number above 90°F will rise.” See p. 185 of Vose, R.S., D.R. Easterling, K.E.
Kunkel, A.N. LeGrande, and M.F. Wehner, “2017: Temperature Changes in the United States,” in Climate Science
Special Report: Fourth National Climate Assessment, Volume I
[Wuebbles, D.J., D.W. Fahey, K.A. Hibbard, D.J.
Dokken, B.C. Stewart, and T.K. Maycock (eds.)]. U.S. Global Change Research Program, Washington, DC, USA, pp.
185-206.
36 EIA’s model uses population-weighted degree days and reflects projected population shifts from colder to warmer
parts of the United States; EIA, “EIA Projects Air-Conditioning Energy Use to Grow Faster Than Any Other Use in
Buildings,” https://www.eia.gov/todayinenergy/detail.php?id=43155.
37 The term “heat island” describes urban areas that have hotter surface and air temperatures than nearby rural areas.
The urban heat island can affect communities by increasing energy demand and energy costs for cooling and air
conditioning, air pollution and greenhouse gas emissions, heat-related illness and mortality, and water pollution. See
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 2008, Reducing Urban Heat Islands: Compendium of Strategies. Draft.
https://www.epa.gov/heat-islands/heat-island-compendium; T. Chakraborty, A. Hsu, D. Manya, G. Sheriff, 2019,
“Disproportionately Higher Exposure to Urban Heat in Lower-Income Neighborhoods: A Multi-City Perspective,”
Environmental Research Letters, vol. 14 (10).
38 These include H.R. 2041, the Weatherization Enhancement and Local Energy Efficiency Investment and
Accountability Act, and S. 983, Weatherization Enhancement and Local Energy Efficiency Investment and
Accountability Act of 2019, as well as two compilation bills: H.R. 2741, Leading Infrastructure for Tomorrow’s
Congressional Research Service
8

The Weatherization Assistance Program Formula

authorize annual appropriations of $350 million for five fiscal years. This would be greater than
program appropriations for at least the last five fiscal years but less than the authorization for
fiscal years 2008 through 2012. Some proposals would establish a timeline for DOE to disperse
allocated funds to states.39 Other bills would link WAP funds to dividends received from a carbon
fee or tax.40
Changing the amount of appropriations or the formula allocation may have different outcomes.
Increasing appropriations to the WAP under the existing program allocation would provide
additional funding to all states and territories. Changing the formula allocation to reflect changes
in energy consumption due to heating and cooling and changes in HDDs and CDDs—holding all
other factors constant—may increase formula allocations to states and territories in warmer
climates (or those areas where a greater percentage of a household’s energy consumption is due to
air conditioning). Expanding the factors that DOE should consider—such as the health and safety
of occupants—may introduce other changes to formula allocations and the subsequent program
allocations to states and territories.


America Act, and S.Amdt. 1407 to S. 2657, Advanced Geothermal Innovation Leadership Act of 2019.
39 Such proposals include H.R. 6167/S. 185, Investing in State Energy Act, and S.Amdt. 1407 to S. 2657, Advanced
Geothermal Innovation Leadership Act of 2019.
40 These include H.R. 4051/S. 2284, Climate Action Rebate Act of 2019, and H.R. 3966, Raise Wages, Cut Carbon Act
of 2019.
Congressional Research Service
9


Appendix A. State Total Allocations, FY2001-FY2020
Table A-1. Weatherization Assistance Program (WAP): State Allocations: FY2010-FY2020
In current dollars
Region/
State
FY2010
FY2011
FY2012
FY2013
FY2014
FY2015
FY2016
FY2017
FY2018
FY2019
FY2020
Alabama
$1,882,352
$1,822,292
$0
$1,875,979
$337,245
$2,047,091
$2,277,174
$2,414,515
$2,669,966
$2,849,629
$3,443,053
Alaska
1,329,537
1,287,597
0
1,322,690
237,780
1,463,587
1,630,495
1,727,958
1,909,237
2,053,765
2,283,222
Arizona
952,279
855,295
0
487,020
157,651
997,882
1,109,782
1,408,970
1,555,787
1,831,626
2,425,326
Arkansas
1,622,103
1,570,573
0
1,615,506
290,420
1,668,947
1,868,107
1,980,223
2,188,755
2,318,929
2,729,832
California
4,917,928
4,758,371
1,649,091
1,523,628
883,418
5,244,959
5,857,131
6,215,232
6,881,295
7,540,160
9,107,043
Colorado
4,307,729
4,168,171
0
4,303,435
773,629
4,590,704
5,134,641
5,448,189
6,031,384
6,314,441
6,940,358
Connecticut
1,972,276
1,909,269
1,319,737
500,092
353,424
2,201,899
2,450,480
2,598,507
2,873,837
3,117,380
3,694,901
Delaware
460,428
446,976
0
452,837
81,406
517,552
572,294
604,501
664,407
717,370
844,216
District of
519,060
503,686
458,248
511,519
91,956
538,874
597,118
630,856
693,610
714,233
779,056
Columbia
Florida
1,484,081
1,437,075
0
709,416
265,586
1,698,578
1,886,281
1,999,517
2,210,133
2,705,406
3,875,985
Georgia
2,282,504
2,209,329
1,018,734
2,276,474
409,242
2,533,810
2,829,878
3,001,301
3,320,146
3,788,068
4,842,022
Hawai
169,266
165,356
54,373
76,406
29,019
195,448
206,123
215,750
233,658
257,473
302,402
Idaho
1,558,041
1,508,611
1,388,688
1,551,391
278,893
1,673,179
1,862,705
1,974,487
2,182,400
2,297,304
2,539,427
Il inois
10,844,851
10,491,023
4,852,662
10,846,159
1,949,814
11,175,446
12,503,393
13,271,340
14,699,712
15,465,764
17,420,195
Indiana
5,137,920
4,971,150
0
4,440,679
923,000
5,551,898
6,193,959
6,572,830
7,277,526
7,755,598
8,886,940
Iowa
3,918,674
3,791,869
0
3,797,481
703,628
4,105,176
4,591,815
4,871,889
5,392,824
5,586,637
6,147,974
Kansas
1,988,468
1,924,929
1,774,148
1,863,608
356,337
2,112,717
2,360,701
2,503,192
2,768,223
2,892,165
3,291,592
Kentucky
3,547,808
3,433,159
3,170,588
3,177,017
636,901
3,814,133
4,260,696
4,520,352
5,003,308
5,234,906
5,884,213
Louisiana
1,340,633
1,298,329
596,996
529,968
239,776
1,214,531
1,345,356
1,425,235
1,573,809
1,695,764
2,082,825
CRS-10


Region/
State
FY2010
FY2011
FY2012
FY2013
FY2014
FY2015
FY2016
FY2017
FY2018
FY2019
FY2020
Maine
2,415,842
2,338,296
2,156,877
766,699
433,233
2,594,260
2,890,611
3,065,779
3,391,590
3,538,802
3,929,166
Maryland
2,083,502
2,016,848
0
403,370
373,437
2,259,316
2,524,106
2,676,673
2,960,448
3,196,150
3,767,334
Massachusetts
5,137,610
4,970,851
4,594,307
5,064,575
922,944
5,426,786
6,058,804
6,429,341
7,118,536
7,507,308
8,509,094
Michigan
11,910,904
11,522,133
3,997,503
11,913,125
2,141,623
12,862,926
14,397,981
15,282,760
16,928,436
17,869,403
20,160,855
Minnesota
7,739,554
7,487,510
0
4,015,528
1,391,096
8,193,811
9,157,907
9,719,552
10,764,207
11,190,371
12,143,741
Mississippi
1,290,592
1,249,929
574,589
249,986
230,773
1,348,340
1,499,412
1,588,790
1,755,035
1,852,245
2,202,874
Missouri
4,703,704
4,551,167
0
3,440,907
844,874
4,977,015
5,564,897
5,904,977
6,537,523
6,876,381
7,842,278
Montana
1,987,207
1,923,710
886,510
676,220
356,110
2,101,326
2,346,361
2,487,968
2,751,354
2,855,298
3,078,176
Nebraska
1,964,240
1,901,497
657,170
380,299
351,978
2,098,732
2,342,735
2,484,118
2,747,089
2,853,612
3,159,918
Nevada
662,859
642,771
587,023
655,441
117,829
797,304
871,308
921,955
1,016,157
1,199,608
1,509,219
New
1,193,071
1,155,605
530,923
1,186,106
213,227
1,292,380
1,438,061
1,523,657
1,682,864
1,780,183
2,007,085
Hampshire
New Jersey
3,999,259
3,869,812
0
773,962
718,127
4,308,921
4,807,576
5,100,955
5,646,638
6,088,137
7,178,533
New Mexico
1,369,544
1,326,143
610,245
889,637
243,456
1,475,444
1,646,802
1,923,264
2,125,643
2,232,675
2,508,160
New York
15,786,616
15,270,806
14,130,828
15,792,155
2,838,955
16,761,187
18,794,102
19,949,970
22,099,866
23,321,618
26,945,581
North
3,249,190
3,144,329
0
2,065,144
583,172
3,505,540
3,916,921
4,155,377
4,598,903
5,064,596
6,186,961
Carolina
North Dakota
1,969,451
1,906,536
0
1,963,153
352,916
2,087,315
2,328,127
2,468,609
2,729,905
2,782,844
2,971,658
Ohio
10,762,015
10,410,903
0
10,763,252
1,934,910
11,336,518
12,670,127
13,448,355
14,895,852
15,710,535
17,866,747
Oklahoma
2,029,472
1,964,590
679,076
2,023,225
363,715
2,166,950
2,426,960
2,573,537
2,846,169
2,996,202
3,525,126
Oregon
2,222,843
2,151,623
1,488,030
2,216,762
398,507
2,422,447
2,696,844
2,860,063
3,163,650
3,325,518
3,707,845
Pennsylvania
11,519,998
11,144,041
3,866,228
2,228,808
2,071,290
12,320,702
13,754,306
14,599,392
16,171,240
16,889,762
19,216,844
Rhode Island
916,134
887,744
813,840
232,526
163,399
986,095
1,094,465
1,158,873
1,278,670
1,352,790
1,539,247
South Carolina
1,388,815
1,344,931
927,855
1,382,018
248,446
1,495,042
1,666,574
1,766,261
1,951,678
2,168,457
2,700,461
South Dakota
1,513,071
1,465,115
505,656
1,506,381
270,802
1,591,553
1,776,878
1,883,366
2,081,435
2,136,561
2,316,227
CRS-11


Region/
State
FY2010
FY2011
FY2012
FY2013
FY2014
FY2015
FY2016
FY2017
FY2018
FY2019
FY2020
Tennessee
3,278,362
3,172,544
0
634,509
588,421
3,619,816
4,036,524
4,282,355
4,739,600
5,045,797
5,875,208
Texas
4,294,261
4,155,146
0
4,289,956
771,205
4,657,454
5,165,132
5,480,562
6,067,254
6,811,752
8,976,933
Utah
1,638,680
1,586,608
730,451
415,578
293,403
1,763,864
1,970,108
2,088,513
2,308,745
2,426,710
2,697,506
Vermont
1,012,458
980,912
0
1,005,339
180,730
1,101,981
1,228,156
1,300,807
1,435,939
1,506,339
1,689,780
Virginia
3,148,212
3,046,661
0
3,142,923
565,003
3,363,309
3,761,099
3,989,946
4,415,600
4,743,147
5,563,082
Washington
3,570,881
3,455,476
3,191,250
2,109,133
641,052
3,885,453
4,325,258
4,588,895
5,079,256
5,329,638
5,918,599
West Virginia
2,525,991
2,444,834
1,127,759
2,520,169
453,051
2,668,468
2,977,505
3,158,033
3,493,809
3,587,126
3,947,952
Wisconsin
6,726,647
6,507,803
6,017,339
6,564,418
1,208,850
7,283,668
8,147,306
8,646,632
9,575,373
10,056,393
11,244,641
Wyoming
852,525
826,080
378,719
744,539
152,077
894,620
996,423
1,055,049
1,164,090
1,205,819
1,413,761
Total State
175,099,448
169,376,014
64,735,443
133,877,148
31,417,736
186,994,954
208,817,505
221,949,228
245,652,571
260,638,395
299,821,174
Al ocation

American
154,860
151,424
132,094
147,007
26,427
162,559
175,791
183,546
197,970
204,166
213,853
Samoa
Guam
158,948
155,377
0
31,075
27,163
167,227
180,948
189,022
204,041
213,233
228,917
Northern
155,635
152,172
0
39,858
26,566
163,441
176,764
184,581
199,120
205,882
216,705
Mariana Islands
Puerto Rico
647,129
627,557
0
405,670
114,998
725,059
797,260
843,340
929,049
905,767
1,379,277
Virgin Islands
161,976
158,306
0
31,661
27,708
170,688
184,770
193,080
208,538
219,950
240,074
Total U.S.
1,278,548
1,244,836
132,094
655,271
222,862
1,388,974
1,515,533
1,593,569
1,738,718
1,748,998
2,278,826
Territories
Al ocations












Navaho Grant
242,391
234,760
0
46,952
44,991
268,138
300,659
0
0
0
0
CRS-12


Region/
State
FY2010
FY2011
FY2012
FY2013
FY2014
FY2015
FY2016
FY2017
FY2018
FY2019
FY2020
Inter-Tribal
0
67,245
61,729
48,013
12,395
78,448
87,250
0
0
0
0
Council of
Arizona Grant
Northern
79,614
77,145
70,734
68,947
14,202
83,546
93,053
98,528
108,711
112,607
120,750
Arapahoe
Grant
Total Tribal
322,005
379,150
132,463
163,912
71,588
430,132
480,962
98,528
108,711
112,607
$120,750
Government
Al ocations
Source: Department of Energy (DOE) annual Weatherization Program Notices regarding Grantee Allocations, accessed from the Weatherization Program Guidance
documents library at the National Association for State Community Services Programs (NASCSP). Documents were previously housed on the former Weatherization
Assistance Program Technical Assistance Center (WAPTAC) website. WAPTAC’s resources and documents library has since been incorporated into the NASCSP
website.
Notes: Each state allocation is the sum of the state program allocation and the state training and technical assistance allocation. The Energy Independence and Security
Act of 2007 (P.L. 110-140, §411c) added Puerto Rico and other territories of the U.S. to the definition of “State” for the purpose of funding allocations. Beginning with
Program Year 2009, the territories of American Samoa, Guam, Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands, Commonwealth of Puerto Rico and the U.S. Virgin
Islands were added to the program. Tribal Government Allocations are derived from state allocations: Navaho Grant allocations are from Arizona and New Mexico state
allocations, Inter-Tribal Council of Arizona Grant allocations are from Arizona allocations, and Northern Arapahoe Grant are from Wyoming allocations.


CRS-13


Table A-2. Weatherization Assistance Program (WAP): State Allocations: FY2001-FY2009 ARRA
In current dollars
Region/
FY2009 ARRA
State
FY2001
FY2002
FY2003
FY2004
FY2005
FY2006
FY2007
FY2008
FY2009
(P.L. 111-5)
Alabama
$1,620,906
$2,437,309
$2,365,903
$2,407,556
$2,417,993
$2,724,123
$2,154,306
$2,396,413
$5,458,962
$71,800,599
Alaska
1,148,143
1,700,925
1,651,545
1,680,350
1,687,568
1,734,314
1,505,217
1,672,643
2,553,917
18,142,580
Arizona
914,996
1,375,478
1,335,832
1,358,959
1,364,754
1,443,174
1,096,515
1,128,755
3,670,756
57,023,278
Arkansas
1,394,048
2,096,068
2,034,869
2,070,568
2,079,513
2,202,800
1,853,518
2,061,017
4,031,570
48,114,415
California
4,238,044
6,374,011
6,184,856
6,295,195
6,322,844
7,085,364
5,624,334
6,265,676
14,161,143
185,811,061
Colorado
3,689,256
5,548,524
5,384,059
5,479,996
5,504,036
5,678,125
4,896,704
5,454,329
9,122,025
79,531,213
Connecticut
1,687,796
2,537,924
2,463,509
2,506,917
2,517,795
2,759,107
2,242,994
2,495,304
5,315,348
64,310,502
Delaware
387,168
581,518
565,620
574,894
577,217
612,727
518,509
572,412
1,183,372
13,733,668
District of
437,201
656,778
638,629
649,216
651,868
712,764
584,848
646,384
998,697
8,089,022
Columbia
Florida
1,317,877
1,981,492
1,923,719
1,957,419
1,965,864
2,592,639
1,752,523
1,948,403
9,885,233
175,984,474
Georgia
1,971,410
2,964,538
2,877,362
2,928,214
2,940,956
3,339,105
2,619,035
2,914,609
8,294,558
124,756,312
Hawai
137,693
206,257
201,583
204,314
204,993
234,987
187,733
203,581
393,559
4,041,461
Idaho
1,328,717
1,997,798
1,939,538
1,973,522
1,982,038
2,076,784
1,766,897
1,964,431
3,366,002
30,341,929
Il inois
9,323,696
14,023,856
13,605,888
13,849,700
13,910,793
14,349,500
12,367,330
13,784,473
24,070,095
242,526,619
Indiana
4,410,532
6,633,467
6,436,551
6,551,417
6,580,199
6,762,132
5,853,032
6,520,687
12,342,276
131,847,383
Iowa
3,359,006
5,051,761
4,902,155
4,989,424
5,011,292
5,153,879
4,458,829
4,966,077
8,578,634
80,834,411
Kansas
1,703,713
2,561,867
2,486,735
2,530,561
2,541,543
2,706,214
2,264,099
2,518,837
5,001,886
56,441,771
Kentucky
3,042,989
4,576,408
4,441,020
4,519,996
4,539,785
4,761,929
4,039,827
4,498,867
7,640,899
70,913,750
Louisiana
1,165,702
1,752,591
1,701,665
1,731,371
1,738,815
1,997,309
1,550,758
1,723,424
3,623,154
50,657,478
Maine
2,065,666
3,106,317
3,014,901
3,068,227
3,081,589
3,240,063
2,744,008
3,053,961
4,924,673
41,935,015
Maryland
1,785,842
2,685,405
2,606,578
2,652,560
2,664,081
2,897,804
2,372,992
2,640,259
5,280,336
61,441,745
CRS-14


Region/
FY2009 ARRA
State
FY2001
FY2002
FY2003
FY2004
FY2005
FY2006
FY2007
FY2008
FY2009
(P.L. 111-5)
Massachusetts
4,408,639
6,630,621
6,433,790
6,548,606
6,577,376
6,938,192
5,850,524
6,517,890
11,794,866
122,077,457
Michigan
10,226,257
15,381,490
14,922,914
15,190,413
15,257,442
15,446,624
13,564,024
15,118,849
25,949,859
243,398,975
Minnesota
6,646,224
9,979,183
9,682,194
9,855,435
9,898,845
10,154,727
8,802,132
9,809,089
15,972,943
131,937,411
Mississippi
1,109,916
1,668,677
1,620,261
1,648,503
1,655,581
1,850,660
1,476,791
1,640,948
3,744,293
49,421,193
Missouri
4,041,710
6,078,686
5,898,363
6,003,549
6,029,907
6,368,172
5,364,017
5,975,410
11,566,101
128,148,027
Montana
1,710,249
2,550,624
2,475,828
2,519,458
2,530,390
2,623,349
2,254,188
2,507,786
3,760,263
26,543,777
Nebraska
1,679,110
2,524,859
2,450,834
2,494,014
2,504,834
2,586,397
2,231,477
2,482,462
4,372,276
41,644,458
Nevada
562,559
845,342
821,553
835,429
838,908
946,130
751,059
831,718
2,547,725
37,281,937
New
1,015,772
1,527,066
1,482,885
1,508,657
1,515,114
1,593,171
1,351,967
1,501,762
2,533,628
23,218,594
Hampshire
New Jersey
3,435,381
5,166,645
5,013,603
5,102,877
5,125,246
5,266,959
4,560,095
5,078,993
10,124,722
118,821,296
New Mexico
1,160,650
1,744,160
1,876,873
1,723,006
1,730,427
1,857,690
1,542,148
1,714,483
2,927,997
26,855,604
New York
13,579,110
20,424,856
19,815,430
20,170,923
20,259,998
21,818,047
18,009,524
20,075,816
36,654,490
394,686,513
North Carolina
2,799,730
4,210,497
4,086,054
4,158,644
4,176,834
4,576,429
3,717,293
4,139,225
9,766,765
131,954,536
North Dakota
1,695,918
2,527,852
2,453,738
2,496,970
2,507,804
2,589,151
2,234,117
2,485,405
3,679,322
25,266,330
Ohio
9,250,620
13,913,935
13,499,255
13,741,148
13,801,761
14,242,973
12,270,440
13,676,435
25,174,465
266,781,409
Oklahoma
1,744,765
2,623,617
2,546,639
2,591,542
2,602,794
2,831,669
2,318,528
2,579,529
5,150,319
60,903,196
Oregon
1,899,540
2,856,430
2,772,488
2,821,454
2,833,724
2,921,655
2,523,743
2,808,354
4,563,299
38,512,236
Pennsylvania
9,901,139
14,892,448
14,448,499
14,707,466
14,772,357
15,101,584
13,132,955
14,638,184
25,400,552
252,793,062
Rhode Island
778,507
1,170,171
1,136,666
1,156,210
1,161,108
1,253,702
1,037,381
1,150,982
2,022,878
20,073,615
South Carolina
1,195,436
1,797,316
1,745,053
1,775,540
1,783,179
1,982,643
1,590,182
1,767,384
4,242,330
58,892,771
South Dakota
1,290,524
1,940,347
1,883,806
1,916,788
1,925,053
1,991,514
1,716,257
1,907,964
3,020,139
24,487,296
Tennessee
2,815,179
4,233,736
4,108,598
4,181,594
4,199,886
4,534,180
3,737,777
4,162,066
8,571,222
99,112,101
Texas
3,753,569
5,645,264
5,477,906
5,575,530
5,599,993
6,607,385
4,981,976
5,549,413
19,793,889
326,975,732
CRS-15


Region/
FY2009 ARRA
State
FY2001
FY2002
FY2003
FY2004
FY2005
FY2006
FY2007
FY2008
FY2009
(P.L. 111-5)
Utah
1,398,486
2,102,745
2,041,346
2,077,161
2,086,136
2,161,298
1,859,403
2,067,579
3,818,075
37,897,203
Vermont
860,443
1,293,419
1,256,227
1,277,921
1,283,358
1,353,926
1,146,018
1,272,118
2,021,240
16,842,576
Virginia
2,704,200
4,066,802
3,946,656
4,016,741
4,034,302
4,344,862
3,590,631
3,997,991
8,025,937
94,134,276
Washington
3,056,649
4,596,956
4,460,953
4,540,287
4,560,166
4,688,820
4,057,939
4,519,063
7,243,701
59,545,074
West Virginia
2,162,350
3,251,749
3,155,983
3,211,847
3,225,843
3,320,985
2,872,199
3,196,901
4,817,624
37,583,874
Wisconsin
5,768,714
8,676,447
8,418,423
8,568,935
8,606,650
8,800,191
7,653,827
8,528,669
14,966,407
141,502,133
Wyoming
793,133
1,188,724
1,154,664
1,174,532
1,179,511
1,221,639
1,053,735
1,069,354
1,550,974
10,239,261
Total State
150,574,880
226,360,956
219,849,999
223,571,556
224,550,063
237,039,567
199,706,355
222,202,364
425,675,396
4,665,810,609
Al ocation











American
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
196,784
719,511
Samoa
Guam
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
198,908
1,119,297
Northern
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
197,186
795,206
Mariana Islands
Puerto Rico
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
452,558
48,865,588
Virgin Islands
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
200,481
1,415,429
Total U.S.
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1,245,917
52,915,031
Territories
Al ocations











Navaho Grant
125,123
189,041
1,176,405
186,724
187,537
362,433
289,645
321,735
703,848
0
Inter-Tribal
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
88,741
102,138
0
Council of
Arizona Grant
Northern
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
99,863
144,840
0
Arapahoe Grant
CRS-16


Region/
FY2009 ARRA
State
FY2001
FY2002
FY2003
FY2004
FY2005
FY2006
FY2007
FY2008
FY2009
(P.L. 111-5)
Total Tribal
125,123
189,041
1,176,405
186,724
187,537
362,433
289,645
510,339
950,826
0
Government
Al ocations
Source: Department of Energy (DOE) annual Weatherization Program Notices regarding Grantee Allocations, accessed from the Weatherization Program Guidance
documents library at the National Association for State Community Services Programs (NASCSP). Documents were previously housed on the former Weatherization
Assistance Program Technical Assistance Center (WAPTAC) website. WAPTAC’s resources and documents library has since been incorporated into the NASCSP
website.
Notes: Each state allocation is the sum of the state program allocation and the state training and technical assistance allocation. The Energy Independence and Security
Act of 2007 (P.L. 110-140, §411c) added Puerto Rico and other territories of the U.S. to the definition of “State” for the purpose of funding allocations. Beginning with
Fiscal Year 2009, the territories of American Samoa, Guam, Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands, Commonwealth of Puerto Rico and the U.S. Virgin Islands
were added to the program. Tribal Government Allocations are derived from state allocations: Navaho Grant allocations are from Arizona and New Mexico state
allocations, Inter-Tribal Council of Arizona Grant allocations are from Arizona allocations, and Northern Arapahoe Grant allocations are from Wyoming allocations.
Also, P.L. 111-5 was enacted as the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009. It is referred to in the last column by the shorthand “ARRA.”

CRS-17

The Weatherization Assistance Program Formula

Appendix B. Base Allocation
Table B-1. Base Allocation Table from 10 C.F.R. §440.10
State

Base Allocation in Dollars
Alabama
$1,636,000
Alaska
1,425,000
Arizona
760,000
Arkansas
1,417,000
California
4,404,000
Colorado
4,574,000
Connecticut
1,887,000
Delaware
409,000
District of Columbia
487,000
Florida
761,000
Georgia
1,844,000
Hawaii
120,000
Idaho
1,618,000
Il inois
10,717,000
Indiana
5,156,000
Iowa
4,032,000
Kansas
1,925,000
Kentucky
3,615,000
Louisiana
912,000
Maine
2,493,000
Maryland
1,963,000
Massachusetts
5,111,000
Michigan
12,346,000
Minnesota
8,342,000
Mississippi
1,094,000
Missouri
4,615,000
Montana
2,123,000
Nebraska
2,013,000
Nevada
586,000
New Hampshire
1,193,000
New Jersey
3,775,000
New Mexico
1,519,000
New York
15,302,000
North Carolina
2,853,000
Congressional Research Service
18

The Weatherization Assistance Program Formula

State

Base Allocation in Dollars
North Dakota
2,105,000
Ohio
10,665,000
Oklahoma
1,846,000
Oregon
2,320,000
Pennsylvania
11,457,000
Rhode Island
878,000
South Carolina
1,130,000
South Dakota
1,561,000
Tennessee
3,218,000
Texas
2,999,000
Utah
1,692,000
Vermont
1,014,000
Virginia
2,970,000
Washington
3,775,000
West Virginia
2,573,000
Wisconsin
7,061,000
Wyoming
967,000
American Samoa
120,000
Guam
120,000
Puerto Rico
120,000
Northern Mariana Islands
120,000
Virgin Islands
120,000
Total
171,858,000
Source: 10 C.F.R. §440.10.
Note: States and territories are organized in the table according to 10 C.F.R. §440.10.





Author Information

Corrie E. Clark
Lynn J. Cunningham
Analyst in Energy Policy
Senior Research Librarian


Congressional Research Service
19

The Weatherization Assistance Program Formula



Disclaimer
This document was prepared by the Congressional Research Service (CRS). CRS serves as nonpartisan
shared staff to congressional committees and Members of Congress. It operates solely at the behest of and
under the direction of Congress. Information in a CRS Report should not be relied upon for purposes other
than public understanding of information that has been provided by CRS to Members of Congress in
connection with CRS’s institutional role. CRS Reports, as a work of the United States Government, are not
subject to copyright protection in the United States. Any CRS Report may be reproduced and distributed in
its entirety without permission from CRS. However, as a CRS Report may include copyrighted images or
material from a third party, you may need to obtain the permission of the copyright holder if you wish to
copy or otherwise use copyrighted material.

Congressional Research Service
R46418 · VERSION 1 · NEW
20