Annual Report, REAP

2009 REAP Annual Report
March 8, 2010
Prepared by

JC Martel
Residential Energy Action Program Manager
Center for ReSource Conservation
2639 Spruce Street
Boulder, Colorado 80302

CONSERVATION STARTS HERE
2639 Spruce Street ♦ Boulder, Colorado 80302 ♦ 303.999.3820 ♦ 303.440.0703 fax
www.ConservationCenter.org ♦ www.ReSourceYard.org

www.conservationcenter.org
Executive Summary

Since its inception, the REAP Program has assisted in market transformation. It began with
subsidized audits. Boulder’s audit program grew the audit market to a point of saturation with a
countywide education and awareness campaign coupled with financial incentives. The post
audit consulting service, now branded the Residential Energy Action Program (REAP), that the
residential audit program transitioned into in 2009 has been driving the private market to evolve
as well. In addition, private companies are integrating a REAP consulting model into contractor
and consulting businesses.

The program has succeeded in reaching its goal of energy education for Boulder County
residents. Some of the key accomplishments from the 2009 program include:

The 2009 program delivered:
 direct outreach to 924 homeowners
 465 energy audits, and
 269 action consultations.

Top 3 program elements most valued services of REAP to homeowners:
1. Personalized Home Energy Action Plan
2. One-on-one energy counseling
3. Subsidized energy audit

Energy Audits:
 Out of 2657 Xcel Energy audits completed in Xcel’s Colorado territory, 30% were done
in Boulder County, or 798 audits.
 88% of Xcel audits completed in Boulder County included infrared, 76% included blower
door, and 12% were clipboard audits.

Action Program:

Carbon Savings Assumptions for 98 Homes in the Action Program
Aggregate 504,859 lbs Aggregate 229 mtCO2e
Carbon Savings Assumptions for 269 Homes in the Action Program
Carbon Savings Assumptions for 1700 Homes Projected
Aggregate 8,770,300 lbs Aggregate 3,978 mtCO2e

 63% of homes reduced their greenhouse gas emissions.
 79% - 91% had made home improvements as a result of the action program.
 Investment average of $7,185 per home.
 Averages of 4 energy upgrades were made per home.

Page 3 of 27


Table of Contents

REAP Overview ............................................................................................................. 5
REAP Impact ................................................................................................................. 8
REAP Program Overview ............................................................................................ 8
Energy Audits .............................................................................................................. 9
Action Program .......................................................................................................... 10
Symbiotic POOH Utility Bill Analysis .......................................................................... 15
Customer Satisfaction ............................................................................................... 18
Marketing and Outreach ............................................................................................ 20
Social Mobilization ..................................................................................................... 23
2010 REAP Outlook..................................................................................................... 25
Appendices ................................................................................................................. 28

Page 4 of 27


REAP Overview

The Energy Division’s REAP program began as a pilot energy audit program in 2006. The
Residential Energy Audit Program was a subsidized energy audit program that subcontracted
professional energy auditors to conduct energy audits that included collection and analysis of
utility data from each client, a home visit and audit report. Over 1,700 audits were conducted
during those 2 ½ years.

However, it became apparent that an audit did not necessarily lead to action. And if it did, the
program did not involve post audit implementation data tracking; therefore post-audit
implementation achievements from REAP were not calculable until the close of 2009. The
consequence of lacking post-audit implementation data has been a negative reputation for
energy audit programs in both the residential and commercial sectors.

In reality, one could argue that 100% of homeowners during or after an energy audit do
something. It can be argued that while auditors do not typically retrofit the home at the time of
the audit, an auditor educates the client to strategically open or close blinds to maximize
passive solar gain, reminds the homeowner to turn off power strips, and urges the homeowner
to move furniture away from vents for proper heat distribution. Additionally, energy efficiency
often becomes incorporated into home improvement projects when it otherwise may not be,
such as in a bathroom or kitchen remodel, or building an addition.

The program changed to address this gap in post audit tracking in 2009. In February 2009, Xcel
Energy launched its own subsidized audit program, so the CRC evolved the REAP program
from an audit program to an action program. This included working in partnership with Xcel to
offer their subsidized audit and contacting each homeowner about their plan to implement the
recommended energy efficiency improvements. Based on the homeowner’s action plan, REAP
staff recommend contractors, review project bids, and ensure that the projects qualify for the
maximum amount of financial incentives.

Figure 1 give a visual representation of REAP’s flow process.

Page 5 of 27


Figure 1. Flow Process

The Action Program was born out of community demand for an unbiased assistance program
beyond the audit, and a local government need for post audit data tracking. REAP still
promotes homeowners to start with an energy audit for a full-home analysis that can then be
reviewed by an energy consultant at our Boulder-based nonprofit. The consultant helps the
homeowner develop an action plan, and then reviews contractor’s estimates to ensure that the
projects will qualify for the maximum amount of financial incentives. REAP provides energy
reduction monitoring so that the homeowner and program oversight can confirm that the
projects are successful in achieving greenhouse gas emissions reductions.

Energy consultations fall into a tiered system, the services include the following:
 one-on-one interaction with the homeowner to discuss retrofit options,
 estimated cost and greenhouse gas summaries,
 contractor referrals, and
 financing information.

Page 6 of 27

The program tiers, bronze, silver and gold, refer to how many times the homeowner receives
the above mentioned services.

Figure 2 outlines the program outcomes for the 2009 program:
 direct outreach to 924 homeowners,
 465 energy audits, and
 269 action consultations.

Figure 2.
2009 Residential Energy Action Program
Results
1000

800

600
2009 YTD

400 2009 Goal

200

0
Outreach Consultations Xcel Audits Non-Xcel Audits
2009 YTD 924 269 465 20
2009 Goal 0 220 390 87

Figure 3 displays a visual representation of REAP.

Figure 1.

Page 7 of 27

REAP Impact

REAP Program Review

The REAP program: 1) provides a subcontracted energy audit to indicate cost-effective energy
conservation gains that can be achieved in individual homes (audit); and 2) provides one-on-
one interaction with homeowners to discuss the recommendations (action).

After a year of implementing the new REAP (Action Program), the CRC estimates that many
homeowners will use the program’s services for up to four years after their energy audit, as
homeowners use REAP as a revolving service. Many enter the program with plans to make one
or two upgrades within the first year after the audit and then the program prompts homeowners
to chart additional upgrades beyond their original plan.

A key value of REAP is its variety of program offerings that are available to meet any
homeowner’s needs. REAP staff analyze each component of a homeowner’s project to offer
suggestions for energy
Figure 2. Evaluating the Program’s Usefulness
efficiency integration. Figure
3 shows the program Which Three did you Find Most Useful?
offerings in REAP that a
sample size of homeowners Facilitate bulk purchasing
valued most. Educational seminars and training

Energy reduction monitoring
As a homeowner ClimateSmart Loan Program information
commented, “I would likely Federal tax incentive information
still have done the insulation
Assistance with rebate forms
and some solar work, but
Review of contractor's estimates
without knowing about it I
would likely have not done Contractor referrals in a trade alley network

some of the smaller, more Subsidized energy audit

effective stuff like putting on A personalized Home Energy Action Plan
a storm door or air sealing.” One-on-one energy counseling

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22
Sample REAP energy
counseling scenarios:
 If a homeowner only wants to spend $400 on energy upgrades, an action consultation and
utility analysis such as a GH Tracker report can best leverage that homeowner’s investment.
 Another homeowner might wish to spend $100,000. They can start with an energy audit,
receive a utility analysis report, and numerous consultations to help them retrofit each
system of their home. After such a large investment, this homeowner might value from a
post-retrofit audit to confirm a healthy air exchange level and an additional utility analysis to
measure the impact of their retrofit.

Page 8 of 27

Energy Audits

2009 Goal: 390 energy audits
2009 Actual: 465 energy audits

Homeowners who contacted the CRC for an energy audit were seamlessly connected to the
Xcel program for an audit or were provided a Boulder County or Longmont Power and
Communications subsidized audit. Figure 4 gives a breakdown of 2009 audits by location.

Out of 2657 Xcel Energy audits completed in Xcel’s Colorado territory, 30% were done in
Boulder County, or 798
Figure 3. Xcel Audits
audits. 88% of Xcel audits
completed in Boulder
County included infrared, Xcel Audits

76% included blower door, 200
186
and 12% were clipboard 180
audits. Five Home Boulder
160
Performance with Energy 140
136
Longmont
Star (HPwES) projects 120
were completed in Boulder 100
Superior
69
County in 2009 whereas 50 80
Louisville
49
HPwES assessments were 60
25
completed in Xcel’s 40 Boulder County: Unincorporated
and NonParticipating Cities
Colorado territory. 20
0

Prior to the commencement of the Xcel Energy audit program, the CRC conducted a limited
number of REAP audits to homeowners who were on the waiting list for an extended period of
time. Figure 5 shows the Figure 4. Non/Pre Xcel Audits
breakdown of non-
Xcel/pre-Xcel audits. Non-Xcel/Pre-Xcel Audits
These audits were
12
conducted in January and
10
February of 2009 and were 10
Boulder
billed to the cities and
Boulder County at rate of 8
Longmont
$150/each. In addition, 6
5
audits in non-Xcel Superior

territories were continued. 4
3 Boulder County: Unincorporated
2 and NonParticipating Cities
2

0

Page 9 of 27

Action Program

2009 Goal: 220 Action Program participants
2009 Actual: 269 Action Program participants

Action consultations is a term used to describe a variety of services - one-on-one interaction
with a homeowner to discuss retrofit options, a Home Energy Action Plan with a prioritized list of
improvements, estimated cost and greenhouse gas calculations, contractor referrals, review of
contractor’s estimates, and financing information. The action consultations focus on home
improvements of interest to the homeowner that also yield the highest return on investment in
terms of energy savings. Figure 7 outlines the jurisdictional breakdown of the action program
consultations.

Figure 5. Action Consultations

Action Consultations

140
129

120 Boulder

100 Longmont

80
65 Superior
60
47 Louisville
40
12 Boulder County: Unincorporated
16
20 and NonParticipating Cities

0

Of the 269 Action Program participants, 98 completed an Action Program cycle. Figure 8 is a
snapshot of those 98 homes with the improvements that were completed, currently planned,
and recommended by the auditor or desired by the homeowner.

Page 10 of 27

Figure 6. Project Status Update

Project Status of 98 Homes Participating in the Action Program

Low flow showerhead
Dryer
Clothes Washer
Dishwasher
Refrigerator Replacement
Cooling
Solar Thermal
Solar PV
Lighting
Water Heating
Duct Sealing
Furnace/Boiler
Weather Strip Doors
Windows
Whole House or Attic Fan
Air Sealing
Perimeter Insulation
Wall Insulation
Attic Insulation
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90

POST REAP PLANNED RECOMMENDED or DESIRED

Figure 9 assumes an average reduction of 2.34 metric tons of CO2e per home with a potential
for 4.05 metric tons of CO2e* for the 98 homes who gave project status updates in January’s
phone call campaign.i
Figure 7. Carbon Emissions Reduction Per Home

Carbon Emissions Reductions for 98 Homes Participating in the
*NOTE: The REAP Program
Action Program Project Status Update Project Manager created a calculator that
estimates energy savings and
4.5
4.05 mtCO2e greenhouse gas reductions per
4 household was prepared based
3.5 on Xcel Energy’s Demand Side
3 Management Plan (pages 419-
2.34 mtCO2e
457.) The calculator was also
mtCO2e

2.5 Actual GHG Savings
2 Potential GHG Savings built into the REAP database to
1.5 summarize expected and
1 potential energy reductions and
0.5
greenhouse gas savings
0
associated with project statuses.
1

Page 11 of 27

Figure 10 assumes an aggregate reduction of 229 metric tons of CO2e per home per year with
a potential for 397 metric tons of CO2e for the 269 homes participating in the 2009 Action
Program.

Figure 8. Carbon Emissions Reduction for 269
Homes
Carbon Emissions Reductions for 98 Homes Participating in the
Action Program Project Status Update Project

450
397 mtCO2e
400

350

300
229 mtCO2e
mtCO2e

250 Actual GHG Savings
200 Potential GHG Savings

150

100

50

0
1

The average anticipated investment in energy efficiency and renewable energy for REAP
participants is $17,100, based on information collected on the REAP application. The median
anticipated investment is $15,000. The average and median income of REAP participants is in
the $90,000 to $95,000 range.

Figure 9. Analysis on 98 Homes
Anticipated Investment from Homeowners
Average Anticipated Investment Per Home on REAP
Application $ 17,100.00
Median Anticipated Investment Per Home on REAP
Application $ 15,000.00
Investment Assumptions for 98 Homes
Actual Investment Per Home (from calc.) $ 7,185.36
Investment Per Home if All Recommended
Improvements are Completed (from calc.) $ 16,084.90
Energy Savings Assumptions for 98 Homes
Aggregate 128,136 kWh Aggregate 20,550 Therms
Per Home 1308 kWh Per Home 210 Therms
Carbon Savings Assumptions for 98 Homes
Per Home 5159 lbs Per Home 2.34 mtCO2e

Page 12 of 27

Attic insulation, refrigerator replacement, efficient lighting and air-sealing yield the best payback.
If all 17 energy efficiency upgrades in the calculator are completed, the project cost would total
approximately $21,975 and avoid 10,644 pounds or 4.83 metric tons of CO2 per home.

Based on the sample size of 98 homes, an investment from action consultation participants of
$7,185.36 per home is assumed. An additional $8,899.54 would need to be spent per home to
complete all of the energy efficiency upgrades in the calculator, excluding solar thermal and
photovoltaic. Some homes are built to code or retrofits had been completed before REAP,
potentially reducing the amount needed to be invested to reach the ideal emissions reductions.
Figure 10. Carbon Emissions Reduction for 269
Conclusions can be related to 269 Homes
homes in the Action Program
based on the statistical Carbon Emissions Reductions for 269 Homes Participating in the
Action Program
significance of 98 homes. 98
homes out of 269 people 450
1,090 mtCO2e
responded to a phone call 400
campaign, yielding a 36% 350
response rate. The primary 300
purpose of the call campaign was 629 mtCO2e
mtCO2e

250 Actual GHG Savings
to find out what improvements 200 Potential GHG Savings
homeowners had made after
150
participating in the Action Program.
100
The study indicates that with 95%
50
confidence it can be stated that
0
79%-91% of the homeowners in 1
REAP Action have made
improvements, with an average of 4 improvements per home. Action participants who joined
REAP in Q409 were unlikely to report completed improvements during the call campaign. It is
assumed that Q409 participants account for percentage of homeowners that had made no
improvements. The following data is based on statistical data from the 98 homes.

Page 13 of 27

Figure 11 assumes an aggregate reduction of 629 metric tons of CO2e per home with a
potential for 1,090 metric tons of CO2e for the 269 homes participating in the 2009 Action
Program.

Investment Assumptions for 269 Homes
Actual homeowner investment in efficiency
improvements $1.9 million
Potential homeowner investment in efficiency
Aggregate 351,852 kWh Aggregate 56,490 Therms

Data relating to past REAP audit-only participants is limited. It is assumed that audits without
consultations promotes energy action and that the Action Program increases numbers of
retrofits but further analysis must be conducted to examine the impact. The following data can
be used to assume a projection if all 1700 homes that have received energy audits in REAP
from 2006-2009 enter the Action Program. This data can also give a projection of REAP’s
expansion. The statistical significance of 98 homes compared to 1700 REAP participants gives
a confidence interval of 12.15.

Estimated Investment in Audits 2006-2009
Homeowner investment in audits $240,000
Government investment in audit subsidies $125,000
Utility company investment in audit subsidies $200,000
Investment Assumptions for 1700 REAP Participants
Actual homeowner investment in efficiency
Potential homeowner investment in efficiency
Aggregate 2,223,600 kWh Aggregate 357,000 Therms
Aggregate 8,770,300 lbs Aggregate 3,978 mtCO2e

Page 14 of 27

Symbiotic POOH Utility Bill Analysis

NOTE: Utility bill analysis differs from the projected analysis for two reasons: 1.) bill analysis
includes occupant behavior and purchases of electronic or devices that increase household
energy consumption 2.) projected analysis assumes energy reduction per year without taking
into account when the project is installed.

The following four graphs display results from the weather normalized utility bill analysis of 508
households through Symbiotic Engineering’s Program Overview and Operational History
(POOH) platform. These records are a subset of the 1700 homes that have received energy
audits from 2006-2009.

Figure A presents the cumulative greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions reductions of 508 homes
from 2006-2009, that have
been normalized based on Figure A
their enrollment date. In
other words, the displayed
monthly periods represent the
first, second, etc. months
after a household received an
audit. Looking at the first
twelve month period after
enrollment in the program,
the cumulative GHG
emissions reductions is
approximately 220 mtCO2e.
Given that some program
participants did not have a full
year of post-audit utility billing
data, this reported GHG
emissions savings is
expected to be higher than has been actually realized. Furthermore, if households which
realized GHG emissions savings (336 out of 508 homes) are isolated, the observed GHG
emissions reductions per household become 1.9 mtCO2e.

Page 15 of 27

Looking at the first twelve month period after enrollment in the program, the cumulative natural
gas emissions reductions is approximately 1,733 therms, as shown in Figure B.

Figure B

Figure C displays the cumulative electricity saving over the first twelve month period after
enrollment date with a cumulative savings of 111,302 kilowatt hours.

Figure C

Page 16 of 27

Figure D shows the frequency distribution of the percent change in greenhouse gas emissions
for 443 homes. The outlier categories of greater than and less than 25 metric tons might be
attributed to incomplete data sets. Removing the outlier categories reduces the data set to 316
homes. Therefore, 63% of homes reduced their greenhouse gas emissions.

Figure D

Page 17 of 27

Customer Satisfaction

A customer satisfaction survey was sent to the 269 Action Program participants, achieving a
13% response rate. Figure 15 evaluates the educational aspect of action consultations.

Figure 13. Educational Evaluation

On a scale of 1 to 5, with 5 being the most, how much have you
learned from our program in terms of...

how to talk with
contractors about your 13% 21% 35% 16% 13%
energy efficient needs?

what is involved with the
installation of energy 5% 13% 29% 32% 18%
efficient technology?

how to choose an
energy efficient
2% 13% 24% 35% 24%
technology that suits
your needs?

the financial return
(rebates or tax credits) 8% 32% 35% 24%
on your investment?

This figure indicates that REAP has excelled at teaching homeowners about return on
investment and choosing efficient technologies. Based on customer comments, it is
recommended for REAP to:
 “Expand the lists and price comparison for contractors”
 “Let people know how much money they could save by implementing the suggestions”
 “Allow consumers to rate vendors and have this available for others to reference”
 “A matrix that enables you to discern quickly what services are offered by various
contractors that are listed on your web site. Have a check in each column (e.g. insulation)
for a service provided by the contract. Sorting through their promotional sentences does
not always make it clear which contractor provides what services.”
 “Have someone to check on contractor's work if problems occur”

Page 18 of 27

In addition, REAP customers were asked “Would you pay for the REAP services if it were not
funded by the local government?”
Figure 14. Value

Would you Pay for the REAP Services if it were not Funded by
Commentary varied. Some
the Local Governments? questioned the cost of such a
service, such as “Most likely too
expensive without the subsidy” and
“it depends on the cost, but overall
28% was a huge help!” Others gave
Yes
suggestions for program
No improvement, “If I paid for them, I
Maybe
would want to have an info sheet that
55%
showed how my expense paid for
itself in X years, just like you get from
17%
a solar company instigating you to
spend money on them.” Figure 16
summarizes the findings.

A calling campaign to the 269 Action Program participants was executed for project status
updates. Contact was made with 98 people, lending a 36% response rate. The primary
purpose of the call campaign was to find out what improvements homeowners had made after
participating in the Action Program.
 85% had made home improvements as a result of the action program. The estimated
homeowner investment in energy efficiency and renewable energy improvements for the
98 homeowners was $700,000 in estimated homeowner investment of efficiency and
renewable technologies.
 Investment average of $7,185 per home.
 Averages of 4 energy upgrades were made per home.

Page 19 of 27

Marketing and Outreach

The CRC provide brochures, website information for REAP and the rebate programs, press
releases, provided workshops and presentations for REAP and had two articles in the
Conservation Magazine. The CRC staff also made reasonable attempts to solicit media
coverage for the program.

Per the MOUs, each government partner was required to make a significant contribution to the
marketing of REAP. Suggested marketing outlets included:
 Utility bill insert
 Direct mailing
 City Newsletter
 Public Service Announcement in local paper
 Public Service Announcement on local radio station
 Advertisement in local newspaper
 Securing a story in local newspaper
 Post on City website
 Post in free local calendar listings
 Place brochure in utility billing office
 Post on community website
 Post text or produce a sport for local cable channel

In addition, REAP was marketed with the following avenues:
 REAP PowerPoint Presentations:
o Neighborhood meetings, to include city of Boulder Neighborhood Action Group
meetings, Longmont neighborhood meetings and block parties
o Businesses, such as Google
o Boulder Green Building Guild (BGBG) brown bag lunches
o BuildSmart and Green Points educational series
 Ads in Daily Camera, Longmont Times, Superior Observer, Mountain Ear, Conservation
Magazine
 Articles in the Camera, Conservation Magazine, Longmont Times
 Bi-monthly tabling at Boulder Farmer’s Market
 Boulder County Solar Week, to include:
o REAP audits highlighted in Tour applications and in home features in
Conservation Magazine
o Signage about REAP in the homes during the tour
o Two REAP workshops during Solar Week
 Other events included 36 ClimateSmart Loan Program Workshops, Sustainability Fair,
Longmont Rhythm on the River, and other events throughout the County
 Email distribution in CRC E-news, ClimateSmart E-news, viral emails
 Contractor referrals, referrals from realtors

Page 20 of 27

 Website information on each partner city website, CRC, ClimateSmart, GEO, contractor
websites
 Word-of-mouth
 Utility bill inserts for LPC customers
 Mail inserts with realtor’s advertising
 Flyer inserts in solar companies sales packets – Namaste Solar, Bella Energy, Uva,
Aqua Care
 Other programs such as Slow the Flow, ClimateSmart, Solar Home Tour
 Building departments for the city of Boulder, Longmont and Boulder County

Figure 15. Marketing and Outreach
From the REAP Marketing and Outreach Results
application, the CRC was for Audit and Action Participants
able to determine how
REAP participants heard
about the program.
Figure 17 is an aggregate 22%
ClimateSmart and CRC
of how all 2009 Programs/Staff
participants, who Local Government
40%
received both audits and
Utility Company
action plans, heard about
the program. 14% Friends, Family, and Neighbors

Print, Web and Events

13%
11%

Page 21 of 27

Figure 18 examines the 14% of participants who heard about REAP through their friends, family
and neighbors. In a customer satisfaction survey, those surveyed were asked how many
people they told about the program. 91% of people who responded told at least one person.

Figure 16. Social Mobilization

How many People have you Mentioned this Program to within
your Community?

6% 9%

17%
None
1 to 10
10 to 25
25 to 50

68%

Page 22 of 27

Social Mobilization

The REAP Program led a countywide social mobilization effort. The two primary components of
this were: (1) targeted calling campaign and (2) outreach to local social groups.

In defining and executing REAP, the CRC looked at the 4 marketing "phases” referenced in the
AIDA model. AIDA is an acronym used in marketing that describes a common list of events that
are very often undergone when a person is selling a product or service:
 A - Awareness: attract the attention of the customer.
 I - Interest: raise customer interest by focusing on and demonstrating advantages and
benefits (instead of focusing on features, as in traditional advertising).
 D - Desire: convince customers that they want and desire the product or service and that
it will satisfy their needs.
 A - Action: lead customers towards taking action and/or purchasing.

Figure 19 displays direct outreach by phone call for participating locations. As part of the
focused calling campaign CRC called potential and current REAP participants. CRC used
complimentary program lists (i.e. CRC's water audit list) to generate Awareness-Interest-Desire
(A-I-D) for REAP and facilitate Action. Figure 17. Outreach with Calling Campaign
Further, the current REAP lists were
used to develop a target list for Direct Outreach
insulation participants. Calls were
made to this target list in an effort to 509
drive repeat action (these are Boulder
# of Homes

participants that have already taken Longmont
action by joining REAP - some have Superior
already made EE improvements - and 197 202 Louisville
repeat action is often easier to insight
Boulder County: Uninc.
than initial action). 30 43 and NonParticipating

As part of the outreach to local social
groups, the Energy Division staff developed contacts and conducted informational meetings with
various organizations, including volunteer organizations, local companies, and homeowner
associations. Summary presentations were given to organizations and interested parties on the
Insulate Colorado program and on REAP as a whole.

This effort also included training Energy Corps (a complimentary County program) on effective
homeowner engagement and energy efficiency education. This outreach further prompted A-I-D
and is expected to lead to future Action (i.e. program enrollment). The following table outlines
the results of CRC's efforts on the social mobilization effort.

Page 23 of 27


Figure 18. Social Mobilization with Mass Media
GEO Marketing Grant
Social Mobilization with Mass Media
Goal Actual Estimated Investment

CRC Total Outreach
(generated from phone call campaign)
500 605 $5,000
Targeted Call List Local
Awareness Interest

Social Groups

CRC Total Incoming
(generated from media campaign)
none specified 63 $15,000
Desire

Emails to CRC Calls to
CRC

CRC Total Action REAP
Enrollment Energy none specified 192
Action

Consultation

From CRC's perspective, the marketing campaign was effective in generating Awareness,
Interest and Desire (A-I-D), and also in prompting Action (i.e. REAP enrollment). The stated
objective of this specific marketing program was, "Increase awareness of the Insulate Colorado
and the parent program, Residential Energy Action Program, thereby generating phone calls to
CRC; and also the ClimateSmart Loan Program and Boulder County Energy Corp." From that
viewpoint, the program was successful, and it is anticipated that the benefits of this campaign
(A-I-D-A generation) will continue for some time.

Figure 19. Marketing
G E O M a rk e t ing G ra nt -
M a rk e t ing
C lic k t o C lic k f o r
N um b er
C lim a t e S m a r t M ore N ot es
R eac hed
We b s it e In f o r m a t io n

D a ily C a m e r a A d s
1 5 1 ,0 0 0 c o m p a r a b le t o in d u s t r y
O n lin e 184
7 0 ,0 0 0 st and ard s
P r in t
2 9 % o p e n e d t h e e m a il
6 .2 % c lic k e d f o r m o r e
E m a il B la s t
2 ,3 7 2 691 146 in f o r m a t io n 41%
C lim a t e S m a r t L is t
1 ,4 8 3 615 127 o p e n e d e m a il 8 .6 %
C R C - R E A P L is t
c lic k e d f o r m o r e
in f o r m a t io n
T w it t e r 400

Page 24 of 27

2010 REAP Outlook

For the 2010 program, the program has continued with the REAP flow process outlined on page
6. However, to maximize efficiencies and build capacity, the following program elements will be
considered.

Internal efficiencies:

 To assist in transitioning new staff into the program, a REAP Operations Manual was
created so that the program is easily operable by new staff, volunteers and interns. The
manual includes office passwords and logins, procedures for sending and receiving
paperwork, outreach and marketing history, an energy information reference guide for
the most frequently asked questions, links to rebate forms and tax information, and
procedures for utility data collection and distribution. The Manual standardizes program
practices and procedures.

 Internal reports are distributed to management staff at CRC for close monitoring of
budgets and goals.

Capacity Building:

 A one week REAP training tri-annually is recommended to engage students and the
community at large to volunteer. The training content should focus on building science,
financial incentives, behavior change and how to engage the homeowner.

 Satellite sites in Longmont are recommended to remove the social and geographical
barrier of program dissemination in Longmont. According to John Farmer’s report,
“Reducing Carbon Emissions in Boulder County,” messaging to residents in Longmont
differs from other Boulder County cities. It seems important for REAP staff to build
relationships with community members in Longmont in person.

Action Program:

 Calling campaigns for project status updates should be made monthly to track home
improvements. These campaigns also serve as outreach to engage the homeowner in
the next level of action, such as the installation of another efficiency measure. Calling
campaigns stimulate Awareness, Interest, and Desire which leads to Action.

 Figure 22 shows a method that was created to determine if a home is in the low,
medium, and high energy use categories. A home in the high usage category is
assumed to have more potential for energy reductions than a home in the low usage
category. For this exercise, 250 home energy usages were analyzed.

Page 25 of 27


Figure 20. Energy Profiling
Square Footage CO2 Emission CO2 Emission CO2 Emission
Level 1 (low) Level 2 (med) Level 3 (high)
1000-1500 0 to 5 5 to 9 9+
1500-2000 0 to 7 7 to 12 12+
2000-2500 0 to 9 9 to 14 14+
2500-3000 0 to 11 11 to 15 15+
3000-3500 0 to 13 13 to 17 17+
3500-4000 0 to 15 15 to 19 19+
4000+ 0 to 17 17 to 21 21+
Percentage of 250 Participants in Each Category
45% 34% 21%

Targeting high energy users to participate in REAP is a preferred outreach strategy. The return
on investment in terms of carbon emission reduction is significantly greater for larger homes.
However, after the pilot, Xcel Energy audits and Energy Corps assessments guaranteed lead
generation that did not
Figure 21. Energy Usage Profiles
necessitate energy profiling. In Energy Usage Profiles
order to conduct consistent
energy profiling, energy records 120

must be collected for each home as
100
it enters the program. The
format of the energy records 80
would likely be in PDF and would
# of Homes

HIGH
require a data management staff 60 MEDIUM
person to transfer the PDF to LOW

excel for energy profiling 40

calculations. Energy profiling is
highly recommended by REAP 20

staff.
0

Marketing and Outreach:

 People who are engaged in a conservation action are likely to be easily motivated to
participate in another conservation action. Therefore, it may be worthwhile to cross-
promote conservation programs within the CRC. Examples of such cross-promotion
includes to habitually call participants in the water audit program each September, to set
up an energy outreach booth at the ReSource Yard, and to network with Water and
ReSource program contacts to expand REAP into other Colorado cities.

Page 26 of 27

Tracking and Reporting:

 A database that can interface with a customer relations management system and allows
multiple users is a high priority for the program. A General Knowledge Base is currently
in development to advance the information delivery system much like a call center does.

 A Monthly Report Generator was built to ensure consistent monthly reporting to program
partners. The monthly report presents program participation data, a marketing and
outreach graph, project status summaries and estimated emissions reduction potential.
The monthly report will motivate staff to achieve higher emissions reductions and to
focus on clients who have numerous efficiency measures to complete.

 A comparative analysis can be conducted to understand retrofit increase as a result of
the Action Program. A calling campaign to people who have had audits but did not
participate in the Action Program could be executed. A comparative analysis of
ClimateSmart Loan Program projects versus REAP projects could also be executed.

Customer comments to consider:

 “Expand the lists and price comparison for contractors”

 “Let people know how much money they could save by implementing the suggestions”

 “Allow consumers to rate vendors and have this available for others to reference”

 “A matrix that enables you to discern quickly what services are offered by various
contractors that are listed on your web site. Have a check in each column (e.g.
insulation) for a service provided by the contract. Sorting through their promotional
sentences does not always make it clear which contractor provides what services.”
i
Carbon emissions are based on City of Boulder’s calculations 0.00532 mtCO2e/therm and 0.0009233 mtCO2e/kWh or 11.7285
lbCO2e/therm and 2.03552 lbCO2e/kWh.

Page 27 of 27

Annual Report, REAP

Empfohlen

Empfohlen

Weitere ähnliche Inhalte

Was ist angesagt?

Was ist angesagt? (20)

Andere mochten auch

Andere mochten auch (13)

Ähnlich wie Annual Report, REAP

Ähnlich wie Annual Report, REAP (20)

Annual Report, REAP