Measuring Energy Assistance Outcomes: The Home Energy Insecurity Scale Roger D. Colton Fisher, Sheehan & Colton Public Finance and General Economics 34 Warwick Road, Belmont, MA 02478

June 2003

Home Energy Insecurity Scale: The Genesis  HHS/OCS/ACF--LIHEAP  LIHEAP “Managing for Results” Committee.

Problems with Prior Outcomes  Improvements to self-sufficiency have been “assumed” rather than measured.

– Or they have been ignored entirely.

 Reductions in energy usage/energy burdens erroneously assumed to be

a priori

a “good thing.”

Problems with Prior Outcomes  Failed to integrate the various aspects of “self-sufficiency” into a coherent approach, let alone a methodologically sound measurement.

– Payment troubles one aspect.

– No payment troubles, but food/medicine.

– No payment troubles or food/medicine, but substantive home energy deprivation.

Home Energy Insecurity Scale: Purposes to be Served  Measure outcomes, not outputs, activities.

 Integrate various energy problems into a measurement of “self-sufficiency” that balances usage, payments, budgets.

 Allows measurement of incremental progress.

 Applies irrespective of program: LIHEAP, WAP, REACH, SBC, USF.

Home Energy Insecurity Scale: Some things need to “let go of”  Self-sufficiency must be reached for “success” to be shown.

  The goal of LIHEAP is to make low income customers “thriving.” Decreased “energy burdens” is an end unto itself rather than a means to an end.

Home Energy Insecurity Scale: Historical Precedent  ROMA Scales – CSBG agencies are completely familiar with.

– Work done by Monitoring and Assessment Task Force (MATF)  USDA’s Food Insecurity Scale

What is a “scale”  Continuum with a “top” and a “bottom.”  Must have benchmarks in between that mark a household’s condition or status.

– Benchmarks called “thresholds.”  Common scales: – Income deciles (richest, poorest) – NCAA “March Madness” tournament.

Home Energy Insecurity Scale: Internal Structure: Thresholds  Thriving  Capable  Stable  Vulnerable  In Crisis

Home Energy Insecurity Scale: Thriving Household A “thriving” household has achieved generally accepted standards of well being. Can engage in full range of home energy uses w/o outside assistance and without strain.

Home Energy Insecurity Scale: Capable Household A “capable” household is secure, even though not having achieved the generally accepted standards of well being. May have arrears, but does not put service at risk. Never experiences adverse impact on basic needs. No more than occasional strain or occasional foregone energy use.

Home Energy Insecurity Scale: Stable Household A “stable” household does not face immediate threats and is unlikely to be in immediate crisis. May sometimes need outside assistance. May have arrears and threat of loss of service, but no actual loss and no actual foregone basic needs.

Home Energy Insecurity Scale: Vulnerable Household A “vulnerable” household is not in immediate danger, but may avoid this danger only through temporary or inappropriate solutions. Occasionally compromises on basic needs. May have threatened loss of service and infrequent actual loss. May have occasional impact on basic needs.

Home Energy Insecurity Scale: In-Crisis Household An “in-crisis” household faces immediate needs that threaten the household’s physical and/or emotional safety. Recurring periods of going without energy. Routinely compromise basic energy needs. Routinely compromise basic non-energy needs.

The Home Energy Insecurity Survey  Eleven questions  Used not simply to collect information, but to place Household on scale.

– Presence or absence of indicator either includes a household or excludes a household.

 Because of inability-to-pay.

Home Energy Insecurity Scale: The Challenge: Part 1 “. . .use[] in diverse circumstances while maintaining some uniformity of design and application.”

Home Energy Insecurity Scale: The Challenge: Part 2 “The Scale treats the person using air conditioning in Tucson the same as the person using heating in Minneapolis. It treats the farmer using propane to heat in Iowa the same as the apartment dweller using electricity to heat in Manhattan. It treats the two-parent household with ten children the same as the widowed retired grandmother the same as the single disabled 25 year old person.”

Home Energy Insecurity Scale: The Challenges: Part 3  Every household must go into one threshold; BUT  Every household must go into no more than one threshold.

Home Energy Insecurity Scale: Scaling a Household

MATF Scales Handbook

“These types of scales lead a case manager in decision making by creating a path with continual forks in the road. The case manager must either turn right or left: he cannot go both ways at the same time.”

The Home Energy Insecurity Survey

Questions 1 - 4



We worry about energy.



We need outside assistance.



We can’t use as much energy as we want.



We reduce energy to uncomfortable or inconvenient levels.

The Home Energy Insecurity Survey

Questions 5 - 7



We cannot heat or cool our entire home.



We compromise on basic energy needs.



We do not pay our bills.

The Home Energy Insecurity Survey

Questions 8 - 10



We use appliances for purposes that they are not intended for.



We compromise on non-energy basic household needs.



We face a threatened loss of energy service.

The Home Energy Insecurity Survey

Question 11



We experience actual loss of energy service.

The Home Energy Insecurity Scale: Reporting Move to Self-Sufficiency Thriving Capable Stable Vulnerable In-Crisis Thriving 1 6 11 16 21 Beginning Status Capable Stable 2 3 7 12 17 22 8 13 18 23 Vulnerable 4 9 14 19 24 In-Crisis 5 10 15 20 25

The Home Energy Insecurity Scale: The National Testing: Diversity  Big vs. small  Rural vs. urban  Natural gas, electric, fuel oil heating  East vs. West  North vs. South  LIHEAP vs. Non-LIHEAP

The Home Energy Insecurity Scale: The National Testing: Results      0 were “thriving” 4 were “capable” 7 were “stable” 37 were “vulnerable” 37 were “in crisis” (15 minute survey: average)

For more information:

[email protected]

Home Energy Insecurity Scale Thank you for assistance in developing Scott Anglemyer Karen Brown Jack Burch John Burgess Glenn Cooper Dr. Peter Kettner Jerry McKim Dr. Bruce Wade Kansas Dept. of Commerce & Housing Colorado Energy Assistance Foundation Community Action Council (KY) Economic Opportunity Foundation (KS) Colorado Dept. of Social Services Arizona State University (retired) Iowa Dept. of Human Rights Spelman College (GA)

Home Energy Insecurity Scale Thank you for assistance in testing Ralph Littlefield Community Action Program, Belknap Merrimack Counties Elliott Jacobsen David Treharne Action Energy West Virginia Community Action Directors Jack Burch Jack Laverty Association Community Action Council Corporation for Ohio Appalachian Development (COAD) Ivan Eames Debra Kennedy Chuck Eberdt Gene Brady Jim Morton Central Missouri Counties Human Development Corporation Community Action Directors of Oregon The Energy Project: The Opportunity Council Commission on Economic Opportunity of Luzerne County Human Resource Development Council VI Concord, NH Gloucester, MA Parkersburg, WV Lexington, KY Athens, OH Columbia, MO Salem, OR Bellingham, WA Wilkes-Barre, PA Missoula, MT