NJ SHARES Evaluation of 2009 Grants

NJ SHARES Evaluation of 2009 Grants

October 15, 2010

Evaluation Goals

• Characterize 2009 NJ SHARES grant recipients

• Characterize 2009 NJ SHARES grants

• Examine good faith payments

• Analyze post-grant payment compliance

2

Evaluation Components

• Part 1 – NJ SHARES database analysis– Characterizes grant recipients– Characterizes grants

• Part 2 – Utility transaction data analysis– “Good Faith” Payment Analysis– Grant Coverage Analysis– Post-Grant Payment Compliance

3

Evaluation Components

• Data received from:– ACE– ETG– NJNG– PSE&G– RECO– SJG– JCP&L* *JCP&L provided data for a random sample of 103 accounts out of 944 accounts that received grants in Q1 2009.

4

NJ SHARES Database AnalysisGrant Counts by Fuel Supplier

5

2009 Recipients

UtilityNumber of

GrantsPercent of All

GrantsGrant Dollars

Percent of Grant Dollars

ACE 1,112 6% $399,593 4%

ETG 886 5% $522,105 5%

JCP&L 2,067 11% $686,260 6%

NJNG 1,071 6% $624,668 6%

PSE&G 11,453 62% $8,064,986 71%

RECO 45 <1% $13,922 <1%

SJG 882 5% $523,913 5%

Others 90 <1% $24,960 <1%

Oil/Propane 928 5% $481,704 4%

TOTAL 18,534 100% $11,342,111 100%

NJ SHARES Database Analysis Grant Counts by Grant Type

6

Type Q1 2007 Q1 2008 Q1 2009 Q1 2010

Electric Only

715 19% 1,008 24% 2,104 19% 1,358 21%

Gas Only 832 22% 1,036 24% 1,993 18% 1,097 17%

Electric & Gas

2,031 55% 1,978 46% 5,808 52% 3,188 49%

Electric Heat 140 4% 236 6% 655 6% 335 5%

Oil -- -- -- -- 672 6% 513 8%

Propane -- -- -- -- 39 <1% 25 <1%

TOTAL 3,718 4,258 11,271 6,516

NJ SHARES Database Analysis By County

7

2009 Grant Recipients

CountyNumber Served

Percent of Total

CountyNumber Served

Percent of Total

Atlantic 614 3.3% Middlesex 1,311 7.1%

Bergen 724 3.9% Monmouth 1,325 7.2%

Burlington 1,175 6.3% Morris 687 3.7%

Camden 1,032 5.6% Ocean 854 4.6%

Cape May 86 0.5% Passaic 950 5.1%

Cumberland 398 2.2% Salem 61 0.3%

Essex 3,077 16.6% Somerset 665 3.6%

Gloucester 689 3.7% Sussex 311 1.7%

Hudson 1,542 8.3% Union 1,377 7.4%

Hunterdon 87 0.5% Warren 119 0.6%

Mercer 1,450 7.8% TOTAL 18,534 100.0%

NJ SHARES Database Analysis Grant Counts by Agency Type

8

Agency Type Q1 2007 Q1 2008 Q1 2009 Q1 2010

# % # % # % # %

Legislative Office

0 0% 64 2% 1,595 14% 789 12%

Other Nonprofit

3,718 100% 4,194 98% 9,676 86% 5,727 88%

TOTAL 3,718 4,258 11,271 6,516

NJ SHARES Database Analysis Number of Years of Grant Receipt2005-2010

9

Number of Years Percent of Grant Recipients

2009 Evaluation 2010 Evaluation

1 Year 81% 78%

2 Years 14% 15%

3 Years 4% 4%

4 Years 1% 2%

5 Years <1% 1%

6 Years N/A <1%

NJ SHARES Database Analysis Number of Household Members Contributing to Household Income

10

Number of Household Members

2005 Recipients

2006 Recipients

2007 Recipients

2008 Recipients

2009 Recipients

None <1 % 0% 0% <1% <1%

One 75% 73% 72% 71% 68%

Two 22% 24% 25% 26% 29%

Three or More

3% 3% 3% 3% 3%

Mean Number

1.3 1.3 1.3 1.3 1.4

NJ SHARES Database Analysis Household Income Sources

11

Income Source 2005

Recipients 2006

Recipients 2007

Recipients2008

Recipients2009

Recipients

Employment 88% 89% 88% 89% 86%

Pension or Social Security

12% 12% 13% 12% 14%

Unemployment Compensation

6% 5% 5% 5% 12%

Disability 5% 4% 5% 5% 4%

Child Support 4% 4% 3% 2% 3%

Other 3% 3% 3% 3% 4%

NJ SHARES Database Analysis Annual Household Income

12

Annual Household Income

2006 Recipients

2007 Recipients

2008 Recipients

2009 Recipients

<$20,000 6% 5% 3% <1%

$20,000 - $29,999 28% 22% 18% 12%

$30,000 - $39,999 29% 29% 26% 23%

$40,000 - $49,999 19% 20% 21% 23%

$50,000 + 19% 24% 32% 41%

Mean Annual Income $38,921 $41,844 $45,567 $49,133

NJ SHARES Database Analysis Household Poverty Level

13

Household Poverty Level

2006 Recipients

2007 Recipients

2008Recipients

2009 Recipients

<175% 6% 5% 4% 1%

175-199% 24% 20% 20% 4%

200-224% 18% 17% 16% 11%

225% - 249% 14% 13% 14% 22%

250% - 299% 16% 17% 18% 31%

300% + 22% 28% 29% 32%

Mean Poverty Level 257% 273% 277% 280%

Note: As of January 23, 2009, income eligibility is capped at 400% of poverty.

NJ SHARES Database Analysis Household Composition

14

Note: A household can be included in more than one category.

Household Composition

2005 Recipients

2006 Recipients

2007 Recipients

2008 Recipients

2009 Recipients

<6 Years Old 29% 26% 28% 23% 22%

≤ 18 Years Old 61% 60% 64% 58% 57%

> 60 Years Old 8% 8% 13% 12% 16%

NJ SHARES Database Analysis Agencies Focused on Seniors

15

2009 Senior Focused Agencies

East Orange Division of Senior Services(East Orange Seniors Only)

Hamilton Township Senior Services- Hamilton Twp. Seniors Only- By Appointment

Lawrence Township Senior Center-Cedarville

Resources For Independent Living-Seniors and Disabled Population

Town of Harrison - Senior Center

Center For Independent Living South Jersey

Camden City Independent Living Center-Camden

City of East Orange Division of Senior Services(East Orange Seniors Only)

DAWN Center for Independent Living-Sussex

Grace Senior Center for Healthy Living

MOCEANS- Center For Independent Living-Ocean County

Morristown Senior Center - Seniors Only

Resources For Independent Living,Inc.-Seniors and Disabled Population

Tri County Independent Living Center -Cumberland

Agencies were indentified as focused on seniors if they have the words “senior” or “independent living” in their name. Highlighted agencies were new in 2009.

NJ SHARES Database Analysis Agencies Focused on Seniors

16

2009 RecipientsElderly Agencies Other Agencies All Agencies

# % # % # %Household Member Over 60

No 428 65% 15,197 85% 15,625 84%Yes 232 35% 2,677 15% 2,909 16%

Total 660 100% 17,874 100% 18,534 100%% of all recipients 4% 96% 100%

2008 RecipientsElderly Agencies Other Agencies All Agencies

# % # % # %Household Member Over 60

No 184 65% 10,274 88% 10,458 88%Yes 97 35% 1,395 12% 1,492 12%

Total 281 100% 11,669 100% 11,950 100%% of all recipients 2% 98% 100%

NJ SHARES Database Analysis Household Composition

17

Note: “Single Parent” and “Elderly Only” households were identified using the age grouping variables, in the database not the variable “Category”.


2005 Recipients

2006 Recipients

2007 Recipients

2008 Recipients

2009 Recipients

Single Parent 14% 13% 27% 24% 21%

Elderly Only 4% 5% 9% 7% 8%


18



2008 Recipients 2009 Recipients

All ≤ 18

Years Old

> 60 Years Old

All ≤ 18

Years Old

> 60 Years Old

<225% 39% 43% 39% 15% 16% 14%

222% - 249% 14% 15% 14% 22% 23% 22%

250% - 299% 18% 19% 17% 31% 31% 30%

300% + 29% 23% 30% 32% 30% 34%

TOTAL 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100%


19



2008 Recipients 2009 Recipients

All Single Parent

Elderly Only

All Single Parent

Elderly Only

<225% 39% 50% 40% 15% 18% 13%

225% - 249% 14% 14% 14% 22% 26% 24%

250% - 299% 18% 17% 16% 31% 30% 29%

300% + 29% 19% 31% 32% 26% 33%

TOTAL 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100%

NJ SHARES Database Analysis Household Size

20

Household Size

2005 Recipients

2006 Recipients

2007 Recipients

2008 Recipients

2009 Recipients

1 26% 22% 24% 21% 20%

2 30% 30% 28% 29% 28%

3 21% 22% 21% 22% 22%

4 14% 15% 17% 17% 18%

5 + 9% 10% 11% 12% 12%

Mean Size 2.5 2.7 2.7 2.8 2.8

NJ SHARES Database Analysis Main Heating Fuel

21

Main Heating Fuel

2005 Recipients

2006 Recipients

2007 Recipients

2008Recipients

2009 Recipients

Natural Gas 82% 83% 84% 84% 83%

Electric 13% 11% 11% 11% 7%

Oil 5% 5% 4% 4% 10%

Propane <1% <1% <1% <1% 1%

Other <1% <1% <1% <1% <1%

NJ SHARES Database Analysis Recipient-Reported Bill Balance at Grant Application

22

Reported Bill Balance

2005 Recipients

2006 Recipients

2007 Recipients

2008Recipients

2009 Recipients

< $250 8% 8% 7% 7% 7%

$250 - $499 25% 20% 23% 21% 19%

$500 - $749 23% 22% 24% 21% 19%

$750 - $999 16% 15% 17% 17% 16%

$1,000 + 29% 35% 29% 35% 40%

Mean Balance $892 $993 $879 $963 $1,070

NJ SHARES Database Analysis Reported Bill Balance at Grant Application

23

2009 Recipients

Bill Balance

Percent of Federal Poverty Level

< 225% 225-249% 250-299% 300% +

< $500 28% 25% 25% 25%

$500 - $749 19% 19% 20% 18%

$750 -$999 15% 15% 16% 16%

$1,000+ 38% 41% 39% 41%

Mean Balance $1,038 $1,093 $1,061 $1,079

NJ SHARES Database Analysis Mean Reported Bill Balance at Grant Application

24

Grant Type 2005

Recipients 2006

Recipients 2007

Recipients2008

Recipients2009

Recipients

Electric Only $563 $566 $557 $635 $723

Gas Only $654 $740 $762 $782 $831

Electric & Gas $1,108 $1,268 $1,168 $1,298 $1,443

Electric Heat $831 $823 $904 $1,010 $1,048

All Grants $892 $993 $879 $963 $1,070

NJ SHARES Database Analysis Collections Actions Pending at Grant Application

25

Note: Percentages may not sum to 100% because a household with grants for more than one utility may have two different collections actions.

Collections Actions 2005

Recipients 2006

Recipients 2007

Recipients 2008

Recipients 2009

Recipients

Past Due Balance 8% 3% 17% 20% 26%

Past Due Warning Notice 47% 18% 17% 19% 23%

Shut-Off Date Not Passed 20% 22% 20% 17% 16%

Shut-Off Date Passed 26% 49% 41% 39% 32%

Utility Shut-Off 0% 9% 4% 6% 3%

NJ SHARES Database Analysis Reason for Grant Application

26

Reason for Application

2005 Recipients

2006 Recipients

2007 Recipients

2008 Recipients

2009 Recipients

Temporary Financial Crisis

60% 68% -- -- --

High Energy Costs 27% 24% 69% 77% 78%

Medical/Health 7% 5% 11% 8% 6%

Unemployment 3% 2% 6% 4% 8%

Reduced Hours/Change in Employment

-- -- 6% 5% 6%

Other 3% 2% 8% 6% 3%

NJ SHARES Database Analysis Detailed 2008 Recipients’ “Other” Reasons for Grant Application

• Household changes (spouse leaving or dying or a new baby)

• Mortgage or rent

• Over income limit for LIHEAP

• Temporary financial crisis

• College Tuition

• Car Repairs

• Not receiving child support/alimony

• Home repairs

27

NJ SHARES Database Analysis Grant Guidelines - Maximum Grant Amounts

28

Grant Amount

2005 Recipients

2006 Recipients

2007 Recipients

2008 Recipients

2009 Recipients

Electric Only $250 $300 $300 $300 $300

Gas Only $250 $700 $700 $700 $700

Electric & Gas

$500 $1,000 $1,000 $1,000 $1,000

Electric Heat $500 $700 $700 $700 $700

Oil/Propane -- -- -- $700 $700

NJ SHARES Database Analysis Grant Amounts

29

Grant Amount

2005 Recipients

2006 Recipients

2007 Recipients

2008 Recipients

2009 Recipients

< $300 45% 14% 11% 11% 10%

$300 <1% 14% 20% 22% 23%

$301 - $699 55% 28% 24% 21% 19%

$700 0% 10% 17% 16% 16%

$700 - $999 0% 12% 10% 9% 7%

$1,000 0% 22% 17% 22% 25%

Mean Grant $373 $603 $588 $596 $612

NJ SHARES Database Analysis Grant Amounts

30

2009 Recipients

Grant Amount

Grant Type

Electric Only

Gas Only Electric & Gas Electric Heat

Oil

< $300 20% 9% 3% 6% 10%

$300 80% <1% <1% 5% <1%

$301 - $699 0% 35% 16% 23% 74%

$700 0% 56% <1% 65% 15%

$700 - $999 0% 0% 19% 0% 0%

$1,000 0% 0% 62% 0% 0%

Mean Grant $281 $589 $873 $607 $519

NJ SHARES Database Analysis % Receiving Max Grant Allowed

31

Grant Type

Electric Only

Gas Only Electric & Gas Electric Heat

Oil

2005 89% 89% 76% 67% --

2006 67% 40% 40% 48% --

2007 75% 50% 43% 58% --

2008 78% 47% 53% 62% 16%

2009 80% 56% 62% 65% 15%

NJ SHARES Database Analysis Mean Grant Amount By Utility

32

Utility 2005

Recipients 2006

Recipients 2007

Recipients2008

Recipients2009

Recipients

ACE $286 $331 $329 $350 $359

ETG $237 $504 $572 $579 $589

JCP&L $278 $303 $333 $329 $332

NJNG $246 $557 $563 $547 $583

PSE&G $420 $669 $698 $710 $704

RECO $237 $284 $319 $326 $309

SJG $236 $544 $586 $565 $594

PART 2Utility Data Analysis Methodology• Focused on Q1 2009 grant recipients

• Transaction data from utilities

• Files contain payments, charges, account balances

• Analyzed:

– Existence of “Good Faith Payment”

– Grant coverage of pre-grant balances

– Ratio of payments made to charges incurred at key intervals

• Used Q1 2008 and Q1 2010 recipients as comparison groups

33

Utility Data Analysis Sample Group Definitions

34

Q1 2009 Recipient Treatment Group

Q1 2008 Recipient Comparison Group

Q1 2010 Recipient Comparison Group

Accounts IncludedAll Q1 2009 grant

recipients

Accounts receiving grants in Q1 2008

only

Accounts receiving grants in Q1 2010 that did not receive grants in Q1 2009

Analysis Period Starts 1 day following grant1 year + 1 day after

grant1 year + 1 day before

grant

Analysis Period Ends1 year + 1 day after

grant2 years + 1 day after

grant1 day before grant

Analysis Period Span Q1 2009– Q1 2010 Q1 2009– Q1 2010 Q1 2009– Q1 2010

Utility Data Analysis Sample Group Definitions

35

2008

Q1 2009 ANALYSIS PERIOD



GRANT DATE

GRANT DATE + 1 YEAR + 1 DAYGRANT DATE + 1 DAY

GRANT DATE

GRANT DATE – 1 DAY

2009 2010

GRANT DATE + 1 DAY

GRANT DATE

1 YEAR

“Good Faith” Payment Analysis “Good Faith” Period Definition

36

• The “Good Faith” payment period is defined as 90 days prior to intake through the day before the grant is applied to the account.

• Only payments made by the customer are counted.

INTAKE DATE – 90 DAYS

INTAKE DATE

GRANT DATE

“GOOD FAITH” PERIOD

GRANT DATE – 1 DAY

“Good Faith” Payment AnalysisAttrition Analysis

37

Q1 2008 Recipients

Q1 2009 Recipients

Q1 2010 Recipients

Number Submitted 4,223 10,418 3,657

Number Returned 3,438 9,531 3,217

Eligible for Analysis*

2,677 8,582 2,681

Percent of Requested Accounts

63% 82% 73%

* An account was eligible for analysis if the NJ SHARES grant could be located in the utility transactions data, the utility-reported account balances did not conflict with the utility transactions data, and there were at least three months of pre-grant utility data.

“Good Faith” Payment AnalysisPercent Making “Good Faith” Payment

38

Q1 2008 Recipients Q1 2009 Recipients Q1 2010 Recipients

98% 97% 96%

“Good Faith” Payment AnalysisPercent Making “Good Faith” Payment By Utility

39

Q1 2010 Recipients

UtilityNumber of Customers

Percentage Making “Good Faith” Payment

ACE 229 93%

ETG 122 95%

NJNG 185 93%

PSE&G 1,958 98%

RECO 10 100%

SJG 177 93%

TOTAL 2,681 96%

“Good Faith” Payment Analysis Amount of Good Faith Payments Made

40

PaymentsQ1 2008

RecipientsQ1 2009

RecipientsQ1 2010

Recipients

$0 1% 2% 2%

$1 - $99 1% 1% 1%

$100 10% 6% 8%

$101 - $250 25% 13% 19%

$251 - $500 30% 25% 27%

$501 + 33% 53% 42%

Mean Payment $467 $679 $577

“Good Faith” Payment Analysis Amount of Good Faith Payments MadeBy Utility

41

Q1 2010 Recipients

Payments ACE ETG NJNG PSE&G RECO SJG Total

Number of Customers

229 122 185 1,958 10 177 2,681

$0 4% 2% 3% 2% 0% 1% 2%

$1 - $99 3% 3% 4% 1% 0% 6% 1%

$100 9% 4% 4% 8% 0% 18% 8%

$101 - $250 21% 39% 42% 14% 50% 25% 19%

$251 - $500 27% 26% 28% 27% 30% 34% 27%

$501 + 36% 26% 20% 49% 20% 17% 42%

Mean Payment

$481 $352 $330 $649 $366 $330 $577

“Good Faith” Payment AnalysisAmount of Good Faith Payments Made

42

Q1 2010 Recipients

Payments

Federal Poverty Level

225-249%

250-299%

≥ 300%

$0 2% 2% 2%

$1 - $99 2% 2% 1%

$100 9% 9% 7%

$101 - $250 20% 17% 19%

$251 - $500 27% 29% 26%

$501 + 40% 40% 45%

Mean Payment

$534 $548 $622

“Good Faith” Payment Analysis Number of Payments for Those Paying at Least $100

43

PaymentsQ1 2008

RecipientsQ1 2009

RecipientsQ1 2010

Recipients

25th Percentile 1 2 2



Mean Number of Payments

2.7 3.5 2.6

Grant Coverage AnalysisAttrition Analysis

44

Q1 2008 Recipients

Q1 2009 Recipients

Q1 2010 Recipients



Eligible for Analysis*

3,229 8,780 2,798


76% 84% 77%

* An account was eligible for analysis if the NJ SHARES grant could be located in the utility transactions data and the utility-reported account balances did not conflict with the utility transactions data.

Grant Coverage AnalysisGrant Coverage

45

Q1 2008 Recipients

Q1 2009 Recipients

Q1 2010 Recipients

Mean Pre-Grant Balance $1,197 $1,280 $1,210

Mean Grant $652 $684 $671

Mean Post-Grant Balance $545 $595 $539

Mean Percent of Pre-Grant Balances Covered

69% 71% 72%

Grant Coverage Analysis Grant Coverage By Utility

46

Q1 2009 Recipients

ACE ETG JCPL NJNG PSE&G RECO SJG Total

Number of Customers

392 470 103 534 6,859 21 401 8,780

Mean Pre-Grant Balance

$775 $923 $799 $874 $1,390 $1,003 $968 $1,280

Mean Grant $333 $595 $354 $605 $728 $306 $604 $684

Mean Post-Grant Balance

$442 $328 $445 $269 $663 $696 $364 $595


60% 80% 62% 84% 70% 48% 84% 71%

Grant Coverage Analysis Grant Coverage By Grant Type

47

Q1 2009 Recipients

Electric Only

Gas OnlyElectric &

GasElectric

Heat

Number of Customers 1,588 2,114 4,628 450

Mean Pre-Grant Balance $869 $1,051 $1,538 $1,148

Mean Grant $272 $607 $869 $603

Mean Post-Grant Balance $597 $444 $669 $545


53% 76% 75% 71%

Grant Coverage Analysis Grant Coverage By Main Heating Fuel

48

Q1 2009 Recipients

Electric Gas Oil Other

Number of Customers 474 7,991 296 19

Mean Pre-Grant Balance $1,149 $1,308 $766 $701

Mean Grant $599 $705 $281 $277

Mean Post-Grant Balance $550 $602 $485 $424


70% 72% 61% 59%

Grant Coverage Analysis Grant Coverage Distribution

49

Q1 2009 Recipients

Percentile

10% 25% 50% 75% 90%

Percent of Pre-Grant Balances Covered

28% 43% 65% 88% 104%

Payment Compliance AnalysisAttrition Analysis

50

Q1 2008 Recipients

Q1 2009 Recipients

Q1 2010 Recipients



Accounts with Usable Data*

2,051 9,004 2,919

Amount of Data Available for Analysis

3 Months 1,584 7,959 2,309

6 Months 1,429 7,244 2,169

9 Months 1,325 6,631 2,050

12 Months 1,218 5,634 1,907


43% 54% 52%

* An account was eligible for analysis if the NJ SHARES grant could be located in the utility transactions data and the utility-reported account balances did not conflict with the utility transactions data.

Payment Compliance Analysis Mean Percent of Bills Paid

51

Date Range

Months after

Grants

Q1 2008 Recipients

Q1 2009 Recipients

Q1 2010 Recipients

Q2 2009 3 Months 148% 97% 141%

Q3 2009 6 Months 136% 102% 133%

Q4 2009 9 Months 125% 95% 114%

Q1 2010 12 Months 105% 89% 89%

Good payment coverage 2nd year after grant

Payment compliance declines at the end of year following grant receipt.

Payment compliance declines prior to grant receipt.

Payment Compliance Analysis Mean Percent of Bills Paid

52

Q1 2008 Recipients

Year After Grant Receipt

First Second

3 Months 84% 148%

6 Months 93% 136%

9 Months 89% 125%

12 Months 79% 105%

Accounts Included 2,690 1,218

Payment Compliance Analysis Mean Percent of Bills PaidSame Accounts

53

Q1 2008 Recipients


First Second

3 Months 86% 146%

6 Months 94% 134%

9 Months 90% 124%

12 Months 81% 104%

Accounts Included

1,057 1,057

Payment Compliance Analysis Mean Percent of Bills Paid By Utility

54

Q1 2009 Recipients

ACE ETG JCPL NJNG PSE&G RECO SJG Total

Number of Customers

292 333 79 424 4,242 16 248 5,634

3 Months 81% 95% 83% 104% 95% 111% 149% 97%

6 Months 79% 105% 92% 119% 98% 102% 149% 102%

9 Months 84% 95% 95% 98% 95% 101% 102% 95%

12 Months 86% 82% 93% 92% 89% 97% 89% 89%

Payment Compliance Analysis Percent That Paid More Than 90 and 100 Percent of Billed Amount

55

Date Range

Month after

Grants

Q1 2008 Recipients Q1 2009 Recipients Q1 2010 Recipients

Pay ≥ 100%

Pay ≥ 90%Pay ≥ 100%

Pay ≥ 90%Pay ≥ 100%

Pay ≥ 90%

Q2 2009 3 Months 64% 70% 37% 45% 59% 65%

Q3 2009 6 Months 69% 78% 43% 54% 64% 72%

Q4 2009 9 Months 72% 81% 39% 55% 57% 70%

Q1 2010 12 Months 59% 76% 27% 48% 23% 41%

Payment Compliance Analysis Percent That Paid More Than 90 and 100 Percent of Billed Amount

56

Q1 2008 Recipients


First Second

Pay ≥ 100% Pay ≥ 90% Pay ≥ 100% Pay ≥ 90%

3 Months 32% 40% 64% 70%

6 Months 36% 49% 69% 78%

9 Months 30% 47% 72% 81%

12 Months 16% 32% 59% 76%

Accounts Included

2,690 1,218

Payment Compliance Analysis Percent That Paid More Than 90 and 100 Percent of Billed AmountSame Accounts

57

Q1 2008 Recipients


First Second

Pay ≥ 100% Pay ≥ 90% Pay ≥ 100% Pay ≥ 90%

3 Months 35% 42% 64% 70%

6 Months 37% 51% 68% 77%

9 Months 33% 49% 71% 80%

12 Months 19% 35% 58% 75%

Accounts Included

1,057 1,057

Payment Compliance Analysis By Utility

58

Q1 2009 Recipients

Pay≥100% ACE ETG JCPL NJNG PSE&G RECO SJG

3 Months 30% 41% 28% 44% 36% 38% 50%

6 Months 27% 53% 38% 57% 41% 63% 62%

9 Months 25% 45% 33% 42% 39% 50% 44%

12 Months 26% 27% 30% 32% 27% 38% 21%

Accounts Included

292 333 79 424 4,242 16 248

Payment Compliance Analysis By Utility

59

Q1 2009 Recipients

Pay≥90% ACE ETG JCPL NJNG PSE&G RECO SJG

3 Months 35% 46% 35% 52% 44% 50% 56%

6 Months 37% 62% 49% 67% 53% 69% 69%

9 Months 42% 59% 59% 59% 54% 69% 56%

12 Months 49% 46% 54% 54% 48% 69% 38%

Accounts Included

292 333 79 424 4,242 16 248

Payment Compliance Analysis Percent of Bills Paid

60

Percent of Bills Paid

Q1 2008 Recipients

Q1 2009 Recipients

Q1 2010 Recipients

< 50% 4% 5% 6%

50% - 75% 8% 20% 23%

76% - 90% 13% 27% 30%

91% - 99% 17% 21% 18%

100% + 59% 27% 23%

Mean 105% 89% 89%

Payment Compliance Analysis Mean Bill Balance

61

Payment Compliance Analysis Mean Bill Balance By Utility

62

Payment Compliance Analysis Segmentation Analysis

63

Successful (32%)


64

Q1 2006 Recipients

Q1 2007 Recipients

Q1 2008 Recipients

Q1 2009 Recipients

Successful 26% 24% 19% 32%

Marginal Success

7% 6% 5% 6%

Need More Help 67% 70% 76% 61%

TOTAL 100% 100% 100% 100%


65

Successful (62%)


66

Q1 2008 Recipients


First Second

Successful 19% 62%

Marginal Success

5% 7%

Need More Help 76% 31%

Accounts Included

2,690 1,218

Payment Compliance Analysis Segmentation AnalysisSame Account

67

Q1 2008 Recipients


First Second

Successful 22% 60%

Marginal Success

5% 8%

Need More Help 73% 32%

Accounts Included

1,057 1,057

Payment Compliance Analysis Segmentation Analysis By Utility

68

Q1 2009 Recipients

Successful

Marginal SuccessNeed More Help

Payment Compliance Analysis Segmentation Analysis By Utility

69

Q1 2009 Recipients

Successful

Marginal SuccessNeed More Help


70

Q1 2009 Recipients

Ending Balance <$100

Balance Declined, Ending Balance

≥ $100

Balance Increased by

<$100


≥ $100

Number of Customers 784 1,042 361 3,447

Percent of Customers 14% 18% 6% 61%

Mean Pre-Grant Balance $803 $1,913 $1,068 $1,156

Mean Grant Amount $584 $687 $610 $688

Mean Post-Grant Balance $219 $1,226 $458 $467

Mean Number of Payments* 10 10 10 9

Mean Percent of Bills Paid 107% 117% 97% 75%

* Note: Only customer payments are counted.


71

Q1 2009 Recipients



≥ $100


<$100


≥ $100



Mean Charges $2,223 $3,164 $2,518 $3,052

Mean Payments $2,383 $3,656 $2,468 $2,343

Payment Compliance Analysis Segmentation AnalysisMean Charges

72

Q1 2009 Recipients

Grant TypeEnding Balance

<$100


≥ $100


<$100


≥ $100

Electric Only $1,751 $2,585 $2,085 $2,419

Gas Only $1,865 $2,464 $2,037 $2,347

Electric & Gas $2,700 $3,766 $3,138 $3,582

Electric Heat $2,059 $3,153 $2,165 $2,903

TOTAL $2,223 $3,164 $2,518 $3,052


73

Q1 2009 Recipients

Balance Increased by $100 - $399


Balance Increased by $1,000 +

Number of Customers 1,250 1,491 706

Percent of Customers 22% 26% 13%

Mean Pre-Grant Balance $978 $1,109 $1,575

Mean Grant Amount $593 $712 $809

Mean Post-Grant Balance $386 $397 $766

Mean Number of Payments* 9 9 7

Mean Percent of Bills Paid 87% 74% 57%

* Note: Only customer payments are counted.


74

Q1 2009 Recipients






Mean Charges $2,445 $2,989 $4,259

Mean Payments $2,120 $2,340 $2,603

Payment Compliance Analysis Segmentation AnalysisMean Charges

75

Q1 2009 Recipients

Grant TypeBalance

Increased by $100 - $399



$1,000 +

Electric Only $1,986 $2,555 $3,603

Gas Only $1,898 $2,265 $4,093

Electric & Gas $3,076 $3,409 $4,426

Electric Heat $2,594 $2,845 $3,844

TOTAL $2,445 $2,989 $4,259


76

Q1 2009 Recipients



≥ $100


<$100


≥ $100



Mean Starting Balance $127 $1,172 $442 $397

Mean Ending Balance -$33 $680 $492 $1,106

Percent Paying ≥ 90% 87% 100% 99% 19%

Percent Paying ≥ 100% 63% 100% 0% 0%


77

Q1 2009 Recipients






Mean Starting Balance $335 $329 $651

Mean Ending Balance $581 $978 $2,306

Percent Paying ≥ 90% 46% 5% <1%

Percent Paying ≥ 100% 0% 0% 0%


Q1 2009 Recipients



≥ $100


<$100


≥ $100



Median Annual Income $44,400 $48,036 $46,884 $48,000

< 225% FPL 11% 8% 7% 10%

225% - 249% FPL 23% 23% 18% 24%

250% - 299% FPL 30% 34% 37% 32%

≥ 300% FPL 36% 36% 37% 34%

Percent Single-Parent 21% 17% 21% 21%

Percent Elderly-Only 10% 8% 10% 8%


79

Q1 2009 Recipients






Median Annual Income $47,820 $47,544 $49,356

< 225% FPL 10% 11% 8%

225% - 249% FPL 23% 24% 25%

250% - 299% FPL 32% 33% 31%

≥ 300% FPL 35% 32% 36%

Percent Single-Parent 21% 21% 22%

Percent Elderly-Only 9% 8% 7%


80

Q1 2009 Recipients

Grant TypeEnding Balance <$100

Balance Declined, Ending

Balance ≥ $100


<$100


≥ $100TOTAL

Electric Only 14% 22% 7% 56% 100%

Gas Only 18% 17% 8% 58% 100%

Electric & Gas

12% 18% 5% 65% 100%

Electric Heat 12% 22% 7% 59% 100%


81

Q1 2009 Recipients

Grant TypeBalance

Increased by $100 - $399



$1,000 +TOTAL

Electric Only 49% 37% 14% 100%

Gas Only 45% 41% 14% 100%

Electric & Gas

28% 46% 26% 100%

Electric Heat 36% 50% 15% 100%

Receipt of Energy AssistancePercent Who Received USF or LIHEAPIn the 12 Months Following Grant Receipt

82

Q1 2009 Recipients

Utility Number of Customers Percent Receiving USF or LIHEAP

ACE 292 8%

ETG 333 7%

NCPL 79 4%

NJNG 424 8%

PSE&G 4,242 8%

RECO 16 6%

SJG 248 10%

TOTAL 5,634 8%

Receipt of Energy AssistancePercent Who Received USF or LIHEAP In the “Good Faith” Period

83

Q1 2009 Recipients

Utility Number of Customers Percent Receiving USF or LIHEAP

ACE 292 2%

ETG 333 <1%

NCPL 79 0%

NJNG 424 0%

PSE&G 4,242 2%

RECO 16 0%

SJG 248 2%

TOTAL 5,634 2%

Key Findings

• NJ SHARES provides grants to those in temporary need of assistance.– 78% received a grant in only one of the past six years.

– Recipients made an average of 2.6 payments in the 90 days preceding the grant.

• Changes in types of households served.– Senior households more likely to receive grants than in previous years

(16%).

– Clients have higher income, due to changes in eligibility (LIHEAP).

– More likely to use oil as main heating source (10%).

84

Key Findings

• NJ SHARES serving those hit by recession.– 12% of 2009 recipients reported receipt of unemployment compensation,

compared to about 5% in previous years.– 8% of 2009 recipients reported unemployment as reason for grant

application, compared to 2% to 6% in previous years.

• Clients are coming in earlier but they need more help.– Grant recipients are more likely to have a past due balance or past due

warning notice and less likely to have the shut-off date passed or already be shut off.

– Balances are higher. 40% have a balance of $1,000 or more and the average balance was $1,070.

– The percent of clients receiving the maximum grant amount has increased.– NJ SHARES continues to cover about 70% of pre-grant balances on average.

85

Key Findings

• Additional evidence to increase electric only grant.– 80% of electric only grant recipients received the $300 maximum.

– Electric only grant recipients had a mean balance of $869.

– Electric only grants covered an average of 53% of the balance (71%-76% for the other grant types).

– There may be a relationship to the use of electric space heating when the main space heating system is not functioning.

• Need for additional analysis of good faith payments.– 96% found to make good faith payments.

– Only 93% for some utilities.

86

Key Findings

• Grant recipients still have a difficult time paying their bill in the year following grant receipt.

– 61% increased their balance by more than $100 in the year following the grant.

– 32% of Q1 2009 recipients were successful compared to 19% of Q1 2008 recipients.

• Grant recipients may need more than one year to get back on their feet.

– Grant recipients improve their payment behavior in the second year after grant receipt compared to the first. (62% successful)

• The only observable difference between more and less successful recipients is that those with higher bills build up greater balances in the year following grant receipt.

– These households may be a good target for subsidized energy efficiency services.

87

Proposed Pro-Bono Study

• Research Questions– Need for assistance.

– Interaction with agency staff.

– How NJ SHARES has solved temporary problems.

– Understanding of utility bill.

– Potential for conservation behavior and measures.

– Whether additional assistance is needed.

– Types of additional assistance needed.

• Research Activities– In-depth interviews with grant recipients.

– Telephone survey of grant recipients.

88

Documents

NJ SHARES Evaluation of 2009 Grants