Abstract
State financing approaches to low-income energy assistance illustrate important program trade-offs in terms of goals and efficiency. This evaluation studied the trade-offs associated with Michigan's new experimental program, the Voluntary Heating Fuel Budget Plan (VHF). It was concluded that VHF was an effective design for a particular segment of the population. Prior to enrollment. VHF participants tended to have higher fuel consumption and more bill payment problems than nonparticipants. After enroll ment, the participants did not change their heating fuel consumption. A cost-avoidance analysis indicated that by including VHF as a second program option, Michigan reduced the cost of providing energy assistance over what would have been expected under its previous monolithic approach.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
