"Broadly stated, the purpose of this project is to provide a comprehensive assessment of the current "state of the practice" of utility-sector energy efficiency program evaluation across the 50 states and the District of Columbia. Toward that end, we have conducted a detailed survey of all states with active utility ratepayer-funded energy efficiency programs in order to establish an up-to-date database on how each state is handling various aspects of energy program evaluation and the reporting of results"--Page 2.

"Broadly stated, the purpose of this project is to provide a comprehensive assessment of the current "state of the practice" of utility-sector energy efficiency program evaluation across the 50 states and the District of Columbia. Toward that end, we have conducted a detailed survey of all states with active utility ratepayer-funded energy efficiency programs in order to establish an up-to-date database on how each state is handling various aspects of energy program evaluation and the reporting of results"--P. 2.

The purpose of this report is to examine and document what states are doing in actual practice, in terms of their decision making regarding the issue of net savings of energy from the implementation of energy efficiency programs.

Energy Efficiency: Towards the End of Demand Growth is a detailed guide to new energy efficiency technologies and policy frameworks affecting the profitability of efficiency projects. The contributions drawn together by F.P. Sioshansi feature insights from recognized thought leaders, detailed examinations of evolving technologies, and practical case studies yielding best practices for project planners, implementers and financiers. This volume challenges the "more is better" paradigm in energy production, examining efficiency technologies and measurement across the supply chain. - Comparative financial analysis of efficiency vs. increased generation - Case studies from four continents highlight the examples of successful technologies and projects - Explains how existing and developing regulatory frameworks impact cost and implementation

Public and private funding for end-use energy efficiency actions is expected to increase significantly in the United States over the next decade. For example, Barbose et al (2009) estimate that spending on ratepayer-funded energy efficiency programs in the U.S. could increase from $3.1 billion in 2008 to $7.5 and 12.4 billion by 2020 under their medium and high scenarios. This increase in spending could yield annual electric energy savings ranging from 0.58% - 0.93% of total U.S. retail sales in 2020, up from 0.34% of retail sales in 2008. Interest in and support for energy efficiency has broadened among national and state policymakers. Prominent examples include (almost equal to)$18 billion in new funding for energy efficiency programs (e.g., State Energy Program, Weatherization, and Energy Efficiency and Conservation Block Grants) in the 2009 American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA). Increased funding for energy efficiency should result in more benefits as well as more scrutiny of these results. As energy efficiency becomes a more prominent component of the U.S. national energy strategy and policies, assessing the effectiveness and energy saving impacts of energy efficiency programs is likely to become increasingly important for policymakers and private and public funders of efficiency actions. Thus, it is critical that evaluation, measurement, and verification (EM & V) is carried out effectively and efficiently, which implies that: (1) Effective program evaluation, measurement, and verification (EM & V) methodologies and tools are available to key stakeholders (e.g., regulatory agencies, program administrators, consumers, and evaluation consultants); and (2) Capacity (people and infrastructure resources) is available to conduct EM & V activities and report results in ways that support program improvement and provide data that reliably compares achieved results against goals and similar programs in other jurisdictions (benchmarking). The National Action Plan for Energy Efficiency (2007) presented commonly used definitions for EM & V in the context of energy efficiency programs: (1) Evaluation (E) - The performance of studies and activities aimed at determining the effects and effectiveness of EE programs; (2) Measurement and Verification (M & V) - Data collection, monitoring, and analysis associated with the calculation of gross energy and demand savings from individual measures, sites or projects. M & V can be a subset of program evaluation; and (3) Evaluation, Measurement, and Verification (EM & V) - This term is frequently seen in evaluation literature. EM & V is a catchall acronym for determining both the effectiveness of program designs and estimates of load impacts at the portfolio, program and project level. This report is a scoping study that assesses current practices and methods in the evaluation, measurement and verification (EM & V) of ratepayer-funded energy efficiency programs, with a focus on methods and practices currently used for determining whether projected (ex-ante) energy and demand savings have been achieved (ex-post). M & V practices for privately-funded energy efficiency projects (e.g., ESCO projects) or programs where the primary focus is greenhouse gas reductions were not part of the scope of this study. We identify and discuss key purposes and uses of current evaluations of end-use energy efficiency programs, methods used to evaluate these programs, processes used to determine those methods; and key issues that need to be addressed now and in the future, based on discussions with regulatory agencies, policymakers, program administrators, and evaluation practitioners in 14 states and national experts in the evaluation field. We also explore how EM & V may evolve in a future in which efficiency funding increases significantly, innovative mechanisms for rewarding program performance are adopted, the role of efficiency in greenhouse gas mitigation is more closely linked, and programs are increasingly funded from multiple sources often with multiple program administrators and intended to meet multiple purposes.

There is growing interest in energy efficiency (EE) among state policymakers as a result of increasing environmental concerns, rising electricity and natural gas prices, and lean economic times that motivate states to look more aggressively for cost-saving opportunities in public sector buildings. One logical place for state policymakers to demonstrate their commitment to energy efficiency is to 'lead by example' by developing and implementing strategies to reduce the energy consumption of state government facilities through investments in energy efficient technologies. Traditionally, energy efficiency improvements at state government facilities are viewed as a subset in the general category of building maintenance and construction. These projects are typically funded through direct appropriations. However, energy efficiency projects are often delayed or reduced in scope whereby not all cost-effective measures are implemented because many states have tight capital budgets. Energy Savings Performance Contracting (ESPC) offers a potentially useful strategy for state program and facility managers to proactively finance and develop energy efficiency projects. In an ESPC project, Energy Service Companies (ESCOs) typically guarantee that the energy and cost savings produced by the project will equal or exceed all costs associated with implementing the project over the term of the contract. ESCOs typically provide turnkey design, installation, and maintenance services and also help arrange project financing. Between 1990 and 2006, U.S. ESCOs reported market activity of (almost equal to)$28 Billion, with about (almost equal to)75-80% of that activity concentrated in the institutional markets (K-12 schools, colleges/universities, state/local/federal government and hospitals). In this study, we review the magnitude of energy efficiency investment in state facilities and identify 'best practices' while employing performance contracting in the state government sector. The state government market is defined to include state offices, state universities, correctional facilities, and other state facilities. This study is part of a series of reports prepared by Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory (LBNL) and the National Association of Energy Services Companies (NAESCO) on the ESCO market and industry trends. The scope of previous reports was much broader: Goldman et al. (2002) analyzed ESCO project costs and savings in public and private sector facilities, Hopper et al. (2005) focused on ESCO project activity in all public and institutional sectors, while Hopper et al (2007) provided aggregate results of a comprehensive survey of ESCOs on current industry activity and future prospects. We decided to focus the current study on ESCO and energy efficiency activity and potential market barriers in the state government market because previous studies suggested that this institutional sector has significant remaining energy efficiency opportunities. Moreover, ESCO activity in the state government market has lagged behind other institutional markets (e.g., K-12 schools, local governments, and the federal market). Our primary objectives were as follows: (1) Assess existing state agency energy information and data sources that could be utilized to develop performance metrics to assess progress among ESPC programs in states; (2) Conduct a comparative review of the performance of selected state ESPC programs in reducing energy usage and costs in state government buildings; and (3) Delineate the extent to which state government sector facilities are implementing energy efficiency projects apart from ESPC programs using other strategies (e.g. utility ratepayer-funded energy efficiency programs, loan funds).