+---------------------------------------------------+---+-----------------+
| > !                                               |   | PO Box 173580   |
| [](media/image1.png){width="1.2395833333333333in" |   |                 |
| > height="1.09375in"}                             |   | Bozeman, MT     |
| >                                                 |   | 59717-3580      |
| > Housing Program                                 |   |                 |
|                                                   |   | Phone           |
|                                                   |   | 406-994-3451    |
|                                                   |   |                 |
|                                                   |   | Fax 1406 994    |
|                                                   |   | 5417            |
+---------------------------------------------------+---+-----------------+

Evaluation Report

**State of Montana**\
**[R]{.underline}**esidential **[E]{.underline}**nergy
**[A]{.underline}**ssistance **[CH]{.underline}**allenge (**REACH**)
Program

(Grant Number 2000 G992206)

Christopher Mee\
Weatherization Technical Specialist\
Lead Evaluator

Michael P. Vogel Ed.D., Professor\
Housing and Environmental Quality Specialist\
Evaluation Director

# ***TABLE OF CONTENTS***  {#table-of-contents .Section-Heading}

[TABLE OF CONTENTS 2](#table-of-contents)

[Executive Summary 3](#executive-summary)

[I. Project Overview and Implementation
7](#i.-program-overview-and-implementation)

[II. Description of Target Population, Analysis of Need, Project
Assumptions
9](#ii.-description-of-target-population-analysis-of-need-program-assumptions)

[III. Project Design Framework: Interventions, Outcomes and Goals
13](#iii.-program-design-framework-interventions-outcomes-and-goals)

[Intervention 13](#intervention)

[Immediate Changes/Outcomes 14](#immediate-changesoutcomes)

[Intermediate Changes/Outcomes 15](#intermediate-changesoutcomes)

[Achievement of Overall Project Goals
16](#achievement-of-overall-program-goals)

[Work Plan 17](#work-plan)

[Program Logic Model 18](#program-logic-model)

[Program Changes and Modifications
21](#program-changes-and-modifications)

[IV. Evaluation Methodology 21](#iv.-evaluation-methodology)

[V. Process Evaluation Findings 23](#v.-process-evaluation-findings)

[VI. Outcome Evaluation Findings 30](#vi.-outcome-evaluation-findings)

[VII. Client Survey 35](#vii.-client-survey)

[Appendix 41](#appendix)

# Executive Summary 

***Overview***

The Montana [R]{.underline}esidential [E]{.underline}nergy
[A]{.underline}ssistance [CH]{.underline}allenge (REACH) program is a
federally funded residential energy assistance demonstration program,
which provided an array of services and benefits to clients who are
recipients of the Low-Income Home Energy Assistance Program (LIHEAP) in
the State of Montana. REACH services and benefits included a client
education questionnaire, diagnostic testing and inspection of combustion
heating devices, a heating system retrofit analysis, a propane tank
purchase analysis, an inspection to identify necessary energy related
health and safety and minor home repairs and assess the need for smoke
and carbon monoxide detectors. During the past three years (December 31,
2000 -December 31, 2002) the Montana Department of Public Health and
Human Services Intergovernmental Human Services Bureau implemented the
program in thirty-one Montana counties served by four Human Resource
Development Councils (HRDC's). This report is a comprehensive review and
evaluation of the program during this period.

***REACH Goals\
\
***Montana\'s REACH Program was designed to ensure that participants
have the resources to live in dignity and health by:

1)  Ensuring their energy burden not greater as a percentage of annual
    income than the average for all Montanans (4.1%)

2)  Ensuring their homes are free of energy related health and safety
    hazards

3)  Encouraging landlords and fuel vendors to participate in activities
    to enhance participants' ability to make timely payments

4)  Improving participants' ability to regularly pay energy cost

5)  Eliminating homelessness due to high energy costs and the presence
    of energy related health and safety hazards

6)  Providing participants, especially welfare reform recipients,
    more disposable income to satisfy basic needs necessary to
    achieve self-sufficiency

7)  Protecting existing energy conservation measures eliminating the
    need for future investment

The money saved by recipients of the REACH program through energy
savings can be used for other family necessities. By having the
opportunity to utilize energy more efficiently and cost effectively, the
people in these areas have achieved one of the primary goals of the
REACH program... adequate, safe and well heated households.

***Program Intervention***

The Montana REACH Program performed an initial needs assessment and
inspection on each dwelling by a certified energy auditor to determine
whether there were opportunities to provide health and safety measures
and perform cost-effective energy conservation related home repairs. The
scope of the inspection included examination of the dwelling envelope
and an assessment of existing carbon monoxide and smoke detectors on all
dwellings. A client education questionnaire, diagnostic testing and
inspection of combustion heating devices, a heating system retrofit
analysis, and an inspection to identify necessary energy related health
and safety and minor home repairs were also included.

While performing retrofits and repairs of combustion heating devices,
mercury thermostats were replaced with non-mercury thermostats. The
mercury thermostats were returned (at no cost to the REACH Program) to
the manufacturers participating in the Mercury Thermostat Reduction and
Recycling Program, which is sponsored by the Thermostat Recycling
Corporation as a means of reducing mercury levels in landfills. Where
appropriate programmable "night set-back" thermostats were installed.

***Evaluation Methodology\
***

An important component of the Montana REACH Program is the evaluation of
the activities carried out with REACH funds and their efficacy to
achieve stated goals related to reducing participant home energy costs
and increasing the ability of participants to meet such costs
independent of payment subsidies.

The process evaluation conducted by MSU documents and describes all
aspects of development and implementation of the proposed Program. The
process evaluation can serve as a document to assist in replication of
program activities by other Federally funded LIHEAP programs.

The outcome evaluation conducted by MSU is intended to document and
interpret the results of program activities relative to expected goals
and performance outcomes and to assess whether program activities can be
replicated with similar results by other Federally funded LIHEAP
programs. In addition the evaluation addresses performance with respect
to gathering data and analyzing the net affects attributable to program
activities/interventions.

***REACH Clients***

The average Montanan spends 4.1 percent of household income on heating
costs. The Montana REACH program design was based on the fact that 71.1
percent of low-income households spend more than 4.1 percent of their
household income on heating costs.

The target population served by the proposed REACH program was LIHEAP
client households with the highest home energy needs. The energy needs
of LIHEAP households in each HRDC's areas were calculated by multiplying
the energy burdens of households occupied by elderly, disabled and
Montana's welfare reform program (FAIM) recipients by 1.25. The energy
needs of all other LIHEAP households remained the same as their
respective energy burdens. In the case of the elderly and disabled, the
formula gave priority to those in this client population who were the
most at risk in an energy crisis.

Households that included recipients of Montana's welfare reform program
were also at risk as their Temporary Assistance to Needy Families (TANF)
benefits expired. This preference includes Montana's families with young
children that are most in need. Applying these factors, the REACH
program focused on those Montana households most vulnerable to rising
energy costs. Participants in the Montana REACH Program were selected
from LIHEAP recipient households that had an arrearage of at least 1/2
of the annual LIHEAP payment. In many cases the energy cost burden for
these households was greater than 15% of the total household income. In
addition, participants were chosen if their dwelling structure or
heating equipment represented a potential health or safety risk or they
appeared to be highly motivated to participate in the program.

The Montana REACH Program completed a total of 568 households during the
program period. The energy burden portion of the evaluation focused on
the program's impact on a representative sample of 72 of these
participants who occupied regulated electric and natural gas-heated
households. They included occupants with an average age of 59.75 years
old. The mean annual income across all agencies and participants was
\$9,812.11. The mean number of occupants per REACH participant household
was 2.75.

***Client Survey Results***

At the conclusion of the Montana REACH program, participants were asked
to complete a questionnaire about their REACH experience. The
overwhelming consensus of 126 participants that returned their survey
was that the REACH program was extremely beneficial to them and to their
families. The participant's comments reflect the many ways in which the
Montana REACH program has had a positive impact on their household
environment and their ability to better manage their energy resources.

These outcomes are most clearly shown by the following findings:

1\. Approximately 53% of the participants that responded indicated that
after receiving REACH/Weatherization services in their home they were
able to pay their energy bill in full every month all of the time. 30%
indicated they were now able to pay their energy bill most of the time.
This is very significant since only 20% of the clients that responded
indicated they could always pay their bill on time before participating
in REACH.

2\. Approximately 63% of the participants reported that after receiving
REACH/Weatherization services they no longer worried about having to
leave their home because of energy related health and safety issues and
21% responded they rarely worried. This too is significant because
before REACH 15% reported they often worried about this issue and 26%
worried some of the time about this issue.

3\. Approximately 72% of the REACH participants expressed through the
survey, that as a result of their homes receiving REACH/Weatherization
services they were more comfortable and livable than before the services
were installed.

4\. REACH participants that were propane costumers were asked a specific
question about the ability to purchase lower cost propane as a result of
owning their own tank and if it affected there fuel cost for the year.
Approximately 50% of the participants that responded indicated that this
affected their fuel cost more than they expected and 77% of the
participants that responded felt their energy bills had decreased as a
result of being able to purchase lower cost propane.

***Summary Conclusion***

In summary, these findings indicate that the Montana REACH Program was
able to assist clients through education, energy conservation measures
and making available the opportunity to acquire services not readily
available through other low-income services provided by the HRDC's. The
success of the Montana REACH program in achieving its objectives
provides strong support for continued activities of coordinated services
and educational resources which has been proven to be an effective
approach in reducing the consumption and costs of energy for low-income
households. This also confirms the value of lowering low income
households' high-energy burden. The evidence presented in this report
indicates clearly that the Montana REACH program has greatly assisted
low-income households ensuring participants have the resources to live
in dignity and health.

# I. Program Overview and Implementation

***Grantee and Sub-grantee Information***

Montana's Weatherization Assistance Program (WAP) and the Low Income
Home Energy Assistance Program (LIHEAP) are situated in the Human
Resource Development Council (HRDC) Services Section of the
Intergovernmental Human Services Bureau, which is part of the Human and
Community Services Division. The Human and Community Services Division
is one of nine divisions within the Montana Department of Public Health
and Human Services.

The Intergovernmental Human Service Bureau (IHSB) contracted REACH funds
to 4 of the 10 HRDC's, and provided program oversight, training,
technical assistance and monitoring. Jim Nolan, Chief of IHSB, has
worked in his capacity since the beginning of LIHEAP. He is responsible
for planning, establishing and overseeing all goals, objectives and
operations of the State of Montana's efforts in the following areas:
Weatherization, LIHEAP, Community Services Block Grant, Emergency
Shelter Grant program, Emergency Community Services for the Homeless
program, and Commodities program. The REACH Program Coordinator for the
State is Kane Quenemoen. Mr. Quenemoen is Section Supervisor for
Montana's LIHEAP, CSBG and Weatherization programs.

***Executive Leadership***

The executive leadership for all HRDC\'s is their Executive Director who
was hired by the respective Board of Directors. The Executive Directors
had oversight responsibilities for the REACH program.

Action for Eastern Montana (AEM) in Glendive has provided energy
conservation programs for over 22 years in seventeen (17) counties
(Carter, Custer, Daniels, Dawson, Fallon, Garfield, McCone, Phillips,
Prairie, Powder River, Richland, Roosevelt, Rosebud, Sheridan, Treasure,
Valley, and Wibaux) in eastern Montana. Leslie Colbrese, AEM Executive
Director, was responsible for managing and administering the REACH
Program for AEM.

District IV HRDC in Havre has been providing energy conservation
programs for over 20 years in 3 counties (Blaine, Hill, and Liberty) in
north central Montana. Thomas Bolan, District VI HRDC Executive
Director, was responsible for the overall management of operations of
the REACH Program.

District VI HRDC in Lewistown has been providing energy conservation
programs for the past 20 years in 6 counties (Fergus, Golden Valley,
Judith Basin, Musselshell, Petroleum, and Wheatland). Pam Higgins,
District VI HRDC Executive Director, had general oversight
responsibilities for this program.

District VII HRDC in Billings has been providing energy conservation
programs for over 20 years in 5 counties (Big Horn, Carbon, Stillwater,
Sweet Grass, and Yellowstone). Carl Visser, District VII HRDC Executive
Director, was responsible for the overall management of operations for
the REACH program for the agency.

***Program Priority***

The Residential Energy Assistance CHallenge (REACH) Program was a
priority program operated within the energy divisions of the HRDC's.
This program empowered the customers of the area toward self-sufficiency
by permanently reducing their energy costs, and enhancing their ability
to make regular utility payments. This program placed a priority on
educating customers and on health and safety issues in the dwellings
they occupied.

***Staff Resources and Responsibilities***

In the designation of the Community Base Organization (CBO) Recipients
for the REACH program, priority was given, as required by the
authorizing legislation, to eligible entities (described in Section 673
of the Community Services Block Grant Act - amended), which have a
record of successfully providing service under LIHEAP and which receive
funds from the Department of Energy's Weatherization Assistance Program.
District VI Human Resource Development Council, District VII Human
Resource Development Council, District IV Human Resource Development
Council and Action for Eastern Montana all have a record of successfully
providing LIHEAP and receive funding to operate the Department of
Energy's Weatherization Assistance program through the leadership of the
following program Directors:

-   Gary Witsoe, AEM Weatherization Program Director, was the
    organization's REACH Program Director.

-   Camie Jorgensen, District IV HRDC Energy Programs Director, was the
    agency's REACH Program Director.

-   Glenn Richards, District VI HRDC, was the REACH Program Director.

-   Wayne Schmidt, District VII HRDC Energy Specialist, was the Agency's
    REACH Program Director.

# II. Description of Target Population, Analysis of Need, Program Assumptions  {#ii.-description-of-target-population-analysis-of-need-program-assumptions .Section-Heading}

***Needs of the Client Population to Be Served***

The average Montanan spends 4.1 percent of household income on heating
costs. The Montana REACH program design was based on the observation
that 71.1 percent of low-income LIHEAP households spend more than 4.1
percent of their household income on heating costs. The target
populations actually served by the REACH program included client
households with the highest home energy needs. The energy needs of
households occupied by elderly, disabled and Montana's welfare reform
program (FAIM) recipients in each CBO's area were calculated by
multiplying the energy burdens of households by 1.25. The energy needs
of all other households were the same as their respective energy
burdens. In the case of the elderly and disabled, this formula gave
priority to those in this client population who were at the most risk
for an energy crisis. Those households who were recipients of Montana's
welfare reform program were also at risk as their Temporary Assistance
to Needy Families (TANF) benefit time clocks expired. This preference
includes Montana's families with young children with the most need. In
using these factors, the REACH program focused on those Montana LIHEAP
households most vulnerable to an energy crisis.

***Current Services Available***

The Department of Energy and Oil Overcharge Weatherization programs
provided energy conservation measures to approximately ten (10) percent
of the LIHEAP households in the target service areas. Measures performed
under these programs include attic insulation, floor insulation, wall
insulation, crawl space insulation, infiltration reduction materials,
and heating system repairs. Approximately 1.6 percent of the area's
households receive Weatherization assistance each year through Montana
Power Company's (now NorthWestern Energy) (MPC/NWE) weatherization
program. In addition to the measures described above, the MPC/NWE
program provides heating system retrofits in instances where switching
to an alternate fuel source is cost effective. Effective January 1,
1999, electric cooperatives and regulated utilities in the proposed
service area were required to expend a minimum of .408 percent of their
1995 gross operating revenues for low-income energy assistance
activities. Co-funding REACH program heating system retrofits provided
them a vehicle to meet their respective Uniform Systems Benefit Charge
(USBC) obligations.

***Where and How Current Services Fail To Meet Needs***

Current services, which are provided to only approximately 10 percent of
LIHEAP households each year, failed to meet clients' needs in terms of
providing more efficient heat sources because the DOE weatherization
program does not allow heating system retrofits except for health and
safety concerns. Moreover, the weatherization program under funded minor
home repairs and did not include household specific energy education,
the purchase of fuel oil and propane tanks, or the routine installation
of programmable thermostats, carbon monoxide and smoke detectors.
Weatherization program managers in the program area estimated that
approximately fifty-seven (57) percent of the LIHEAP homes are at risk
for health and safety problems because of an ill maintained, aging or
inadequate heating system. Other than the MPC/NWE program, which served
only a small fraction of LIHEAP customers in the target area, utility
companies and fuel vendors offered no energy conservation services
comparable to those in either the weatherization or in the REACH
program.

***Why the Services Were Appropriate and Meet These Needs***

The services provided by REACH allowed for a heating system retrofit
analysis to be conducted in each selected household. In the original 325
homes identified before REACH services were implemented, recipients
benefited from fuel switching and increased household energy efficiency
there by significantly lowered out-of-pocket home heating costs. Minor
home repairs were introduced to protect energy conservation measures and
reduce or eliminate the need for costly future replacements. Provision
of heating system repairs, carbon monoxide and smoke detectors brought
low-income households into compliance with building codes applicable to
new construction. As part of the REACH program approximately 275
existing heating systems, where heating system retrofits were not
cost-effective, were to be inspected, tested, cleaned and repaired.
These services, coupled with LIHEAP heating assistance benefits, ensured
a safe living environment and reduced the energy burdens of Montana's
neediest households to approximate the average energy burdens of all
Montana households.

***Target Population and Geographic Area that was served***

The target population for the Montana REACH program included those
households with the highest energy needs. From the outset of the
program, there were 4,260 LIHEAP households in the geographic area
included in the original proposal.

The initial energy burden was represented as an average household energy
expenditure (\$942) as a percent of average household income (\$22,988),
4.1 percent of income. The program considered the elevated number of
heating degree-days in the program area. The Montana DOE Weatherization
Program adopted a savings to investment ratio of 1.8 in order to stay
within DOE's allowable average cost per home of \$2,032. In contrast,
warmer climate states are able to use a savings to investment ratio of
1.0 and still meet DOE's average cost per home requirement.

The geographic area impacted included 31 of Montana's 56 counties or
approximately one-half of the state's geographic area. The area also
encompasses the Rocky Boy, Fort Peck, Fort Belknap, Northern Cheyenne
and Crow Indian Reservations. The appropriate CBOs served all residents
of the Crow reservation and non-tribal residents of the Rocky Boy, Fort
Belknap, Fort Peck and Northern Cheyenne reservations.

***Building Type, Condition and Age of Low-Income Housing***

Eastern Montana has not experienced the recent "boom" in population seen
in the western half of the state and new housing starts are relatively
low. Census data showed that approximately one third of the housing
stock in Eastern Montana's rural areas was constructed before 1950. In
almost half of the counties in the program area, the percentage of homes
built before 1950 is 40 percent or higher. Survey data indicated that
this is the housing stock low-income families can afford to occupy.
These families are not able to maintain or upgrade these homes and
therefore their condition deteriorates and is typically substandard.

***Predominant Fuel Used for Home Heating***

The predominant fuel used by LIHEAP clients for home heating is natural
gas. However, this program targeted those households using electric,
propane, oil, and other more costly sources of fuel. Fifteen percent or
618 LIHEAP households in the program area served use propane heat. In
the geographic area to be served, the total amount paid in 1998 LIHEAP
benefits for propane was as follows:

-   \$89,460 (in Districts 1, 2 and 3);

-   \$9,536 (in District 4);

-   \$40,070 (in District 6);

-   \$114,097 (in District 7); and

-   \$253,163 total for all districts.

Thirteen percent or 568 of all LIHEAP households in the program area use
electric heat. The amount paid by homes with electric heat was as
follows:

-   \$30,846 (in District's 1, 2 and 3);

-   \$25,421 (in District 4);

-   \$22,596 (in District 6);

-   \$144,008 (in District 7); and

-   \$222,871 total for all districts.

***The Number and Percent of Utility Shutoffs Among Low-Income
Consumers***

In 1998, Montana Dakota Utilities (MDU) disconnected 1307 low-income
consumers for non-payment. This represented 2 percent of its total
Montana customer base. In 1998, Montana Power Company/NorthWestern
Energy (MPC/NWE) disconnected 3350 low-income consumers for non-payment.
This represented 2 percent of its total Montana customer base. MPC/NWE
and MDU serve approximately 59 percent of Montana's LIHEAP caseload.
Unlike Montana's unregulated cooperatives and independent fuel vendors,
MDU and MPC are subject to Public Service Commission imposed moratorium
on winter shutoffs.

***Climatic Conditions***

Climatic conditions vary widely from region to region in Montana. The
eastern half of Montana, which was included in the service area of the
Montana REACH program, consists of vast areas of prairie, farm and ranch
land. Annual precipitation ranges from 11 to 17 inches in the program
area. Average 12 month temperature ranges from 42 in North Central
Montana (District 4) to 46 in the easternmost districts (Districts 1, 2
and 3).

***Unemployment Statistics for the Area***

In general, for the 31-county area, unemployment rates increased
steadily from 1998 to 1999. In eastern Montana unemployment equaled the
statewide average of 5.6% in March of 1999. The prosperity of the
program area, highly dependent upon agriculture, reflects the downturn
in that sector of the economy. The Montana REACH region contained five
tribal reservations, the Crow, Fort Belknap Reservation, Fort Peck
Reservation, Northern Cheyenne and the Rocky Boy Reservation. The
average unemployment of the five reservations is 71%.

***Price of Fuels and the Demand Management Services Offered by Local
Utilities at Start of REACH***

The price of fuels was as follows:

Montana Power Company/NWE Electricity \$0.072 per KWH

Montana Dakota Utilities Electricity \$0.072 per KWH

Other Electric Providers \$0.06472 per KWH

Oil \$91.8 cents per gallon

Propane (winter rates) \$1.29 per gallon

Propane (summer rates) \$0.69 per gallon

Natural Gas \$5.047 per MCF

Montana Power Company/NWE Natural Gas \$4.9393 per MCF

Montana Dakota Utilities Natural Gas \$5.35 per Decatherm

Wood \$65.00 per cord

Coal \$65.00 per ton

The winter and summer rates are listed for propane to illustrate the
fuel cost savings potential the LIHEAP consumers have by purchasing
propane in the summer months when prices are at their lowest. The
Montana REACH program gave clients this option by providing participants
ownership of larger propane tanks.

Only one electric cooperative, Yellowstone Valley Electric in District 7
REACH region, offers incentives for switching to heat pumps or
performing energy saving measures. The cooperative offers a \$1000
rebate on geothermal heat pumps, a \$750 rebate on air source heat pumps
and free 40 to 70 gallon water heaters with high demand shut off
switches. They also offered a 5 percent loan on approved credit to help
finance these retrofits. According to their management, they were
willing to work with other programs to help fund these retrofits. No
other utility company or fuel vendor in the program area provides such
an option which is one reason this portion of the state was targeted for
this program.

# III. Program Design Framework: Interventions, Outcomes and Goals

Over the course of the Montana REACH program period at least 600 LIHEAP
households were to be selected by the four (4) Community Action Agencies
listed above. They participated in the following activities which were
to be provided in addition to and in coordination with regular LIHEAP
benefit payments and emergency services. No regulated utility covered by
the program was required to act in a manner that is inconsistent with
applicable regulatory requirements.

The four (4) Community Action Agencies listed previously provided the
services described below. In doing so they solicited and were responsive
to the views of individuals who are financially eligible for benefits
and services under the Montana REACH program.

# Intervention

***Initial Household Assessment***

The initial assessment performed on all dwellings included a client
education questionnaire, diagnostic testing and inspection of combustion
heating devices, a heating system retrofit analysis, and an inspection
to identify necessary energy related health and safety and minor home
repairs and assess the need for smoke and carbon monoxide detectors.

The client education questionnaire (Appendix A[)]{.underline} consisted
of a series of appliance usage and building characteristics questions
designed to build an energy consumption profile for each dwelling. This
information was utilized to structure energy conservation counseling
which was part of the energy education phase of the Montana REACH
program. To reinforce household specific energy conservation counseling,
a quarterly newsletter containing follow-up energy conservation tips and
reminders was mailed to program participants throughout the 36-month
duration of the program (Appendix B).

An analysis was performed to determine the cost effectiveness of
switching water and/or space heat devices in eligible dwellings. The
analysis performed on each dwelling utilizing the Montana REACH Program
-- Cost Effectiveness Analysis, a computerized audit, to analyze heating
system efficiencies and the cost effectiveness of upgrades (Appendix C).
Space and/or water heating devices were retrofitted in instances where
doing so was cost effective by virtue of demonstrating a savings to
investment ratio of at least 1.0. In at least half of all rental
situations, landlords were *required* to contribute 25 percent of costs
associated with respective heating system retrofits. Fuel
vendors/utility companies supplying fuel to retrofitted heating systems
were also asked to contribute or provide discounts and fee waivers equal
to 25 percent of all costs associated with retrofits.

In instances where retrofits were not cost effective, existing heating
appliances were to be cleaned, tested, checked for safety problems and
repaired by certified heating system technicians utilizing state of the
art diagnostic equipment, which followed procedures, contained in the
attached Heating Worksheet (Appendix D). Propane and fuel oil tanks were
purchased, when applicable, to provide LIHEAP households a choice in
fuel vendors and the opportunity to purchase these fuels at low summer
prices.

Mercury thermostats replaced in the course of performing retrofits and
repairs were returned (at no cost to the REACH program) to manufacturers
participating in the Mercury Thermostat Reduction and Recycling Program
sponsored by the Thermostat Recycling Corporation as a means of reducing
mercury levels in landfills. Where appropriate programmable "night
set-back" thermostats wer installed.

In addition to the above activities, inspections were performed on each
dwelling by a certified energy auditor to determine whether there
existed opportunities to provide health and safety measures and perform
cost-effective energy conservation related home repairs. The scope of
the inspection included examination of the dwelling envelope and an
assessment of existing carbon monoxide and smoke detectors.

# Immediate Changes/Outcomes

***Client Education***

Designing an energy consumption profiles for program participants
resulted in implementation of household specific energy conservation
counseling and identification of unique opportunities to influence
energy usage behavior. Information obtained from energy consumption
profiles and energy usage counseling was incorporated in newsletters to
reinforce and sustain behavioral changes in household energy usage.
Client education was intended to increase energy efficiency, lower
out-of-pocket heating costs and improve safety and comfort levels in
LIHEAP households.

***Heating System Retrofits***

Heating system retrofit analyses resulted in the identification of
opportunities and implementation of cost-effective activities intended
to increase energy efficiency, lower out-of-pocket home heating costs
and increase comfort levels in households through the replacement of
inefficient heating systems.

***Existing Heating System Testing, Safety Inspection and Repair***

Heating system testing and safety inspections resulted in the
identification and installation of heating system repairs and
rectification of life threatening health and safety conditions in
households. Heating system repairs also contributed to an increase in
heating efficiency, lower out of pocket heating costs and improved
comfort levels and safety conditions in households.

***Energy Conservation and Health and Safety Related Minor Home Repair
Assessment***

Home repair assessments resulted in minor home repairs intended to
protect existing energy conservation measures and reduce or eliminate
the need for costly future replacement. Health and safety related minor
home repairs, included the installation of no more than one (1) carbon
monoxide detector and one (1) smoke detector per dwelling to improve
safety conditions in homes. Energy conservation and health and safety
related repairs resulted in increased energy efficiency, lower
out-of-pocket heating costs and improved safety and comfort levels in
LIHEAP households.

# Intermediate Changes/Outcomes

***Client Education***

Over the 36-month program period, 600 households were to receive client
education counseling based upon their energy usage profiles. All REACH
participant households also received newsletters intended to reinforce
and sustain energy usage behavioral changes. Client education activities
were to be performed at an average cost of \$250 per participating
household.

***Heating System Retrofits***

Over the 36 month program period, 325 heating systems (space and/or
water) were to be cost effectively retrofitted at an average cost to the
REACH program of \$2,696 per dwelling. In at least half of all rental
situations, landlords were required to pay 25 percent of the costs of
retrofitting heating systems (space and/or water). Landlord
contributions were intended to increase the minimum number of households
participating in the REACH program at a rate of one (1) additional
household per \$2,125 in landlord contributions. Fuel vendors were asked
to provide fee waivers, discounts and co-funding equal to 25 percent of
the costs of retrofitting heating systems (space and/or water). Vendor
co-funding was intended to increase the minimum number of households
participating in the REACH program at a rate of one (1) additional
household per \$2,125 in vendor co-funding. Heating system retrofits
performed under this proposal were to result in discounted (at a rate of
4.7 percent) savings to participant households (over the program
lifetime of each retrofit (20 years for furnaces and 13 years for
domestic water heaters)) equal to or greater than the total retrofit
cost to the REACH program.

***Existing Heating System Testing, Safety Inspection and Repair***

Over the 36 month program period, 275 existing heating systems (space
and/or water) were to be inspected, tested, cleaned and repaired at an
average cost of \$250.18 per dwelling.

***Energy Conservation and Health and Safety Related Minor Home
Repairs***

Over the 36-month program period, 600 households were to receive energy
conservation and health and safety related minor home repair at an
average cost not to exceed \$300 per dwelling. 100 percent of
participating households utilizing combustion heating or cooking devices
were to have installed, digital read-out carbon monoxide detectors and
receive instruction on the use and operation of same. 100 percent of
participating households that lack working smoke detectors were to have
one (1) installed and receive instruction on the use and operation of
it. Costs associated with smoke and carbon monoxide detectors are
included in the \$300 per dwelling average noted above.

# Achievement of Overall Program Goals

The above described REACH activities and outcomes coupled with existing
LIHEAP heating assistance benefits were intended to contribute to the
overall goal of the REACH program which was to ensure that low-income
families have the resources necessary to live in decency and health by:

1.  Ensuring the energy burdens of low income Montanans are no higher as
    a percentage of annual income than the average for all Montanans
    (4.1% of household income).

2.  Ensuring that dwellings occupied by low-income Montanans are free of
    energy-related health and safety hazards.

3.  Requiring landlords and encouraging fuel vendors to participate
    financially in activities intended to increase low-income families'
    ability to pay energy costs in a timely manner.

4.  Improving low-income Montanans ability to regularly pay energy
    costs.

5.  Eliminating homelessness due to high-energy costs and/or the
    presence of energy-related health and safety hazards.

6.  Providing low-income households, especially Montanans welfare reform
    participants, more disposable income to satisfy basic needs
    necessary to achieve self-sufficiency.

7.  Protecting the integrity of existing energy conservation measures in
    low-income dwellings and reducing or eliminating the need for future
    energy conservation investment.

8.  Positioning low-income Montana families to take advantage of
    customer choice opportunities arising as a result of electric and
    natural gas industry restructuring or ownership of fuel oil or
    propane tanks.

9.  Encouraging fuel vendors and utility companies to satisfy their
    respective low-income uniform systems benefit program obligations
    (established in Montana law as a percentage of each companies 1995
    gross operating revenues) through future replication of the
    activities/interventions contained in this proposal.

# Work Plan

  ------------------ ------------------------------- ---------------- -------- -------- -----------
  **Intervention**                                   **Quantitative                     
                                                     Outcome (# of                      
                                                     Households)**                      

  **Program          **Description**                 **Year 1**       **Year   **Year   **Total**
  Activities**                                                        2**      3**      

  Initial Household  The initial assessment          176              212      212      600
  Assessment         performed on all dwellings                                         
                     shall include a client                                             
                     education questionnaire,                                           
                     diagnostic testing and                                             
                     inspection of combustion                                           
                     heating devices, a heating                                         
                     system retrofit analysis, and                                      
                     inspection to identify                                             
                     necessary energy related health                                    
                     and safety and minor home                                          
                     repairs and assess the need for                                    
                     smoke and carbon monoxide                                          
                     detectors.                                                         

  Client Education   Energy consumption profiles for 176              212      212      600
                     participants will be conducted.                                    
                     Each household will receive                                        
                     specific energy conservation                                       
                     counseling and identification                                      
                     of unique opportunities to                                         
                     influence energy usage                                             
                     behavior. Information obtained                                     
                     from energy consumption                                            
                     profiles and energy usage                                          
                     counseling will be incorporated                                    
                     in quarterly newsletters whose                                     
                     purpose shall be to reinforce                                      
                     and sustain behavioral changes                                     
                     in household energy usage.                                         

  Heating System     Heating system retrofit         93               116      116      325
  Retrofits          analyses will be conducted.                                        
                     Cost-effective activities                                          
                     intended to increase energy                                        
                     efficiency, lower out-of-pocket                                    
                     home heating costs and increase                                    
                     comfort levels in LIHEAP                                           
                     households will be implemented.                                    

  Heating System     Heating system testing and      93               96       96       275
  Test and Repair    safety inspections will                                            
                     identify threatening health and                                    
                     safety conditions requiring                                        
                     repairs. Heating system repairs                                    
                     will be conducted. Heating                                         
                     system repairs will also result                                    
                     in increased heating                                               
                     efficiency, lower out of pocket                                    
                     heating costs and improved                                         
                     comfort levels and safety                                          
                     conditions in LIHEAP                                               
                     households.                                                        

  Health and Safety  Assessments and minor home      176              212      212      600
  Minor Home Repair  repairs intended to protect                                        
                     existing energy conservation                                       
                     measures and reduce or                                             
                     eliminate the need for costly                                      
                     future replacement will be                                         
                     conducted. Health and safety                                       
                     related minor home repairs,                                        
                     including installation of no                                       
                     more than one (1) carbon                                           
                     monoxide detector and one (1)                                      
                     smoke detector per dwelling,                                       
                     will improve safety conditions.                                    
  ------------------ ------------------------------- ---------------- -------- -------- -----------

# Program Logic Model

+----------------------+------------+---+---------------+-------------+
| STATE / AGENCY:      |            | C |               |             |
|                      |            | O |               |             |
| Montana Department   |            | N |               |             |
| of Public Health and |            | T |               |             |
| Human Services       |            | A |               |             |
| (DPHHS),             |            | C |               |             |
| Intergovernmental    |            | T |               |             |
| Human Services       |            | : |               |             |
| Bureau(IHSB)         |            |   |               |             |
|                      |            | * |               |             |
|                      |            | * |               |             |
|                      |            | S |               |             |
|                      |            | t |               |             |
|                      |            | a |               |             |
|                      |            | t |               |             |
|                      |            | e |               |             |
|                      |            | : |               |             |
|                      |            | K |               |             |
|                      |            | a |               |             |
|                      |            | n |               |             |
|                      |            | e |               |             |
|                      |            | Q |               |             |
|                      |            | u |               |             |
|                      |            | e |               |             |
|                      |            | n |               |             |
|                      |            | e |               |             |
|                      |            | m |               |             |
|                      |            | o |               |             |
|                      |            | e |               |             |
|                      |            | n |               |             |
|                      |            | ( |               |             |
|                      |            | 4 |               |             |
|                      |            | 0 |               |             |
|                      |            | 6 |               |             |
|                      |            | ) |               |             |
|                      |            | 4 |               |             |
|                      |            | 4 |               |             |
|                      |            | 7 |               |             |
|                      |            | - |               |             |
|                      |            | 4 |               |             |
|                      |            | 2 |               |             |
|                      |            | 6 |               |             |
|                      |            | 7 |               |             |
|                      |            | * |               |             |
|                      |            | * |               |             |
|                      |            |   |               |             |
|                      |            | * |               |             |
|                      |            | * |               |             |
|                      |            | E |               |             |
|                      |            | v |               |             |
|                      |            | a |               |             |
|                      |            | l |               |             |
|                      |            | u |               |             |
|                      |            | a |               |             |
|                      |            | t |               |             |
|                      |            | o |               |             |
|                      |            | r |               |             |
|                      |            | s |               |             |
|                      |            | : |               |             |
|                      |            | M |               |             |
|                      |            | i |               |             |
|                      |            | k |               |             |
|                      |            | e |               |             |
|                      |            | V |               |             |
|                      |            | o |               |             |
|                      |            | g |               |             |
|                      |            | e |               |             |
|                      |            | l |               |             |
|                      |            | / |               |             |
|                      |            | C |               |             |
|                      |            | h |               |             |
|                      |            | r |               |             |
|                      |            | i |               |             |
|                      |            | s |               |             |
|                      |            | M |               |             |
|                      |            | e |               |             |
|                      |            | e |               |             |
|                      |            | \ |               |             |
|                      |            | ( |               |             |
|                      |            | 4 |               |             |
|                      |            | 0 |               |             |
|                      |            | 6 |               |             |
|                      |            | ) |               |             |
|                      |            | 9 |               |             |
|                      |            | 9 |               |             |
|                      |            | 4 |               |             |
|                      |            | - |               |             |
|                      |            | 3 |               |             |
|                      |            | 4 |               |             |
|                      |            | 5 |               |             |
|                      |            | 1 |               |             |
|                      |            | * |               |             |
|                      |            | * |               |             |
+----------------------+------------+---+---------------+-------------+
| **PROGRAM: MONTANA   |            |   |               |             |
| REACH PROGRAM**      |            |   |               |             |
+----------------------+------------+---+---------------+-------------+
| **ESTIMATED PROGRAM  |            |   |               |             |
| START DATE:          |            |   |               |             |
| 01/01/2000**         |            |   |               |             |
+----------------------+------------+---+---------------+-------------+
| **ESTIMATED PROGRAM  |            |   |               |             |
| COMPLETION DATE:     |            |   |               |             |
| 01/01/2003**         |            |   |               |             |
+----------------------+------------+---+---------------+-------------+
| **PROGRAM GOAL: To   |            |   |               |             |
| ensure participants  |            |   |               |             |
| have the resources   |            |   |               |             |
| to live in dignity   |            |   |               |             |
| and health.**        |            |   |               |             |
+----------------------+------------+---+---------------+-------------+
| **OBJECTIVES**       | **IN       |   | **MEANS OF    | **AS        |
|                      | DICATORS** |   | V             | SUMPTIONS** |
|                      |            |   | ERIFICATION** |             |
+----------------------+------------+---+---------------+-------------+
| IMMEDIATE OUTCOMES   |            |   |               |             |
| OR OUTPUTS:          |            |   |               |             |
+----------------------+------------+---+---------------+-------------+
| Number of and Cost   | -# of      |   | -energy audit | -the        |
| per heating systems  | heating    |   | from HRDC's   | dwelling    |
| (both Water and      | system     |   |               | has a       |
| Space heat)          | retrofits. |   |               | heating     |
| retrofitted per CBO  |            |   |               | system      |
| each year            | -avg. cost |   |               | which       |
|                      | per        |   |               | qualifies   |
|                      | retrofit.  |   |               | for a       |
|                      |            |   |               | retrofit    |
+----------------------+------------+---+---------------+-------------+
| Number of and Cost   | -# of      |   | -energy audit | -the        |
| of Heating system    | heating    |   | from HRDC's   | dwelling    |
| diagnostic test,     | system     |   |               | has a       |
| inspection, and      | diagnostic |   |               | heating     |
| repair per CBO year. | tests.     |   |               | system      |
|                      |            |   |               | which needs |
|                      | -avg. cost |   |               | m           |
|                      | per        |   |               | aintenance. |
|                      | diagnostic |   |               |             |
|                      | test       |   |               |             |
+----------------------+------------+---+---------------+-------------+
| Households of        | -#c        |   | -post audit   | -the        |
| participants are     | ompletions |   | documentation | dwelling is |
| inspected and energy |            |   | and           | in need of  |
| efficient            |            |   | verification  | energy      |
|                      |            |   | of            | efficient   |
|                      |            |   | installation  | measures.   |
+----------------------+------------+---+---------------+-------------+
| **INTERMEDIATE       |            |   |               |             |
| OUTCOMES OR PROGRAM  |            |   |               |             |
| PURPOSE:**           |            |   |               |             |
+----------------------+------------+---+---------------+-------------+
| Improve Low-Income   | \% MT      |   | -public       | -arrearage  |
| Montanans = ability  | LIEAP      |   | service Comm. | rate        |
| to regularly pay     | homes in   |   |               | correlates  |
| energy cost;         | arrears    |   | -participant  | with        |
|                      |            |   | surveys.      | ability to  |
|                      | \% of all  |   |               | pay         |
|                      | MT homes   |   | -utility      |             |
|                      | in arrears |   | company       |             |
|                      |            |   | reports.      |             |
|                      | \% REACH   |   |               |             |
|                      | recipients |   |               |             |
|                      | in arrears |   |               |             |
+----------------------+------------+---+---------------+-------------+
| **OBJECTIVES**       | **IN       |   | **MEANS OF    | **AS        |
|                      | DICATORS** |   | V             | SUMPTIONS** |
|                      |            |   | ERIFICATION** |             |
+----------------------+------------+---+---------------+-------------+
| Providing low-income | \%         |   | -utility      | -money      |
| households,          | reduction  |   | consumption   | households  |
| especially Montana=s | in energy  |   | data.         | save on     |
| welfare reform       | c          |   |               | energy will |
| participants, more   | onsumption |   |               | be used to  |
| disposable income to |            |   |               | satisfy     |
| satisfy basic needs  |            |   |               | basic       |
| necessary to achieve |            |   |               | needs.      |
| self-sufficiency;    |            |   |               |             |
+----------------------+------------+---+---------------+-------------+
| Eliminating          | #/% of     |   | -participant  | -other      |
| homelessness due to  | REACH      |   | surveys.      | influences  |
| high energy costs    | recipients |   |               | on          |
| and presence of      | reporting  |   |               |             |
| energy related       | ho         |   |               | behavior    |
| health and safety    | melessness |   |               | such as     |
| hazards;             | due to     |   |               |             |
|                      | high       |   |               | e           |
|                      | energy     |   |               | nvironment, |
|                      | costs or   |   |               | economic    |
|                      | health and |   |               |             |
|                      | safety     |   |               | or social   |
|                      | hazards.   |   |               | ci          |
|                      |            |   |               | rcumstances |
|                      |            |   |               |             |
|                      |            |   |               | do not get  |
|                      |            |   |               | worse       |
+----------------------+------------+---+---------------+-------------+
| Ensuring that        | #/% of     |   | -audits from  | -households |
| dwellings occupied   | REACH      |   | HRDC's        | are able to |
| by low-income        | recipients |   |               | identify    |
| Montanans are free   | reporting  |   | Survey        | and         |
| of energy related    | presence   |   |               | describe    |
| health and safety    | of energy  |   |               | health and  |
| hazards;             | related    |   |               | safety      |
|                      | health and |   |               | hazards if  |
|                      | safety     |   |               | they exist. |
|                      | hazards    |   |               |             |
|                      | after work |   |               |             |
|                      | is done.   |   |               |             |
+----------------------+------------+---+---------------+-------------+
| Protect the          | #/% of     |   | -audits from  | -the        |
| integrity of         | REACH      |   | HRDC's        | residence   |
| existing energy      | homes in   |   |               | is not in   |
| conservation         | which      |   | Survey        | disrepair.  |
| measures in          | energy     |   |               |             |
| low-income dwellings | co         |   |               |             |
| and reducing or      | nservation |   |               |             |
| eliminating the need | measures   |   |               |             |
| for future energy    | protected. |   |               |             |
| conservation         |            |   |               |             |
| investments.         | #/% of     |   |               |             |
|                      | REACH      |   |               |             |
|                      | homes      |   |               |             |
|                      | reporting  |   |               |             |
|                      | no need    |   |               |             |
|                      | for future |   |               |             |
|                      | energy     |   |               |             |
|                      | co         |   |               |             |
|                      | nservation |   |               |             |
|                      | measures.  |   |               |             |
+----------------------+------------+---+---------------+-------------+
| Requiring landlords  | -landlord  |   | -audits from  | -landlords  |
| and encouraging fuel | and fuel   |   | HRDC's        | are willing |
| vendors to           | vendor     |   |               | to          |
| participate          | co         |   |               | participate |
| financially in       | ntribution |   |               | and         |
| activities intended  | as a % of  |   |               | contribute. |
| to increase          | all        |   |               |             |
| low-income family's  | ex         |   |               |             |
| ability to pay       | penditures |   |               |             |
| energy costs.        | and        |   |               |             |
|                      | relative   |   |               |             |
|                      | to stated  |   |               |             |
|                      | goals.     |   |               |             |
+----------------------+------------+---+---------------+-------------+
| **\                  | **\        |   | **\           | **\         |
| OBJECTIVES**         | IN         |   | MEANS OF      | AS          |
|                      | DICATORS** |   | V             | SUMPTIONS** |
|                      |            |   | ERIFICATION** |             |
+----------------------+------------+---+---------------+-------------+
| Participants achieve | #/% REACH  |   | -pre and post | -other      |
| energy savings, or   | p          |   | consumption   | influences  |
| reduction in energy  | articipant |   | on a sample   | on behavior |
| burden.              | achieving  |   | of metered    | such as     |
|                      | lower      |   | recipient.    | e           |
|                      | energy     |   |               | nvironment, |
|                      | co         |   |               | dwelling    |
|                      | nsumption. |   |               | chara       |
|                      |            |   |               | cteristics, |
|                      |            |   |               | economic or |
|                      |            |   |               | social      |
|                      |            |   |               | ci          |
|                      |            |   |               | rcumstances |
|                      |            |   |               | do not      |
|                      |            |   |               | change      |
|                      |            |   |               |             |
|                      |            |   |               | -metered    |
|                      |            |   |               | homes also  |
|                      |            |   |               | rep         |
|                      |            |   |               | resentative |
|                      |            |   |               | of homes    |
|                      |            |   |               | heated with |
|                      |            |   |               | storable    |
|                      |            |   |               | fuels       |
+----------------------+------------+---+---------------+-------------+
| Positioning          | #/% REACH  |   | -participants | -p          |
| participants with    | p          |   | survey        | articipants |
| the ability to take  | articipant |   |               | are willing |
| advantage of lower   | achieving  |   |               | to take     |
| cost propane or fuel | lower      |   |               | advantage   |
| oil, during the off  | energy     |   |               | of lower    |
| season and use the   | co         |   |               | cost        |
| money that would     | nsumption. |   |               | propane or  |
| have been used to    |            |   |               | fuel oil    |
| pay rent on the tank |            |   |               | early in    |
| to purchase fuel, by |            |   |               | the heating |
| purchasing fuel      |            |   |               | season.     |
| tanks                |            |   |               |             |
+----------------------+------------+---+---------------+-------------+
| ACTIVITIES:          | Hous       |   | -budget       | -low-income |
|                      |            |   | records or    | households  |
| Housing              |            |   | audit         | can be      |
| improvements:        |            |   | reports.      | weatherized |
|                      |            |   |               | and made    |
| -   Audit household  |            |   |               | energy      |
|     conditions.      |            |   |               | efficient.  |
|                      |            |   |               |             |
| -   Weatherize homes |            |   |               |             |
|     as needed using  |            |   |               |             |
|     other funds      |            |   |               |             |
|                      |            |   |               |             |
| -   Health & safety  |            |   |               |             |
|     household        |            |   |               |             |
|     improvements     |            |   |               |             |
|                      |            |   |               |             |
| -   Heating system   |            |   |               |             |
|     conversions,     |            |   |               |             |
|     retrofits, and   |            |   |               |             |
|     clean and tune.  |            |   |               |             |
+----------------------+------------+---+---------------+-------------+
| Evaluation and       |            |   | -data base,   | -historical |
| Monitoring:          |            |   | historical    | data on     |
|                      |            |   | and updated.  | energy      |
| -   Collect baseline |            |   |               | utilization |
|     data on          |            |   |               | is          |
|     participant's    |            |   |               | available   |
|     energy           |            |   |               | from energy |
|     practices.       |            |   |               | companies:  |
|                      |            |   |               |             |
| -   Collect          |            |   |               | -energy     |
|     follow-up data   |            |   |               | data is     |
|     during and after |            |   |               | available   |
|     participation    |            |   |               | in useable  |
|                      |            |   |               | formats.    |
| -   Install measures |            |   |               |             |
|                      |            |   |               |             |
| -   Monitor          |            |   |               |             |
|     performance      |            |   |               |             |
|     measures.        |            |   |               |             |
+----------------------+------------+---+---------------+-------------+
|                      |            |   |               |             |
+----------------------+------------+---+---------------+-------------+

# Program Changes and Modifications

During the program period only one major program change/modification was
necessary. It entailed a funding reallocation change which occurred
through the determination of a sub-grantees inability to spend its
allotment. The funds were redistributed to other sub-grantees for use in
their REACH programs. This did not affect the outcome of the program
since the money allocation was adjusted to continue the program at a
higher number of completions at these agencies and diminishing the level
and allocations of completions the other.

# IV. Evaluation Methodology

***Overview***

An important component of the REACH program was the evaluation of the
activities carried out with REACH funds and their efficacy in achieving
goals related to reducing participant home energy costs and increasing
the ability of participants to meet such costs independent of payment
subsidies. Accordingly, the grantee contracted with the Montana State
University (MSU) Extension Service for the duration of the program to
perform an overall process and outcome evaluation and provide the
grantee, CBOs and other interested parties summary information and
continual feedback necessary to ensure the most efficient and effective
implementation of all program activities. The lead evaluator
representing MSU was Mr. Christopher L. Mee Weatherization Technical
Specialist under the direction of Dr. Michael P. Vogel, Professor and
Housing and Residential Energy Specialist.

As noted above, the premise from which all of the activities and
interventions of this program were derived is that low-income Montanans
pay a disproportionate amount of their incomes toward home energy costs
and live disproportionately in substandard and unsafe housing. Through
implementation of the REACH activities, it was the goal of the program
to ensure that participating families have the resources necessary to
live in decency and health by:

1)  Ensuring their energy burden is no higher as a percentage of annual
    income than the average for all Montanans (4.1% of household
    income).

2)  Ensuring their home is now free of energy-related health and safety
    hazards.

3)  Encouraging landlords and fuel vendors to participate financially in
    activities intended to increase their ability to pay energy costs in
    a timely manner.

4)  Improving their ability to regularly pay energy costs.

5)  Eliminating the prospect of homelessness due to high-energy costs
    and/or the presence of energy-related health and safety hazards.

6)  Providing them, especially those who are participating in Montanans
    welfare reform program, more disposable income to satisfy basic
    needs necessary to achieve self-sufficiency.

7)  Protecting the integrity of existing energy conservation measures in
    their homes and reducing or eliminating the need for future energy
    conservation investment.

8)  Positioning participating families to take advantage of customer
    choice opportunities arising as a result of propane or fuel oil tank
    ownership and/or electric and natural gas industry restructuring.

9)  Encouraging participants fuel vendors and utility companies to
    satisfy their respective low-income uniform systems benefit programs
    obligations (established in Montana law as a percentage of each
    company's 1995 gross operating revenues) through co-funding REACH
    activities and future replication of the activities/interventions
    contained in this proposal.

To achieve the overall goal and sub-elements of the program, dwellings
occupied by LIHEAP households (those with the highest documented energy
needs) were assessed and provided energy conservation and health and
safety related minor home repairs and client education. Approximately
325 of the 600 participating LIHEAP households were, as a result of
receiving a heating system retrofit energy audit, switched to a more
cost effective heating system and/or heating fuel source. The heating
systems of all other participant households were tested, inspected and
if necessary repaired.

***Data Collection Procedures***

Data was collected throughout the program period by the use of the
Client Education Tool (CET) REACH Evaluation page, and Energy
Consumption pre and post page. The data in the CET was entered by each
CBO and delivered through disk media or electronic mail. After the data
was collected it was then transferred to a database, which in turn was
used for verification and analyzes through tables, queries and reports.
All process and outcome data was derived from the database.

# V. Process Evaluation Findings

-   The number of and cost per heating system (for both water and space
    heat) retrofitted each year of the program

![](media/image2.wmf){width="4.89375in"
height="3.341666666666667in"}![](media/image3.wmf){width="4.89375in"
height="2.9881944444444444in"}

-   The number of and cost per heating system diagnostic test,
    inspection and repair was \$29.56 based on 268 participants from all
    CBO's and a grand total of \$7,922.88 for all heating system
    diagnostic tests, inspections and repairs

![](media/image4.wmf){width="5.135416666666667in" height="3.09375in"}

-   The number of dwellings impacted by Minor Home Repair was 171 with
    an average cost of \$302 per dwelling.

![](media/image5.wmf){width="5.135416666666667in" height="3.09375in"}

-   The number of dwellings impacted by protecting energy conservation
    measures was 3 with and average cost of \$280 per dwelling.

![](media/image6.wmf){width="5.135416666666667in" height="3.09375in"}

-   The number of dwellings impacted by health and safety was 74 with an
    average cost of \$819 per dwelling.

![](media/image7.wmf){width="5.135416666666667in" height="3.09375in"}

-   The number of dwellings impacted by client education was 452 with an
    average cost of \$95.85 per dwelling. **\
    **

![](media/image8.wmf){width="5.135416666666667in"
height="3.3229166666666665in"}

The total cost for all Health and Safety, Energy Conservation, Minor
Home Repairs and Client Education was \$152,427**\
**

***Agency Survey Information***

1)  The adequacy of annual CBO budget allocations relative to completion
    goals in all program elements.

-   At the beginning of the grant cycle the fund allocations were
    allotted based on a subgrantee survey conducted by the DPHHS. After
    the grant was in full swing the budget allocation was adjusted based
    on an individual subgrantee assessment. All agencies reported that
    the Allocation was adequate.

2)  Effectiveness of proposed participant selection methodology in
    ensuring households with the highest energy needs receive assistance
    under the program;

-   Through the utilization of a priority list generated by DPHHS, each
    agency was able to determine the homes with the highest energy need,
    which were typically electric and propane, and then proceeded with
    REACH activities. In general homes with the highest energy need were
    served first and only on rare occasions were homes that had lower
    energy needs served by the program.

3)  Effectiveness of heating system diagnostic equipment and Heating
    Worksheet procedures in identifying and addressing heating system
    health, safety and efficiency issues;

-   The heating worksheet was used successfully to help keep heating
    technicians on track while analyzing a heating system. Health,
    safety, and efficiency issues were easily identified by the use of
    the worksheet. It served as a valuable tool in keeping record of
    these issues so they could be taken care of appropriately. The
    utilization of diagnostic tools and equipment in conjunction with
    the heating worksheet was valuable in documenting actual levels of
    carbon monoxide and efficiency of heating systems.

4)  Adequacy and ease of use of the computerized retrofit audit utilized
    to assess the cost effectiveness of heating system retrofits;

-   The retrofit audit uses a cost per Btu analysis to determine a
    savings to investment ratio which adequately showed the cost
    effectiveness of a fuel switching retrofit. It was well utilized by
    all agencies and through this audit many heating systems were
    retrofitted for efficiency.

5)  Effectiveness of measures utilized by CBOs and the grantee to ensure
    REACH program quality control and financial accountability;

-   Each sub-grantee followed a priority list provided by the State of
    Montana where home were prioritized on a ratio of heating costs to
    client income. Typically, they worked mostly on the higher cost
    fuels such as electricity and propane and seldom was a lower energy
    fuel home completed.

6)  Adequacy and understandability of client education and educational
    materials intended to encourage fuel vendor and landlord financial
    contributions

-   After being adequately trained on the uses of the Client Education
    Spreadsheet, the client education specialist/auditors were able to
    show clients where their energy dollars were going and by utilizing
    the Power Bill energy tip brochures, provided by Montana State
    University Extension Service, where able to further express ways to
    save energy.

7)  Number of utility companies and fuel vendor's adopting/co-funding
    program activities to satisfy their respective low-income uniform
    system benefits program requirements.

-   Through the course of the REACH program no new fuel vendor's or
    utility company's adopted/co-funded programs then before the
    program.

***Client Summary Data***

![](media/image9.wmf){width="4.7in" height="4.166666666666667in"}

-   The average energy burden for all REACH participants for 2001 was
    8.35%.

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   The mean annual income across all agencies and participants was
    \$9,812.11

-   The type of dwellings occupied were,\
    227 Mobile homes\
    314 Single family dwellings\
    10 Multi Family dwellings

-   The mean number of occupants per REACH participant household was
    2.75,

-   The mean age of occupants was 59.75 years old,

-   The total costs and numbers of programmable thermostats was 6 at a
    total cost of \$295.00,

-   The total cost of replacement fuel tanks was \$271,002. There were
    239 purchased at an average cost of \$1,134,

-   The total cost of smoke alarms installed for all participants was
    \$3230.69. There were 200 purchased at an average cost of \$16.15,

-   The total cost of carbon monoxide detectors was \$12,001.04. There
    were 288 detectors installed at an average cost of \$41.67,

# VI. Outcome Evaluation Findings

***Energy Cost Reductions***

The Annual energy cost (normalized to reflect actual heating degree
days) of participant households during the year prior to participating
in REACH was \$1001.00. During the year immediately after receiving
REACH services, the average energy cost was \$932.00. This represents an
annual savings of 7% for REACH households. The average energy burden of
all LIHEAP recipients for 2001 and 2002 was 9.1 %. The Average burden
for all REACH participants for 2001 was 8.35%.

  ------------ ------------- --------------- ------------ ---------- --------------- ---------- -------------- ----------
  **Agency**   **Average     **Pre- WX                    **Pre- WX  **Post-WX       **Pre- WX  **\$           **%
               Household     Energy                       Energy\    Energy\         Energy\    Consumption\   Change**
               Income**      Consumption**                Use as %   Consumption**   Use as %   Change**       
                                                          of                         of                        
                                                          Income**                   Income**                  

  **Action for \$10,217.55                   \$1,031.00   10.1%      \$951.00        9.3%       -\$80.0        -7.8%
  Eastern MT**                                                                                                 

  **District 4 \$16,280.75                   \$922.00     5.7%       \$817.00        5.0%       -\$105.0       -11.4%
  HRDC**                                                                                                       

  **District 6 \$10,797.80                   \$992.00     9.2%       \$910.00        8.4%       -\$82.0        -8.3%
  HRDC**                                                                                                       

  **District 7 \$11,744.40                   \$1,001.75   8.5%       \$932.00        7.9%       -\$69.8        -7.0%
  HRDC**                                                                                                       
  ------------ ------------- --------------- ------------ ---------- --------------- ---------- -------------- ----------

***Utility and Fuel Bill Arrearage***

The following chart shows the frequency and amount of utility
company/fuel vendor arrearages among a select number of participants in
the program who were part of the outcome energy burden analysis above.
Base on account number these numbers were the totals acquired through
the utility company assistance.

  -------------------------------------- --------------- ---------------- ---
  **Northwestern Energy Clients**                                         

  **After REACh Services**                                                

  **Sample Size = 23**                                                    

                                                                          

  **Description**                        **Number**      **Percentage**   

  Arrears                                                                 

  Between 0-2 months of arrears out of   13              56.5%            
  12 month period                                                         

  More than 2 months of arrears out of   10              .43.5            
  12 month period                                                         

  Regular Payments                                                        

  Paid something every month             18              78.3%            

  Made sporadic payments during 12 month 3               13.0%            
  period                                                                  

  Made no payments during 12 month       5               8.7%             
  period                                                                  

  **MDU Account after REACh**                                             

  **\# of Occurrences for 12 month                                        
  Period**                                                                

  **Sample size =12**                                                     
  -------------------------------------- --------------- ---------------- ---

##### 

  -------------------------------------------- ------------ --------------
  Arrears                                                   

  Between 0-2 months of arrears out of 12      6            50%
  month period                                              

  More than 2 months of arrears out of 12      4            33%
  month period                                              

  Regular Payments                                          

  Paid something every month                   6            50%
  -------------------------------------------- ------------ --------------

##### 

***Miscellaneous Findings***

-   Total utility company/fuel vendor contributions toward program
    activities intended to reduce energy burdens of eligible households:
    **\$23,896.**

-   Total landlord contributions toward program activities intended to
    reduce energy burdens of eligible households: **\$29,542.**

-   Percent of natural gas, electricity, fuel oil and propane fueled
    participant households aware of and taking advantage of customer
    choice of fuel suppliers:

***From the onset of the REACH program the ability of clients to choice
their fuel supplier was limited to those who used propane as a source of
heat. As a result of the propane tank purchasing for these clients it
has been determined that 239 propane clients now have the ability to
take advantage of customer choice in fuel supplies. This has allowed for
purchasing propane at substantially lower prices at the beginning of the
heating season as well as the ability to shop around for the lowest
price when the heating season is in full swing and propane prices have
increased to meet the demand.***

-   Total avoided cost of replacement energy measures as a result of
    minor home repairs:

***Though it is hard to estimate a dollar figure here, District 7
indicated that there was approximately \$3500.00 of avoided cost for
there agency. There were situations that other agencies remarked
concerning these measures such as replacing floors in mobile home water
heater compartments which certainly would be avoided costs of future
minor home repair.***

-   Number of Montana utility companies and fuel vendors replicating
    program activities to meet their respective USBC guidelines:

***MDU, MPC, Energy West-Great Falls Gas, Hill County Electric, Big Flat
Electric, Lincoln Electric and all Bonneville Power Company electric
cooperatives contribute/sponsor low income weatherization activities in
the state. Collectively they serve over 70 percent of Montana's
residential customers.***

-   Frequency of heating system condemnations among LIHEAP recipients in
    general and among REACH program participants specifically:

**105** REACH Program Participants had Heating System condemnations.

###### 

###### Note : Need LIHEAP condemnations 

-   Frequency of Utility Termination Notices Among LIHEAP and REACH
    participants:\
    **LIEAP Recipients 5.860%**\
    **REACH Recipients 4.936%**

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   Frequency of Eviction Notices Among:

####### **LIEAP Recipients 0.378% REACH Recipients 0.000%**

# VII. Client Survey

***Overview***

At the conclusion of the Montana REACH program, participants were asked
to complete a questionnaire about their REACH experience. The
overwhelming consensus of 126 participants that returned their survey
was that the REACH program was extremely beneficial to them and to their
families. The participant's comments reflect the many ways in which the
Montana REACH program has had a positive impact on their household
environment and their ability to better manage their energy resources.

***Client Survey Outcomes***

+-----------------------------------+----------------------------------+
| 1)  **Before** receiving          | 2)  **After** receiving REACH/   |
|     REACH/Weatherization services |     Weatherization services in   |
|     in my home I was able to pay  |     my home I was able to pay my |
|     my energy bill in full every  |     energy bill in full every    |
|     month;                        |     month:\                      |
|                                   |     \                            |
| **Always 25 Participants\         |     **Always 67 Participants\    |
| 19.84%**                          |     53.17%\                      |
|                                   |     Most of the Time 38          |
| **Most of the Time 41             |     Participants\                |
| Participants**                    |     30.16%\                      |
|                                   |     Some of the Time 2           |
| **32.54%**                        |     Participants\                |
|                                   |     1.59%\                       |
| **Some of the Time 20             |     Rarely 12 Participants\      |
| Participants\                     |     9.52%\                       |
| 15.87%**                          |     No Answer 7 Participants\    |
|                                   |     5.56%**                      |
| **Rarely 36 Participants**        |                                  |
|                                   |                                  |
| **28.57%**                        |                                  |
|                                   |                                  |
| **No Answer 4 Participants\       |                                  |
| 3.17%**                           |                                  |
+-----------------------------------+----------------------------------+

![](media/image10.wmf){width="4.772222222222222in"
height="2.8305555555555557in"}

+-----------------------------------+----------------------------------+
| 3)  **Before** REACH/             | 4)  **After** REACH/             |
|     Weatherization services were  |     Weatherization services were |
|     conducted on your home, how   |     conducted in your home, how  |
|     often did you worry about     |     often did you worry about    |
|     having to move from your home |     having to move from your     |
|     because of High Energy        |     home because of High Energy  |
|     Cost:**\                      |     Cost:\                       |
|     \                             |     \                            |
|     Often 20 Participants\        |     **Often 2 Participants**\    |
|     15.87%\                       |     **1.59%**\                   |
|     Some of the Time 31           |     **Some of the Time 22        |
|     Participants\                 |     Participants**\              |
|     24.60%\                       |     **17.46%\                    |
|     Rarely 27 Participants\       |     Rarely 23 Participants\      |
|     21.43%\                       |     18.25%\                      |
|     Never: 41 Participants\       |     Never 73 Participants\       |
|     32.54%**                      |     57.94%**                     |
|                                   |                                  |
| **No Answer 7 Participants**\     | **No Answer 6 Participants**\    |
| **5.56%**                         | **4.76%**                        |
+-----------------------------------+----------------------------------+

![](media/image11.wmf){width="4.7375in" height="2.7493055555555554in"}

+-----------------------------------+----------------------------------+
| 5)  **Before** receiving REACH/   | 6)  **After** receiving REACH/   |
|     Weatherization services in    |     Weatherization services in   |
|     your home, how often did you  |     your home, how often did you |
|     worry about having to leave   |     worry about having to leave  |
|     your home because of energy   |     your home because of Energy  |
|     related health and safety     |     Related Health and Safety    |
|     issues: (Examples of which    |     Issues: (Examples of which   |
|     would include: Carbon         |     would include: Carbon        |
|     Monoxide, Failing Roof,       |     Monoxide, Failing Roof,      |
|     Broken window)\               |     Broken window)               |
|     \                             |                                  |
|     **Often 19 Participants**\    | **Often 4 Participants**\        |
|     **15.08%\                     | **3.17%\                         |
|     Some of the Time 33           | Some of the Time 9               |
|     Participants**\               | Participants**\                  |
|     **26.19%\                     | **7.14%\                         |
|     Rarely 22 Participants**\     | Rarely 27 Participants**\        |
|     **17.46%\                     | **21.43%\                        |
|     Never 47 Participants**\      | Never 80 Participants**\         |
|     **37.30%\                     | **63.49%\                        |
|     No Answer 5 Participants\     | No Answer 6 Participants\        |
|     3.97%**                       | 4.76%**                          |
+-----------------------------------+----------------------------------+

![](media/image12.wmf){width="4.259722222222222in"
height="2.9291666666666667in"}

+----------------------------------+-----------------------------------+
| 7)  **Before** having REACH/     | 8)  **After** having REACH/       |
|     Weatherization services      |     Weatherization services       |
|     completed on your home did   |     completed on your home did    |
|     you feel your home was free  |     you feel your home was free   |
|     of Energy Related health and |     of Energy Related health and  |
|     safety hazards?              |     safety hazards?               |
|                                  |                                   |
| **All of the time 60             | **All of the time 24              |
| Participants**\                  | Participants**\                   |
| **47.62%**                       | **19.05%**                        |
|                                  |                                   |
| **Most of the time 33            | **Most of the time 36             |
| Participants**\                  | Participants**\                   |
| **26.19%**                       | **28.57%**                        |
|                                  |                                   |
| **Some of the time 19            | **Some of the time 30             |
| Participants**\                  | Participants**\                   |
| **15.08%**                       | **23.81%**                        |
|                                  |                                   |
| **Very Concerned about potential | **Still Concerned about potential |
| health and safety problems 11    | health and safety problems 32     |
| Participants**\                  | Participants**\                   |
| **8.73%**                        | **25.4%**                         |
|                                  |                                   |
| **NO Answer 3 Participants**\    | **No Answer 4 Participants**\     |
| **2.38%**                        | **3.17%**                         |
+----------------------------------+-----------------------------------+

![](media/image13.wmf){width="4.66875in" height="2.69375in"}

+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+
| 9)  **A.** Did the ability to purchase lower cost fuel throughout the |
|     year because you owned your own propane tank, affect your overall |
|     fuel cost for the year: **(If your home is not heated with        |
|     propane, skip to next question.)**                                |
|                                                                       |
| **\                                                                   |
| More than I expected\                                                 |
| 29 Participants**\                                                    |
| **23.02%**                                                            |
|                                                                       |
| **Somewhat\                                                           |
| 8 Participants**\                                                     |
| **8.73%**                                                             |
|                                                                       |
| **Less than I expected\                                               |
| 1 Participants**\                                                     |
| **.79%**                                                              |
|                                                                       |
| **None\                                                               |
| 19 Participants**\                                                    |
| **15.08%**                                                            |
|                                                                       |
| **NO Answer\                                                          |
| 66 Participants**\                                                    |
| **52.38%**                                                            |
|                                                                       |
| ![](media/image14.wmf){width="4.430555555555555in"                    |
| height="5.445138888888889in"}                                         |
|                                                                       |
| ![](media/image15.wmf){width="4.330555555555556in"                    |
| height="3.234027777777778in"}                                         |
|                                                                       |
| **B**. Do you feel your fuel cost went up or down?                    |
|                                                                       |
| **UP**\                                                               |
| **9 Participants**\                                                   |
| **7.14%**                                                             |
|                                                                       |
| **DOWN**\                                                             |
| **37 Participants**\                                                  |
| **29.37%**                                                            |
|                                                                       |
| **Stayed the Same**\                                                  |
| **2 Participants**\                                                   |
| **1.59%**                                                             |
|                                                                       |
| **No Answer**\                                                        |
| **77 Participants**\                                                  |
| **61.11%**                                                            |
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+

+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+
| 10) As a result of REACH/ Weatherization services being performed in  |
|     my home, my home is comfortable and livable:                      |
|                                                                       |
| **More than expected\                                                 |
| 91 Participants**\                                                    |
| **72.22%**                                                            |
|                                                                       |
| **Did not change\                                                     |
| 18 Participants**\                                                    |
| **14.29%**                                                            |
|                                                                       |
| **Less than expected\                                                 |
| 7 Participants**\                                                     |
| **5.56%**                                                             |
|                                                                       |
| **No Answer\                                                          |
| 10 Participants**\                                                    |
| **7.94%**                                                             |
|                                                                       |
| ![](media/image16.wmf){width="4.553472222222222in"                    |
| height="3.640972222222222in"}                                         |
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+

+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+
| 11) Did the Client education tips that you received through the       |
|     REACH/WX Program help you to understand your energy usage:        |
|                                                                       |
| **A lot**                                                             |
|                                                                       |
| **69 Participants**\                                                  |
| **54.76%**                                                            |
|                                                                       |
| **Somewhat**                                                          |
|                                                                       |
| **33 Participants**\                                                  |
| **26.19%**                                                            |
|                                                                       |
| **Very Little**                                                       |
|                                                                       |
| **10 Participants**\                                                  |
| **7.94%**                                                             |
|                                                                       |
| **Not at all**                                                        |
|                                                                       |
| **5 Participants**\                                                   |
| **3.97%**                                                             |
|                                                                       |
| **No Answer**                                                         |
|                                                                       |
| **9 Participants**\                                                   |
| **7.14%**                                                             |
|                                                                       |
| > ![](media/image17.wmf){width="4.467361111111111in"                  |
| > height="4.46875in"}                                                 |
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+

+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+
| 12) Did the Client education tips that you received through the       |
|     REACH/WX Program help you to lower energy usage:                  |
|                                                                       |
| **A lot\                                                              |
| 51 Participants**\                                                    |
| **40.48%**                                                            |
|                                                                       |
| **Somewhat**                                                          |
|                                                                       |
| **47 Participants**\                                                  |
| **37.30%**                                                            |
|                                                                       |
| **Very Little**                                                       |
|                                                                       |
| **14 Participants**\                                                  |
| **11.11%**                                                            |
|                                                                       |
| **Not at all**                                                        |
|                                                                       |
| **6 Participants**\                                                   |
| **4.76%**                                                             |
|                                                                       |
| **No Answer**                                                         |
|                                                                       |
| **8 Participants**\                                                   |
| **6.35%**                                                             |
|                                                                       |
| ![](media/image18.wmf){width="4.782638888888889in" height="4.25in"}   |
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+

### 

# Appendix

A.  ***client education questionnaire (**SEE ATTACHED**)***

B.  ***REACH Newsletters (**SEE ATTACHED**)***

C.  ***REACH Switch AUDIT (**SEE ATTACHED**)***

D.  ***Montana HEATING Worksheet (**SEE ATTACHED**)***

E.  ***client Survey (**SEE ATTACHED**)***