Topic:"Participant Costs Benefits" in M12186

› Incentive calculations can cause confusion among participants. Participants do not always realize that they must pay tax on overall project expenditures and that the program component only covers up to 80% of pre-tax costs. E1 provides v...

AI summary Participants face confusion regarding tax obligations on project expenditures and rebate calculations, as program coverage is limited to 80% of pre-tax costs. E1 provides explanations but struggles to clarify rebate determinations, while some participants mistakenly assume preapproval estimates are final rebate amounts.

› Some participants would benefit from project management support. Based on comments from E1, Energy Auditors (EAs) and participants, project management assistance, technical/maintenance support, and help finding contractors would be usefu...

AI summary Participants require project management support, technical assistance, and contractor access to avoid delays and program withdrawal. Additional information on upgrades like heat pumps and insulation, along with case studies, is requested to improve program engagement and understanding.

› Costs and lack of budget are barriers to participation. Financial barriers constitute the main reasons most interviewed dropped-out participants withdrew from the program component. The majority had no budget available for building maint...

AI summary Financial barriers and lack of budget are primary reasons for participant withdrawal from programs, with most dropped-out participants citing unavailable funds for maintenance and efficiency upgrades. Affordable Multifamily Housing participants also highlighted low rental rates and ad-hoc repair approaches. Co-funding and low-interest financing are proposed as critical support mechanisms.

Dropped-out Participant Interviews In October and November 2024, Narrative Research conducted six telephone interviews among participants who started the program but did not complete the participation process (hereafter referred to as drop...

AI summary In October-November 2024, Narrative Research conducted six interviews with participants who dropped out of the AMH program, focusing on motivations and barriers. Four had MURBs, two had non-bed facilities, and two prescriptive path interviews were partially completed. The analysis aimed to understand dropout reasons and participation challenges.

3.2.3 Barriers to Participation and Program Completion For the dropped-out participants who started but did not complete the program component, financial barriers were cited most often as reasons for dropping out of AMH. Dropped-out partic...

AI summary The analysis identifies financial barriers, low incentives, lengthy payback periods, and affordability covenant issues as key reasons for AMH program dropout. Participants cited insufficient budgets, unexpected costs, and dissatisfaction with rental rates. Program ineligibility and external factors like property sales or illness also contributed. E1 staff and EAs highlighted ongoing challenges with affordability and upfront costs.

2024 AMH-Finding: Rental rates in the operating agreement cause division among dropped-out participants and non-participants. Opinions on the operating agreement among dropped-out participants and non-participants were polarized. Negative...

AI summary The 2024 AMH-Finding highlights that rental rates in the operating agreement are perceived as below market rates by dropped-out participants and non-participants, creating division. Adjusting these rates to align with current market conditions is deemed critical to improve perceptions of AMH. E1 regularly reviews rental rates for alignment with market trends.

Motivations for Participating in ASFH The main reason heat pump only participants wanted to take part in the program component was to save on energy or reduce energy costs (50%). Other explanations, following far behind, included the inten...

AI summary Participants in the Affordable Single-family Homes (ASFH) program were primarily motivated by saving on energy costs (50%), followed by system upgrades (13%), free installation (10%), and environmental reasons (10%).

2024 ASFH-Finding: Participants see the value of the program. The energy efficient retrofits installed at no cost through ASFH are perceived by participants to be making their homes more comfortable and warmer in winter and less expensive...

AI summary Participants in the Affordable Single-family Homes (ASFH) program report increased home comfort and reduced heating costs due to no-cost energy-efficient retrofits, indicating perceived value in the program.

Table 26: 2024 EPI Evaluation Approach Evaluation Objectives Research Questions Methodology Collect information on participant perspectives › How do participants become aware of EPI? › What is the level of satisfaction with the program com...

AI summary This section outlines the 2024 EPI Evaluation Approach, focusing on participant perspectives, gross and net results calculation, and identifying new opportunities for electrician-installed measures. The evaluation includes surveys, tracking sheet audits, site visits, and jurisdictional scans.

13 EPI Participant Perspectives This section summarizes the findings obtained through the EPI participant survey. A survey of 100 participating households was conducted as part of the 2024 EPI evaluation. Surveyed participants were asked q...

AI summary A survey of 100 EPI participants revealed high satisfaction (9.4/10) with the program, driven by motivations like energy cost savings (61%) and efficiency upgrades (26%). Most learned about EPI via word-of-mouth (22%) or online ads (16%), with 65% having no concerns. Recommendations included more product options (12%) and improved installation service (6%).

2024 EPI-Finding: Participants are highly satisfied with the overall program component. During the 2024 participant survey, participants rated the overall program component a 9.4 out of 10 and also provided high ratings on the time taken t...

AI summary The 2024 EPI-Finding highlights high participant satisfaction with the program component, scoring 9.4/10. Participants praised work quality, time efficiency, and information on energy-efficient products. The finding emphasizes positive feedback on installation quality and product efficiency.

Expired Participant Survey To reassess unconverted D assessment savings parameters, Narrative Research conducted a telephone survey with a total of 76 expired participants, i.e. participants who did not complete a final home energy assessm...

AI summary Narrative Research conducted a telephone survey of 76 expired participants in E1's DSM program who did not complete final home energy assessments. The survey, part of the 2024-2025 DSM MA evaluation process, aimed to reassess unconverted D assessment savings parameters and inform energy savings calculations for prescriptive measures.

B. Awareness and Motivations for Participating - B1. How did you first become aware of the Affordable Multifamily Housing program? [DO NOT READ. SINGLE RESPONSE] - 1. (Efficiency Nova Scotia Energy Solutions Advisor) - 2. (Contractors) - 3...

AI summary The document surveys participants in Nova Scotia's Affordable Multifamily Housing (AMH) program, asking about awareness channels (e.g., Efficiency Nova Scotia, contractors) and motivations (e.g., rebates, energy savings, environmental impact). It also explores knowledge of the program's two pathways (Prescriptive vs. Comprehensive) and reasons for selecting one.

APPENDIX XVIII EPI Algorithm for Participant Spillover Calculation Participant spillover was measured using a participant survey. Participants were asked, pursuant to participating in EPI, whether they implemented any additional energy eff...

AI summary This appendix describes the EPI Algorithm for calculating participant spillover, which measures the impact of energy efficiency programs on participants' additional energy efficiency measures. Surveys were used to determine the influence of program components on participants' decisions, and spillover was calculated by dividing additional savings by total savings achieved through program participation.

3.1 Participant Awareness and Decision to Purchase

AI summary This section discusses participant awareness and the decision-making process related to purchasing energy efficiency measures or programs. It likely addresses factors influencing consumer choices, program accessibility, and barriers to participation in initiatives like DSM or BER.

2024 BER Participant and Distributor Perspective Highlights - › The majority of Instant Rebate survey participants purchased energy efficient products for their own organization, while fewer purchased the products for a customer/project ou...

AI summary Participants in the 2024 BER Instant Rebate program primarily purchased energy-efficient products for their own organizations, driven by energy efficiency and cost savings. Satisfaction with the service was high (9.1), though distributors suggested expanding eligibility and improving rebate processes. Distributors used E1 rebates to promote LEDs but faced challenges with administrative burdens and product adoption perceptions.

For Application Rebates, spillover occurs when participants implement eligible energy efficiency measures due to influence from previously participating in the service without having received any kind of additional support. The last data c...

AI summary The document discusses spillover effects in Application Rebates, noting that no spillover was found in the 2021 evaluation, leading to a 0% spillover level used in the 2024 evaluation.

4.4 Participant Satisfaction There is a relatively high level of participant satisfaction with Custom New Construction overall, leading to an average satisfaction score of 7.9 out of 10, on a scale where a score of 1 means "not at all sati...

AI summary Participant satisfaction with Custom New Construction is high (7.9/10), with strong approval for E1's responsiveness (8.9) and application speed (8.5). Lower satisfaction relates to implementation incentives for complex projects and insufficient information on energy savings.