CAMBRIDGE ACTION TO SAVE HEAT:
A CASE STUDY OF A WEATHERIZATION PROGRAM
by
RIEKO HAYASHI
B.A. Columbia University
Submitted to the Department of
Urban Planning
in Partial Fulfillment of the
Requirements of the Degree of
MASTER OF CITY PLANNING
at the
MASSACHUSETTS INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY
May 1983
Rieko Hayashi 1983
ii
I)
Signature of Author
Department of U'rban Planning
23 May 1983
Certified by
Tnesis Supervisor
Accepted by:
Chairman, City Planning
Departmental Committee
MASSACHUSETTS INSTITUTE
OF TECHNOLOGY
JUL 21 1983
LIBRARIES
CONTENTS
ABSTRACT
I.
INTRODUCTION
II.
DESCRIPTION OF
III. THE
1
PROGRAM
PARTICIPANTS
5
9
IV.
RESULTS
23
V.
ANALYSIS OF RESULTS
24
VI.
RECOMMENDATIONS
28
BIBLIOGRAPHY
END
NOTES
CAMBRIDGE ACTION
A
CASE
STUDY
TO
SAVE
HEAT:
OF A WEATHERIZATION
PROGRAM
by
RIEKO
HAYASHI
Submitted to the Department of Urban Studies
and Planning on May 23, 1983 in partial
fulfillment of the requirements for the
Degree of Master of City Planning
ABSTRACT
This thesis was written to assist the weatherization
program's,
Cambridge Action to Save Heat (C.A.S.H.),
effort
to recruit a larger sector of Fuel Assistance participants
The central question I looked at was
in their program.
what do Fuel Assistance participants perceive as the
obstacles to undertaking a weatherization program and what
incentives do these people need to undertake weatherization
programs.
Despite the consensus of experts on the importance of
energy conservation, the number of residents in Massachusetts making substantial investments in energy conservation
To better understand these previously low
remains small.
levels of participation from the perspective of the Fuel
Assistance participants, I thought it best to ask the user
how he perceives
the weatherization
program.
Iusedt ifteen
people who have participated in or are eligible to
cipate in C.A.S.H. as case studies to learn from.
parti-
By speaking with these participants and discovering what
they felt were the important issues concerning weatherization, I hoped to have developed a list of criteria by which
to evaluate other energy programs with more sensitivity
to the user.
Thesis
Supervisor:
Title:
Phillip Herr
Associate
Professor
of
Urban
Planning
INTRODUCTION
low-income
people
incentives
do
how
be
particularly
have
reports
Low
programs.
steps
in
house
order
cost/no
Currently
investments
there
is
the
in
conservation
by
the
attacking
studies
low
the
significant
experts
number
a proposal
of
By
as
of
on
cost
air
cold
the
large
and
energy
energy
Savings
and
efficacy
cost/no
defined
is
energy
1981 and
Fuel
Massachusetts
and
of
(Berman and
DOE/FOMAC Report
1981 2).
the
energy
conservainto
the
savings.
importance of
residents making
conservation
we
These
poor.
from the
infiltration
consensus
conservation,
stantial
cost
receive
to
the
of
documented both
which require
Despite
energy
1981:
of weatherization
potential
tion
cost
MCAF Evaluation,
1982:
Evaluation,
only
a
on
dependency
inefficient housing, will
evaluation studies.
statewide
these
that
sensible
the most
sector's
a number
CBO Study
1981:
Cooper,
their
living.
of
encourage
energy
supported by
are
claims
energy
the
to mitigate
able
to
Proponents argue
measures.
causes,
is
resources
energy
scarce
agree
the residential
to decrease
concern for
a
of
out
costs
basic
and policy makers
Analysts
way
other
in meeting
difficulty
came
themselves warm given
low-income people keep
what
undertake weatheriza-
to
questions
These
and
homes,
their
from weatherizing
these people need
tion programs.
have prevented
obstacles
at what
looks
thesis
This
remains
in Massachusetts
to
subsmall.
request
2
the
shifting of funds
from fuel assistance
weatherization programs.
With the assumption
the greater availability of
funds is not
incentive to motivate the user,
understand
it
is
low-cost
that just
sufficient
important to better
these previously low levels of participation
from the perspective of
therefore,
to
the fuel assistance participants;
to ask the user how he per-
I thought it best
ceives weatherization programs.
I decided to
use people
who have participated in a particular weatherization
I interviewed
program as case studies to learn from.
fifteen people who have either participated or are eligible
to participate
in the C.A.S.H.
(Cambridge Action to
weatherization program.
Heat)
I selected C.A.S.H. as
the
organization I would work
with because it had a good reputation,
the
is
located in one of
largest cities in Massachusetts and was truly
in the
new
Save
findings of my study
to
interested
improve their own effective-
.
Of those interviewed, all were participants
in the
Fuel Assistance program and ranged from people who had
never had contact with the C.A.S.H. program to people who
had made
substantial weatherization investments.
By speak-
ing with these participants and discovering what they felt
were
the important
issues concerning weatherization,
I
hoped to have developed a list of criteria by which to
evaluate other
user.
energy programs with more
sensitivity to the
3
STUDY METHODOLOGY
of
selection
The
of
range
to weatherize
initiative
the
the most
select
group
this
fore
already have a means
programs.
However,
Fuel Assistance
participants
Together with
person's
person
a
and by
result,
The
with
story was
sample or
a
not
As
the
structure of
The
the
a
most
questions
questions
as
that
depending
interviews
I asked
C.A.S.H. were the
on
years.
Don Falk,
I
ask participants.
a distinct
each
case
the
the person's
were conducted
people who had
following:
the number
as weatherization
I conducted
statistic.
for
weatherization
C.A.S.H.,
to
access
of
interview was open because
documented
phone,
of
director
of
the
over
growing
list
a
developed
have
as well
participants
There-
in need.
note
taken
a
are
They
the
enter
C.A.S.H. staff
the
been
has
to
have
represent
do not
issue
the
only address
study will
people who
population
the larger
within
and
household,
population.
people who
of
of
homes
their
the
of
sectors
needy
that
should be noted
It
handicapped.
) and represented a
Elderly, female head
people:
parti-
assistance
fuel
the
on p.
chart
(see
eligible guidelines
The
questions.
all within
selected were
I
cipants
to
respond
clients would
with how
myself
familiarize
to
used
informal interviews
several
followed
fifteen participants
these
interviews.
fifteen
the
data was
of
source
main
The
by
had
study,
interviews
in
preference.
phone.
some
contact
4
CAMBRIDGE ENERGY PROGRAMS
INCOME ELIGIBILITY STANDARDS
PROGRAM
CASH
Income
guidelines
Fuel
Ass't
NORTH
CAMBRIDGE
HIP
Moderate
WEATHERIZATION
MWAP
DOE
househol d
size
1
8,190
16,240
8,190
5,850
2
10,885
18,560
10,885
7,775
3
11,640
20,880
13,580
9,700
4
13,950
23,200
16,275
11,625
5
16,260
24,650
18,970
13,550
6
18,570
26, 100
21,665
15,475
7
20,880
27,550
24,360
8
23,190
29,000
27,055
each
additional
person:
2,310
2,695
1,925
*
*
Note: AFDC and SSI
recipients qualify
automatically for
MWAF and DOE
weatherization.
5
C.A.S.H.?
1.
How did you first hear about
2.
When was
3.
What
4.
Of the measure you have taken advantage of,
results have you noticed?
that?
services have you taken
a.
monetary
b.
differences in comfort
advantage of?
what
5.
Do you feel the program was worthwhile?
6.
Why or why not?
The
questions I asked people who were fuel assistance
eligible but had not had contact with C.A.S.H. were
the
following:
Has someone from the C.A.S.H. (Cambridge Action to
Save Heat) office been in touch with you?
1.
can
I tell you about the program?
a.
If no,
b.
If yes, perhaps you would be interested in
Can I tell you
participating in the program.
If no, would you mind
how the program works?
telling me why?
DESCRIPTION OF PROGRAM
Cambridge Action to Save Heat is a program created to
assist
Cambridge residents in their
Specifically,
they provide a variety of
weatherization programs for
programs.
One
stay warm."
low cost/no cost
The
the 29 pilot programs in
statewide energy program which was
the Massachusetts
to
residents and homeowners.
program began in 1981 as one of
the first
"plight
initiated by
Conservation Assistance Fund
(MCAF)
of the program's primary goals was to make
6
"citizens more
of energy
conserva-
The hope was that low cost conservation could
tion."3
reduce
independent in matters
the money spent on home heating, particularly by
those dependent on fuel assistance.
an individual community could
With the assumption that
conduct a community-wide energy conservation program
successfully with its
own
resource, the funding for C.A.S.H.
came through a sub-contract granted to
City
Along with Offices of the
nity Development Office.
Government,
the Cambridge Commu-
independent
Community Action Agencies and
community agencies or coalitions also administered the
MCAF projects.
The program was successful
in educating
many citizens but without the financial support from the
state and
federal resources,
participation of
its
ability to assure the
low income households and provide adequate
coordination, was limited.
As a result,
there now exists,
in every state with a provision in the Fuel Assistance
of
Fuel Assistance funds
Block Grant,
that up to
15%
be allocated
for energy
conservation measures.
C.A.S.H. began with a full-time staff
volunteers, and a budget of
budget of $20,000).
training,
in basic
$30,000
of
two,
can
eight
(plus a supplementary
This original program sought to provide:
low cost/no cost
conservation measures,
simple materials for installation for program participants,
heating system improvements
and repairs would be
to the appropriate agency.
The training
referred
in conservation
7
measures was available to all citizens, while
system improvements were targeted
and heating
recipients
volunteers,
and a budget of
four full-time
$100,000
from universities, church groups,
from
and community groups to
the
the increasing financial as well as political
for the program, C.A.S.H. has been able to expand
support
a full-scale weatherization program.
entitled the
attics,
basements;
owners),
doors;
Other programs which are
C.A.S.H. in cooperation with the Community
Development Department are:
Program, Home
contractors to insulate
install storm windows and
repair heating systems.
sponsored by
The program
Cambridge Weatherization Assistance Program
(WAP) provides trained crews and
and
(plus $50,000
With the growth of
suplement their paid staff.6
program and
fifteen
staff,
C.A.S.H. actively recruits volunteers
additional sources).
walls,
to fuel
only. 5
At present, C.A.S.H. has
to
the material
The Burner Tune-up and Repair
Improvement Program
(for Cambridge Home-
North Cambridge Neighborhood Energy Project
(specifically geared to
organize North Cambridge residents
into weatherization programs).
Weatherization is
the process of preventing heat from
escaping from the building structure.
ways.
Heat escapes in two
One, by blowing directly through the material the
house's exterior or
Secondly, by
"shell"
flowing in air
is made out of
(conduction).
currents through cracks, joint
8
seams,
in the
shell
(infiltration).
Conduction can be
insulating the exterior walls, roof,
reduced by
attic
floors and by installing storm windows and doors.
and
Infiltra-
tion can be reduced by caulking and weatherstripping all
joints that allow air to pass
seams and
sealing all
openings in the shell
For example, plugs
through and
that are not in use.
in the wall, closets.
At present C.A.S.H. offers the following services to
deal with the above mentioned problems:
They provide for workshops which demonstrate
simple energy saving techniques and common sense
methods of saving money and fuel.
Distribute free weatherization kits to people
who are receiving fuel assistance, who come to
Materials
a workshop to get a home energy audit.
in the kit are worth up to 100 dollars and
Rope caulk, plastic storm windows.
include:
C.A.S.H. will install free weatherization kits
in the homes of people who are elderly or disabled.
C.A.S.H. will arrange energy audits for people's
The
to show where heat is being lost.
homes
assistance
fuel
are
who
people
for
free
is
service
and costs ten dollars for everyone else.
eligible
conducted by Massachusetts SAVE.
are
Audits
Additional services
include:
1.
Full scale weatherization, such as
installation of storm windows, insullation.
2.
Emergency Repairs
for heaters and oil burners.
TIME SCHEDULE
C.A.S.H. operates on a year round basis.
largely determined by the
flow of funds.
Their
schedule is
Since fuel assi-
9
stance recipients
usually receive their
beginning of December, most
Workshops are more effective when
time.
cold and
still
best
outreach is
realized.
tural repairs,
conveniently
demand
checks around the
done prior
to this
the weather is
savings due to infiltration measures are
such as
Measures
caulking, glazing, struc-
and installing water devices,
done in the summer.
Because of
are more
the cyclical
in the heating oil business, few dealers will
They
consider doing tune-ups during the heating season.
rely on such work to keep them busy during
Therefore, burner repairs
summer
are saved for
to prepare participants
even
the summer.
the spring and
for. the following winter.
THE PARTICIPANTS
In this chapter
used
I will
introduce the sample of people
in my study and explain why I chose those particular
people.
I categorized people into groups according to
services
they used,
summarized my
and analyzed my results
previous
the
findings for each group
in relation to findings reported
in
studies.
Since all
the participants were Fuel Assistance
eligible, most were dependent on some form of public
social security.
assistance, such as AFDC,
SSI, and
Therefore most people not
only qualified for
but
free materials
also for assistance installing the materials.
means that most
This
of the people I interviewed were not
10
required
to spend any financial or physical effort to
participate in the program.
age
The participants ranged
All but
30-95, with most people falling in between.
four people were renters
houses.
among
There was
in apartments
of multifamily
a noticeable absence of minorities
This
the C.A.S.H. participants I observed.
seemed
peculiar since there are a large percentage of blacks
Cambridge.
Hispanics in
Morever, minorities
disproportionate percentage of
There seems
speakers
those
of
and
comprise a
on public
to be a gradual recognition
Mass SAVE has
from
assistance.
the problem;
just begun a Portuguese audit.
constitute the largest non-English
Portuguese
speaking group
in Cambridge.
The people I interviewed were broken down into
groupings according to
their level of participation in the
program, Fuel Assistance eligible, audit completed only,
some level
of weatherization completed
The amount
of work they had
C.A.S.H.'s
categorization of
by
the charts on pp.
12-14.
(see chart on p.1
1
done was grouped according to
their services,
as explained
).
11
PROFILE
CHARACTERISTICS
OF
PERSON
INTERVIEWED
ELIGIBILITY
GROUP A
OWNER/
APPLICATION
RENTER
DATE
PHONE/
IN PERSON
(Fuel Assistance)
Mr.
Barnes
Elderly
R
Phone
Ms.
Lee
AFDC
R
Phone
As.
Kane
Elderly
R
Phone
As.
Saunder
Elderly
R
Phone
GROUP B
Hr.
James
Ms.
Walter
Mrs.
Lucci
Income
eligible
"
Elderly
(Had Audit)
R
82
Person
R
81
Phone
R
81
Phone
GROUP C (Had Tier
1)
s.
Arnold
AFDC
R
81
Person
Ms.
Baxter
SSI
R
81
Person
Mrs.
Martin
Elderly
R
81
Person
Mrs.
Lewis
Income
eligible
R
81
Person
Ms.
Pines
Elderly
R
82
Phone
Ms.
Smith
Elderly
0
82
Phone
GROUP
Mr.
Mrs.
Stein
Crane
D
(Had Tier
2)
Elderly
0
81
Phone
Social
Security
R
82
Person
12
LIST OF MATERIALS NEEDED FOR
INSTALLATION OF TIERS 1, 2, & 3
TIER ONE
1. Rope Caulk (Moretite brand)
2. Plastic Storm Windows
(packs of four)
3. Double Sided Carpet Tape
4. Glass Patch
5. Clear Tape
6. Outlet and Switch Gasket Packs
7. Shopping Bags
TIER TWO
1. Door Weatherstripping
(aluminum & vinyl)
2. Door Weatherstripping
(wood feltstick)
3. Door Sweeps
4. Hack Saws
5. Tube Caulk
6. Caulking Guns
7. Putty Knives
8. V-Strip Seal
(continued)
13
-LIST
OF MATERIALS NEEDED FOR
INSTALLATION OF TIERS 1, 2, & 3
CONTINUED...
9. Roll
Felt
10.
Faucet Aerators
11.
Hot Water Tank Jackets
12.
Sash Locks
13.
Radiator Reflectors
14.
Shower Heads
15a.
Hot Water Pipe Insulating Wrap (tube)
15b. Hot Water Pipe Insulating Wrap (tape)
15c.
Duct Tape
TIER THREE
1.
Glazing Compound
2. Mortar Mix
3. Wire
4.
(20 Guage only)
Flat 2" L Brackets (for window corners)
5. Steam Radiator Vents
6. Spring Bronze
7. Vinyl Heating Duct Wrap
8. Exterior Spackle
9. Plastic Trash Bags
10.
Paper Towels
11.
Fiberglass Insulation
(continued)
14
LIST OF MATERIALS NEEDED FOR
INSTALLATION OF TIERS 1, 2, & 3
12.
Spot Sash Cords (#7 & #9)
13. Linseed Oil
14. Parting Beads
15. Window Stops
16. Strapping Wood
17. Butane Tanks
(all of it!)
18. Hardware
a) Flat Wood Screws:
6 x 7/8"
6 x 1
6 x 1
"4
6 x 1
"4
8
8
8
8
x
x
x
x
7/8"
1 "
1
"Y
1 "
b) Storm Window Screws:
6 x 7/8"
c) Nails:
6 D
8 D
10 D
12 D
d) Carpet Tacks (#10 gal.)
e) Staples
f) Chisels
(3/4" &
Y/"o)
g) Sandpaper: (Medium & Coarse)
h) Nails:
1%" (17 Guage)
1%" (18 Guage)
i) Utility Knives
j)
Yard Sticks
15
The following is
group
the grouping of
the participants:
People who were participating in the Fuel
A
Assistance program but had not participated in
any phase of
group
the C.A.S.H. program.
People who had had an energy audit;
B
step
the
first
in the weatherization process, prior to
having work done on their home.
tier.
group
C
People who had had work done in the first
group
D
People who had had work done in the second tier.
GROUP
The
people in this
cant because
A
category were
they represented a large
particularly signifisector of
tion which could potentially be drawn into
tion program.
lists
the weatheriza-
At present, C.A.S.H. contacts
given to
fuel
the computer
assistance participants by going through
print-out
the popula-
them by the Fuel Assistance Office.
In 1981-1982 approximately
160,000 households
in
Massachusetts were served by the Fuel Assistance program.
The average household received between
$450 and $500,
approximately one third of the average fuel bill for a
Massachusetts household.
elderly and an
The
It
is estimated
8
equal number were SSI or AFDC recipients.
four people I interviewed were
An elderly man, an AFDC recipient,
Of
that 40% were
and
comprised
of:
two elderly women.
the four people, only the elderly mand, Mr.
Barnes, was
16
"I'm 95 years
told me,
be
Mr.
interested in participating in the program.
not
around long enough
to appreciate it."
an audit
scheduled for them.
schedule
the audit on the spot.
of
the
Ms.
before.
the program and having
four said they had heard
the program
of
Lee, a single parent who receives AFDC, was
claimed she had never heard of
the program.
she
was
interested in persuing the energy audit.
an elderly woman, who lives
she had heard
of
in October
not pursued it,
I did not want
she
to probe
she rents,
she applied for Fuel
I asked her why she had
When
1982.
She
Mrs. Kane,
alone in an apartment
C.A.S.H. when
told me
(caulking
from C.A.S.H. previously
but
Assistance
I could not
Unfortunately,
cord and carpet tape and plastic)
said
others were
The
as having received some materials
on record
I won't
I'm too old to bother.
old.
interested in finding out more about
One
Barnes
it had
totally slipped her mind.
the woman any further
since
it may
The
other
two par-
have only provoked responses from guilt.
ticipants had not heard of C.A.S.H. before but they did
know what weatherization was.
woman who
When I asked Ms.
lives on social security, if
in learning more about C.A.S.H.,
she asked if
do with caulking and weatherstripping.
yes,
she
said
she would be interested.
she was
Saunders, a
interested
this had
When I told her
to
17
GROUP
The
participants
Haitian
man, who
section
of
her
child,
lived
an
of
not
they
expected
a
had forgot
since
the
this
confusion
at
but
same
follow-up.
the audit
It
in
them or
of
director
the
fail
time
now
is
to
C.A.S.H.himself
One
participant
in this
group
also had
but
arranging the
She was very
promised
many
hours
contacted
to
and never
me
Lucci
C.A.S.H.
disappointed with
talking
who was
Mrs.
installation
things
the
they
program
past,
auditors
would
of
and never
C.A.S.H.
to
after
the
audit.
disappointed
not
had an
only
begin proceedings
weatherization materials.
the
did
notify
C.A.S.H.'s policy
contact
Lucci.
(why
They
responses:
client must
delay was Mrs.
occurred.
a C.A.S.H. representative
the
of
the weatherization
occurs because
promised that
promised
The
heard
audit
since
call
C.A.S.H.
participants
In most
Office.
to
call
lived with
had
group
C.A.S.H. representative
to
a
C.A.S.H. office.
pursue
gave me
of
Haitian
these
the
this
many
passed
of
two
the client
for
in the
of
call
audit
comprised
one
often
by
the
in this
anything to
usually
have
that
to
Assistance
the Fuel
done
me
this
All
people what had happened
told
of
family
elderly woman.
or more had
they
program?)
with his
the people
through
I asked
When
group were
walking distance
a year
cases,
had
and
four
C.A.S.H.
lived
this
Cambridgeport, a single mother who
within
All
in
B
program because
anything.
did
They
anything.
"they
spent
I am not
18
Mrs. Lucci was an elderly woman and
interested anymore."
she
confided to me that
irrespon-
she perceived as dishonest and
people
of
invaded by
I suspected she felt
in her house.
strangers
a group
she felt uncomfortable having
sible.
feeling was confirmed by another woman I shall
This
Mrs.
call
X,
She was so
the
because
I
discontent
she would not
affiliated with C.A.S.H.,
she said,
people in my house anymore.
my sample.
even let me complete
I don't want
"No,
They didn't do anything.
door."
They didn't fix my
The Haitian, Mr. James,
group
in
soon as I identified myself as being
As
interview.
her
did not include
was the most eager
to receive assistance from C.A.S.H.
to
of
He had
this
first
the Fuel
learned of
the program when he went
Assistance
Office to inquire about a problem he was having
with his
heater.
country for
system.
James told me,
seven years but
In my country
problems."
hot.
Mr.
When he
When he
was advised by
"I've been in this
I don't understand
(Haiti) they
do not have these
turned the heater on,
turned the heater off,
it was extremely
it was freezing.
He
the Fuel Assistance representative to
contact the weatherization office which he did.
not sure what went wrong with the heater;
not make
the heating
the problem any clearer
the confusion of
the problem, Mr.
to him.
James
He was
the auditor did
Despite the wait,
is interested in
19
pursuing the program.
his
in his
landlord will let him stay
GROUP
This group represented
measures
C
the largest sample of people
low cost
first tier of
They were
infiltration
installed.
question, "How did you first hear about
To the
two out of
C.A.S.H. program?"
of
or not
apartment.
to weatherize their home.
who had taken measures
people who had the
is whether
His only obstacle
the
six answered they had heard
the program when they applied for Fuel Assistance.
of the women classifed as
they had heard of
Two
elderly could not remember how
the program.
Four
of
the people who are
now using the program let a year or more pass between when
they first heard of
the program and the time when
they
applied.
second question "When was that?"
To the
two years ago
said,
others
said,
(the year the program began).
last year.
friends or neighbors
half the people
The
Some people were informed by
about the program.
The
time the
applicants applied for weatherization usually corresponded
to
the year
To the
tage of?"
ping, then
they became dependent
on public assistance.
question, "What services have you taken advan-
most people responded caulking and weatherstripstorm windows
(tier one).
Half of
the people
were waiting to have additional work done on their home.
20
Two
of the most actively involved participants were
strikingly different in
motivated
them to
their circumstances
and in what
their involvement in the program.
Ms.
Baxter was a black woman of 55 years who had multiple
sclerosis.
She lived with her
elderly mother and daughter
in a small apartment in Central
Square.
on
Although
public assistance now, and eligible for a maximum amount of
assistance from C.A.S.H.,
herself.
With measures
she has
such as
done
the work
installation of
windows wich require lifting, she had
In addition, she got her
some of
storm
to have assistance.
landlord and other
tenants
in the
building involved in the program.
Ms.
Baxter's
disease makes
her particularly sensitive
Her
to slight changes in temperature.
not
He
to expose herself
to
doctor advised her
extreme cold or hot
suggested she keep the heat on at all
she recieves Fuel Assistance,
temperatures.
times.
Although
the fuel bill exceeds the
amount of assistance she receives.
Therefore,
she requested
caulking and weatherstripping from C.A.S.H. to prevent
drafts
from coming in..
storm windows.
Soon after, C.A.S.H. installed
She has found the storm windows particularly
helpful in cutting down on drafts.
upstairs
had
However, due to
leakage
that damaged her apartment's celing and walls she
to have
waiting for
the storm windows removed.
She is currently
assistance to reinstall the windows.
Baxter was not burdened with her
If Ms.
handicap and had someone
21
to
assist her,
She
told
support
she
me
she would
that
her
until
family.
could not
do
In contrast,
house
his
in North
family.
other
people
level
of
she
and
moderate
she
public
C.A.S.H.
full-time to
the
illness
These
changes
had
fuel
she was
do not
that
live
son
and
that most
at
same
the
fact
the
that
receiving a
live comfortably.
and
several
forced her
to
years
after
apply
for
then weatherization.
and
assistance
family
how
for
aware
years
for many
died
two
lives with her
them to
allowing
spacious
explained by
could be
husband
assistance,
of
apologetic
and
her
ago
a
she
very
had worked
income and
retired.
owns
assistance
This
husband
Seven years
Martin,
house was
on public
comfort.
her
is only because
Martin was
her
for
work herself.
Mrs.
Mrs.
to wait
she had worked
Cambridge, where
furnished
nicely
recently
It
the
not have
GROUP D
Since
the
participants
C.A.S.H.
this
did
not
I
two years
is only
have a
at
applied
interviewed
old
significant number
and not
all
its beginning,
of
people
in
category.
I
and
the program
interviewed
Mrs.
Crane.
Mr.
living with his wife
the
lived
in
lived
there
first
in this
two people
Stein was
in a house
floor
with her
75
of
son who
years
he
a house
had
group,
old,
owned.
she
Mr.
retired
Mrs.
rented.
cerebral
Stein
palsy.
and
Crane
She
They both
22
receive social
security.
In addition, Mrs.
Crane has
arthritis which has made it difficult for her to lift
Despite the pain she experiences when using her
things.
hands,
"I never ask help
in C.A.S.H.
from anyone."
she used
Prior
to her
involvement
tape to caulk the windows.
her arthritis bothered her too much
weatherization materials this year.
requested were metal and felt
for her
However,
to put
in the
Other services
stripping, copper
she
stripping
She
the hot water heater blanketed.
the windows, and
said,
She told me
as an independent person.
to think of herself
on
She likes
lifts her son's wheelchair herself.
she
"the house does feel warmer."
she likes
the program because
She is happy with
the one-on-one contact.
"they
listened to me."
Mr.
Stein first found out about C.A.S.H. when they
contacted him through his Senior Citizen's
two years ago.
to
As
a spokesperson
for that
That was
Group.
group, he went
the
C.A.S.H.'s workshop and thoroughly investigated
program.
first
self.
attic
He was very satisfied and proceeded
tier of work put in.
Over the years, he has
insulation put
Mr.
explained
this by
this work him-
had storm windows installed,
in through a DOE program.
Stein was very enthusiastic about
although he did not
17%,
He did much of
to have the
the program,
site noticeable differences.
He
saying that fuel prices have gone
up by
the weather was warmer this winter, and his house
is
23
over
100 years old.
Mr.
person.
Stein struck me as an unusually
He understood the program as well or better than
any C.A.S.H. employee.
Although 75 years old,
quite a few items himself, and he
people into
services
mind,
self-reliant
to
the program.
he installed
organized many other
He thinks most people expect
be handed to them on a silver platter.
In his
assistance should not be expected, therefore he
welcomes any
help.
He believes
the program should not be
criticized because they are doing something about
the
problem.
RESULTS
Although each case was a different person's
there were responses
story,
common to all participants.
the program through
1.
Most people had first heard of
the Fuel Assistance Office.
2.
Usually, this was in the past year and a half.
3.
Most people were in the process of having work
done or waiting to have work done on their home.
4.
Most of the people I interviewed, particularly the
elderly, had difficulty remembering the answers to
some of the questions.
5.
Most people did not respond to the question,
"What results have you noticed?" until I
prompted them.
6.
Despite uncertainty about what results people
noticed, overall people thought the program was
worthwhile.
7.
When I asked people why
they thought
the program
24
was worthwhile, most people said they were anticipating benefits in the future, or they were
appreciative that someone was trying to assist
them.
ANALYSIS OF RESULTS
I will
In this chapter
offer some
In particular, what distinguished
results.
took action from those who did not.
action, what were
ment
and what
seem to
the obstacles they perceived
this have for
implications does
indicate that
seem to
to
invest-
C.A.S.H.?
(group
differ signi-
(age, income level of
pay for their own heat).
show that
took no
involvement
these people did not
ficantly in their characteristics
need, and all
the people who
those who
For
The responses from people with no
A)
analysis of my
Their responses
they could potentially be drawn into the
program without much difficulty.
Most of
them were
inter-
ested in receiving further information and possibly applying
of
for the program.
Since none of
these people had heard
the program before they did not have preconceived
notions about
it.
This receptivity toward my phone
future participation in C.A.S.H. may
call and toward
indicate that with
more personalized outreach, more Fuel Assistance participants would become
involved in
most people heard of
tance
the program.
Also, since
the program through the Fuel Assis-
Office but none of
these people
remembered hearing of
25
the program, this indicated the need for
the
tion between
greater coordina-
Fuel Assistance Office and the C.A.S.H.
Office.
In the group
that had had the audit
people
(Group B),
were also receptive to
the idea of greater participation
the C.A.S.H. program.
However,
it
is questionnable
to me
A
they said.
whether they would have followed up on what
in
year or more had passed since they had the audit and all
lived within walking distance of
The main
reasons given for not having pursued the
C.A.S.H. had not called back
program were the following:
or the participant
earlier
in the
the lack of
C.A.S.H.
As explained
had not called C.A.S.H.
thesis,
this
confusion is partially due
to
coordination between the audit program and
In addition,
the audit
is only
The auditor
a home's energy efficiency.
of
the C.A.S.H. office.
an evaluation of
often unaware
is
the extent to which C.A.S.H. assists people to
deal with
their landlords, explain energy saving measures or offer
labor assistance.
Thus,
ciencies may leave
the
However,
the auditor's checklist of
tenant
or homeowner overwhelmed.
the participant must also be made
stand that C.A.S.H. is not invincible.
the more dependent a person is on
the process will be.
assistance
to
under-
They are a small
organization which is understaffed, short of
wloer
defi-
resources, and
their services,
the
Although C.A.S.H. offers labor
to the elderly and handicapped,
many of these
26
people have done the work themselves.
In the case of Mrs.
Lucci,
the work alone but
she probably could not have done
with the help of
picked up
The
that the
a relative
the materials and
or friend,
she could have
finished the work.
results of my findings for groups C and D show
both with individual resourcefulness and
available to
that person.
This is not
person's
circumstance is necessarily
response
to the program.
destitute people
were some
Ms.
do
level of services a person used does have to
to say that
a
a predicter of
For example,
their
some of the most
(in terms of resources available to
of the most motivated.
Baxter,
the resources
them),
The prime example being
the woman who had multiple sclerosis and
lived
with her elderly mother and daughter.
For
say that
the most part I would agree with the experts who
the services
offered in tier
for the homeowner than for
window sashes,
three make more
Insulation, new
the renter.
glazing mortar compounds around the windows
require additional
investment,
the payback period is longer.
take longer to
install and
Therefore cost
and time
considerations are not a priority unless
to buy
these renters plan
their apartments.
Moreover, with the difficulty it
into
takes
to get people
the program, getting them to make greater
is not
sense
likely.
The longer
term solutions that
investments
tier three
offers will not be made a priority by Fuel Assistance parti-
27
cipants until more people's homes obtain a basic
level of
energy efficiency.
A response
that kept reoccurring during
the interview
process was the particpants embarrassment at being dependent
on public assistance, particularly since
a person's
dependency was made public by a C.A.S.H. employee coming
to that
group
person's house.
C's participants
a point of
assistance,
responses,
several people had made
telling me they did not want
to be on public
it was only because they were ill,
without adequate
assistance.
As mentioned in the summary of
income that they had
too old
or
decided to apply for
For people with this attitude
toward public
assistance to apply for weatherization, they would have to
perceive their situation as
this perception
urgent or desperate.
indicates that many people perceive the
program to be too much of a giveaway
more
and would
actively involved in earning the subsidy
receiving.
Perhaps,
like to be
they are
28
RECOMMENDATIONS
way
One
the
to put
is
ment
Energy
The
Citizen's Energy
formed
energy company
crude
oil
directly
countries,
has
it
buys
Conservation
Citizen's
a
with
revolving
arranges
the
the
for
next
loan.
The
Conservation
tenant
and
landlord
In
years.
five
As
Corporation
is
return,
to
year's heating bill is
The project
First,
people
made
is
it has proven
of
terms
savings).
are
any
an
subsidiary,
of
Corporation
pays
improvements
savings,
left
over
pay
to
the
for
fuel
hearing
energy
tenants
fuel
the
in
the
the
the
after
paid.
attractive model
provide
to
As
a
has
Corporation
rebate money
the
unclear about
concrete
the
those
a result of
able
reduced
at
a building
of
energy conserving
bills while making
building.
cost
It
foreign
Corporation, which assists
the projected
Corporation
it
Corporation
Energy
crisis.
other
and
delivers
and
Kennedy.
non-profit
a
energy
the
from Venezuela
refined,
Citizen's
The
prices.
to
response
in
is
Corporation
is
program
by Joseph
created
Corporation,
Citizen's
some
building's
in the
kind of
this
of
for
return
improvement
example
One
efficiency.
energy
in
or money
time
invest
fuel bill or
their
on
savings
the
to
participant
programs which require
into
subsidy
their
embarrass-
the participants'
dealing with
of
for
two
reasons.
concerete benefits
results
of
my
study
(in
show,
most
whether or not weatherization
differences,
and
they
do
not
know how
has
to
29
measure benefits in the future.
responses
toward
the program may
The overall positive
have been
program wold help in the future.
Second,
the program
contains a hidden subsidy which induces people
the program without feeling
to
that the
gratitude for assistance and the belief
their
due
largely
to
undertake
they are depending on public
assistance.
A
second recommendation would be
the various agencies
among
(e.g. Low-Income Energy
Assistance Program, MCAF, WAP).
programs
ments,
make
differ
fiscal
cycles, staffing patterns.
eligible households.
assistance.
At present,
the various
in their objectives, regulatory require-
it more difficult to provide
the agencies'
greater coordination
ability
These variances
"one-stop"
service
to
Better coordination would enhance
to merit additional support and
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Summary and Evaluation
Cowell, Stephen and Dunn, Debra.
the Massachusetts Conservation Assistance Fund,
Massachusetts Executive Office of Communities and
Development, 1981.
of
the
Household Energy Consumption:
Frieden, Bernard.
Record and the Prospect, M.I.T. Program on Neighborhood and Regional Change, Cambridge, Mass., 1981.
Kim,
Study of a Community Energy
Hunmee and Kwass, Peter.
Business in Somerville, John F. Kennedy School of
Government, Harvard University, Cambridge, Mass., 1982.
A Plan to
Massachusetts CAP Directors' Association.
Develope a Comprehensive Low-Income Energy System
Massachusetts, 1982.
in
"Low-Income
National Consumer Law Center, Various Memos:
Weatherization Updates and Weatherization Alerts,"
Boston,
1981-1982.
END NOTES
Berman and Cooper.
CBO Study
(1981)
pp.
24-26.
2
Cowell, Stephen and Dunn, Debra.
Summary and Evaluation of the Massachusetts Conservation Assistance Fund,
(Massachuetts Executive Office of Communities and Develop-
ment,
1981).
3
pp.
12-14.
Cowell
and Dunn,
p. 4.
Cowell
and Dunn,
p.
17.
Cowell
and Dunn,
p.
18.
Cambridge Office
C.A.S.H. Brochures.
of
Communities
4
5
6
7
8
and
Development,
C.A.S.H. Brochures.
Personal
interview with
Don Faulk,
January
15,
1983.