Property Assessed Clean Energy (PACE) Survey

Transcription

1 Final Report Property Assessed Clean Energy (PACE) Survey Understanding Homeowners Motivation for Electing PACE Financing: Discretionary or Non-Discretionary Reasons May 31, 2017

2

3 Final Report Property Assessed Clean Energy (PACE) Survey Understanding Homeowners Motivation for Electing PACE Financing: Discretionary or Non-Discretionary Reasons May 31, 2017 Prepared By: Funded By:

4 PO Box Portland, OR NE Martin Luther King Jr. Blvd., Suite 300 Portland, OR Phone: Fax: Contact: Jane S. Peters, President

5 Table of Contents Executive Summary... ES-1 Purpose of the Research Report... ES-1 Methodology... ES-1 Results of the Study... ES-1 Research Objectives and Methods... 1 Objectives... 1 Methods & Disposition... 1 Measure & Geographic Location Definitions... 2 Respondent vs. Non-Respondent Comparison... 3 Motivations for Financing Upgrade... 5 Importance of Financing Speed... 7 Motivations & Importance of Financing Speed... 8 Appendix... A-1 Measure Categories... A-1 Geographic Location Categories... A-2 Survey Instrument... A-3 Table of Contents Page i

6 Executive Summary Property-Assessed Clean Energy (PACE) programs are designed to promote energy efficiency, renewable energy, water conservation, and other home improvements that have a public purpose (as defined in state law). The PACE assessments are repaid through a new line item on the homeowner s local property taxes. The data used came from a survey of 3,405 homeowners that have undergone non-solar energy efficient PACE renovations with Renovate America under its Home Energy Renovation Opportunity (HERO) program. Renovate America is a California-based PACE provider - currently the largest PACE provider in California and nationally. Purpose of the Research Report This study aimed at addressing two research questions, including: 1. What proportion of projects financed by HERO/PACE participants were emergency repair/replacement, deferred maintenance or discretionary upgrades? 2. How important to customers was the speed at which the financing was available? Methodology Research Into Action conducted a web-based survey in May 2017 with Renovate America HERO/PACE customers that completed a non-solar project since January A total of 3,405 valid survey completes were obtained allowing the presentation of results with +/-2% margin of error at the 99% level of confidence. The response rate for the survey was 14.5%. Results of the Study Discretionary or Non-Discretionary Motivation for PACE Usage: Almost two-thirds (60%) of respondents reported that the motivation for getting their PACE-financed assessment was to replace or fix something for non-discretionary reasons: Over one-third (37%) reported using the loan for emergency repair or replacement. Almost one-quarter (23%) reported that they obtained the loan to fix or repair something that was likely to fail in the near future. In contrast, about two-fifths (39%) reported completing their PACE-financed upgrade to increase the appearance, comfort, or energy efficiency of their home (i.e., discretionary purposes). Importance of Financing Speed to PACE Homeowners: Overall, the majority (64%) of respondents reported that the speed at which financing was available was very important or important in their decision to make an upgrade. Only about one-quarter (27%) reported that the speed was not very important or not at all important, and nine percent skipped the question. Executive Summary Page ES-1

7 Research Objectives and Methods Objectives Research Into Action was contracted by Renovate America to conduct a brief study aimed at addressing two research questions, including: 1. What proportion of projects financed by HERO/PACE participants were emergency repair/replacement, deferred maintenance or discretionary upgrades? 2. How important to customers was the speed at which the financing was available? The remainder of this memo presents the findings from this research. We first present a brief discussion of the survey methods and disposition, and then summarize the findings. Methods & Disposition Renovate America provided Research Into Action with a comprehensive data file containing all non-solar HERO/PACE customers in California since January After removing contacts with duplicate property IDs (3,099) and address (54), the population consisted of 23,487 program participants (Table 1). 1 Research Into Action invited the 23,487 participants to participate in a brief web-based survey (see Appendix for survey). The data collection period lasted from 5/4/17 to 5/9/17. 2 A total of 3,425 participants completed the survey. However, 20 respondents did not answer any questions before submitting the survey, resulting in a total of 3,405 valid completions and a response rate of 14.5%. Thus, as shown in Table 1, a sample size of 3,405 for this population carries an +/- 2% margin of error at 99% confidence. 1 While all 23,487 contacts had an address, seventeen were invalid, resulting in a total of 23,470 valid contacts in our sample frame (see Table 1). 2 The evaluation team pulled a random sample of 500 contacts for the soft launch on 5/4/17, 78 of which completed the survey. We then implemented the full launch of the remaining 22,987 participants on 5/5/17. Research Objectives and Methods Page 1

8 Table 1: Survey Fielding, Sampling, and Disposition Send Date Launch Number Sent 5/4/2017 Soft Launch 500 5/5/2017 Full Launch 22,987 Total 23,487 Sample Count Number of Cases Removed Program Data 26,640 0 Without Duplicate Property IDs 23,541 3,099 Without Duplicate Addresses 23, Without Invalid s 23, Sample Frame 23,470 3,170 Completions Count Number of Cases Removed Raw Completes 3,425 0 Without Straight liners* 3, Valid Completes 3, Response Rate 14.5% Confidence / Margin of Error 99% +/- 2% * Respondents who did not answer any survey questions before submitting. Measure & Geographic Location Definitions The evaluation team developed measure and geographic location groupings to simplify the analysis. We grouped the financed measures into five categories: HVAC, Insulation/Shell/Air-Sealing, Lighting, Water Heating, and Other (for a detailed breakdown of measures see Measure Categories in the Appendix). Geographic groupings were determined using the California Technology, Trade & Commerce Agency (CTTCA) Regional Definitions. 3 This segmentation resulted in nine categories; Northern California, Northern Sacramento Valley, Greater Sacramento, Bay Area, San Joaquin Valley, Central Sierra, Central Coast, Southern California, and San Diego-Boarder Region (for a detailed breakdown of measures see Geographic Location Categories). As shown below (Figure 1 and Table 2), the majority of survey respondents live in the central and southern regions of California. 3 California Department of Social Services. (2001). The Regions of California: Recommended Grouping of the Counties for Regional Studies. Retrieved May 11, 2017, from Research Objectives and Methods Page 2

9 Figure 1: Geographic Location of Survey Respondents (California) CTTCA Grouping Respondent vs. Non-Respondent Comparison In order to ensure representativeness of our findings, Research Into Action compared respondents to non-respondents based on their geographic location, number of measures, and types of measures financed through the program. Overall, the only statistically significant difference between respondents and non-respondents was the proportion who financed water heating measures (Table 2). All other characteristics (geographic location and number of measures financed) were no different between the two groups, suggesting the sample of respondents is similar to the population across these three attributes. Research Objectives and Methods Page 3

10 Table 2: Region Respondent vs. Non-Respondent Comparison Region Non-Respondent Respondent Population Count Percent Count Percent Count Percent Southern California 12,710 63% 1,996 59% 14,706 63% San Joaquin Valley 3,027 15% % 3,572 15% San Diego-Border Region 2,349 12% % 2,767 12% Bay Area 1,107 6% 246 7% 1,353 6% Greater Sacramento 797 4% 181 5% 978 4% Central Coast 28 0% 9 0% 37 0% Northern Sacramento Valley 15 0% 4 0% 19 0% Northern California 1 0% 1 0% 2 0% Central Sierra 1 0% 0 0% 1 0% Missing 30 0% 5 0% 35 0% Total 20, % 3, % 23, % A slight majority of participants (62%) reported financing Insulation/air-sealing related upgrades and nearly half of participants (49%) reported financing HVAC related upgrades (Table 3). Those who financed water heating related upgrades were slightly over-represented in the survey compared to the program population (5% and 4%, respectively). Table 3: Measure Type Respondent vs. Non-Respondent Comparison (Multiple Response) Financed Measure Non-Respondent (n=20,065) Respondent (n=3,405) Population (n=23,470) Count Percent Count Percent Count Percent Insulation/Shell/Air-Sealing % % % HVAC % % Water Heating* 840 4% 175 5% % Lighting 249 1% 43 1% 292 1% Other 23 0% 4 0% 27 0% * Difference is statistically significant, (x2 <.05) Those who installed multiple vs. single measure types was split relatively evenly in both the program population and survey respondents (52% and 4, respectively Table 4). Research Objectives and Methods Page 4

11 Table 4: Number of Measures Respondent vs. Non-Respondent Comparison Number of Measures Financed Non-Respondent Respondent Population Count Percent Count Percent Count Percent One type of measure More than one type of measure % % % Total % % % Motivations for Financing Upgrade Overall, almost two-thirds (60%) reported that the motivation for getting their PACE-financed loan was to replace or fix something for non-discretionary reasons. More specifically, over one-third (37%) reported using the loan for emergency repair or replacement, and almost one-quarter (23%) reported that they obtained the loan to fix or repair something that was likely to fail in the near future. In contrast, about two-fifths (39%) reported completing their PACE-financed upgrade to increase the appearance, comfort, or energy efficiency of their home. Survey results show that there are no significant differences between regional groupings regarding the motivation to complete an upgrade (Figure 2). Figure 2: Motivations for Financing Upgrade Region Total (n=3,405) 37% 23% 39% Northern Sacramento Valley (n=4) 50% 25% 25% Greater Sacramento (n=181) 3 33% 29% San Joaquin Valley (n=545) 45% 23% 32% Central Coast (n=9) 44% 22% 33% Bay Area (n=246) 39% 26% Southern California (n=1,996) 36% 23% 42% San Diego-Border Region (n=418) 31% 20% 4 Northern California (n=1) 100% 0% 25% 50% 75% 100% Fix or replace something that was broken or to address an immediate need Fix or replace something that you worried would break or fail in the near future Increase the appearance, comfort, or energy efficiency Research Objectives and Methods Page 5

12 In comparison to overall responses regarding motivations to complete PACE-financed upgrades, respondents who completed lighting, insulation/air-sealing, and HVAC reported significantly different motivations (Figure 3). Respondents who completed HVAC project(s) were more likely to report doing so as an emergency repair or replacement for existing equipment. Conversely, respondents who completed lighting and/or insulation/air-sealing project(s) were more likely to report doing so as a discretionary upgrade compared to all respondents. Figure 3: Motivations for Financing Upgrade Measure Type Total (n=3,405) 37% 23% 39% HVAC* (n=1,671) 46% 2 26% Water Heating (n=175) 43% 25% 33% Lighting* (n=43) 30% 19% 51% Insulation/Shell/Air-Sealing* (n=2,068) 29% 21% 51% Other (n=4) 25% 50% 25% 0% 25% 50% 75% 100% Fix or replace something that was broken or to address an immediate need Fix or replace something that you worried would break or fail in the near future Increase the appearance, comfort, or energy efficiency * Difference is statistically significant, (x 2 <.05) Respondents who financed just one measure were slightly more likely to report financing a discretionary upgrade compared to those who financed more than one type of measure (Figure 4). Figure 4: Motivations for Financing Upgrade Multiple Measures* Total (3,405) 21% 44% One type of measure (n=1,623) 37% 23% 39% More than one type of measure (n=1,782) 39% 25% * Difference is statistically significant, (x 2 <.05) 0% 25% 50% 75% 100% Fix or replace something that was broken or to address an immediate need Fix or replace something that you worried would break or fail in the near future Increase the appearance, comfort, or energy efficiency Research Objectives and Methods Page 6

13 Importance of Financing Speed Survey results show that there are no significant differences between regional groupings regarding the importance of the speed at which the financing was available in their decision to make an upgrade (Figure 5). Overall, the majority (64%) of respondents reported that the speed was very important or important in their decision to make an upgrade. Only about one-quarter (27%) reported that the speed was not very important or not at all important, and nine percent skipped the question. Figure 5: Importance of Financing Speed Region Total (n=3,405) 29% 19% 9% San Joaquin Valley (n=545) 31% 36% 17% Greater Sacramento (n=181) 30% 43% 1 5% 4% San Deigo-Border Region (n=418) 2 34% 21% 9% Southern California (n=1,996) 2 34% 19% 10% Bay Area (n=246) 27% 43% 16% 7% 7% Central Coast (n=9) 11% 67% 22% Northern California (n=1) 100% Northern Sacramento Valley (n=4) 75% 25% 0% 25% 50% 75% 100% Very important Important Not very important Not at all important Skipped In comparison to overall responses regarding the importance of the speed at which the financing was available in participants decision to make an upgrade, respondents who completed insulation/airsealing and HVAC reported significantly different sentiment. Respondents who completed insulation/air-sealing project(s) were less likely to report high importance of speed compared to those who completed HVAC project(s) (61% and 67%, respectively Figure 6), this is consistent with participants reason for completing the project (see Figure 8). Research Objectives and Methods Page 7

14 Figure 6: Importance of Financing Speed Measure Type Total (n=3,405) 29% 19% 9% Lighting (n=43) 21% 2% 7% HVAC* (n=1,671) 32% 17% Water Heating (n=175) 27% 31% 22% 12% Insulation/Shell/Air-Sealing* (n=2,068) 26% 20% 9% 10% Other (n=4) 25% 75% * Difference is statistically significant, (x 2 <.05) 0% 25% 50% 75% 100% Very important Important Not very important Not at all important Skipped There were no significant differences between those who financed multiple or single measure types regarding the importance of the speed at which the financing was available in participants decision to make an upgrade (Figure 7). Figure 7: Importance of Financing Speed Multiple Measures Total (3,405) 29% 19% 9% One type of measure (n=1,623) 2 36% 1 9% 9% More than one type of measure (n=1,782) 29% 20% 9% 0% 25% 50% 75% 100% Very Important Important Not very important Not at all important Skipped Motivations & Importance of Financing Speed Participants who completed non-discretionary upgrades were significantly more likely to place high importance on the speed at which they could receive financing. Nearly three-quarters (73%) of those who completed emergency repair or replacement projects reported financing speed as very important or important compared to just about half (56%) of those who completed discretionary projects (Figure 8). Research Objectives and Methods Page 8

15 Figure 8: Motivations by Importance of Financing Speed* Fix or replace something that was broken or to address an immediate need (n=789) 3 12% 5% 10% Fix or replace something that you worried would break or fail in the near future (n=1,255) 22% 41% 21% 7% Increase the appearance, comfort, or energy efficiency of your home (n=1,344) 23% 33% 24% 12% 9% 0% 25% 50% 75% 100% Very important Important Not very important * Difference is statistically significant, (x 2 <.001) Research Objectives and Methods Page 9

16 Appendix Measure Categories Measure Categories HVAC Central Air Conditioner Air Source Heat Pump Furnace Geothermal Heat Pump Ventilation Fans Duct Replacement Whole House Fan Attic Fan Hydronic Radiant Heating Evaporative Cooler Ducts Mini Split Heat Pump Mini Split Air Conditioner Ceiling Fan Biomass Furnace Heat Energy Recovery Ventilation Duct Sealing Water Heating Natural Gas Storage Water Heater Boiler Gas Condensing Water Heater Gas Tankless Water Heater Electric Heat Pump Water Heater Hot Water Delivery System Insulation/Shell/Air-Sealing Air Sealing Attic Insulation Wall Insulation Under Floor Insulation Radiant Barrier Exterior Windows Exterior Doors Window Film Cool Roof Prescriptive Heat Reflective Cool Walls Cool Roof Performance Exterior Window Shading Device Insulated Siding Lighting Skylights and Tubular Daylighting Lighting Fixture Lighting Controls Other Site Preparation Electric Vehicle Charging Station Appendix Page A-1

17 Geographic Location Categories Region (California Technology, Trade and Commerce Agency Grouping) Southern California Los Angeles County, Orange County, Ventura County, San Bernardino County, Riverside County San Diego-Border Region Imperial County, San Diego County San Joaquin Valley Fresno County, Kern County, Kings County, Madera County, Merced County, San Joaquin County, Stanislaus County, Tulare County Central Coast Monterey County, San Benito County, San Luis Obispo County, Santa Barbara County Bay Area Alameda County, Contra Costa County, Marin County, Napa County, San Francisco County, San Mateo County, Santa Clara County, Santa Cruz County, Solano County, Sonoma County Northern California Del Norte County, Humboldt County, Lake County, Lassen County, Mendocino County, Modoc County, Plumas County, Sierra County, Siskiyou County, Trinity County Greater Sacramento El Dorado County, Nevada County, Placer County, Sacramento County, Sutter County, Yolo County, Yuba County Northern Sacramento Valley Butte County, Colusa County, Glenn County, Shasta County, Tehama County Central Sierra Alpine County, Amador County, Calaveras County, Inyo County, Mariposa County, Mono County, Tuolumne County Appendix Page A-2

18 Survey Instrument Q1. Did you do your PACE-financed renovation to: 1. Fix or replace something that was broken or to address an immediate need? 2. Fix or replace something that you worried would break or fail in the near future? 3. Increase the appearance, comfort, or energy efficiency of your home (nothing was broken, old, or in need of repair). Q2. How important was the speed by which you could get financing and begin your renovation? 1. Very important: You would have substantially changed your renovation or not done a renovation at all if the financing approval process had been slower. 2. Important: The speed with which you could get financing was a motivator in your decision to do the renovation the way you did. 3. Not very important: The speed with which you could get financing was an attractive feature, but not critical in your decision. 4. Not at all important: The time required to obtain financing did not impact your decision to do your renovation the way you did. Appendix Page A-3