Better Buildings Residential Network Peer Exchange Call ... · people we’re not reaching now...
Transcript of Better Buildings Residential Network Peer Exchange Call ... · people we’re not reaching now...
Better Buildings Residential Network Peer Exchange Call Series: Bullseye: The Advantages of Targeted MarketingJuly 20, 2017Call Slides and Discussion Summary
Agenda and Ground Rules
▪ Agenda Review and Ground Rules ▪ Opening Polls▪ Residential Network Overview and Upcoming Call Schedule▪ Featured Speakers
▪ Marti Frank, Principal, Efficiency for Everyone, LLC ▪ Annika Todd, Senior Scientific Engineering Associate in the Electricity
Markets and Policy Group, Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory ▪ Kessie Avseikova, Senior Project Manager, Opinion Dynamics
▪ Discussion▪ Closing Poll and Announcements
2
Ground Rules:
1. Sales of services and commercial messages arenot appropriate during Peer Exchange Calls.
2. Calls are a safe place for discussion; please do notattribute information to individuals on the call.
Better Buildings Residential Network
Join the NetworkMember Benefits: ▪ Recognition in media and publications▪ Speaking opportunities▪ Updates on latest trends▪ Voluntary member initiatives▪ Solution Center guided tours
7
Commitment: ▪ Members only need to
provide one number: their organization’s number of residential energy upgrades per year.
Upcoming calls:• July 27: Making Program Evaluation Work for You• August 3: Making The Grade: Innovative Approaches to Improving Quality• August 10: Doing More with Less: Low Cost Program Strategies• August 17: Back to School: Engaging Students in Energy Efficiency at
Home and in the Classroom
For more information or to join, for no cost, email [email protected], or go to energy.gov/eere/bbrn & click Join
Best Practices: Efficiency for Everyone, LLC Marti Frank, Principal
What You Don’t Know Can Hurt You
Three (not so) easy steps to design programs for people we’re not reaching now
Marti Frank, Efficiency for Everyone
DOE Better Buildings Peer Network WebinarJuly 2017
Who do we want to reach?
Who do we want to reach?
= ≠
Who do we want to reach?
=Data
≠
Who do we want to reach?
=Data
≠
Who’s participating? Who’s not?
Who do we want to reach?
=Data
≠
Who’s participating? Who’s not?
How do we reach more of
them?
Who do we want to reach?
=Data
≠
Who’s participating? Who’s not?
How do we reach more of
them?
Who do we want to reach?
=Data
≠
Who’s participating? Who’s not?
Why?How do we
reach more of them?
Who do we want to reach?
=Data
≠
Who’s participating? Who’s not?
Why?
What do we do about it?
How do we reach more of
them?
Three (not so) easy steps
=Data
≠
Who’s participating? Who’s not?
Why?
What do we do about it?
How do we reach more of
them?
Source: Frank and Nowak. 2016. Who’s Participating and Who’s Not? The Unintended Consequences of Untargeted Programs. ACEEE Summer Study.
Example #1 Participation in California IOU appliance programs
Applianceincentives
Refrigerator recycling
All homeowners
High-income 48% 29% 30%
College degree 87% 54% 57%
English speakers Unknown 94% 85%
Single-family home 83% 79% 74%
Example #2 Pacific Northwest regional collaboration
Who: Ten utilities/funders in Oregon, Washington, Idaho, Montana
What: Coordinating to define a process for analyzing participation data, publish report on participation
When: Q1 2018
Why: Meet Power Plan goal of ensuring full participation
Contact: Kevin SmitNorthwest Power and Conservation Council
2nd question Why?
=Data
≠
Who’s participating? Who’s not?
Why?
What do we do about it?
How do we reach more of
them?
3rd question What do we do about it?
=Data
≠
Who’s participating? Who’s not?
Why?
What do we do about it?
How do we reach more of
them?
Example #1 VEIC’s Revised Home Performance with Energy Star
Who’s not Moderate-income homeownersparticipating?
Why? Key program elements don’t work for themPrimarily due to time and $ constraints
What do we Testing a free home energy visit/consultationdo about it? Testing role of Home Energy Advisor
Contact: Matt KilcoyneEfficiency Vermont
Example #2 Efficiency for Everyone’s Shift Model for Appliances
Who’s not Low/moderate income, no college, rentersparticipating? Buyers of low-priced appliances
Why? High incremental cost of Energy Star$ constraints
What do we do Target incentives to buy down the cost of ando about it? Energy Star appliance to the same price as the
cheapest (inefficient) model on the sales floor
Contact: Marti FrankEfficiency for Everyone
What You Don’t Know Can Hurt You
Three (not so) easy steps to design programs for people we’re not reaching now
Marti Frank
DOE Better Buildings Peer Network WebinarJuly 2017
Presentation Highlights: Efficiency for Everyone, LLC
22
▪ Programs should understand both who they are missing and why. ▪ Biggest misses are often the lower and middle-income segments:
▪ Evaluation in California found less variation in participation in an incentive program for appliance recycling compared to providing incentives for purchase of new appliances
▪ The latter program attracted wealthier, higher education participants, mainly due to high cost and rigid offerings.
▪ There’s no one right way to identify the “why” once you’ve identified who’s not participating. VEIC did extensive qualitative research to understand why moderate income homeowners were not participating in its HPwES program: ▪ Findings: (1) Homeowners thought they know what their home needed and did not want
to do the required audit; (2) The required comprehensive upgrades were too expensive; (3) Homeowners preferred to do the labor themselves rather than use pre-qualified contractors
▪ Solution: VEIC initiated a free energy visit, direct shipment of free bulbs and appliance coupons; created a home energy advisor role
▪ First-cost barrier: people are wired to favor the most convenient choices. ▪ A Shift Model tested in Fort Collins (CO) used midstream incentives paid to retailers to
reduce the cost of the most inexpensive Energy Star appliances to shift sales away from inexpensive and inefficient versions.
Best Practices: Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory Annika Todd, Senior Scientific Engineering Associate in the Electricity Markets and Policy Group
Behavior Analytics:new data + new techniques understand people, target the right segments and tailor messages, improve programs!Annika Todd, PhD, July 2017Team: Sam Borgeson, Dan Fredman, Ling Jin, Sid Patel, Anna Spurlock, Annika Todd, Alex Sim, John Wu, Taehoon Kim, Dongeun Lee, Jaesik Choi
Things are changing!
• Electric vehicles, renewables, fancy batteries
changing grid
• Energy reductions: need programs to deliver▪ Where we need it
▪ When we need it
▪ How much we need
• And cheaply!
• And quickly!
sound overwhelming?
Things are changing!
• Electric vehicles, renewables, fancy batteries
changing grid
• Energy reductions: need programs to deliver▪ Where we need it
▪ When we need it
▪ How much we need
• And cheaply!
• And quickly!
Our solution: Behavior Analytics
new, easily accessible
data+
new (and old) techniques
Understand people & their energy behavior
Target the right segments, Tailor specific messages
Get programs to deliver more (enrollment, energy savings)
Proof-of-concept (aka, example)
CPP program
smart meter data
9 types of people (segments),
with different energy behaviors
Proof-of-concept (aka, example)
CPP program
smart meter data only - no surveys! no marketing labels!
9 types of people (segments),
with different energy behaviors
percent enrollment vs. percent savings
15% 24% enrollment
60% savings
10%
You might think people who are more likely to enroll also save the most energy…
15% 24% enrollment
60% savings
10%
But actually – people that enroll more save less energy!
15% 24% enrollment
60% savings
10%
But actually – people that enroll more save less energy!
15% 24% enrollment
60% savings
10%
Which of these are those pesky people who will automatically get lower bills but don’t deliver
actual savings? You might think:
15% 24% enrollment
60% savings
10%
Which of these are those pesky people who will automatically get lower bills but don’t deliver
actual savings? You might think:
15% 24% enrollment
60% savings
10%
Actually – these are the people that automatically get lower bills actually deliver high energy savings. Let’s get them to enroll! Tell them they’ll save $!
15% 24% enrollment
60% savings
10%
Target enrollment
So who are these people who enroll and don’t save much?
15% 24% enrollment
60% savings
10%
These people have flexible energy schedules (maybe want to save). Let’s help them save!
Tailor the program to fit their needs!
15% 24% enrollment
60% savings
10% Tailor ↑ savings
Target to ↑ enrollment of high saversTailor programs to ↑ savings of high enrollers
Predict to optimize program planning
15% 24% enrollment
60% savings
10%
Target enrollment
Tailor ↑ savings
Behavior Analytics: it works, it’s
cheap, it can be done today!
understand people & their energy use
Target Tailor Predict
programs that deliver what we need!
Contact:Annika Todd
Presentation Highlights: Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory
42
▪ Behavior analytics can debunk myths about segments of people and their energy savings potential. ▪ Myth: people who are more likely to enroll in an energy efficiency program
save the most energy. ▪ Reality: people who are the least likely to enroll provide greater energy
savings.▪ LBNL’s demand response program focused on increasing enrollment and
increasing energy savings through two means: ▪ Increase enrollment of the most likely high-savers: they’ll generate
savings even without significant behavior changes as their off-peak rates will be lowered through enrollment.
▪ Tailor the program to increase energy savings of participants already enrolled people: they have limited savings due to their variable schedules and day-to-day variations in energy use.
▪ Analyzing behavior doesn’t always require surveys. LBNL’s program used only hourly smart meter data to generate the profiles of their targeted audiences.
▪ Once the upfront behavioral analysis is done, the cost of implementing such a program is relatively low.
Best Practices: Opinion Dynamics Kessie Avseikova, Senior Project Manager
NICHE PROGRAMS – BEST
PRACTICES AND LESSONS
LEARNED
July 20, 2017
WHAT IS THE SECRET TO A
SUCCESSFUL NICHE PROGRAM?
What is the secret to a successful niche program?
It Depends…On:
Target audience
Design
Operations
People involved
Niche Programs - Best Practices and Lessons Learned 46
WHAT ARE THE TACTICS TO ENSURE
EFFECTIVE NICHE PROGRAM
DESIGN?
Designing a Niche Program
48
Carefully consider goals
Strategically select target niches
Understand and document barriers, possible interventions,
expected outcomes, and performance metrics
Establish baseline measurements
Acknowledge the
necessary ramp-up
period and build needed
time and resources
Niche Programs - Best Practices and Lessons Learned
This combination of planning steps can help increase “success” and clarify
decision points along the way (thus illuminating “no go” decisions early
on in the process)
WHAT ARE THE TACTICS TO ENSURE
EFFECTIVE NICHE PROGRAM
IMPLEMENTATION?
Implementing a Niche Program
Niche Programs - Best Practices and Lessons Learned 50
▪ Understand the most effective way to engage the target customer niche
▪ Leverage existing structures but customize based on goals and barriers
▪ Multiple delivery partners = delivery bottlenecks
▪ Select appropriate marketing, outreach, and messaging tactics
▪ Streamline participation process to reduce customer dropout
▪ Total number of participation steps, application process, etc.
▪ Investigate and integrate various funding sources (bank loans, bill pay, etc.) or
other programs/measures
▪ Develop and integrate appropriate customer support systems or enhance existing
systems
▪ Multi-lingual phone support/in-language program materials
▪ Concierge services
▪ Dedicated community members
▪ Participation process walk-through
Niche Programs - Best Practices and Lessons Learned
Select Appropriate Marketing, Outreach, and Messaging Tactics
51
Overall Marketing and
Outreach
▪ Partnerships with local governments
can contribute to energy efficiency
implementation through:
▪ Regulatory mechanisms
▪ Financial incentives
▪ Local relationships
▪ Deeper energy savings can be
achieved through collective action
commitment by communities
▪ Rewards, competition, and incentives
can generate enthusiasm toward
energy efficiency
▪ Following up with customers (calls,
email alerts) while sometimes costly,
can ensure higher uptake
▪ Timing marketing activities can
advance the success of marketing
interventions (e.g., lifecycle
opportunities, such as purchase of
new home)
Sources of Outreach
▪ One of the most influential means of
encouraging engagement in
environmentally responsible behaviors is
the use of credible sources of
communication
▪ Trust in utilities is as high as community
organizations
▪ In-person communication is a powerful
outreach tool, however, the value of
community groups conducting the
outreach might not be much greater than
other outreach sources
▪ Home shows, community fairs, home
improvement workshops draw customers
who are already looking to do something in
their homes (“foot-in-the-door” approach)
▪ Website that can provide
homeowners/businesses readily available
access to information needed to evaluate
the fit of the program for their home (such
as personalized vivid information on energy
use, project outcome calculators,
community map or thermometer, links to
social media sites)
Messaging
▪ Customers are looking for a clear
pathway to participation and a
roadmap to measure selection.
Providing marketing that contains
specifics that customers can study on
their own time might be effective
▪ Strategically combine “generic” vs.
“specific” messages
▪ Highlight non-energy benefits (comfort,
health, etc.) in addition to bill and
energy savings
WHAT ARE THE TACTICS TO
MEASURING NICHE PROGRAM
SUCCESS?
Measuring Niche Program Success
53Niche Programs - Best Practices and Lessons Learned
▪ Establish data tracking, sharing, and reporting systems in advance of the
effort launch
▪ Set up and test data tracking and reporting systems prior to the effort’s
launch
▪ This will enable monitoring and mid-course corrections
▪ Align data tracking mechanisms with the effort’s goals and performance
metrics
▪ Marketing and outreach (customer movement from outreach to participation, lead
tracking, etc.)
▪ Channeling
▪ Energy savings
▪ Projects, etc.
▪ Where possible and feasible, track cost-related data strategically to
support cost-effectiveness analysis
CASE STUDIES
Efficient Neighborhoods +
A demonstration of successful target
audience selection
Niche Programs - Best Practices and Lessons Learned 55
Efficient Neighborhoods+
Geographic Microtargeting
Niche Programs - Best Practices and Lessons Learned 56
+
8 communities, 12,469
eligible customers
Design
▪ Existing audit and
weatherization program
▪ Enhanced incentives for
customers in targeted
communities
▪ Streamlined
participation process
Targeted Outreach
▪ Door-to-door
▪ Phone calls
▪ Events
▪ Mass media
Results
Energy
assessments
927
69%due to
EN+
Weatherization
Projects
248
76%due to
EN+
Energy Savings
(MMBTU)
10,698
73%due to
EN+
Concierge Initiative
A demonstration of why people
matter
Niche Programs - Best Practices and Lessons Learned 57
Concierge Initiative
Design▪ Pilot with personalized concierge services offered on top of the existing audit and weatherization program
▪ 2 concierge representatives for a randomly assigned group of 1,000 program participants also randomly
assigned to each concierge
Niche Programs - Best Practices and Lessons Learned 58
Sign-up Concierge Interaction HEA Concierge
Interaction InstallationConcierge Interaction
Quality Control
Concierge Interaction
Results
Audit-to-Weatherization
Conversion Rate
58% 64%54% 57%
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
Concierge
Total
(n=583)
Concierge 1
(n=275)
Concierge 2
(n=308)
Control
(n=1,969)
Statistically significant differences at 90% confidence
+1% over Control
+7% over Control -3% below
Control
Average Per-Project Savings (in
MBTU)
5,704 6,171 5,283 5,174
2,644 3,211
2,134 2,385
4,847 4,965
4,741 4,000
-
2,000
4,000
6,000
8,000
10,000
12,000
14,000
16,000
Total
Concierge
(n=1,001)
Concierge 1
(n=474)
Concierge 2
(n=527)
Control
(n=3,551)
Sa
vin
gs in
MB
TU
Other fuel
savingsGas
savingsElectric
savings
13,19514,347
12,15811,559
+14% over
Control
+24% over
Control+5% over
Control
KESSIE AVSEIKOVA
DIRECTOR
Presentation Highlights: Opinion Dynamics
60
▪ Tips for “niche” program design: ▪ Identify your program’s goals first, then identify your target▪ Identify where your customers are, then decide the appropriate outreach strategy ▪ Make the participation process as clear as possible; lower barriers to entry▪ Align data tracking to your goals▪ Consider the potential to scale effective niche program models to increase cost
effectiveness▪ Hard to reach customers respond well to targeted cost incentives: Efficient
Neighborhoods + program implemented by Massachusetts utilities used microtargeting to offer enhanced incentives to middle and low-income and make energy efficiency improvements more affordable.
▪ Program performance can depend on the people involved: the Concierge Initiative showed that one concierge outperformed the other by better engaging with his group of program participants, and achieving 24% more energy savings over the control group.
▪ Targeted customized outreach is very expensive, but starting small and/or using secondary data sources can help bring costs down. ▪ Programs with limited resources can start with the “low hanging fruit” setting up basic
program mechanisms and then scale it up. ▪ Data from the Census Bureau is public to everyone and available to use.
Discussion Highlights: What are the gaps in knowledge for this topic that, if filled, would help improve work in this area?
▪ Demographic data on program participants: lack of program evaluation data and general data collection restricts opportunity for targeted analyses.
▪ Look beyond participation and focus on energy savings: programs tend to aim for increased program participation, but could achieve greater energy savings by focusing on enrolling households with the highest potential for savings.
▪ The incremental cost related to niche and community-based programs: understanding this cost and how it’s split between the various design and implementation components can provide valuable insight into how to improve the cost-effectiveness of future efforts.
▪ Evaluation and characterization of existing niche/community programs would help establish best practices in the field: a “multi-level model” study to assess existing targeted outreach strategies and their impact to various audiences would enhance understanding of the many targeted approaches and their effectiveness for different audiences.
61
Upcoming Seasonal Messaging Opportunities
Now is the time to start planning energy efficiency messaging!
62
5thNational Energy Efficiency Day Oktoberfest
31stHalloween
October: Energy Action Month
Alliance to Save Energy Article Energy Vibe
Posters
Arlington County Post
62
Addenda: Attendee Information and Poll Results
64
Call Attendee Locations
Call Attendees: Network Members
▪ Boulder County▪ Building Performance Institute
(BPI)▪ Center for Energy and
Environment (CEE)▪ City of Columbia▪ City of Kansas City▪ City of Plano▪ Clearesult▪ Columbia Water & Light▪ Connecticut Green Bank▪ County of San Luis Obispo▪ Efficiency Nova Scotia
▪ EnergySavvy▪ Greater Cincinnati Energy
Alliance▪ Local Energy Alliance
Program (LEAP)▪ Montgomery County
Department of Environmental Protection
▪ The Insulation Man, LLC▪ TRC Energy Services▪ Vermont Energy Investment
Corporation (VEIC)▪ Wisconsin Energy
Conservation Corporation (WECC)65
Call Attendees: Non-Members (1 of 2)
▪ AmeriCorps▪ Aeroseal▪ Alliant Energy▪ Blue Ridge Energy▪ California Public Utilities
Commission▪ Canadian Home Builders'
Association (CHBA)▪ Cascade Natural Gas▪ City of Asheville▪ Efficiency for Everyone, LLC ▪ Enbridge Gas Distribution,
Inc.
▪ Energy Solutions Professionals
▪ Fraunhofer Society▪ Hawaii Energy▪ ICF ▪ Insight Property Services, Inc.▪ Jofforts Energy▪ Leidos▪ Local Government
Commission▪ Loveland Water and Power▪ Metropolitan Government of
Nashville▪ Mercy Housing66
Call Attendees: Non-Members (2 of 2)
▪ Minnesota Pollution Control Agency
▪ NANA Regional Corporation▪ National Fuel Gas▪ North Carolina Sustainable
Energy Association (NCSEA)▪ NW Energy Coalition▪ Off The Grid Renovations,
LLC▪ Opinion Dynamics▪ Potawatomi Business
Development Corporation▪ Platte River Power Authority
▪ Proctor Engineering Group ▪ PV Blue▪ Rebuilder Group, Inc.▪ Rhode Island Housing▪ San Joaquin Valley Clean
Energy▪ Smaart House▪ Southwest Energy Efficiency
Project▪ Stewards of Affordable
Housing for Future (SAHF)▪ Texas Energy Poverty
Research Institute (TEPRI)67
Opening Poll #1
▪ Which of the following best describes your organization’s experience with targeted marketing? ▪ Some experience/familiarity – 58%▪ Limited experience/familiarity – 30%▪ Very experienced/familiar – 8%▪ No experience/familiarity – 2%▪ Not applicable – 2%
68
Closing Poll
▪ After today's call, what will you do?▪ Seek out additional information on one or more of the ideas
– 56%▪ Consider implementing one or more of the ideas discussed
– 28%▪ Make no changes to your current approach – 11%▪ Other (please explain) – 5%
69