Library: Evaluation, Apprise

3 results


Evaluation of Energy Affordability Programs (Abstract Only)

Date Published: January 1, 2007     Document Type: Conference publication

Energy affordability programs have been implemented by state governments, public utility commissions, and utility companies around the country. The purposes of these programs are to make energy more affordable for low-income customers and reduce the problems that are associated with unaffordable energy bills. This paper describes how these programs are designed and evaluation strategies for assessing these programs. Results from several different affordability programs are compared and related back to differences in program design and implementation. (Abstract only)

Low-Income Electric Usage Reduction: The Ohio Universal Services Fund Experience (Abstract Only)

Date Published: January 1, 2005     Document Type: Conference publication

The Ohio Office of Energy Efficiency launched the Electric Partnership Program (EPP) in 2001 to reduce the electricity usage and ratepayer cost associated with the Ohio Percentage of Income Payment Program (PIPP), a low income payment subsidy plan. The primary program treatments include refrigerator and freezer replacements, compact fluorescent lighting retrofits, and energy education. This paper summarizes results from the first round of impact and process evaluation activities. (Abstract only)

A Model For Onsite Inspections: That Quantify Program Comprehensiveness And Service Delivery Quality (Abstract Only)

Date Published: January 1, 2005     Document Type: Conference publication

The utility restructuring law passed in New Jersey created a statewide ratepayer funded energy efficiency program targeted to low-income electric and gas customers. The legislation and subsequent BPU orders mandated that the program deliver comprehensive services that met explicit usage reduction targets. Since the primary focus of the BPU mandate was on meeting program savings targets, the evaluation report empowered the program management team by measuring that the rate at which the program missed cost-effective measures and by estimating the cost implications of increasing measure installation rates. The evaluation report also identified savings that the program could realize by eliminating installation of ineffective program measures. (Abstract only)