TVA tracks data from its energy efficiency programs in both internal and external databases, which can add complexity. Efforts are underway to develop a single centralized tracking database. The C&I programs currently collect data from two sources for different programs. Challenges include unclear requirements, inadequate tracking data, and inconsistent data collection. Recommendations include annually reviewing requirements, inventorying participants individually, developing common program attributes and IDs, creating data dictionaries, and thoroughly collecting all required data.

1. C&I Program Impact and Process Evaluation Final Report - Section One
4.2.2 Tracking Database
Tracking system data is the foundational cornerstone for any successful energy efficiency program. The
importance of assimilating high quality tracking system data can streamline internal reporting
mechanisms, and reduce internal resource time for data mining activities; as well efficiently confirm
programmatic requirements, participant energy savings, and program incentive payments should any be
offered.
TVA is in a unique position by tracking multiple programmatic elements for the EnergyRight® Solutions
portfolio across several market sectors. Residential and commercial energy efficiency programs generally
have multiple stakeholders involved which contribute information at various levels of granularity.
Additionally not all programmatic inputs are tracked internally by TVA but are outsourced and tracked
externally with a TVA approved third party implementation vendor. Occasionally this has been observed
to add a layer of complexity instead of streamlining the operational process. However programmatic
inputs that are tracked in an in-house database can still experience levels of disorganization if internal
departments within TVA do not share the same reporting goals and are not coordinated, thus missing
opportunities to collect vital data from program participants. Figure XX below shows the current state of
performance tracking systems as self-reported by TVA.
The suite of C&I programs as made mention in Section 4.2.1 currently collects data inputs from two
different sources. The Tailored Solutions for Industry (C1) program currently utilizes internal TVA field
engineers to verify implemented energy saving measures of program participants and directly inputs data
into internal reporting documents in-house at TVA. The remaining programs in the C&I program suite;
C2, C3, C10, C11, are managed by an implementation vendor, most recently Nexant. Figure EEDR 1
shows the current state of input data as self-reported by TVA. At the top of the map shows the C&I suite
of programs.
In fiscal year 2013 a successful effort was undertaken by TVA to develop a process control system of all
incoming program data for the entire EnergyRight® Solutions portfolio. Efforts are currently underway
to develop a single platform where all unique data elements will be housed in an internal centralized
tracking system database. This new database is slated to include QA/QC parameters which will reduce
manual touch points, potentially automate work flows between internal departments, and provide
consistent data field population mechanisms to avoid data input redundancies and missing information.
As well a centralized database will potentially alleviate resource constraints and transparency for intra-
department accessibility.

2. With respect to TVA it should be mentioned this is the first evaluation of their energy efficiency
programs since the inception of the ESRB & I portfolio in 2009. It should also be noted that there was a
learning curve between TVA and DNV KEMA as both parties gained to understand what information was
required for evaluation purposes and what information was available to evaluate. Since the evaluation
began in 2011 TVA has taken efforts to improve their operational and logistical strategies with regards to
programmatic data collection and is actively working towards a centralized tracking system database.
Below is high level summary of observed challenges and recommendations for the C&I program suite.

3. Program Tracking System Data
Existing Challenges Recommendations for Success
 Program requirements may be unclear to
stakeholders
 Inadequate tracking system data
 Review program requirements annually
ensuring all stakeholders have a clear
understanding of the defined terms and
responsibilities within the contract
 Annual review allows stakeholders to adopt
newly added programmatic requirements
and allow for consistent reporting
parameters across all programs
 Program participants should be inventoried
as: a line item, one row per participant
 Do not embed or “roll up” multiple site
locations under one participant or company
name
 Embedding can skew program population
data, it can attribute to double counting of
measures, alters evaluation sample design
parameters and budget, as well lacks detail
for EM&V site work and measure types
 Commonly observed “rolled up” participants
include: universities, primary schools,
military bases, franchises, housing
developments, condominium complexes
 Include the actual utility account number.
This important unique numerical identifier is
used for both identifying program overlap
and for program evaluation billing data
 Develop a set of common attributes across
all of EEDR using a unique TVA ID that links
several groups of information to the ID
 Avoid changing TVA ID naming configurations
when energy efficiency programs adopt new
program names or alter programmatic
requirements

4. Program Tracking System Data
Existing Challenges Recommendations for Success
 Inadequate tracking system data
 Inconsistent data collection
 Develop a data dictionary for each program
database (e.g. E-Tracker, CSG) that includes
what each index field is called, a short
description of what the index field is, and
identify whether the database source is
internal or external
 To help third party evaluators data mine
mind map or develop a process flow chart of
which EEDR department is responsible for
extracting or maintaining tracking system
data
 Data collection must be thorough regardless
if the source is internal or external
 All data fields listed on the reporting
documents should be filled out to the fullest
extent possible
 Include in data collection activities
participant utility account numbers
 QA/QC participant data as it enters through
the program
 If an implementation vendor is responsible
for collecting and maintaining program data
and reporting documents an EEDR QA
oversight committee may consider a bi-
annual review of the vendors work