2013-2015Energy Efficiency Plans:

Supplemental Information on Performance Incentive

Mechanisms Council Consultants

MA EEAC MeetingSeptember 11, 2012

1

Build on the Current Approach• For 2013-2015, build upon the current

performance incentive mechanism with its three components: savings (benefits), value (net benefits), and performance metrics

• Three components focus on key objectives:– Higher savings, more benefits for MA– Value and cost-effectiveness (net benefits)– Metrics for other specific objectives: deeper

savings, targeted market segments (rental), etc.

2

Trying to Do Two Things at the Same Time

• Set high goals• Achieve high goals

• Current mechanism has features intended to do both– Setting of the targets (goals) in the Plan– Encouraging achievement of the goals

3

Key Topics • Amount or level of performance incentive –

total amount of the performance incentive or pool

• Incentive mechanism (and its components)– Potential modifications to the performance

incentive mechanism (e.g., threshold)– Performance metrics (third component)

4

2011 Performance Incentives Based on 2011 Annual Reports -- Electric

5

Plan Report Plan Report Plan Report Plan ReportSavings (Benefits) 2,343,288$ 2,767,085$ 676,934$ 693,177$ 7,554,223$ 5,929,092$ 10,574,444$ 9,389,355$ 88.8%Value (Net Benefits) 1,604,462$ 2,104,117$ 454,845$ 527,468$ 5,329,808$ 4,885,253$ 7,389,116$ 7,516,840$ 101.7%Performance Metrics 1,402,568$ 1,491,797$ 1,090,886$ 1,257,652$ 1,402,568$ 997,228$ 3,896,023$ 3,746,678$ 96.2%Total Performance Incentives 5,350,396$ 6,363,001$ 2,222,545$ 2,478,298$ 14,286,642$ 11,811,574$ 21,859,584$ 20,652,873$ 94.5%

118.9% 111.5% 82.7% 94.48%

Residential Low Income C&I Total

Actual Performance Incentive as % of Plan (Target)Total 94.5%NGrid 88.7%NSTAR 100.9%WMECO 91.0%Unitil 118.3%CLC

2011 Performance Incentives Based on 2011 Annual Reports -- Gas

6

Plan Report Plan Report Plan Report Plan ReportSavings (Benefits) 724,012$ 866,181$ 243,442$ 325,481$ 1,020,169$ 861,805$ 1,987,624$ 2,053,467$ 103.3%Value (Net Benefits) 370,846$ 488,051$ 95,837$ 216,266$ 679,121$ 587,036$ 1,145,804$ 1,291,352$ 112.7%Performance Metrics 432,159$ 373,824$ 336,124$ 373,555$ 432,159$ 226,949$ 1,200,441$ 974,328$ 81.2%Total Performance Incentives 1,526,668$ 1,728,054$ 675,087$ 915,303$ 2,132,332$ 1,675,790$ 4,333,895$ 4,319,147$ 99.7%

113.2% 135.6% 78.6% 99.66%

Residential Low Income C&I Total

Actual Performance Incentive as % of Plan (Target)Total 99.7%NGrid 105.9%NSTAR 116.8%CMA 73.7%Unitil 86.3%Berksire 67.8%NEG 77.3%

Why Performance Metrics?

7

Identify and develop ways to motivate and incent the PAs' behavior related to some specific priorities or objectives, which (in our view) are not adequately or very effectively incented in the two overarching components of the performance incentive mechanism, either in the savings (achieve $ benefits) or the value (achieve net benefits, i.e., achieve benefits cost-effectively from a TRC perspective) components of the performance incentive. 

These important priorities (in the past) have included:- Achieving deeper savings and comprehensiveness - Pursuing CHP- Cost-efficiency in the use of ratepayer funding (which is not directly incented through the value component of the performance incentive)- Low income objectives that are addressed in the performance metrics- Focus on initiatives with longer time horizons, which will establish the foundation building blocks on which to build increased savings levels- Others?

Performance Metrics – EEAC Notes

• Key Question: whether to have performance metrics, and if so, which metrics

• Any metrics would have to be clear (simple), effective, and meaningful

• Fewer metrics (have had ~12 metrics)

• Consultant proposal: six performance metrics focused on deeper savings (5) and renters (1)

8

Performance Metrics• Large Retrofit Depth of Savings• Purpose: Continuous improvement in capturing deep savings

• Description: Each year, increase the number of large retrofit program projects that achieve the savings depth target. To meet the depth target, projects must include both gas and electric savings, with each qualifying project achieving at least 20% savings in one fuel, and at least 5% savings in the secondary fuel. The design level for the metric is an increase in projects meeting the depth target by at least 15% from the previous year accomplishment.

• (Two other/similar C&I performance metrics)

9

Performance Metrics• Mass SAVE/Weatherization Depth of Savings• Purpose: Continuous improvement in capturing deep savings

• Description: Each year, increase the average depth of savings for each Home Energy Assessment. Savings depth will be measured on a total MMBtu basis, combining electric, gas, and oil savings. The design level for the metric is an increase in the average depth of savings of at least 12.5% from the previous year

10

Performance Metrics• Low Income Depth of Savings• Purpose: Continuous improvement in capturing deep savings

• Description: Each year, increase the average depth of savings in 1-4 unit low income projects. Savings depth will be measured on a total MMBtu basis, combining electric, gas, and oil savings. The design level for the metric is an increase in the average depth of savings of at least 7.5% from the previous year.

11

Performance Metrics• Multifamily Rental Market Penetration• Purpose: Continuous improvement in serving the multifamily

rental market

• Description: Each year, increase the number of rental units served by the multifamily program, relative to the total units served. The design level for the metric is an increase of at least 7.5% from the previous year .

• Rental market: including both multifamily and single family?

12

Potential Modifications to the Existing Performance Incentive

13

Concern/Issue Potential Modification Options/Specifics

Not achieving the goals; earning an incentive for lower levels (75%) of performance

Increase the threshold (minimum performance level for which an incentive is offered)

Increase threshold from 75% to 80% or 85%

Not achieving the goals, inadequate incentive to achieve and exceed the goals

Scale the incentive by offering a higher incentive for performance above the 100% target and a lower incentive below the target

1. Use two payout rates (higher at and above 100%, lower below 100%)2. Scale the incentive across the perf. range (see diagram)

Not achieving the goals, inadequate incentive to achieve and exceed the goals (funding left on the table)

Increase the % weight on the savings (benefits) component

Increase the % weight for savings (benefits) and decrease % weight for value component (net benefits)