aa) The legislature may react to a risk of underfunding by means of awarding additional claims (see C I 1 above) to grants. If existential needs fail to be covered on the basis of the standard needs as calculated in the present case, the social courts must interpret the law in conformity with the Constitution […]. If applicable law cannot be interpreted in such a way, the legislature must create a legal claim to a grant in addition to the standard benefits. Persons in need may only be required to resort to loans for procurement of certain items, which mandatorily involve a reduction in welfare benefit […], if the standard benefits are set at a level high enough to permit repayment. 116 bb) In principle, the legislature may require persons in need to compensate for underfunding internally (cf. BVerfGE 125, 175 <238>) if a need not included in the standard needs arises but temporarily or if a need is considerably more costly than the statistical average sum paid to cover it. However, persons in need may not be generally required to compensate internally with sums intended to cover minimum sociocultural needs. In addition, the lump sum must be set at a level high enough to permit savings. 117 (1) Persons in need of assistance cannot generally be required to compensate internally by using benefits intended to cover socio-cultural needs […], because the need for social and cultural contacts is part of the dignified minimum existence guaranteed as a fundamental right. Nor are the benefits included in the lump sum to cover standard needs freely disposable as a pool from which to balance other areas, as these needs must likewise be covered as part of securing minimum existence (cf. BVerfGE 125, 175 <223 and 224>; 132, 134 <161, para. 64 and 65 >; see C I 1 a above). 118 (2) There is in principle no constitutional objection to the rule […] that persons in need of assistance must in their own responsibility balance out and make savings from the benefits they receive to cover their needs. Such a model is consistent with the Basic Law if the amount of benefits paid as a lump sum to cover monthly standard needs is high enough to permit putting part of it aside to cover needs that occur irregularly or are more costly. There has been no indication in the present case that there is any underfunding that might endanger existence. However, the legislature must ensure in the future that, in total, needs necessary for existence are covered (see D I below). This requires that the standard needs are set at a level high enough to allow for compensation. 119 The method used in the present case to calculate standard needs presents, as one example, the danger of underfunding consumer goods that are vitally necessary but last long and are purchased at intervals of several years, with a very large difference between average statistical value and purchase price. Here, merely an amount of less than EUR 3 has been allocated for the purchase of refrigerators, freezers, washing machines, dryers, dishwashers and ironing machines […]. Similarly, underfunding can occur if health needs such as spectacles or contact lenses can neither be covered within the scope of the standard benefits nor be otherwise secured (cf. BVerfGE 125, 175 <252 et seq.>). 120 22/29