2009 Recovery Act — Frequently Asked Questions about Weatherization
The following answers to frequently asked questions address the role of the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Weatherization Assistance Program funding to the states under the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009. You can learn more about the 2009 Recovery Act on the DOE Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy (EERE) Web site.
- Monitoring and Reporting
- Training
- Home Audits and Technical Support
- Federal Funding, State and Local Spending
- Best Practices
- Historical Preservation
- Weatherization Program Background
- Impact of the 2009 Recovery Act on Weatherization
Monitoring and Reporting
-
What are DOE Recovery Act reporting requirements?
Recovery act reporting requirements fall into two broad categories:
- OMB reporting requirements
- Program-specific DOE reporting requirements
OMB reporting requirements for the quarter ending on September 30 have been finalized. These reports are due to FederalReporting.gov on October 10, 2009. A full description of these requirements is published on the Recipient Reporting Information section of the Recovery.gov Web site. DOE will also issue additional FAQs for recipients on its Energy Recovery Web site and has set up a hotline to answer any additional questions: 1-888-DOE-RCVY (1-888-363-7289).
-
What reporting items and metrics are States and sub-recipients required to submit?
For OMB required reporting into FederalReporting.gov, recipients will input 31 data elements. These elements comprise primarily organizational, financial and jobs related information, and do not include performance metrics, which will be covered in program specific reporting. Some key data elements include:
- Amount of award
- Total amount of Recovery Act expenditure
- Sub-awards:
- Basic data elements for any sub-awards over $25,000
- Total number and amount of sub-awards
- Vendors
- Basic data elements for any purchases more than $25,000
- Total number and amount of payments to vendors less than $25,000
- Number and description of jobs created or retained (by both prime and sub-recipients)
- Primary place of performance
- Top five highly compensated officers
For a complete list of all data elements, please see Recipient Reporting Information on the Recovery.gov Web site.
-
Will DOE require new performance metrics based on energy savings, energy efficiency, or other outcomes of the Weatherization Assistance Program (WAP)?
Not at this time. DOE is in the process of conducting a new national evaluation of the WAP. In addition to the traditional metrics, this effort will expand to include emphasis on bill reductions. In the near future, DOE will focus more on non-energy benefits such as carbon reduction and health and safety impacts.
-
Are States and/or sub-recipients required to conduct monthly monitoring?
The reporting requirements are currently being modified to require monthly reporting for Recovery Act funded activities and will be made available to the network upon completion.
-
How should States determine energy savings?
DOE is developing a simplified methodology that multiplies the number of weatherized homes by standardized state-by-state energy savings (supplied by DOE) which will provide quarterly savings information.
-
How are "jobs created" measured?
There are two broad categories of recipients: recipients of "financial assistance," including grants, loans, cooperative agreements; and direct Federal contractors. Recipients of financial assistance are subject to the full OMB guidance on jobs reporting and will report jobs created or retained by both the grantee and any sub-grantees.
Direct Federal contractors are governed by the FAR (52.204-11) and are not required to report sub-contractor job creation.
Both recipients of financial assistance and contractors should report direct jobs created and retained using a standard calculation, translating both full- and part-time employees into "full-time equivalents," (FTEs), using the following formula:
Cumulative total hours worked by all employees in the quarter
Cumulative total hours in a full-time scheduleExamples: A "half time employee" = 0.5 FTE. Equally, a full-time employee who is only 50% funded from Recovery Act funds = 0.5 FTE. An employee who works overtime (time and a half) = 1.5 FTE.
Recipients should be careful to report only direct jobs. That is, any job that is directly funded by the Recovery Act on the grantee or sub-grantee level. Indirect jobs—those that are not directly funded by Recovery Act funds or those that are created by a material supplier—are not reported into FederalReporting.gov.
-
How do we calculate job counts for contractors on pay-for-performance systems (specifically, lead generation contactors)?
Grants and Loans
If the original source of the funding is financial assistance—grant, loan, or collective agreement—the prime recipient will estimate job creation for the sub-contractor. In this case, the recipient will need to convert the piece-rate or pay-for-performance system into an FTE equivalent to the best of their ability for reporting purposes. The recipient can use the industry-specific standard full-time schedule for the denominator in the FTE equation.Cumulative total hours worked by all employees in the quarter
Cumulative total hours in a full-time scheduleFor the purposes of an FTE calculation the "wage rate" is not relevant, so the recipient should calculate the jobs count based on estimated hours worked.
Contracts
If the original source of Federal funding is a contract, the recipient will not report the sub-contractor job creation numbers. -
Are administrative expenses reportable to Recovery.gov?
Administrative expenses are reported in the WAP consistent with the associated activities under the DOE grant. DOE will compile the costs and make any necessary reporting to Recovery.gov.
-
With regards to the reporting function, is it better to centralize reporting with States or allow sub-recipients to handle their own reporting to DOE?
For OMB reporting requirements, the prime recipients (e.g. States) have the option of delegating some reporting requirements to their sub-recipients or reporting themselves. DOE does not have a preference on this issue, but urges prime recipients to consider both the details of a data collection mechanism, the administrative burden and which method would elicit the most accurate data. In either case, the prime recipient is responsible for clearly communicating the information and reporting needs to its sub-recipients.
It is also important to note that recipients of grants, loans and cooperative agreements cannot delegate the jobs reporting requirement to sub-recipients. They must collect that information from the sub-awardees, and they are responsible for entering that data element as an aggregate number of jobs created/retained by both the recipient and the sub-recipient.
-
What's a reasonable frequency of field inspections for the WAP?
DOE is currently amending the monitoring and oversight requirements under the Recovery Act. Generally, 5% inspections of completed units is recommended, however, this figure is likely to increase under the Recovery Act.
-
Are States advised to supplement their field monitoring staff with outside evaluators who can measure impacts, benefits, and cost-effectiveness of grantees' energy programs?
For certain States, Recovery Act funding represents a 25-fold increase in funding. Ramping up the States' capability to adequately supplement additional staffing will be critical in providing the necessary oversight of the WAP with Recovery Act funds. Using outside evaluators could help mitigate this shortfall in staffing.
-
How can States best reconcile the historical metrics by which State agencies have gauged the progress of their programs with the added metrics (i.e. job creation/retention) from the Recovery Act?
DOE is currently amending the WinSAGA system to accommodate the new reporting requirements. Grantees will be notified when these updates have occurred, including how to report jobs created.
-
Does DOE require States to report any additional data not currently defined in the OMB or Recovery Act terms and conditions?
No. Not at this time.
Training
-
Will DOE provide guidance on required training curriculum?
Yes. DOE is developing a comprehensive training and technical assistance plan which will address curriculum as well as many other related issues. This plan is expected to be released soon.
Home Audits and Technical Support
-
In the event that a State or sub-recipient requires additional technical assistance for its weatherization program, what resources are available?
There is a myriad of technical assistance available within the weatherization network. You should contact you State Weatherization Program Manager to discuss what is available in your particular State. Likewise, you can check the Weatherization Assistance Program Technical Assistance Center (WAPTAC) to see what is available nationally as well as what other States are doing.
-
Are there any recommended methods and technologies States and/or sub-recipients should use?
There is a myriad of technical assistance available within the weatherization network. You should contact you State Weatherization Program Manager to discuss what is available in your particular State. Likewise, you can check with WAPTAC Web site to see what is available nationally as well as what other States are doing.
-
What criteria determine which homes will be weatherized?
DOE suggests that local agencies and states determine eligibility based on poverty level, elderly in poverty, disabled, fuel costing. Local agencies should determine whether a particular unit is deemed to be a "good candidate home" for weatherization services. An assessment of whether the home needs any type of rehabilitation work or is free of major health and safety concerns can eliminate many units until they have been referred to the appropriate agency to have these major deficiencies corrected prior to weatherization.
-
Does DOE require States to use infrared technology in dwelling assessments?
No. DOE does not impose mandates on equipment. However, infrared cameras are an effective auditing tool that the grantees may choose to purchase for insulation purposes.
-
Are States encouraged to use new and innovative weatherization technologies or should they utilize more conventional measures?
No. DOE does not impose mandates on equipment.
-
Is guidance available for additional approved weatherization installation measures?
Weatherization measures will differ for each unit based on various factors including climate, existing materials, and cost. But the following measures are approved as long as the savings-to-investment ratio is 1.0 or higher:
- Insulation
- Air Sealing
- Windows
- Heating
- Water Heaters
- Air Conditioning and Warm Climate Weatherization Measures
- Electrical Appliances and Weatherization Base Load Measures
Read more about weatherization technologies on the WAP Web site.
If innovative technologies are available and meet the cost effective test, then grantees can request that DOE review and approve the technology for use in the field. The new technology must be used in the field for DOE to consider it as an allowable measure.
If there are additional measures that are not specified by DOE that your agency would like to utilize, please contact your State weatherization program liaison to seek approval from DOE.
-
Must "designated agencies" be used to do the work for the WAP? Can agencies beyond those listed in an application be used?
You cannot use agencies beyond the one you listed in your application per Code of Federal Regulations Title 10 Part 440.14. However, DOE encourages the use of new and innovative technologies that are designed to improve program performance.
-
Must legal status be confirmed for all weatherization assistance recipients, specifically those residing in multi-unit dwellings?
The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) issued Information Memorandum LIHEAP-IM-98-25 dated August 6, 1998, outlining procedures for LIHEAP and WAP grantees serving non-qualified aliens to implement new status verification requirements. This memorandum is based on a proposed rule issued by the Department of Justice (DOJ) on August 4, 1998. The Welfare Reform Act is a complex issue and there is some confusion on the specific application of this part of the Act. To insure WAP continuity between LIHEAP and Weatherization for the many sub-grantees operating both programs, the WAP will follow the interpretation as adopted by HHS.
The primary area of confusion resides in the types of local agencies that are exempt/nonexempt from "status verification requirements." Local agencies that are both charitable and non-profit, which comprise about three-quarters of the local agency network, would be exempt.
However, those agencies which are designated as local government agencies operating the WAP would not be exempt and, therefore, must conduct "status verification." Under the DOJ ruling, Grantees subject to this ruling have two years to fully implement this procedure after the publication date of the final rule. As of this date, the final rule has not been issued.
-
Is blower door testing required for multi-unit dwellings?
No. It is not required, but it may be recommended. Some multi-unit dwellings—generally units that are one to four floors or garden style—function as a single-family unit. Therefore they would benefit from a blower door air leakage test. For larger multi-family buildings, a multi-family focused audit procedure (such as EQ-UIP) would be best.
-
If a blower door diagnostic of a home passes initial inspection, but the home is in obvious need of weatherization services (via duct blaster or infrared inspection), are contractors still authorized to perform work?
If a client qualifies for WAP funds and does not need air sealing or insulation but needs additional measures, then that unit should be completed with the appropriate measures. The cost of the completion would then be lower.
-
Do blower door tests have to be performed twice per house, once when the improvements are being made and once by the quality assurance team?
A diagnostic energy audit is required on all DOE units; this audit includes blower door testing. The post inspection/quality control is the same as the diagnostic audit; it just ensures that the installations were completed effectively. It is also a best practice and DOE recommendation that blower door tests are completed as the measures are being installed, especially when air sealing.
Federal Funding, State and Local Spending
-
How quickly can the network ramp up?
The coming year will see grantee and local agencies hiring and training workforce and buying vehicles and equipment. It is estimated that the network could reach the capacity to weatherize a substantial number of homes per year within 12 months.
-
Is there a way to speed up the State procurement process?
This is an individual State issue.
-
Are the States advised to use FY 2009 funding to ramp up for WAP work?
As long as the States stay within the appropriate cost categories, such as administrative funds not exceeding capped categories, it is allowable.
-
When will the remaining 50% of funds be distributed?
DOE will provide guidance shortly to States on what documentation is required to receive the remaining 50% of the total funding.
-
Is the $6,500 reimbursement per-unit based on the average of all work performed or on a unit-by-unit basis?
State agencies may utilize an average of $6,500 per unit.
-
Can DOE Recovery Act funds be used to upgrade weatherization reporting systems?
Yes, all funds utilized for program ramp up purposes including, but not limited to, information technology infrastructure, marketing and program outreach, staff resources, and diagnostic equipment may be classified as "administrative."
-
What percentage of weatherization funding is allowable for health and safety purposes?
The WAP is not a home repair program, and health and safety costs must be energy related. There is not set percentage for health and safety, but the cost must be justified as appropriate.
-
What are the deadlines for spending of Recovery Act funds?
DOE has indicated in the Grant Guidance documents that Recovery Act funds are to be spent over a three-year period.
-
Can marketing costs that benefit all weatherization programs (e.g. DOE, LIHEAP, utilities) use Recovery Act funding, or should costs be evenly split and charged to each program account?
Costs should be charged appropriately to each program.
-
How should marketing costs be accounted for: as training and technical assistance or as administrative?
Generally, these costs are charged as training and technical assistance.
-
Are States authorized to purchase vehicles above the $5,000 equipment threshold?
DOE must approve all equipment and vehicle purchase above $5,000 prior to purchase. Once grantees receive DOE approval, they can purchase the vehicles.
-
Some community action groups are located in areas where leasing vehicles is extremely difficult and expensive. Can they purchase vehicles with Recovery Act funds?
DOE rules allow for vehicle purchases, although, on the other hand, a State may set a requirement to lease.
-
Does DOE prefer leasing or purchase of vehicles for Recovery Act programs?
All decisions on vehicle or equipment purchases should be discussed with the respective Project Management Center to help decide the best option.
-
If States or sub-recipients have program funding from additional sources—LIHEAP, non-Recovery Act DOE, public utilities, etc.—should those funding sources be exhausted prior to utilizing Recovery Act funds, or may they be used concurrently?
Funds can be used in conjunction with each other. However, only one source of DOE funds can go into a unit. Accounting for different funding allocation expenditures should be delineated separately and clearly.
-
Are amounts paid to a contractor to perform oversight and monitoring administrative costs?
On the grantee level, monitoring can either be charged to administrative costs or to training and technical assistance. On the sub-grantee level, monitoring and quality control can either be charged to administrative costs or program operations.
-
Can pre-award cost be requested back to February when the Recovery Act was signed into law?
Grantees should contact their respective Project Management Center for specific guidance on this issue.
-
Can States or sub-grantees make bulk purchases of equipment—high efficiency boilers, blower doors, or windows—for WAP, and if so, what's the savings-to-investment potential?
Bulk purchasing is allowable. As a caution, the purchaser will want to ensure that the materials will be used. Bulk purchasing does not eliminate the need to audit. If a computerized audit is being used then the unit cost categories would be adjusted in the library to reflect the reduced price per unit due to the bulk purchase.
Best Practices
-
In the event that I have additional Recovery Act related questions, what other resources are available?
Contact your DOE project manager or WAPTAC.
-
Where can we go to learn about best practices from other States?
Contact your DOE project manager or WAPTAC.
-
How do you suggest we do the ramp up for hiring people? Are there any best practices for hiring?
Contact your DOE project manager or WAPTAC.
-
How can States best expand energy audit capacity?
Contact your DOE project manager WAPTAC.
Historical Preservation
-
What implications does Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act have on the States for Recovery Act-related programs?
Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act requires entities using federal funds in historic properties or potentially historic properties to submit appropriate documentation to the State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) prior to completion of work to ensure that there is no adverse affect on the property. A historic property is identified as on or eligible for the National Register of Historic Places. There are levels of significance required for eligible properties, but the minimum requirement is an age of 50 years or older. There is a provision in the Act that the property owner does have the first right of refusal.
Weatherization Assistance Program Background
The Weatherization Assistance Program is the core DOE program for reducing energy costs for low-income families through increased home energy efficiency. The program serves low-income families in owned or rented homes, whether they reside in single-family, multifamily, or mobile homes.
The results of the program are significant. Since 1976, this program has provided weatherization services to more than 6.2 million low-income families using a combination of funds from DOE and other sources.
Each year, Congress appropriates funding to DOE to administer the Weatherization Assistance Program, which in turn provides funding to the states. The program operates in all 50 states, the District of Columbia, and the U.S. territories beginning in 2009. Funds are distributed to the states according to an allocation formula that considers low-income populations, residential energy expenditures, and climatic conditions.
What are the advantages of weatherization?
The DOE Weatherization Assistance Program offers energy and nonenergy benefits to local communities and the nation.
-
For every $1 invested, weatherization returns $2.73 in benefits. These include $1.65 in energy-related benefits and $1.07 in other benefits such as reducing pollution, unemployment, and adverse health concerns.
Low-income families save approximately $350 or more each year on their energy bills after their homes have been weatherized. These homes avoid an estimated 1.79 tons of carbon dioxide emissions annually.
Weatherization measures reduce average gas space heating by 32% annually.
By decreasing the amount of personal income spent on home energy, weatherization makes housing more affordable, lowers the demand for public assistance, and keeps more money in local communities.
Weatherization improves local air quality, avoids emissions of greenhouse gases, reduces the risk of fires, and decreases cases of homelessness.
According to studies conducted in 2005, the average avoided costs during the winter for all households weatherized were nearly $1.9 billion annually. Weatherization reduces national energy demand by the equivalent of 18 million barrels of oil each year.
-
How Does Weatherization Work
DOE awards grants to state-level agencies, which then contract with local agencies—usually community action agencies—to deliver weatherization services to eligible residents. Although matching funds are not required, state and local agencies leverage core DOE funding with other federal, state, utility, and private resources to weatherize more low-income homes and to deliver additional services while crews are in the homes. Leverage funds include amounts set aside by states from federal Low Income Home Energy Assistance Program (LIHEAP) funds and funds collected from utility ratepayers.
After a unit is selected, weatherization crews use computerized energy audits and diagnostic equipment, such as a blower door, manometer, or infrared camera, to determine the most cost-effective measures for each home. Typical measures include installing insulation in walls, floors, and attics; reducing air infiltration and pressure imbalances; sealing and repairing ducts; and, tuning and repairing heating and cooling units.
Crews use DOE funds to install only those energy-efficiency measures that meet a savings-to-investment ratio of 1:1 and higher. DOE funds can be used to address energy related health and safety problems or to perform incidental repairs. This approach ensures the program’s cost effectiveness.
Who is eligible, and how much can be spent on each home?
The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 increased the statewide average expenditure limit per home to $6,500. The Recovery Act also increased the eligibility criteria to include any household whose income is at or below 200% of the poverty level. However, states, U.S. territories, and Indian tribes that administer the program may also elect to use the LIHEAP eligibility criteria of 60% of the state median income. You can check with your state weatherization contact to see about eligibility.
How do individuals apply for the weatherization assistance?
Individuals and families apply through their state weatherization office or with their local weatherization services provider. Learn how to apply for weatherization on the DOE Weatherization Assistance Program Web site.
What is the difference between Weatherization and Heating Assistance (LIHEAP)?
LIHEAP provides federal assistance to states to help low-income families pay their utility bills. The purpose is to help households with the lowest incomes—those who pay a large percentage proportion of household income for home energy—to meet their immediate home energy needs. LIHEAP has been administered by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) since 1982.
Because LIHEAP is a block grant program, it differs from the DOE Weatherization Assistance Program. Under LIHEAP, HHS provides funding to states, U.S. territories, and Indian tribes with general instructions about how to spend the money. Weatherization, on the other hand, is a formula grant program, and DOE provides funding to program grantees—states, U.S. territories, and Indian tribes—with specific rules and regulations for spending.
The 2009 Recovery Act and Weatherization
Congress provided $5 billion for weatherization under the 2009 Recovery Act, and DOE distributes these funds to program grantees according to an allocation formula. See a list of Recovery Act funding for weatherization by state.
The 2009 Recovery Act funding is substantially greater than annual funding in the past. For example, Congress appropriated $204.6 million for the DOE Weatherization Assistance Program in FY 2007, $227.2 million in FY 2008, and $250 million in FY 2009 under the Continuing Resolution (which was in addition to Recovery Act funding).
-
When will local weatherization agencies receive 2009 funding?
DOE Weatherization Assistance Program funding is available to the states beginning April 1, 2009. Program grantees are encouraged to provide advances to local weatherization service providers and allow local agencies to incur pre-award costs as soon as possible.
Here is how the funding process works. Congress appropriates funds to DOE, which in turn issues program guidance and funding allocations to the program grantees—states, U.S. territories, and Indian tribes. The grantees must submit annual applications to DOE to receive the funds. After DOE issues its annual program guidance, each state has 60 days to complete a plan, hold a public hearing about the plan, and submit it to DOE for approval. States then fund local agencies to install energy conservation materials on qualified low-income individual homes.
-
What accountability measures are in place at the local level?
DOE has accountability measures in place for weatherization service providers at the local level, for program grantees at the state level, and for fiscal monitoring at the national level to prevent waste, fraud, and abuse.
Local accountability
Federal regulations require that all homes receiving weatherization services undergo a quality control inspection to determine workmanship, resource accountability, and adherence to audit protocols and standards.
State accountability
Each state has a field monitoring and inspection protocol as part of its annual state plan submission to DOE. States are required to monitor local agencies at least once each year to determine compliance with administrative, fiscal, and field policies and guidelines. These monitoring plans also allow for a percentage of inspections by state staff to determine whether proper local quality control efforts are in place and establish the field accountability expected by the governing policies.
At least 5% of the completed units across the country are inspected by state staff during the course of the year. DOE anticipates that program grantees will increase the frequency of monitoring in 2009 to keep up with the increase of services under the Recovery Act. However, the percentage of quality control inspections performed by the state staff will likely remain at 10% unless issues with quality are discovered.
Specific federal regulations and guidance help program grantees and local weatherization service providers manage their programs and fiscal training. This vigorous oversight and reporting of program activities ensure program quality and effectiveness is maintained.
National accountability
The federal Project Management Center offices in Morgantown, West Virginia, and Golden, Colorado, have field staff assigned to conduct oversight monitoring of state operations. Each program grantee receives a thorough administrative, fiscal, and field monitoring at least once every two years. Funding will be released in stages to ensure compliance with requirements, accurate recordkeeping, and reporting. States must demonstrate satisfactory progress in the expansion of the weatherization work force, in the number of homes weatherized, and in worker training, and must demonstrate quality control in the work performed.
How quickly can the weatherization network ramp up?
The coming year will see grantee and local agencies hiring and training workforces and buying vehicles and equipment. The network could reach the capacity to weatherize as many as 1 million homes per year by early 2010.
For the program grantee and local weatherization service provider networks to successfully ramp up services to these levels, several steps must be taken:
DOE must issue grant guidance and the notice of fund availability to the states.
Program grantees need to develop plans, hold public hearings, and adjust funding formulas to the local weatherization agencies to distribute funds.
Grantees will execute contracts with local agencies after receipt of approved state plans.
DOE must approve these plans quickly.
Local agencies will hire staffs and procure equipment to expand production capability.
Training at all levels will be required to increase skills of new hires, increase oversight capabilities, and support resource accountability.
What is DOE doing to help?
DOE is doing several things to help local weatherization service providers ramp up services to their customers under the 2009 Recovery Act, including:
Working with the Weatherization Trainers Consortium to develop a national training plan and standardized training curriculum to facilitate training new hires.
Working with stakeholders to define the minimum energy audit standards required for effective weatherization so that all energy auditors will be held to the same level of competency.
Developing standard work order specifications for typical weatherization measures so that work awarded to contractors that are new to the program results in cost-effective energy savings and is completed with good workmanship.
Helping program grantees develop priority lists of generally cost-effective energy efficiency measures to streamline the measure selection process. On request, priority lists are developed by applying a DOE-approved energy audit software tool to a representative sample of the grantee’s housing stock using grantee-specific fuel prices and measure costs.