HomeMy WebLinkAbout8 Clarifiaction on Migrate to EECP from EOTRUCKEE DONNER
Public Utility District
,.400 A
MEETING DATE: October 6, 2021
TO: Board of Directors
AGENDA ITEM # 8
FROM: Steven Keates, Conservation & Customer Service Senior
Analyst
SUBJECT: Consideration to Approve a Contract with Efficiency Services
Group for Rebate Processing and Administrative Services
APPROVED BY
Michael Salmon, Chief Financial Officer
RECOMMENDATION:
Authorize the General Manager to execute a contract in an amount of $132,275 plus a
10% change order authorization for a total not to exceed contract amount of $145,613
with ESG for the Energy Efficiency Collaboration Platform and Vimotely software
services.
DISCUSSION:
At the September 1, 2021 meeting, staff presented to the Board an item for approval
under the consent calendar that included authorization for the General Manager to
execute a professional services contract with ESG for the Energy Efficiency
Collaboration Platform and Vimotely software in an amount not to exceed $145,613.
Following Board approval, staff identified an administrative error in the recommendation
to the Board characterizing the procurement as taking place through a joint public
procurement with the Northern California Power Agency (NCPA). This procurement
contract is not through the NCPA SPPA mechanism and will be executed directly with
the vendor as a "Professional Services Contract" under District Code 3.08.050
Procedure for Enterina into an Aareement for Special Services.
Staff is bringing this item back before the Board for approval under the appropriate
procurement mechanism within District Code.
FISCAL IMPACT:
The cost proposal from ESG is $41,000 for the first year and $43,200 for years 2 and 3,
for a total 3-year contract amount of $127,400. Sufficient funds exist within the approved
FY21 Electric and Water Utility Budgets, and Draft FY22-23 budgets.
Page 1 of 2
ATTACHMENTS:
1.) Regular Board Meeting, on September 1, 2021, AGENDA ITEM #12
Page 2 of 2
TRUCKEE DONNER
Public Utility District
MEETING DATE: September 1, 2021
TO: Board of Directors
AGENDA ITEM #12
FROM: Steven Keates, Conservation & Customer Service Senior
Analyst
SUBJECT: Consideration of Approving Energy Solutions Group for
Rebate Processing and Administrative Services
APPROVED BY
Brian C. Wright, General Manager
RECOMMENDATION:
1) Authorize the General Manager to execute a NCPA SSPA contract in an amount of
$127,400 plus a 10% change order authorization for a total not to exceed contract amount
of $140,140 with ESG for the Energy Efficiency Collaboration Platform and Vimotely
software services; and
2) Cancel/exit Energy Orbit service contract
DISCUSSION:
In 2013, Northern California Power Agency (NCPA) facilitated a joint procurement for
rebate processing and program management software with some members - including
the District. This software/platform is called `EnergyOrbit'. The desired outcome was a
single platform that all POUs could use to easily input, approve, track, pay rebates, and
help manage conservation efforts. Unfortunately the project was only partially
successful and it should be noted that, to date, all of the initial participants in the joint
procurement (except the District and Roseville) have quit using the application.
EnergyOrbit is built on -top of the popular Salesforce customer relationship management
platform. Properly leveraged, this platform can be quite powerful and customized for a
variety of processes. The District initially saw the potential of the program because of
NCPA's setup work and it was an improvement from the previous tools the District used
to manage and track rebates. The software has facilitated rebate processing and
tracking, but it also required significant manual effort to complete the data entry, rebate
Page 1 of 5
verification & approval, and program management processes. In practice, EnergyOrbit
has proven under -developed for the District's needs which has resulted in:
1) Inefficient use of District staff time due to required technical knowledge of
Salesforce systems,
2) Additional program administration overhead due to lack of integration with District
systems,
3) Missed opportunities in tracking various program activities/metrics, and
4) Missed opportunities to improve customer experience with the District through
online/automated application process (note that one of the original objectives
was to move away from paper applications which we've yet been unable to do
with EnergyOrbit).
Significant investment in our conservation program management and rebate processing
tracking system(s) is necessary in order to re -launch our conservation and sustainability
programs. In order to address the above, the District would need to invest significant
resources in both staff labor and in purchasing specialized consulting services to fully
develop a useful Salesforce application.
District staff have reviewed potential solutions for program tracking & management
which meet program/staff needs in the most cost-effective manner. In our review we
have determined that migrating to the program management platform offered by Energy
Solutions Group will offer significant improvement in all areas previously mentioned, but
will also do so more cost effectively.
Statement of Purpose
The Conservation Department recommends discontinuing the use of EnergyOrbit
software platform and migrating our program management and reporting to the Energy
Efficiency Collaboration Platform (EECP) provided by Energy Solutions Group (ESG).
As one of the Direct Technology operating units, Energy Solutions Group (ESG) has
been focused on delivering reliable and comprehensive solutions for utilities since 2003.
ESG has delivered solutions to more than 90 utilities across the country. Finally, District
staff have determined that ESG provides the best cost solution (presented in the `Cost'
section below) for this need.
This service agreement will fall squarely under section 3.08.050 of the District Code
(Procedure for Entering into an Agreement for Special Services). The GM has
determined that an RFP is not warranted for these services. This item is before the
board as the amount is over GM approval authority level.
Proposed Scope and Services
Staff recommends that the District secures services with ESG over a not -to -exceed
three-year term. These services will include the following tasks:
1) Task 1: TDPUD Program Review and Setup (One time only)
Page 2 of 5
a. Review and recommendations for TDPUD's current Energy Efficiency,
Water Conservation, and De -Carbonization programs.
b. Setup District instance of EECP
i. user and client configurations
ii. Initial synchronization with NISC CIS
iii. Set-up standard reports
c. Configure two of the District's program offerings in EECP
i. Program tracking/management processes
ii. Define `measure' offerings
d. Establish online portal for electronic applications
e. Set-up Vimotely module
f. District staff training on program set-up/management and Vimotely
2) Task 2: Migrate Historical Data (One-time Only)
a. Consult District on best practices/methods to archive and migrate existing
EnergyOrbit program data.
b. Provide data template to District to facilitate upload of historical data into
EECP
c. Upload historical data provided by District to EECP.
3) Task 3: Systems Integration
a. Provide scheduled/automated delta file transfer process to maintain
synchronization between NISC CIS and EECP.
b. Explore Multispeak integration with NISC
4) Task 4: Version Updates and On -going Technical Support
Page 3 of 5
Costs Summary
1. Initial Program Review and Setup (One -Time -Only) - ESG will charge a
one-time fee of $33,800 for the set-up of EECP and Vimotely described in
Task 1 above
2. On -Going Monthly Program Support - ESG will bill a standard fee of
$3, 765 per month for the services described in the remaining tasks (including
annual licensing).
Cost Detail and Analysis of Fiscal Impacts
The following table provides a breakdown of the costs associated with the proposed
EECP + Vimotely services and the status quo EnergyOrbit + Streem services. Note that
the following comparison includes estimates for District staff labor resources associated
with each option in the presented totals.
Table 1 Breakdown of costs associated with each service
Set-up (Re -Design) Tracking Database
$30,800
$29,750
One -Time
Virtual Audit Software Set-up
$3,000
$0
System/Process Development (*Manager)
$4,640
$9,280
Tracking Database Service
$21,600
$11,550
Annual
(External)
Virtual Audit Service
$21,600
$19,440
Technical/Development Support
$0
$15,000
Annual
System/Process Development (*Manager)
$4,582
$6,960
(Internal)
Rebate processing (Staff)
$23,170
$30,870
Sub -Total (One -Time Costs)
$38,440
$39,030
Sub -Total (Annual External Costs)
$43,200
$45,990
Sub -Total (Annual Internal Costs)
$27,752
$37,830
* Manager refers to the Conservation & Customer Service Sr. Analyst overseeing Conservation Department
It can be seen in the totals above that migrating to EECP will save an average of $2,790
annually compared to Energy Orbit when looking at the cost of services alone. When
District staff labor is included that figure expands to $12,868 annually.
It can be argued that Customer Service (CSRs) staff labor should not be included in
these calculations since CSR labor hours are already included in the department
budget. In response, it should be noted that CSR hours can be re -directed from rebate
process to be spent improving the customers' interactions with our programs. However;
it also stands EECP provides cost savings over Energy Orbit of $11,787 over the course
of the next budget cycle when only accounting for labor hours spent by the
Conservation & Customer Service Senior Analyst (whose hours can be re -directed into
other, more beneficial, projects/activities for the district).
Page 4 of 5
Table 2 Comparing Budget Cycle Costs for EECP over Energy Orbit for District Including CCSA Labor
$41,000
$37,415
$5,404
$10,440
($1,451)
$43,200
$45,990
$4,582
$6,960
($5,168)
$43,200
$45,990
$4,582
$6,960
($5,168)
Total Cost Difference: ($11,787)
Finally, it should be noted that the above fiscal analysis assumes that the entire cost burden
(and subsequent benefits from use) of the Vimotely software is absorbed by the conservation
department alone. In reality, the Vimotely portion of the software has use cases in several
additional departments and is expected to reduce costs from un-necessarily dispatching
trucks to customer residences (especially during "off hours") — thereby reducing costs for both
the District and its customers. As such, this cost analysis can be considered "conservative"
from the perspective that it under -represents a portion of the potential cost savings expected
for the District.
FISCAL IMPACT:
The cost proposal from ESG is $41,000 for the first year and $43,200 for year 2 and
year 3 for an ESG total of $127,400.
Sufficient funds exist within the approved FY21 budget and the draft FY22 & FY23
budgets for this procurement. It is anticipated that this expense would be included in
future budgets.
ATTACHMENTS:
None
Page 5 of 5