1. Py2015 California statewide on-bill finance
Impact Evaluation
December 12, 2017

2. Study Background
On-Bill Financing (OBF) is offered to non-residential customers by four California program administrators (PAs): PG&E, SCE, SDG&E, SCG
Customers receive loans for energy efficiency upgrades and repay the loan on their utility bill
The loans are 0% interest
To participate in the 2015 OBF programs, customers also had to participate in one of the PA’s non-residential incentive programs.
Savings from OBF-funded projects are claimed through the incentive programs in which customers participate.
This study very closely followed the approach of the 2013/14 OBF impact evaluation.
In 2015, the IOUs did not directly claim savings for the OBF programs.
To change this text, go to Insert, then Header & Footer, change your text, then click Apply to All

3. Study Scope OBF Evaluation Analyses: “Gap” Analysis
Gross Impact Analysis
Net-to-Gross Analysis
Net Impact Analysis
Incremental Net Impact Analysis
OBF Loan-to-Incentive Ratio Analysis
Funding Source Analysis

4. Study Scope
Given that energy savings are tracked through the incentive programs, most of these analyses relied on matching information from the loan databases with the California Statewide Claims database.
While this study focuses on the 2015 program year, our participant survey included both 2015 and 2016 participants. All survey-based analyses include both 2015 and 2016 participants.
Ideally 2016 projects would have been included in all aspects of this study, but 2016 incentive program impact evaluations were not available at the time of the study. We will be updating this study when 2016 results become available.

5. Overview of the 2015 OBF Program Loans
Table Loans Associated with 2015 Projects PA
All 2015 Loans
2015 Loans Associated with 2015 Claims
# Loans
Loan Amount
Loan AmountA
Average Loan
PG&E
367
$17,821,958
266
$9,540,529
$35,598
SCE
400
$9,665,226
152
$5,680,628
$37,372
SDG&E 37
$3,235,300 24
$1,809,675
$75,403
SCG 4
$89,024
$64,423
$16,105
Statewide
808
$30,811,508
446
$17,095,256
$38,159
A Loan amounts were allocated in proportion to incentive amounts.
Source: 2015 OBF tracking data; 2015 Claims database
In 2015, the IOUs did not directly claim savings for the OBF programs.
To change this text, go to Insert, then Header & Footer, change your text, then click Apply to All

6. Gross Impact Analysis (PY2015)
Objective: Determine ex post gross impacts and GRRs for OBF-backed claims
Methodology:
Matching of 2015 OBF loans to 2015 claims
Application of incentive program ex ante and ex post gross savings to OBF claims
Development of PA- and technology-level GRRs for OBF projects
Results:
Statewide
PG&E
SCE
SDG&E
SCG
a. Claims Ex Ante Gross Savings (MMBtu)
107,335
55,760
45,068
5,020
1,487
b. Claims Ex Post Gross Savings (MMBtu)
79,183
44,523
29,999
3,632
1,029
c. Claims Ex Post GRR (c = b / a)
0.74
0.80
0.67
0.72
0.69

7. NTGR Analysis (PY2015/16)
Objective: Determine NTGRs for OBF projects, by PA and technology
Methodology:
2016 loan recipients were included in the participant survey
NTGR Algorithm based on C&I incentive program algorithm
Adds consideration of OBF loan
Three Program Attribution Indices (PAI)
PAI-1: Rating of program and non-program factors
PAI-2: Points (out of 10) allocated to program and to other factors
PAI-3: Likelihood of implementing the same project without OBF program
Respondent-level NTGR is average of three PAIs
NTGRs by PA and technology (lighting and non-lighting)

8. NTGR Analysis, cont. Statewide Results: Overall Lighting Non-Lighting
Overall
Lighting
Non-Lighting
Mean NTGR
0.64
0.69
0.56
90 Percent CI
0.61 to 0.67
0.65 to 0.73
0.51 to 0.6
Relative Precision
0.05
0.06
0.08
Valid NTG Points (n)
154
113 41
OBF Projects (N)
1,382
1,004
378
Percent of MMBtu Sampled
15%
14%
16%

9. Not estimated by technologyA
NTGR Analysis, cont.
Results by PA:
Overall
Lighting
Non-Lighting
Statewide
0.64
0.69
0.56
PG&E
0.65
0.80
0.49
SCE
0.61
0.77
SDG&E
0.68
Not estimated by technologyA
SCG
Not estimatedA
A Due to small sample sizes

10. Incremental Net Impact Analysis (PY2015)
Objective: Determine savings that are attributable to the OBF programs but that have not already been claimed by the PAs through the incentive programs.
Incremental impacts do NOT reflect the absolute or relative importance of the OBF loan.
Methodology
OBF incremental NTGR (by PA and technology) = OBF-evaluated NTGR – Claims-based NTGR

11. Incremental Net Impact Analysis (PY2015), cont.
Results:
OBF-Evaluated
Incentive Program
(for OBF Projects)
Incremental
Net Savings
NTGR
MMBtu kW
(1a)
(1b)
(1c)
(2a)
(2b)
(2c)
(2d)
(1a-2a)
(1b-2b)
(1c-2c)
(1c-2d)
Statewide
51,780
1,127
0.64
41,811
980
0.53
0.56
9,968
148
0.11
0.08
PGE
30,227
703
0.65
23,257
605
0.52
0.55
6,971 98
0.12
0.09
SCE
19,099
333
16,565
291
0.57
2,534 42
SDGE
2,453 92
0.68
1,990 84
0.62
463 8
0.13
0.06

12. OBF Loan-to-Incentive Ratio Analysis (PY2015/16)
Objective: Determine the relative importance of the OBF loan and the program incentive
Methodology:
Based on responses to freeridership questions in participant survey
Comparison of responses to questions about loan with responses to questions about incentive
Score 1: Importance rating (scale of 0 to 10)
Score 2: Points allocated to loan and to incentive
Score 3: Likelihood of implementing same project without loan and without incentive
Loan-to-Incentive Ratio = Loan response / incentive response

13. OBF Loan-to-Incentive Ratio Analysis (PY2015/16), cont.

14. OBF Loan-to-Incentive Ratio Analysis – Results by Technology

15. OBF Loan-to-Incentive Ratio Analysis – Results by PA

16. Conclusions & Recommendations
Gross Impacts
Strive to reduce the lag time between when an incentive project is finalized and when an OBF loan is issued
Account for mismatch of loan year and claims year when determining how savings from OBF projects might be claimed in the future
Track Claims savings in addition to OBF-specific savings
Net Impacts/Incremental Net Impacts
There are net savings associated with OBF loans that are not currently being claimed by the PA incentive programs
Update analyses for combined PY2015/16
Relative Importance of OBF Loan and Incentive
Both are important
Move forward with pilots that test alternative loan-incentive structures