statewide home energy efficiency survey program -presentation to calmac- october 17, 2007

Statewide Home Energy Efficiency Survey Program

Presented by:Sharyn Barata

Vice President - MarketingOpinion Dynamics Corp.

Statewide Home Energy Efficiency Survey Program -Presentation to CALMAC-

October 17, 2007

Big empty box in white font

2


Overview of Program

› Started as several separate, independent programs

› Some well-established program components (SCE mail) and some very new (PG&E’s in-home program started Jan 2005)

› Added the “in-home” delivery mechanism to the statewide program in 2004-2005

Statewide HEES

3


Original HEES Eval Objectives

» Conduct a process evaluation

» Test program assumptions:› Customers lack complete e-e knowledge› HEES fills the knowledge gap› Knowledge engenders action› HEES plays a substantial, unique informational

role

4


HEES Process Methodology

» In-depth interviews with administrators and review of materials

» Program theory/metric workshop

» General population survey

» Review databases/verify number of audits completed by each IOU/Cross HEES databases with other CA program databases

» Conduct satisfaction survey

5


HEES Process Methodology Cont

» Conduct adoption survey with 2004/5 participants

» Conduct follow-up interviews with participants in both HEES and another impact program (based on database crossing)

» In all 5000 surveys were conducted as part of this effort

6


Program Structure and Delivery

Versions of HEESMail Online In-Home

PG&E Kema-Xenergy Nexus Kema-Xenergy 2

SCE Kema-Xenergy Kema-Xenergy CSG 3

SDG&E Kema-Xenergy Enercom CSG 3

SoCalGas Kema-Xenergy Enercom Sempra 3

1 3 3

7


Program Structure and DeliveryDirect Costs Per Unit Vary Greatly by Delivery

Mechanism, Channel, Utility and Vendor

Mail Online In-Home

PG&E Kema-Xenergy

($25.00)

Nexus

($20.00)

Kema-Xenergy

($60.00)

SCE Kema-Xenergy

($12.30)

Kema-Xenergy

($11.32)

CSG

($81.81)

SoCalGas Kema-Xenergy

($22.56)

Enercom

(not provided)

CSG

($41.91)

SDG&E Kema-Xenergy

(not provided)

Enercom

(not provided)

Sempra/SDG&E

($35.00 for HTR)

8



» Recommendations made to customers› 235 unique recommendations (some similar)

› 110 characterizations (when grouped)

› 16 types or “measures/end uses” covered

» Approximately split between measures (which require equipment) and practices (behavioral)

» Median number of recommendations per channel range from 3 to 16 (overall mean = 7 recs/house)

9



1. Use compact fluorescent bulbs (71% receive rec.)

2. Seal air leaks and install weatherstripping (67%)

3. Have ducts tested/sealed, clean or replace ac filters, shade windows and avoid using appliances (45%)

4. Replace washer (30%)

5. Lower heater temperature setting (27%)

6. Install energy efficient shower heads/aerators (25%)

Top recommendations to customers:

10


Marketing

Top Ways That Participants Learned About HEES (multiple response)

Total(n=1045)

Mail(n=242)

In-Home(n=242)

Online(n=561)

Utility bill insert 27% 31% 31% 23%*

Utility website 24% 4% 4% 42%*

Mail survey 16% 48%* 6% 6%

Utility representative 8% 2% 21%* 4%

Friend or relative 7% 7% 16%* 3%

Online banner 7% 2% 1% 11%*

Email 5% -- -- 10%

* Independent Z-Test for Percentages. Asterisks indicate significance (significantly

different than comparison groups) at 90% confidence +/- 10% error.

11


Participation

» Participant was defined as a customer who received some form of recommendations through the program

» All of the channels that reported program goals met their 2004-2005 targets.

» Over 151,000 customers participated in HEES in 2004 and 2005 combined.› 67% participated by mail

› 23% participated online

› 10% participated through in-home visits.

12


Participation

57% said they thoroughly read the report

Total(n=1045)

Mail(n=242)

In-Home

(n=242)

Online(n=561)

Read the report thoroughly 57% 62% 59% 53%

Read some portions of the report 20% 16% 16% 24%^

Just glance through it 10% 10% 10% 11%

Do not read the report at all 2% 2% 2% 1%

Do not recall receiving the report 11% 11% 13% 11% Independent Z-Test for percentages. Symbol indicates significance (significantly higher than

online group) at 90% confidence +/- 10% error.^ Symbol indicates significance (significantly higher than mail and in-home groups) at 90% confidence +/- 10% error

13


Satisfaction

45%37%

45%47%

69%*

23%^

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

In-home Mail Online

Somewhat

Very

Satisfaction (By Delivery Mechanism)

*Independent Z-Test for percentages. Symbol indicates significance (significantly higher than comparison groups) at 90% confidence +/- 10% error.^ Symbol indicates significance (significantly lower than comparison groups) at 90% confidence +/- 10% error

14


Awareness-Action Continuum

General Population v. Participants (Prior to HEES Participation)

Not aware of actions

Aware, not reached decision point

Aware, considered, NOT taken action yet

Has taken actions to reduce

Program Participants

89%

5%

3%

2%

General Population

68%

5%

22%

5%

Independent Z-Test for percentages. The percentage of program participants that report taking actions action is significantly higher than comparison groups at 90% confidence +/- 10% error.

15


Overall Usefulness of Information

» Not “all things” to “all people” but valuable to many

» 39% felt that HEES played a unique informational role—they could not have found this information anywhere else (or 44% if you exclude “did not read report”)

» 44% gave a rating of 8, 9 or 10 on a scale of 1 to 10 where 10 is “extremely useful”. Mean was 6.8

~Similar across all delivery mechanisms

16


Overall Usefulness of Information

› 26% of the participants say they had already done most of the recommendations in the energy report

› 37% say they had taken about half the actions suggested

› 21% had done one or two actions › Only 9% had not taken any of the actions

recommended by HEES

» Not all of the recommendations made by HEES are actionable because many participants had already taken at least some of the actions recommended by HEES

17


Adoption of Recommendations

» Customer adoption of program recommendations› By recommendation—13% of all recommendations adopted

~ Install CFLs

~ Seal air leaks/Install weatherstripping

~ Lowering temperatures of ac or water

› By person—38% influenced by HEES to take at least one recommendation

Would have acted without HEES (22%)

Did not act (40%)

Acted because of HEES (38%)

18


Cross-Program Marketing

» HEES encourages customers to participate in other programs by:› Including promotional inserts in the energy report › Providing links to other programs in the online

survey› Verbally promoting programs during the in-home

survey › Including information such as the 800 number in

the recommendations

19



» Four delivery channels: (1) PG&E mail, (2) SCE mail, (3) SCE in-home, and (4) SCE online › based on data availability

» Crossing of databases› to determine percentage of HEES participants who then participated

in other utility programs › programs included:

~ Appliance Recycling Program~ Rebate Programs (Single- and Multi-Family)~ The Summer Discount Plan (or AC Cycling Program)~ The 20/20 Program (less emphasis on this one)

» Cross-program telephone survey with customers to determine the extent to which they report being influenced

20



Program

ParticipantsParticipated in atLeast One OtherProgram Since

Jan 2004

Non-ParticipantsParticipated in atLeast One Other

Program Since Jan2004

Single-FamilyRebate

6.5% 4.7%

Multi-FamilyRebate

2.4% 1.7%

ApplianceRecycling

5.5% 6.0%

AC Cycling 7.5% 7.9%

20/20 7.5% 8.2%

Total 25.7% 25.6%

21



37%

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

Bill Inserts TV/Radio HEES Newspaper Local Gov't Events

Very Influenced (combined ratings of 4 & 5) Somewhat Influenced (combined ratings of 2 & 3)

Adjusted database numbers by percentages that self-reported that HEES played some role

(ranged from 28%-50% depending on program/utility)

On a scale of 1 to 5, where 1 is no influence and 5 is a great deal of influence, the influence that different factors had on their decision to participate in additional programs

22



» Influences a small percentage of participants to participate in other energy efficiency program efforts (~5% over two year period)

~ extrapolating using SCE numbers since that is “best guess”

» There does not appear to be conclusive evidence that HEES leads to an increase in other program participation

~ primarily based on database review

23


Collect complete customer information Develop a statewide master list of recommendations

with savings estimates, fuel type, EULs

Flag participants who receive CFLs Consider budgeting by delivery mechanism Consider analyzing each channel separately in future evaluation efforts

Things to Consider For The Future

On the HEES Databases/Evaluation…

24


Things to Consider For The Future

On the HEES Report…

Review the wording of all recommendations to ensure that they are actionable

Ensure that the list of possible recommendations is complete within each channel

On the HEES Survey…

Collect additional information to help develop more specific recommendations

25


Sharyn BarataOpinion Dynamics Corp.

949 [email protected]

Contact Information

statewide home energy efficiency survey program -presentation to calmac- october 17, 2007

Documents