Search results for "program implementation":
Page #1 of 1
|Ontario Power Authority Small Commercial Direct Install Program Evaluation||Ontario Power Authority/Nexant, Inc.||2011|
|Behavior and Energy White Papers||California Institute for Energy and Environment||2008|
|Refrigerator Replacement Program Process Evaluation||Bonneville Power Administration||2006|
|Process Evaluation of the California Energy Efficiency Loan Fund||KEMA||2006|
Page #1 of 1
As a subcontractor to Nexant, Inc., Research Into Action led the process evaluation and provided support for the impact evaluation of Ontario Power Authority's Small Commercial Direct Install Program. The program reduces the electrical energy and demand requirements of small businesses whose demand is < 50 kW through assessment and turn-key retrofit of lighting and selected water-heating measures. To avoid over-burdening OPA's commercial customers, the evaluation team integrated process-related data collection into several of the onsite impact evaluation tasks. The goals for the process evaluation were to: 1) assess the appropriateness of the incentive structure, 2) identify reasons why customers might choose not to participate in the program, 3) identify potential additional measures appropriate for food service businesses, 4) explore the effectiveness of the Incremental Retrofit Performance Incentive (IRPI), 5) assess the appropriateness of the contractor remuneration framework and reimbursement levels, and 6) document job creation effects at local distribution companies (LDCs) and participating contractors. Based on interviews with program representatives, we sent email surveys to participating LDCs to help us diagram and document the key choices and important differences in how the LDCs implemented the program. We also interviewed 20 LDCs about their program design choices, the effectiveness of the IRPI, and any program-related job-creation effects LDCs had observed. We asked 2009 program participants about their satisfaction with the program and expectations for future equipment replacement. In addition, we conducted telephone surveys with 135 participants in the 2010 program about the appropriateness of the incentive structure, their satisfaction with the program, and expectations for the future. We also conducted telephone surveys with partial participants and assessors/contractors, and an online survey of nonparticipants.