# Discretionary Programs

## Low Income Home Energy Assistance Program

###  *[Low Income Home Energy Assistance Program (LIHEAP)]{.underline}*

+------------------------------+------------+------------+------------+
| **1.1 LT Long Term Goal:**   |            |            |            |
| Increase the availability of |            |            |            |
| Low-Income Home Energy       |            |            |            |
| Assistance Program (LIHEAP)  |            |            |            |
| fuel assistance to low       |            |            |            |
| income, vulnerable           |            |            |            |
| households, with at least    |            |            |            |
| one member that is an        |            |            |            |
| elderly individual or a      |            |            |            |
| young child to 96 and 122    |            |            |            |
| respectively, by FY 2010, as |            |            |            |
| measured by the annual       |            |            |            |
| recipiency targeting         |            |            |            |
| index.[^1]                   |            |            |            |
+------------------------------+------------+------------+------------+
| **Annual Measure**           | **FY**     | **Target** | **Result** |
+------------------------------+------------+------------+------------+
| A.  Increase the recipiency  | *2009*     | 96         | Aug-10     |
|     targeting index          |            |            |            |
|                              |            |            |            |
| score of LIHEAP households   |            |            |            |
| having at least one member   |            |            |            |
| 60 years or older.[^2]       |            |            |            |
| (*outcome*)                  |            |            |            |
+------------------------------+------------+------------+------------+
|                              | *2008*     | 96         | Aug-09     |
+------------------------------+------------+------------+------------+
|                              | *2007*     | 94         | Aug-08     |
+------------------------------+------------+------------+------------+
|                              | *2006*     | 92         | 74         |
+------------------------------+------------+------------+------------+
|                              | *2005*     | 84         | 79         |
+------------------------------+------------+------------+------------+
|                              | *2004*     | 82         | 78         |
+------------------------------+------------+------------+------------+
|                              | *2003*     | Baseline   | 79         |
+------------------------------+------------+------------+------------+
| B.  Maintain the recipiency  | *2009*     | 122        | Aug-10     |
|     targeting index          |            |            |            |
|                              |            |            |            |
| score of LIHEAP households   |            |            |            |
| having at least one member   |            |            |            |
| five years or younger.[^3]   |            |            |            |
| (*outcome*)                  |            |            |            |
+------------------------------+------------+------------+------------+
|                              | *2008*     | 122        | Aug-09     |
+------------------------------+------------+------------+------------+
|                              | *2007*     | 122        | Aug-08     |
+------------------------------+------------+------------+------------+
|                              | *2006*     | 122        | 115        |
+------------------------------+------------+------------+------------+
|                              | *2005*     | 122        | 113        |
+------------------------------+------------+------------+------------+
|                              | *2004*     | 122        | 115        |
+------------------------------+------------+------------+------------+
|                              | *2003*     | Baseline   | 122        |
+------------------------------+------------+------------+------------+
| **Data Source:** State       |            |            |            |
| *LIHEAP Household Report*    |            |            |            |
| and Census Bureau's Annual   |            |            |            |
| Social and Economic          |            |            |            |
| Supplement (ASEC) to the     |            |            |            |
| Current Population           |            |            |            |
| Survey.[^4]                  |            |            |            |
+------------------------------+------------+------------+------------+
| **Data Validation:** ACF     |            |            |            |
| obtains weighted number of   |            |            |            |
| LIHEAP income eligible (low  |            |            |            |
| income) households from the  |            |            |            |
| ASEC which is validated by   |            |            |            |
| the Census Bureau. ACF       |            |            |            |
| aggregates data from the     |            |            |            |
| states' annual *LIHEAP       |            |            |            |
| Household Report* to furnish |            |            |            |
| national counts of LIHEAP    |            |            |            |
| households that receive      |            |            |            |
| heating assistance           |            |            |            |
| (including data on the       |            |            |            |
| number of LIHEAP recipient   |            |            |            |
| households having at least   |            |            |            |
| one member who is 60 year or |            |            |            |
| older and the number of      |            |            |            |
| LIHEAP recipient households  |            |            |            |
| having at least one member   |            |            |            |
| who is five years or         |            |            |            |
| younger). The aggregation    |            |            |            |
| and editing of               |            |            |            |
| state-reported LIHEAP        |            |            |            |
| recipiency data for the      |            |            |            |
| previous fiscal year are     |            |            |            |
| typically completed in July  |            |            |            |
| of the current fiscal year.  |            |            |            |
| Consequently, the data are   |            |            |            |
| not available in time to     |            |            |            |
| modify ACF interventions     |            |            |            |
| prior to the current fiscal  |            |            |            |
| year. There are no federal   |            |            |            |
| quality control or audit     |            |            |            |
| requirements for the data    |            |            |            |
| obtained from the *LIHEAP    |            |            |            |
| Household Report*. However   |            |            |            |
| ACF provides to states an    |            |            |            |
| electronic version of the    |            |            |            |
| *LIHEAP Household Report*    |            |            |            |
| that includes formulae that  |            |            |            |
| protect against mathematical |            |            |            |
| errors. ACF also cross       |            |            |            |
| checks the data against      |            |            |            |
| LIHEAP benefit data obtained |            |            |            |
| from the states' submission  |            |            |            |
| of the annual *LIHEAP        |            |            |            |
| Grantee Survey* on sources   |            |            |            |
| and uses of LIHEAP funds.    |            |            |            |
| ACF also is seeking OMB      |            |            |            |
| clearance to require states  |            |            |            |
| to report unduplicated       |            |            |            |
| counts of households         |            |            |            |
| receiving LIHEAP assistance  |            |            |            |
| to provide a more accurate   |            |            |            |
| measure of recipiency        |            |            |            |
| targeting than that which is |            |            |            |
| currently limited to the     |            |            |            |
| receipt of heating           |            |            |            |
| assistance.                  |            |            |            |
+------------------------------+------------+------------+------------+
| **Cross Reference:** This    |            |            |            |
| performance goal and related |            |            |            |
| measures support HHS         |            |            |            |
| Strategic Objectives 3.1 and |            |            |            |
| 3.4, and the Secretary's 500 |            |            |            |
| Day priority to, "Protect    |            |            |            |
| Life, Family and Human       |            |            |            |
| Dignity."                    |            |            |            |
+------------------------------+------------+------------+------------+

Long term goal 1.1 directly relates to the Low Income Home Energy
Assistance Program (LIHEAP) statute, which mandates that LIHEAP
assistance be targeted to those low income households with the highest
home energy needs, i.e., vulnerable households and high-energy burden
households. The recipiency targeting index measures whether the program
is serving each of these types of households at a higher rate than their
prevalence in the low income target household population.

ACF implemented a federal LIHEAP outreach campaign in FY 2004 to improve
the recipiency targeting of LIHEAP vulnerable households. For example,
ACF has distributed a LIHEAP brochure nationwide. ACF also has been
working primarily with the Administration on Aging at the U.S.
Department of Health and Human Services to reach low income households
with an elderly member. Since May of 2006, ACF has been collaborating
with the Energy for Health Working Group that is led by the National
Energy Assistance Directors' Association. Periodic teleconferences have
been held with experts from the public health and energy assistance
fields.

ACF tracks LIHEAP's heating recipiency annually through targeting index
scores that can be used for multiple purposes.[^5] The results of
LIHEAP's outreach efforts will need to be examined with respect to
external factors that may affect the final targeting index scores. For
example, fluctuations in the national economy will generally affect the
need for human services programs such as LIHEAP. In addition, the
following factors can impact LIHEAP program performance in particular:
(1) weather; (2) home energy prices; (3) utility deregulation; (4)
utility arrearages; (5) welfare reform; (6) the availability of
additional energy assistance funding sources (such as public service
benefit programs, state funds, and private fuel funds); (7) perceptions
of the program (that may produce barriers to vulnerable households from
applying for assistance); and, (8) the block grant design of LIHEAP.[^6]
ACF is investigating whether standard errors of measurement can be
calculated for the targeting indexes to test for statistical
significance in changes of targeting index scores over time.

Regarding annual measure 1A, the baseline index score for households
with at least one member 60 years or older was 79 for FY 2003. This
score indicates that such households were underserved within the
eligible population of elderly households. Both the FY 2004 targeting
index score of 78 and the FY 2005 targeting index score of 79 indicate
that there was no apparent improvement in targeting the elderly since
the LIHEAP outreach campaign began in FY 2004. The targeting index score
of 74 indicates a decrease in targeting the elderly in FY 2006. ACF's
target is to increase the index score to 96 by FY 2009. Further ACF
initiatives at the federal level are necessary to reach more LIHEAP
income eligible households with an elderly member. ACF is studying what
effect the increase in the number of low income elderly households will
have on achieving its targets for elderly LIHEAP households. ACF has not
increased the target for FY 2009 given that the data for FY 2006 is
below the baseline targeting index score of 79.

Regarding annual measure 1B, the baseline targeting recipiency index
score for households with a young child was 122 for FY 2003. The FY 2004
targeting index score of 115, FY 2005 targeting index score of 113, and
FY 2006 targeting index score of 115 represents a decrease in
performance from FY 2003. However, the scores indicate that LIHEAP
program still is providing effective outreach to eligible households
with a child under the age of five, such that they are significantly
more likely to receive LIHEAP. ACF has studied the structure and
outreach efforts of the Food Stamp program, which has also experienced a
downward trend in serving low income young child households, to
determine whether similar strategies can be applied to LIHEAP.

Starting in 2007, Division of Energy Assistance (DEA) staff from ACF's
Office of Community Services has held meetings with ACF staff from the
Office of Head Start (OHS) and the Temporary Assistance for Needy
Families (TANF) programs to share recipiency data and explore the extent
to which similar trends can be seen regarding the number of households
served with either an elderly member or a young child. DEA has scheduled
teleconferences with its Regional Offices and its state LIHEAP grantees
to further explore these trends and what some states or regions may
already be doing to prevent further decline in the recipiency numbers.
DEA plans to maintain this communication in order to support coordinated
action on this issue. Furthermore, DEA has arranged with OHS to share
resources and expand LIHEAP outreach through OHS points of contact.[^7]

ACF's *LIHEAP Energy Burden Evaluation Study* (July 2005) examined the
performance of LIHEAP in serving high-energy burden households in FY
2001. The study used data from the Energy Information Administration's
2001 Residential Energy Consumption Survey (RECS). This survey is
conducted every four years. ACF funded the LIHEAP RECS Supplemental
Sample for 2001 and 2005. The 2001 LIHEAP RECS Supplemental Sample
provided for the first time: (1) national data to compute the benefit
targeting index[^8] and the burden reduction targeting index;[^9] (2)
examination of the overlap between vulnerable eligible households and
high-energy burden eligible households; and (3) the ability to develop
of empirical definitions of low, moderate, and high home energy burdens.

The study found the following:

-   For FY 2001 the benefit targeting index score for high-energy burden
    households was

> 108\. This indicates that these households received higher LIHEAP
> benefits than other types of LIHEAP recipients. The study also found
> that the burden reduction targeting index score for these households
> was 96. This indicates that these households have a somewhat smaller
> burden reduction than other types of LIHEAP recipient households.

-   About 20 percent of low income households are both vulnerable and
    high-energy burden households. ACF needs to determine whether there
    is a practical way for LIHEAP grantees to identify LIHEAP eligible
    households that are both vulnerable and high-energy burden,
    especially for those states that rely on mail-in LIHEAP
    applications.

The study has led ACF to investigate whether the results will be
replicated in the 2005 RECS, which included an improved sampling design
and questions for the 2005 RECS LIHEAP Supplemental Sample.

+--------------------------------+--------+-----------------+----------+
| **Efficiency Measure**         | **FY** | **Target**      | **       |
|                                |        |                 | Result** |
+--------------------------------+--------+-----------------+----------+
| C.  Increase the ratio of      | *2009* | 3.95            | Aug-10   |
|     LIHEAP households          |        |                 |          |
|                                |        |                 |          |
| assisted (heating, cooling,    |        |                 |          |
| crisis, and weatherization     |        |                 |          |
| assistance) per \$100 of       |        |                 |          |
| LIHEAP administrative costs.   |        |                 |          |
| *(OMB approved)*               |        |                 |          |
+--------------------------------+--------+-----------------+----------+
|                                | *2008* | 3.88            | Aug-09   |
+--------------------------------+--------+-----------------+----------+
|                                | *2007* | 3.81            | Aug-08   |
+--------------------------------+--------+-----------------+----------+
|                                | *2006* | 3.74            | 3.04     |
+--------------------------------+--------+-----------------+----------+
|                                | *2005* | 3.67[^10]       | 3        |
|                                |        |                 | .67[^11] |
+--------------------------------+--------+-----------------+----------+
|                                | *2004* | Baseline        | 3.67     |
+--------------------------------+--------+-----------------+----------+
|                                | *2003* | Pre-baseline    | 3.61     |
+--------------------------------+--------+-----------------+----------+
|                                | *2002* | Pre-baseline    | 3.67     |
+--------------------------------+--------+-----------------+----------+
|                                | *2001* | Pre-baseline    | 3.64     |
+--------------------------------+--------+-----------------+----------+
|                                | *2000* | Pre-baseline    | 3.75     |
+--------------------------------+--------+-----------------+----------+
| **Data Source:** *LIHEAP       |        |                 |          |
| Grantee Survey* and *LIHEAP    |        |                 |          |
| Household Report*.             |        |                 |          |
+--------------------------------+--------+-----------------+----------+
| **Data Validation:** Each      |        |                 |          |
| winter, State LIHEAP grantees  |        |                 |          |
| report on the *LIHEAP Grantee  |        |                 |          |
| Survey* the amount of          |        |                 |          |
| obligated LIHEAP               |        |                 |          |
| administrative costs for the   |        |                 |          |
| previous fiscal year. These    |        |                 |          |
| data, along with data from the |        |                 |          |
| *LIHEAP Household Report*, are |        |                 |          |
| used to calculate the          |        |                 |          |
| efficiency measure. The        |        |                 |          |
| aggregation and editing of the |        |                 |          |
| administrative cost data for   |        |                 |          |
| the previous fiscal year are   |        |                 |          |
| typically completed by August  |        |                 |          |
| of the current fiscal year.    |        |                 |          |
| Consequently, the data are not |        |                 |          |
| available in time to modify    |        |                 |          |
| interventions prior to the     |        |                 |          |
| current fiscal year. There are |        |                 |          |
| no federal quality control or  |        |                 |          |
| audit requirements for the     |        |                 |          |
| fiscal data obtained from the  |        |                 |          |
| *LIHEAP Grantee Survey*.       |        |                 |          |
| However, as with the *LIHEAP   |        |                 |          |
| Household Report*, for the     |        |                 |          |
| last several years ACF has     |        |                 |          |
| made available an electronic   |        |                 |          |
| version of the *LIHEAP Grantee |        |                 |          |
| Survey* that State LIHEAP      |        |                 |          |
| grantees are using in          |        |                 |          |
| submitting their data to ACF.  |        |                 |          |
| The electronic version         |        |                 |          |
| includes a number of edits     |        |                 |          |
| that check the data for        |        |                 |          |
| mathematical mistakes and      |        |                 |          |
| against statutory limits in    |        |                 |          |
| the use of LIHEAP funds.       |        |                 |          |
+--------------------------------+--------+-----------------+----------+
| **Cross Reference:** This      |        |                 |          |
| efficiency measure supports    |        |                 |          |
| HHS Strategic Objectives 3.1   |        |                 |          |
| and 3.4, and the Secretary's   |        |                 |          |
| 500 Day priority to, "Protect  |        |                 |          |
| Life, Family and Human         |        |                 |          |
| Dignity."                      |        |                 |          |
+--------------------------------+--------+-----------------+----------+

Efficiency measure 1C focuses on increasing the ratio of the number of
households receiving LIHEAP assistance (numerator) to State LIHEAP
administrative costs (denominator).[^12] An increase in the ratio
indicates an increase in program efficiency through a greater number of
LIHEAP households being served at a lower administrative cost,
regardless of its effects on the extent to which LIHEAP benefits
increase the affordability of home energy costs. The trend data for FY
2000 through FY 2005 indicate that this ratio ranged from 3.61 to 3.75.
The LIHEAP statute limits LIHEAP grantees' administrative costs to 10
percent of the funds payable. The target for FY 2005 reflects the FY
2004 baseline measure.[^13]

The FY 2006 target was not reached. Instead, the data indicated that
program efficiency (3.04) declined below the range for FY 2000-FY 2004.
This decline most likely reflects the unexpected increase in LIHEAP
funding late in FY 2006. In March 2006, Congress appropriated \$1
billion in supplemental LIHEAP funds that were then distributed to
LIHEAP grantees. However, the appropriating legislation included a
restriction that none of the funds could be applied to administrative
costs. This restriction prevented new outreach initiatives. Preliminary
evidence suggests that a number of State LIHEAP grantees decided to use
the additional funds to increase the amount of fuel assistance and
crisis assistance benefits for the same households that were assisted
earlier in FY 2006, rather than incur administrative costs to use the
supplemental funds to distribute benefits to new households. This would
have the effect of limiting the increase in number of assisted
households while increasing administrative costs to provide the
additional benefits. Program efficiency is expected to return for FY
2007 given that no similar amount of additional LIHEAP funds was
appropriated in FY 2007.

[^1]: The language of this measure has been corrected to reflect the
    appropriate data source and to be consistent with the related annual
    measures.

[^2]: The recipiency targeting index quantifies the extent to which such
    households are receiving LIHEAP assistance. The index is computed by
    dividing the percent of LIHEAP recipient households that are members
    of a target group by the percent of all LIHEAP income eligible
    households that are members of the target group and then multiplying
    by 100. For example, if 25 percent of LIHEAP recipients are elderly
    households, and 20 percent of all income eligible households are
    elderly households, the recipiency targeting index for elderly
    recipient households is 125 (25/20 x 100). An index score above 100
    indicates that LIHEAP is serving a target group of households at a
    rate higher than the prevalence of LIHEAP income eligible households
    that are members of that group

[^3]: See previous footnote.

[^4]: Annual data are unavailable for measuring the targeting of
    high-energy burden households.

[^5]: For example: 1) to enhance ACF's LIHEAP outreach activities
    campaign, the recipiency targeting index scores can be analyzed
    geographically to determine if in some sections of the country
    vulnerable households are being underserved; 2) to focus future
    LIHEAP outreach activities, such as the dissemination of LIHEAP
    brochures to those underserved sections of the country; and 3) to
    evaluate the effectiveness of the LIHEAP outreach campaign in
    increasing the extent to which vulnerable households receive LIHEAP
    assistance.

[^6]: The Department has allowed states maximum flexibility under the
    block grant statutes to design and operate programs suited to each
    state's assessments of its citizens\' needs. Consequently, the
    federal government has very limited control of a block grant program
    such as LIHEAP. For this reason, there will be variations in program
    performance due to how states design their program to reflect their
    own program goals which may differ from ACF\'s performance goals.

[^7]: These discussions have already proved fruitful in that one new
    trend has been identified across several ACF programs concerning the
    rise in the number of grandparents raising grandchildren. DEA will
    continue to investigate this trend in more detail to determine the
    impact it may have on factors such as the diminished household need
    for assistance, and the effect of new or multiple barriers to
    applying for assistance faced by households with more than one
    category of "vulnerable" member.

[^8]: The benefit targeting index score is computed by dividing the mean
    LIHEAP benefit for a target group of recipient households by the
    percent of LIHEAP benefits for all LIHEAP recipient households times
    100. For example, if high energy burden recipient households have a
    mean heating assistance benefit of \$250 and the mean heating
    assistance benefit for all households receiving heating assistance
    is \$200, then the benefit targeting index is 125 (\$250 divided by
    \$200 times 100). A benefit targeting index score above 100
    indicates that LIHEAP is providing higher benefits to a target group
    of households than to all LIHEAP recipient households.

[^9]: The burden reduction targeting score is computed by dividing the
    percent reduction in the median home energy burden (i.e., home
    energy costs divided by household income) for a target group of
    LIHEAP households by the percent reduction in the median home energy
    burden for all LIHEAP households. For example, if high burden
    recipient households have their home energy burden reduced by 25
    percent and all recipient households have their home energy reduced
    by 20 percent, the burden reduction index is 125 (25 percent divided
    by 20 percent times 100). An index score above 100 indicates that
    LIHEAP benefits are providing a target group of households a greater
    reduction in home energy burden than for all LIHEAP recipient
    households.

[^10]: This target was previously reported as 3.68, which was a
    preliminary figure, pending data from one additional state. This
    target has since been revised to reflect data from all states.

[^11]: This result has been updated based on final data for the FY 2005
    LIHEAP Household Report to Congress.

[^12]: The efficiency measure does not indicate whether the quality of
    LIHEAP services is impacted by the provision of more efficient
    LIHEAP services.

[^13]: The targets for FY 2006, FY 2007, and FY 2008 are to increase the
    ratio of LIHEAP households assisted per \$100 of LIHEAP
    administrative costs by 1.5 standard deviations from the mean for
    each year.