Appendix 1. FRN Comments and Responses

Appendix 1. Federal Register Notice Comments & Responses

#	Commentor	Comment	Change Decision	Change Notes
1	NEADA	Quarterly Instructions- On page 3 there is a box explaining unduplicated household counts. It cuts off in the middle of a sentence and the instructions in that box are not continued anywhere.	Accept Change	OCS has corrected this formatting issue.
2	NEADA	Quarterly Instructions- On page 5, there is an attempt to show how households assisted by service types would be counted in multiple cells, (after the sentence “Based on the scenarios described above, the answers to questions 1-3 in Section II of the report would be as follows:” –but the table has all zeros.	Accept Change	OCS has corrected this formatting/typo issue.
3	NEADA	Quarter 4 Spreadsheet- Cell C12 in each quarter is supposed to add the total unduplicated households for each quarter to get a running cumulative total. For Quarters 1-3 cell C12 adds the number in B12 for all previous quarters. However, for Quarter 4, cell C12 adds the cumulative total from Quarter 3 (cell C12) and not just the number of households from Quarter 3, resulting in an incorrect total number of cumulative households for Quarter 4.	Accept Change	OCS has corrected this formula issue.
4	National Consumer Law Center/Natural Resources Defense Council	OCS should commit to publishing all reported data, including in the form of a public facing tracker or “dashboard.” The tracker should present data on both households served and amounts of assistance provided, including sufficient geographic breakdown of data to assess whether funds are being equitably allocated within the states.	No Change	OCS will publish a dashboard with data from the quarterly and annual reports. Data will be made available by state and/or in aggregate form.
5	NEADA	NEADA is also concerned about the addition of demographic data to be collected from LIHWAP households. While we recognize that these data elements were disclosed in the LIHWAP Terms and Conditions, they still represent an increase in the required reporting compared to LIHEAP. The fact that these data elements are optional in 2021 and 2022 does not make their inclusion any more reasonable. NEADA anticipates that most state LIHWAP offices will have exhausted the majority of their limited allocations prior to Federal Fiscal Year 2023. As a result, implementing new data requirements for a small portion of LIHWAP recipients in the final year of the program adds additional burden with few benefits. At best, the data collected will provide an incomplete picture of the households served through the program as it will only include states that did not spend their full allocations in prior years.	No Change	OCS appreciates the concerns regarding the reporting burden associated with the collection of demographic data. However, OCS has determined that collecting demographic data is critical for assessing the success of our efforts to conduct outreach and distribute resources equitably, while also assessing ongoing needs of the populations we serve. Other stakeholders have called on OCS to include demographic data collection earlier on in the program’s implementation. To balance the needs of ensuring equitable implementation and not overburdening grant recipients, OCS will continue to require demographic data collection for household applicants in FY 2023. Demographic data collection for household applicants and members will remain optional in FY 2022. OCS is implementing demographic data collection for household applicants in LIHEAP beginning in FY 2023. Given the significant overlap in LIHWAP and LIHEAP grant recipients, OCS has aligned the demographic data collection start dates to reduce grant recipient reporting burden and ideally increase efficiencies.
6	NEADA	Quarterly form- Service type B is called “Multiple Water Services”, however in the instructions it is called “Multiple Services” (no water). a. The definition of “Multiple Services” in the instructions states “assistance with both water/wastewater services and non-water services” and discusses that other non-water utilities may be assisted in order to restore or prevent loss of water services. Having a category to specifically capture instances where non-water utilities are paid is confusing when on the form it is labelled “Multiple Water Services” and is inconsistent with the instructions provided for the form.	Accept Change	OCS has changed the language to "Multiple Water Services" in the instructions and added clarifying language around use of funds for this category.
7	Water Advocate Groups1	Quarterly Section IV - Performance Management: In addition to the metrics outlined in this section, we recommend adding the following: 1. Capturing utility data that provide essential information on the scope of need prior to program implementation, including: (a. Number of households that have had their water shutoff/disconnected, b. Number of households that have received notice that their water will be shut off/disconnected, c. Number of households in arrearages, average amount of debt per household and range (lowest and highest arrearages). Including baseline data allows states and HHS to clearly understand the level of impact and success of the program. 2. A brief description of their process for identifying and prioritizing households in need	Alternate Approach	Adding a requirement to collect this information at this stage would place a significant burden on grant recipients and could create unintentional consequences. However, OCS will undertake a similar research project to better understand what data is available and what can be collected to both better understand the landscape of water and wastewater needs and improve services.
8	Water Advocate Groups	Annual Sections V-VIII: We recommend that the data collection of race, ethnicity, and gender for Fiscal Year 2022 be required for assisted household applicants and assistant household members, rather than optional. - It seems adequate that this is optional for FY 2021- adding four indicators should not be an unreasonable burden for recipients. -Reporting on race and ethnicity is in alignment with the Administration’s priorities related to a “whole-of-government” approach to environmental justice and the Justice40 initiative and it is critical to have robust data on the equitable distribution of funds by household race and ethnicity. - Inclusion of housing-type: We suggest including the total number of households assisted by housing-type: homeowner, single-family renter occupied or multifamily renter occupied. This is important to measure whether program benefits are reaching tenants, who are often excluded from existing water utility discount programs.	Alternate Approach	As discussed above, OCS agrees that collecting demographic data is critical for assessing the success of our efforts to conduct outreach and distribute resources equitably, while also assessing ongoing needs of the populations we serve. However, in order to collect this data a significant number of grant recipients will have to update their applications and IT systems. The latter can take a considerable amount of time. In an effort to balance both the need to collect this important data and ensure that the reporting requirements do not cause a disruption in benefit issuance, OCS will require demographic data collection for household applicants in FY 2023. Demographic data collection for household applicants and members will remain optional in FY 2022. OCS agrees with the commentors that adding a data collection for households assisted by housing type is a valuable addition. This is something that OCS was intending to add to the data collection efforts. However, similar to the demographic data, submitting this data will be optional for the remainder of FY 2022. OCS will require the collection of this data in the annual report beginning in FY 2023.
9	National Consumer Law Center/Natural Resources Defense Council	We urge OCS to add key financial metrics to the quarterly reports, which are critical to monitoring the success of the program. The proposed quarterly reports include data on the number of households served, but do not request data on the amount of funds committed or disbursed for household assistance...If states do not rapidly stand up their programs and disburse benefits, the program will not serve its intended purpose. Therefore, it is critical that quarterly reports provide a means of tracking states’ rates of spending.	Alternate Approach	OCS is monitoring each grant recipient’s spend down rate and agrees that it would be beneficial to include this information in the quarterly reports. As such, OCS will add obligation data to quarters 3 and 4 for FY 2022 and will collect obligation data quarterly in FY 2023.
10	National Consumer Law Center/Natural Resources Defense Council	Ideally, OCS would be providing monthly data reporting, but we understand the challenges in standing up a water assistance program given the sheer number of water and wastewater utilities. Like the FCC and Treasury, HHS’s OCS should be transparent about the performance of its emergency COVID-19 low-income assistance program and post the information on its website in a timely fashion, no later than 30 days after the reports are due. We note the frequency and detail of the FCC and Treasury data.	Alternate Approach	OCS will publish the data on a quarterly basis. Quarterly data will be published within 45-60 days following the submission deadline. Data from the annual report will also be published in a dashboard within 45-60 days following the submission deadline.
11	National Consumer Law Center/Natural Resources Defense Council	Similarly, the data in the annual LIHWAP reports should also be publicly available on the LIHWAP tracker. The individual reports should be publicly available and the tracker should post the data in a manner that informs the public about how the program has been performing at the state and local level as well as in the aggregate. We note that HHS has experience preparing state summaries for the LIHEAP program. However, the data from the annual LIHWAP report should be posted in a timely manner on the tracker, also within 30 days of the due date. Thus, timely quarterly and annual tracker updates should be filed in a spreadsheet format like Treasury’s ERAP monthly reports or on a website like FCC’s EBB Tracker.	Alternate Approach	Quarterly and annual report data will be used to both provide an analysis of grant recipients’ performance and identify challenges and technical assistance needs so that OCS can best support grant recipients in administering LIHWAP in an efficient and effective manner. The latter information will not be made public by state, tribe, or territory to ensure grant recipients can be forthcoming and receive the assistance they need to successfully administer the program. However, we will provide this information in aggregate form. Given the dual purpose of the data reports, OCS will not publish the quarterly and annual reports themselves. Instead, OCS will release quarterly and annual data in a dashboard within 45-60 days of the reporting deadline. OCS will need time to clean, consolidate, and disseminate the submitted data. Additionally, LIHWAP grant recipients are states, tribes, and territories. All data will be provided at this level. At this time, OCS does not have the ability to collect local level data.
12	National Consumer Law Center/Natural Resources Defense Council	We recommend that OCS ask states to include in their reports any available information that would help quantify the immediate need for assistance that cannot be met by available LIHWAP funding, including the universe of customers who did not receive or apply for LIHWAP benefits. For example, the proposed annual report form asks for the number of households “waitlisted for non-availability of funds.” This data point would be extremely valuable to have during the first year, in the quarterly reports, in order to inform policymakers of unmet need. For the same reason, reporting on waitlisted households should include data on the amount of funding for which households may have been eligible, to the extent that information is available (e.g., based on the arrearage amount listed on an application).	Alternate Approach	OCS sees the value in collecting data on waitlisted households on a quarterly basis; however, given the emergency and limited nature of the program, we will not require grant recipients to report on waitlisted households quarterly due to ongoing concerns regarding grant recipient reporting burden. However, OCS will analyze the qualitative data provided by grant recipients in Section 4 of the quarterly reports to identify unmet water and wastewater needs in each grant recipient’s service area.
13	National Consumer Law Center/Natural Resources Defense Council	Additionally, states can be encouraged to gather from vendors and submit to OCS data that includes non-applicant residential customers, such as: the number of residential customers disconnected for non-payment, the number of residential customers eligible for disconnection for non-payment but not yet disconnected, the total dollar amount of residential customer arrears that are at least 60 days overdue, the amount of funding for arrearage forgiveness available from other sources, and availability of and participation rates in deferred payment agreements.	Alternate Approach	OCS agrees this data collection is valuable; however, as stated above, OCS does not believe it is currently feasible to ask grant recipients to collect this data. However, OCS will explore the feasibility of collecting this information through a research project.
14	NEADA	NEADA is very concerned about the addition of quarterly reports that were not disclosed in the LIHWAP Terms and Conditions or the Dear Colleague Letter “2021-05 LIHWAP Funding Release” published in June 2021...States that developed their LIHWAP data collection processes based on this guidance do not have the capability to add additional reports to the system without significant expense and administrative burden...the addition of a quarterly reporting requirement at this late stage of implementation is an unreasonable expectation of state offices.	No Change	OCS appreciates the concerns regarding administrative burden for grant recipients and has worked diligently to reduce the burden of quarterly reporting to the greatest extent possible. However, OCS has determined that quarterly reports are essential in implementing this emergency program. The quarterly reports will allow OCS to identify areas for necessary technical assistance, assess progress among recipients, and provide a format for consultation with recipients regarding areas of challenges and opportunities.
15	Water Advocate Groups	Quarterly Section I - Total households assisted: While capturing the total amount of households assisted is important, we recommend the following additional metrics: 1. Total number of households that applied for LIHWAP benefits 2. Total number of households waitlisted for LIHWAP benefits due to insufficient funds 3. Total amount of LIHWAP funds allocated to households, including average amount per household 4. Maximum benefit available to households 5. We also strongly encourage reporting to be disaggregated by community and/or vendor. Preferably, data within a utility’s service area could be reported at a zip code-level. If zip code-level specificity is not feasible, we request that recipients report a breakdown of geographic areas with as much specificity as possible (i.e. at the county level).	No Change	OCS agrees that many of the metrics listed would produce informative data. However, given the emergency nature of LIHWAP, OCS needs to ensure that we are only collecting data on a quarterly basis that is essential to our monitoring and oversight. In particular, disaggregating data by community and/or vendor would constitute a significant burden for grant recipients and a change in their data systems. Please note that the maximum benefit available to households can be found in the grant recipient’s implementation plans located here: https://www.acf.hhs.gov/ocs/lihwap-implementation-plans
16	Water Advocate Groups	Quarterly Section II - Assistance provided by service type: In addition to the suggested metrics, we suggest adding “reduction or elimination of water arrearages” as a category of assistance type. This metric is essential to capturing households that face penalties other than water shutoffs for their debt, such as liens.	No Change	This data request would be duplicative as households will not be disconnected from service or have a prevention of disconnection without having arrearages. Therefore, we are capturing households served with reduction or elimination of arrearages in the existing assistance type categories.
17	Water Advocate Groups	Quarterly Section III - LIHWAP implementation information: In addition to the suggested metrics, we propose an additional question or set of questions on implementation for Quarter 1 and Quarter 2: 1. How have you tracked outreach and education to water vendors in your state, territory, or tribe regarding LIHWAP? For example, through emails, flyers, webinars, etc. 2. Are there specific regions of your state that are lagging behind in entering into vendor agreements? (If so, are there training and/or technical assistance needs that the Office of Community Services can support in those regions?) 3. Number of water vendors recipient has entered into an agreement with by size of service population: very small (500 or fewer), small (501-3,330 people), mid (3,331- 10,000), large (10,001 to 100,000), very large (>100,000)	No Change	1. OCS asks a question about outreach activities to vendors in the LIHWAP implementation plans and OCS will also follow-up with grant recipients during our ongoing T/TA efforts to assess progress on vendor outreach. 2. Question 5 in Section 3 asks grant recipients to report if there are areas of the state/territory/tribe that have not reached full implementation, and Question 4 in Section 4 asks grant recipients about T/TA needs. OCS does not feel it is necessary to add in another separate question seeking this information. 3. OCS is working on compiling a spreadsheet with similar information and will publish our findings publicly.
18	Water Advocate Groups	Quarterly- Additional Data Collection - Actual Funding Amounts Disbursed: In addition to the metrics outlined above, quarterly tracking of how much money each recipient has committed and disbursed is necessary to understand how effective the recipients are at distributing funds. Reporting this quarterly will allow for mid-course correction in states that are lagging.	Alternate Approach	OCS agrees with the comment regarding obligation and will be adding this data collection to quarters 3 and 4 (and in every quarter in FY 2023). The addition of expenditure data is not necessary as OCS has access to this data through the Payment Management System and can track grant recipient expenditure of funds.
19	Water Advocate Groups	Annual- Module 1 - Use of Funds Report: We support the sections currently outlined and would suggest adding one additional category of type of water assistance prioritized: Reduction of arrearages for households that receive debt forgiveness and are served by utilities that use liens rather than water shutoffs. This is consistent with the language found in the American Rescue Plan Act of 2021, "providing funds to owners or operators of public water systems or treatment works to reduce arrearages of and rates charged."	No Change	This data request would be duplicative as households will not be disconnected from service or have a prevention of disconnection without having arrearages. Therefore, we are capturing households served with reduction or elimination of arreages in the existing assistance type categories. OCS has issued guidance that payment of tax liens to restore service or prevent disconnection is an allowable use of funds.
20	Water Advocate Groups	Annual- Module 2 - LIHWAP Household Report: The data collected in this module is arguably the most important for states to track and report. We reiterate the importance of tracking the number of households that applied but are waitlisted for LIHWAP benefits. We also make the following recommendations for additional information to be collected in Section I - Number of Households: Similar to our comments above regarding the quarterly reports, we support reporting on the following metrics to demonstrate the full scope of household need addressed or yet to be addressed by LIHWAP funds. We strongly encourage reporting on the following metrics be disaggregated by community and/or vendor: 1. Total households that applied for LIHWAP benefits 2. Total households waitlisted for LIHWAP benefits due to non-availability of funds 3. Total eligible households that did not receive funds and for whom a waitlist was unavailable 4. Total amount of LIHWAP funds allocated to households, including average amount per household 5. Total unmet need in the form of: (a. Number of eligible applicants that did not receive funds due to nonavailability of funds, b. Total amount of outstanding debt/arrears (dollar amount) not addressed by LIHWAP due to non-availability of funds)	No Change	OCS agrees that these data elements are valuable; however, given the emergency nature of this program, OCS feels that at this time these data points are not essential for collection, particularly given the urgent need to assist households as quickly as possible. OCS believes these data metrics should be included for consideration should the LIHWAP program receive a permanent authorization. While OCS sees value in disaggregating these data points by community/vendor; this data collection would be especially burdensome for grant recipients. However, collecting data in this manner could be a possible project OCS engages in with grant recipients that have centralized/robust data systems and are able to report the data in this way.
21	Water Advocate Groups	Annual Sections III and IV: These sections clearly outline requirements for collecting information on household poverty level and vulnerable populations. We recommend reporting on water and wastewater bills as a share of household income for participating customers to capture the impact of assistance, in line with LIHWAP statute that assistance shall be especially for “those with the lowest incomes, that pay a high proportion of household income for drinking water and wastewater services."	No Change	OCS has encouraged grant recipients to prioritize funds to pay the full bill necessary to reconnect service or prevent disconnection. If LIHWAP receives a permeant authorization, this is something that would be considered.
22	Water Advocate Groups	Annual- Module 3 - Performance Management This section of reporting is again critical in understanding the need for low-income water assistance and the efficacy of the current program design and implementation. In addition to the points outlined in Sections I-IV, we recommend the following metrics: -Section I: Water Burden Targeting - As iterated above, disaggregated data by household type, community, vendor and/or utility size is important in understanding what is and is not working in implementation and where certain communities and funding recipients may require additional assistance. For this reason, we recommend adding language to require this level of detail in the water burden targeting section of Module 3.	No Change	As noted above, OCS will not be asking grant recipients to disaggregate data at this granular level due to concerns about grant recipient burden and feasibility of this data collection in an emergency program. As discussed above, OCS will be conducting an analysis of the vendor landscape and will share the results publicly.
23	Water Advocate Groups	Annual- Module 3- Recommend adding the additional categories: 1. Trends in application for assistance - To better understand the need for water services support, it is important to know when households apply more than once for assistance. This information gives a better picture of how frequently this resource may be used in certain areas, especially: a. Total households that applied for and received LIHWAP funds more than once, disaggregated by community and/or vendor, b. Total households that applied for LIHWAP funds more than once but did not receive all funds for which they applied, disaggregated by community and/or vendor. 2. Vendor performance - Tracking data on vendor performance is just as important as metrics regarding household impact. We recommend adding the following metrics to Module 3 to capture vendor performance data: a. Total households assisted, b. Total amount allocated per vendor and service population: very small (500 or fewer), small (501-3,330 people), mid (3,331-10,000), large (10,001 to 100,000), very large (>100,000)	No Change	As noted above, OCS will not be asking grant recipients to disaggregate data at this granular level due to concerns about grant recipient burden and feasibility of this data collection in an emergency program. OCS will be conducting an analysis of the vendor landscape and will share this publicly.
24	National Consumer Law Center/Natural Resources Defense Council	If the LIHWAP data must be aggregated to protect personally identifiable information, the data may be aggregated to balance the public accountability of the operation of LIHWAP programs and the individual’s right to privacy. In addition to municipal or county level reporting, the information on the quarterly reports should also be aggregated and reported at the state level on the OCS tracker. The public as well as policy makers will want to know how LIHWAP is performing in their states. This information can also inform the need for targeted outreach in certain parts of a state to increase enrollment in areas that are being underserved. It will be important for the public to know how quickly the funds are being obligated and if there are parts of the country that will be out of funds quickly.	No Change	OCS is not collecting PII in our data collection. OCS will share information gleaned from the reports in a public dashboard.
25	National Consumer Law Center/Natural Resources Defense Council	To the extent that annual reports include certain quantitative metrics that are not included in quarterly reports, the annual report should require a breakdown by quarter. This will allow at least a retrospective assessment of the pace of program implementation in each state during the first year.	Alternate Approach	Given that the most salient metrics will be reported quarterly with the addition of obligation data to quarterly reports, OCS believes this request would be an unwarranted, added burden for grant recipients.
26	National Consumer Law Center/Natural Resources Defense Council	We recommend that the quarterly reporting continue until all program funds have been obligated and in a timely and transparent basis, rather than sunsetting after the first year of the program.	Accept Change	OCS agrees and will work to implement quarterly reports in FY 2023.
27	Jean Public	there is no need for quarterly reports at all and such should be immediately defunded and not done. a report every year or every 2 years is more than often enough. this comment is for the public record. please receipt. jean public [email protected]	No Change	OCS has determined that quarterly reports are essential in implementing this emergency program. The quarterly reports will allow OCS to identify areas for necessary technical assistance, assess progress among recipients, and provide a format for consultation with recipients regarding areas of challenges and opportunities.
28	Water Advocate Groups	We request that data collected must be published online, including in an easy to-understand dashboard. An online dashboard maintained by HHS using the data collected in quarterly and annual reports would be immensely helpful in tracking program use and success/disparities across states. As a model, the FCC’s dashboard for the Emergency Broadband Benefit program includes financials and enrollment data. We applaud the state of Minnesota’s effort to clearly convey demographic information on their LIHWAP online dashboard and would like to see public-facing reporting of reported data by HHS.	No Change	OCS will publish the quarterly and annual data in a public facing dashboard.
29	National Consumer Law Center/Natural Resources Defense Council	Quarterly and annual reports should include: 1. Program eligibility criteria for households to qualify for assistance 2. Number of households that applied for assistance and the number receiving assistance, broken out by owners and renters and by the number of participants whose applications were approved based on categorical eligibility versus documentation of income eligibility 3. Average amount of the household support and a copy of the benefit matrix, if applicable 4. Number and type of system operators or owners receiving program funds (i.e., drinking water or wastewater, publicly owned or privately owned), sizes of systems receiving funds (e.g., grouped by size of population served), and amount of funds paid out by system type and size 5. Total and average amount of funds directed to customer arrears (broken out by drinking water or wastewater and owner versus tenant) 6. Total and average amount directed to current bills (broken out by drinking water or wastewater and owner versus tenant)	Alternate Approach	1. Program eligibility criteria is already collected in the grant recipient implementation plans, that data can be found here: https://www.acf.hhs.gov/ocs/lihwap-implementation-plans 2. As noted above, OCS will ask grant recipients to break out households served by homeowners and renters in the annual report beginning in FY 2023. OCS will not require grantees to report this data quarterly or by categorical eligibility vs. documentation of income eligibility due to concerns regarding grant recipient reporting burden. 3. The annual report requires grant recipients to report on average benefit. OCS will not require this reporting on a quarterly basis due to reporting burden. Please note, most states are not currently using a benefit matrix because their funding is being used to serve the first two priority groups. 4. This would place a significant burden on grant recipients’ as most accounting systems do not have the ability to report the data this way. 5. OCS is asking for total funds spent to reconnect or prevent disconnection of water/wastewater service in the annual report. OCS will not require further disaggregation of this data or reporting it on a quarterly basis due to concerns regarding grantee reporting burden. 6. OCS is asking for total funds spent on rate reduction for water/wastewater bills in the annual report, OCS will not require further disaggregation of this data or reporting it on a quarterly basis due to concerns regarding grantee reporting burden.

1 Water advocate groups include the following organizations: Alabama Rivers Alliance, Alliance for the Great Lakes, Center for Water Security and Cooperation, Food and Water Watch, Natural Resources Defense Council, River Network, We the People of Detroit

9