NJ SHARES 2018 Evaluation Presentation

NJ SHARES 2018 Evaluation Presentation
October 19, 2018

Evaluation Goals Characterize 2017 NJ SHARES grant recipients
Characterize 2017 NJ SHARES grants Examine good faith payments Analyze post-grant payment compliance 2

Evaluation Goals 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

NJ SHARES Database Analysis Grants Distributed
In 2016, 2,213 grants were provided and a total of $1,417,663 was distributed. In 2017, 1,390 grants were provided and a total of $842,290 was distributed. Compared to 2016: 37% decrease in number of grants 41% decrease in grant dollars distributed 4

NJ SHARES Database Analysis Grants Distributed by Utility
Number of Grants Percent of All Grants Grant Dollars Percent of Grant Dollars ACE 114 8% $58,922 7% ETG 42 3% $18,634 2% JCP&L 300 22% $134,576 16% NJNG 141 10% $62,853 PSE&G 718 52% $531,874 63% RECO 6 <1% $2,510 SJG 69 5% $32,921 4% TOTAL 1,390 100% $842,290 5

NJ SHARES Database Analysis Grants Distributed by Grant Type
Number of Grants Percent of All Grants Grant Dollars Percent of Grant Dollars Electric Only 420 30% $179,651 21% Gas Only 307 22% $145,345 17% Electric & Gas 504 36% $425,004 50% Electric Heat 159 11% $92,290 TOTAL 1,390 100% $842,290 6

NJ SHARES Database Analysis Grants Distributed by County
2017 Grant Recipients County Number Served Percent of Total Atlantic 67 5% Middlesex 53 4% Bergen 105 8% Monmouth 111 Burlington 80 6% Morris 96 7% Camden 41 3% Ocean 174 13% Cape May 2 <1% Passaic 45 Cumberland 16 1% Salem 8 Essex 224 16% Somerset 27 2% Gloucester 68 Sussex 13 Hudson 18 Union 77 Hunterdon 7 Warren 20 Mercer 138 10% TOTAL 1,390 100% 7

NJ SHARES Database Analysis Grants Distributed by Legislative Offices
Note: NJ SHARES began working with legislative offices in 2008. 8

NJ SHARES Database Analysis Repeat NJ SHARES Recipients
Years of NJ SHARES Receipt Percent of Recipients who Received Grants in Multiple Years 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 1 Year 78% 79% 77% 2 Years 15% 14% 3 Years 4% 5% 4 Years 2% 5 Years 1% <1% Notes: Data includes grants received from 2005 through Fewer than one percent received grants in six or more years. 9

NJ SHARES Database Analysis Recipient Income Sources
2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 Employment 88% 89% 86% 83% 78% 80% 84% 82% Pension or Social Security 13% 12% 14% 18% 23% 22% 20% 25% 24% 27% Unemployment Compensation 5% 15% 11% 10% 6% 3% 4% Disability Child Support 2% Other 10

NJ SHARES Database Analysis Annual Household Income
2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 Mean Income $41,844 $45,567 $49,133 $51,931 $49,429 $48,578 $48,447 $50,482 $50,734 $49,386 $51,333 11

NJ SHARES Database Analysis Recipient Poverty Level
**LIHEAP Eligibility Guidelines from NJ 2017 LIHEAP Model Plan: Household Poverty Level 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 Mean Poverty Level 273% 277% 280% 294% 278% 275% 270% LIHEAP Eligible 175% 225% 200% Note 1: As of January 23, 2009, income eligibility is capped at 400% of the Federal Poverty Level. Note 2: LIHEAP eligibility is for fiscal years. 12

NJ SHARES Database Analysis Household Composition
Note: A household can be included in more than one category. 13

NJ SHARES Database Analysis Household Composition
Note: “Single Parent” and “Elderly Only” households were identified using the age grouping variables in the database, not the variable “Category”. 14

NJ SHARES Database Analysis Agencies Focused on Seniors by Household Composition
2017 Recipients Elderly Agencies Other Agencies All Agencies # % Household Member Over 60 No 23 39% 975 73% 998 72% Yes 36 61% 356 27% 392 28% Total 59 100% 1,331 1,390 % of all recipients 4% 96% 2016 Recipients Elderly Agencies Other Agencies All Agencies # % Household Member Over 60 No 56 49% 1,708 81% 1,764 80% Yes 59 51% 390 19% 449 20% Total 115 100% 2,098 2,213 % of all recipients 5% 95% 15

NJ SHARES Database Analysis Agencies Focused on Seniors
16

NJ SHARES Database Analysis Main Heating Fuel
17

NJ SHARES Database Analysis Recipient-Reported Bill Balance at Grant Application
2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 Mean Balance $993 $879 $963 $1,070 $1,028 $936 $1,124 $1,248 $1,082 $996 $897 18

NJ SHARES Database Analysis Mean Reported Bill Balance at Grant Application
19

NJ SHARES Database Analysis Collections Actions Pending at Application
20

NJ SHARES Database Analysis Collections Actions Pending at Application
Shut Off Date includes shut off date not passed and shut off date passed. Past Due includes past due balance and past due warning notice. 21

NJ SHARES Database Analysis Reason for Grant Application
Reason for Application 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 High Energy Costs* 69% 77% 78% 73% 71% 76% 14% 16% 9% 5% 7% Medical/Health 11% 8% 6% 20% 25% 31% 35% 40% Unemployment 4% 10% 15% 12% Reduced Hours/Change in Employment 34% 37% 30% Other 3% 2% 18% *High Energy Costs was a standard response option in previous years’ data, but was not included after the 2012 data. For grantees, this reason for application was identified using verbatim responses for the “Other” option. Note: Percentages sum to >100% because participants that chose the “Other” option may have indicated more than one reason. 22

NJ SHARES Database Analysis Recipients with Unemployment
Utility Unemployment Compensation Application Reason 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 ACE 13% 9% 7% 4% 23% 17% 11% 16% ETG 14% 3% 5% 0% 6% 18% 10% JCP&L 12% 2% 19% NJNG 20% PSE&G 8% RECO 25% NA SJG 1% Total 15% 23

NJ SHARES Database Analysis Detailed 2017 Recipients’ “Other” Reasons for Grant Application
Reduced income Financial hardship Household changes (birth, death, move, etc.) Unspecified bills/costs Car repairs Childcare costs College tuition (including student loan payments) Household repairs Mortgage or rent | _varname count pct | | | 1. | reason_income | 2. | reason_finance | 3. | reason_hh_ch | 4. | reason_bills | 5. | reason_other | 6. | reason_car | 7. | reason_child | 8. | reason_tuition | 9. | reason_repair | 10. | reason_rent | 11. | reason_weather | 12. | reason_no_support | 13. | reason_support | 14. | reason_fixed_inc | 24

NJ SHARES Database Analysis Grant Guidelines - Maximum Grant Amounts
2005 2018 Electric Only $250 $300 $500 $700 Gas Only Electric & Gas $1,000 $1,200 $1,400 Electric Heat Oil/Propane -- 25

NJ SHARES Database Analysis Grant Amounts
2017 Recipients Grant Amount Grant Type Electric Only Gas Only Electric & Gas Electric Heat < $500 39% 50% 17% 27% $500 61% 1% $501 - $699 0% 19% 16% 12% $700 30% 60% $701 - $1199 $1,200 26% Mean Grant $428 $473 $843 $580 26

NJ SHARES Database Analysis % Received Max Grant
27

NJ SHARES Database Analysis Mean Grant Amount By Utility
Note: There were no Rockland Electric grants in 2014 28

PART 2: Utility Data Analysis Methodology
Focused on Q1 and Q grant recipients Comparison groups Q1 and Q recipients Q1 and Q recipients Analysis Payments in Good Faith period Grant coverage of pre-grant balances Ratio of payments made to charges incurred at key intervals Transaction data from utilities Payments Charges Account balances 29

Utility Data Utilities included Request not sent to ETG ACE JCP&L NJNG
PSE&G RECO SJG Request not sent to ETG 30

Utility Data Analysis Group Definitions
2016 Q1 & Q ANALYSIS PERIOD Q1 & Q ANALYSIS PERIOD Q1 & Q ANALYSIS PERIOD GRANT DATE GRANT DATE + 1 YEAR + 1 DAY GRANT DATE + 1 DAY GRANT DATE – 1 DAY 2017 2018 1 YEAR 31

Good Faith Payment Analysis Good Faith Period Definition
Starts 90 days prior to intake Ends the day before the grant is applied to the account Required payment is $100 GOOD FAITH PERIOD INTAKE DATE – 90 DAYS GRANT DATE INTAKE DATE GRANT DATE – 1 DAY 32

Good Faith Payment Analysis Attrition Analysis
Q1 & Q Recipients Number Submitted 619 Number Returned 614 Eligible for Analysis* 585 Percent of Requested Accounts 95% *** last year’s slide only included 2017 grantees. * 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. 33

Good Faith Payment Analysis Percent With Good Faith Payment
Q1 & Q2 Recipients Customer Payments All Payments 2016 2017 2018 Utility That Received Grant 96% 95% 92% 98% 97% Any Utility 99% ** 2016 data taken from last year’s eval. 34

Good Faith Payment Analysis Percent Made Good Faith Payment By Utility
Q1 & Q Recipients Utility Number of Customers Percent Made “Good Faith” Payment Customer Payments All Payments Utility That Received Grant Any Utility ACE 31 97% 100% JCP&L 171 88% 94% 98% NJNG 112 85% 96% PSE&G 256 99% RECO 1 0% SJG 14 93% TOTAL 585 92% 95% 35

Good Faith Payment Analysis Amount of Good Faith Payments Made
Q1 & Q2 Recipients Customer Payments All Payments 2016 2017 2018 $0 2% 3% 1% $1 - $99 5% 0% $100 17% 12% 13% 6% $101 - $250 24% 26% 25% 28% 27% $251 - $500 34% 29% $501 + 21% 30% 31% Mean Payment $422 $374 $359 $492 $425 $457 **2016 taken from last year’s presentation 36

Good Faith Payment Analysis Amount of Good Faith Payments Made By Utility
Q1 & Q Recipients Payments ACE JCP&L NJNG PSE&G RECO SJG Total Number of Customers 31 171 112 256 1 14 585 Mean Payments (Customer Only) $491 $381 $243 $383 $75 $295 $359 (All Payments) $585 $644 $397 $320 $457 37

Good Faith Payment Analysis Amount of Good Faith Payments Made By Poverty Level
** this is for year == also have data for all credits vs. just customer payments. The slide only shows customer payments Federal Poverty Level <225% % % ≥ 300% Mean Payment $355 $305 $388 $360 38

Good Faith Payment Analysis Number of Payments for Those Paying at Least $100
Q1 & Q2 Recipients 2016 2017 2018 1 37% 34% 29% 2 31% 32% 3 or More 40% Mean Number of Payments 2.2 2.5 ** also have data for all credits to account vs. just customer payments Note: Only includes payments made by customer. 39

Grant Coverage Analysis Attrition Analysis
Q1 & Q Recipients Q1 & Q Recipients Q1 & Q Recipients Number Submitted 1,231 1,066 619 Number Returned 1,224 1,051 614 Eligible for Analysis* 1,116 968 583 % of Requested Accounts 91% 94% ***last year’s PPT used only 2017 recipients numbers taken from 2017 log. * 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. 40

Grant Coverage Analysis Grant Coverage
Q1 & Q Recipients Q1 & Q Recipients Q1 & Q Recipients Mean Pre-Grant Balance $956 $931 $908 Mean Grant $684 $662 $668 Mean Post-Grant Balance $274 $271 $241 Mean Percent of Pre-Grant Balances Covered 81% 80% ***2016 numbers taken from 2017 eval. 41

Grant Coverage Analysis Grant Coverage By Utility
Q1 & Q Recipients ACE JCP&L NJNG PSE&G RECO SJG Total Number of Customers 96 138 78 620 4 32 968 Mean Pre-Grant Balance $1,476 $797 $565 $935 $511 $752 $931 Mean Grant $528 $463 $485 $760 $448 $491 $662 Mean Post-Grant Balance $949 $335 $76 $176 $63 $287 $271 Mean Percent of Pre-Grant Balances Covered 53% 77% 87% 85% 92% 74% 80% 42

Grant Coverage Analysis ACE Grant Coverage by Grant Type
ACE Q1 & Q Recipients Electric Heat Electric Non-Heat Total Number of Customers 28 68 96 Mean Pre-Grant Balance $2,025 $1,251 $1,476 Mean Grant $650 $477 $528 Mean Post-Grant Balance $1,375 $773 $949 Mean % of Pre-Grant Balances Covered 54% 53% Notes Highest balances were $9,830, $6,151, and $2,315 Highest balances were $5,451, $2,642, and $1,501 * Electric non-heat = electric only 43

Grant Coverage Analysis ACE Historical Grant Coverage
Q Recipients Q Recipients Q1 & Q Recipients Q1 & Q Recipients Q1 & Q Recipients Q1 & Q Recipients Number of Customers 50 43 - 32 116 96 Mean Pre-Grant Balance $1,133 $1,216 $1,136 $1,548 $1,476 Mean Grant $352 $348 $529 $515 $528 Mean Post-Grant Balance $781 $868 $607 $1,033 $949 Mean Percent of Pre-Grant Balances Covered 47% 76% 71% 52% 53% * Previous years’ data taken from previous years’ presentations * ACE did not provide data in 2015 for their 2014 grant recipients due to switching to a new billing system. 44

Grant Coverage Analysis Balance Exceeds Max Grant Amount
Q1 & Q Recipients Balance > Maximum Grant Amount ACE JCP&L NJNG PSE&G RECO SJG Total Number of Customers 80 71 19 222 1 12 405 Percent of Customers 83% 51% 24% 36% 25% 38% 42% 45

Balance > Maximum Grant Amount
Grant Coverage Analysis ACE Historical Balance vs. Maximum Grant Amount ACE Balance > Maximum Grant Amount Q1 & Q Recipients Q1 & Q Recipients Number of Customers 91 80 Percent of Customers 78% 83% * Previous year’s data taken from previous year’s presentations 46

ACE Q1 & Q2 2017 Recipients Balance > Maximum Grant Amount
Grant Coverage Analysis ACE Balance > Maximum Grant Amount by Grant Type ACE Q1 & Q Recipients Balance > Maximum Grant Amount Electric Heat Electric Non-Heat Total Number of Customers 22 58 80 Percent of Customers 28% 73% 83% * Electric non-heat = electric only 47

Q1 & Q Recipients Balances > Maximum Grant Amount Electric Only Gas Only Electric & Gas Electric Heat Number of Customers 150 53 137 65 Percent of Customers 59% 35% 30% 61% 48

Balance > Maximum Grant Amount Q1 & Q Recipients Main Heating Fuel Electric Gas Other Number of Customers 65 310 30 Percent of Customers 61% 38% 68% 49

Grant Coverage Analysis Grant Coverage By Grant Type
Q1 & Q Recipients Electric Only Gas Only Electric & Gas Electric Heat Number of Customers 255 152 454 107 Mean Pre-Grant Balance $810 $684 $1,022 $1,188 Mean Grant $435 $514 $854 $603 Mean Post-Grant Balance $376 $177 $169 $585 Mean Percent of Pre-Grant Balances Covered 73% 81% 86% 71% 50

Grant Coverage Analysis Grant Coverage By Main Heating Fuel
Q1 & Q Recipients Main Heating Fuel Electric Gas Other Number of Customers 106 818 44 Mean Pre-Grant Balance $1,195 $902 $842 Mean Grant $605 $680 $469 Mean Post-Grant Balance $591 $224 $373 Mean Percent of Pre-Grant Balances Covered 71% 82% 72% 51

Payment Compliance Analysis Attrition Analysis
Q1 & Q2 Recipients 2016 2017 2018 Number Submitted 967 1,066 619 Number Returned 952 1,051 614 Accounts with Usable Data* 947 1,042 606 Amount of Data Available for Analysis 3 Months 678 924 514 6 Months 611 862 498 9 Months 557 798 471 12 Months 526 756 450 Percent of Requested Accounts 54% 71% 73% * An account was eligible for analysis if the utility-reported account balances did not conflict with the utility transactions data. 52

Payment Compliance Analysis Mean Percent of Bills Paid
Date Range 2016 Q1 & Q2 Recipients 2017 Q1 & Q2 Recipients 2018 Q1 & Q2 Recipients Months after Grant Percent Months before Grant Q2 & Q3 2017 15 135% 3 79% 12 122% Q3 & Q4 2017 18 123% 6 84% 9 113% Q & Q1 2018 21 106% 96% Q1 & Q2 2018 24 103% 85% 81% Good payment coverage 2nd year after grant Payment compliance remains fairly steady throughout the year Payment compliance declines prior to grant receipt 53

Payment Compliance Analysis Mean Percent of Bills Paid
Grant Receipt Q1 2012 Q1 2013 Q1 & Q2 2014 Q1 & Q2 2015 Q1 & Q2 2016 Q1 & Q2 2017 Year After Grant Year After Grant Receipt 1st 2nd 3 Months 85% 83% 144% 154% 74% 120% 80% 135% 6 Months 93% 89% 132% 95% 131% 86% 108% 123% 84% 9 Months 94% 91% 126% 88% 119% 98% 82% 106% 1 Year 90% 111% 99% 87% 103% Accounts Included 672 497 318 316 218 474 307 828 526 756 54

Payment Compliance Analysis Mean Percent of Bills Paid By Utility
Q1 & Q Recipients ACE JCP&L NJNG PSE&G RECO SJG Total Number of Customers 73 113 65 482 3 20 756 3 Months 100% 86% 57% 63% 421% 79% 6 Months 103% 89% 75% 60% 220% 84% 9 Months 105% 66% 80% 69% 141% 12 Months 101% 92% 78% 108% 85% 55

Payment Compliance Analysis Percent That Paid More Than 90 and 100 Percent of Billed Amount
Months After Grant 2nd year after grant 1st year after grant Year before grant Q1 & Q Recipients Q1 & Q Recipients Q1 & Q Recipients Pay ≥ 100% Pay ≥ 90% 3 Months 60% 66% 26% 32% 52% 59% 6 Months 65% 73% 28% 38% 54% 9 Months 67% 25% 44% 41% 57% 12 Months 70% 24% 43% 17% 34% 56

Payment Compliance Analysis Percent That Paid More Than 100 Percent of Billed Amount
Months after Grant Receipt Q Recipients Q1 & Q Recipients Q1 & Q Recipients Q1 & Q Recipients Q1 & Q Recipients Year After Grant Receipt First Year After Grant Receipt 1st 2nd 3 Months 30% 70% 32% 63% 20% 54% 26% 60% 6 Months 33% 72% 41% 66% 27% 52% 65% 28% 9 Months 34% 79% 68% 25% 42% 23% 12 Months 48% 24% Accounts Included 497 318 316 218 474 307 828 526 756 57

Payment Compliance Analysis Percent That Paid More Than 90 Percent of Billed Amount
Months after Grant Receipt Q Recipients Q1 & Q Recipients Q1 & Q Recipients Q1 & Q Recipients Q1 & Q Recipients Year After Grant Receipt First Year After Grant Receipt 1st 2nd 3 Months 34% 75% 37% 68% 27% 63% 32% 66% 6 Months 43% 81% 51% 35% 73% 38% 9 Months 50% 88% 46% 80% 58% 36% 67% 44% 12 Months 39% 84% 48% 70% 45% Accounts Included 497 318 316 218 474 307 828 526 756 58

Payment Compliance Analysis By Utility
Q1 & Q Recipients Pay≥100% ACE JCP&L NJNG PSE&G RECO SJG 3 Months 42% 33% 20% 75% 6 Months 51% 31% 29% 22% 0% 90% 9 Months 55% 23% 14% 21% 85% 12 Months 34% 17% 65% Accounts Included 73 113 65 482 3 20 Q1 & Q Recipients Pay≥90% ACE JCP&L NJNG PSE&G RECO SJG 3 Months 51% 42% 22% 27% 33% 85% 6 Months 59% 44% 38% 32% 0% 90% 9 Months 63% 54% 29% 39% 12 Months 67% 61% 34% 35% 75% Accounts Included 73 113 65 482 3 20 59

Payment Compliance Analysis Bill Balance Following Grant Receipt
60

Payment Compliance Analysis Segmentation Analysis
Successful (32%) Marginal Success (5%) Need More Help (63%) 61

Success One Year After Grant Receipt Q1 2008 Q1 2009 Q1 2010 Q1 2011 Q1 2012 Q1 2013 Q1 & Q2 2014 Q1 & Q2 2015 Q1 & Q2 2016 Q1 & Q2 2017 Successful 19% 32% 49% 26% 29% 38% 34% Marginal Success 5% 6% 7% Need More Help 76% 61% 62% 44% 69% 66% 57% 55% 60% 63% TOTAL 100% 62

Q1 & Q Recipients Grant Type Ending Balance <$100 Balance Declined, Ending Balance ≥ $100 Balance Increased by <$100 Balance Increased by TOTAL Electric Only 26% 18% 6% 49% 100% Gas Only 19% 5% 57% Electric & Gas 15% 4% 74% Electric Heat 17% 9%

Successful (57%) Marginal Success (9%) Need More Help (35%) 64

Q Recipients Q1 & Q Recipients Q1 & Q Recipients Q1 & Q Recipients Q1 & Q Recipients Year After Grant Receipt 1st 2nd Successful 29% 67% 38% 69% 55% 34% 57% 32% Marginal Success 5% 8% 9% 7% 10% 6% Need More Help 66% 25% 22% 35% 60% 63% Accounts Included 497 318 316 218 474 307 828 526 756 65

Payment Compliance Analysis Segmentation Analysis By Utility
Q1 & Q Recipients 66 66

Q1 & Q Recipients Ending Balance <$100 Balance Declined, Ending Balance ≥ $100 Balance Increased by <$100 Balance Increased by Number of Customers 144 95 40 477 Percent of Customers 19% 13% 5% 63% Mean Pre-Grant Balance $580 $1,857 $802 $880 Mean Grant Amount $549 $634 $540 $685 Mean Post-Grant Balance $27 $1,223 $260 $200 Mean Number of Payments* 10 8 Mean Percent of Bills Paid 105% 122% 96% 70% * Note: Only customer payments are counted. 67

Q1 & Q Recipients Ending Balance <$100 Balance Declined, Ending Balance ≥ $100 Balance Increased by <$100 Balance Increased by Number of Customers 144 95 40 477 Percent of Customers 19% 13% 5% 63% Mean Charges $1,892 $2,820 $2,026 $2,309 Mean Payments $2,011 $3,348 $1,972 $1,655 68

Q1 & Q Recipients Balance Increased by $100 - $399 Balance Increased by $400 - $999 Balance Increased by $1,000 + Number of Customers 204 193 80 Percent of Customers 27% 26% 11% Mean Pre-Grant Balance $696 $904 $1,291 Mean Grant Amount $566 $723 $898 Mean Post-Grant Balance $135 $189 $393 Mean Number of Payments* 9 7 Mean Percent of Bills Paid 83% 67% 45% * Note: Only customer payments are counted. 69

Q1 & Q Recipients Balance Increased by $100 - $399 Balance Increased by $400 - $999 Balance Increased by $1,000 + Number of Customers 204 193 80 Percent of Customers 27% 26% 11% Mean Charges $1,849 $2,384 $3,298 Mean Payments $1,600 $1,733 $1,610 70

Q1 & Q Recipients Ending Balance <$100 Balance Declined, Ending Balance ≥ $100 Balance Increased by <$100 Balance Increased by Number of Customers 144 95 40 477 Percent of Customers 19% 13% 5% 63% Median Annual Income $45,426 $49,524 $42,108 $46,116 < 225% FPL 15% 23% 20% 18% 225% - 249% FPL 24% 17% 250% - 299% FPL 25% 28% 27% ≥ 300% FPL 42% 40% 38% Percent Single-Parent 10% 16% Percent Elderly-Only

Q1 & Q Recipients Balance Increased by $100 - $399 Balance Increased by $400 - $999 Balance Increased by $1,000 + Number of Customers 204 193 80 Percent of Customers 27% 26% 11% Median Annual Income $45,096 $48,228 $45,606 < 225% FPL 21% 17% 15% 225% - 249% FPL 22% 12% 19% 250% - 299% FPL 32% 30% ≥ 300% FPL 37% 39% 36% Percent Single-Parent 13% Percent Elderly-Only 18% 14% 72

Payment Compliance Analysis Segmentation Analysis of Elderly Households
Q1 & Q Recipients Elderly Only Non-Elderly Only Difference Number of Customers 133 623 -- Percent of Customers 18% 82% Pre-Grant Balance $785 $966 -$182* Grant Amount $571 $661 -$90* Post-Grant Balance $217 $307 -$90 # % Success 47 35% 192 31% 5% Marginal Success 10 8% 30 3% Needs More Help 76 57% 401 64% -7% * Statistically significant at the 95% level 73

Receipt of Energy Assistance USF or LIHEAP
Utility Received USF or LIHEAP in 12 Months Following Grant Receipt Q1 2013 Q1 & Q2 2014 Q1 & Q2 2015 Q1 & Q2 2016 Q1 & Q2 2017 N % ACE 35 11% - 25 16% 92 17% 73 4% ETG 17 24% JCP&L 49 6% 34 8% 86 9% 113 NJNG 33 12% 21 5% 14% 65 PSE&G 334 7% 265 364 586 482 RECO 1 0% 2 3 SJG 28 13 20 TOTAL 497 316 474 828 756 *N indicates the total number of grant recipients from that utility company - not the number of recipients from each utility company that also received USF or LIHEAP 74

Receipt of Energy Assistance USF or LIHEAP Recipients
Utility Received USF or LIHEAP in “Good Faith” Period Q1 2013 Q1 & Q2 2014 Q1 & Q2 2015 Q1 & Q2 2016 Q1 & Q2 2017 N % ACE 35 3% - 25 8% 92 4% 73 ETG 17 0% JCP&L 47 34 49 2% 86 113 NJNG 33 12 65 PSE&G 295 1% 265 364 586 482 <1% RECO 1 2 3 SJG 26 13 28 20 TOTAL 454 316 474 828 756 *N indicates the total number of grant recipients from that utility company - not the number of recipients from each utility company that also received USF or LIHEAP 75

Key Findings Decrease in grants from 2016 to 2017
1,390 recipients in 2017 compared to 2,213 in 2016 $842,290 grant dollars in 2017 compared to $1,417,663 in 2016 NJ SHARES serves needy households Children under the age of six: 15% Family member over 60: 28% Single parent households: 17% Annual income below $50,000: 58% NJ SHARES serves the working poor 80% of households have employment income NJ SHARES provides grants to those in temporary need of assistance 78% received a grant in only one of the past 10 years 8% received a grant in more than two of the past 10 years In 90 days before grant, 2018 recipients averaged 2.5 payments and $359 in payments 76

Key Findings Clients coming in for help earlier
Fewer have service shut off when they come in 4% of clients with service shut off at grant application in 2017 Compared to peak of 13% in 2015 Lower balance at grant application Mean balance declined to $897 in 2017 From $1,248 in 2014, $1,082 in 2015, and $996 in 2016 Electric grants still show greater unmet need 60% of electric heat and 61% of electric-only 2017 grant recipients received max grant Compared to 30% of gas-only grants and 26% of electric and gas grants Opportunity for referrals 18% of 2017 grant recipients have income below 225% of poverty and are potentially eligible for Comfort Partners 77

Key Findings Payment compliance in 1st year after grant declined
32% of Q1 & Q grant recipients were successful Compared to 38% in Q1 & Q and 2014, and 34% in 2016 Payment compliance in 2nd year after grant is lower than historical levels 57% of Q1 & Q recipients were successful in 2nd year after grant Compared to 69% in 2014, and 67% in 2013 78

NJ SHARES 2018 Evaluation Presentation

Similar presentations

Presentation on theme: "NJ SHARES 2018 Evaluation Presentation"— Presentation transcript:

Similar presentations

About project

Feedback

Log in

Auth with social network:

NJ SHARES 2018 Evaluation Presentation

Similar presentations

Presentation on theme: "NJ SHARES 2018 Evaluation Presentation"— Presentation transcript:

Similar presentations

About project

Feedback