As the clean energy industry evolves, developmental evaluation is emerging as an essential approach for utilities committed to maximizing program effectiveness and responding rapidly to changing market conditions. Unlike conventional evaluation approaches that often focus on retrospective assessment, developmental evaluation offers a flexible, collaborative, and real-time problem-solving methodology. Katie Cary, an expert in program evaluation and strategic consulting at TRC, shares her insights on the power of developmental evaluation, best practices, client benefits and the future of energy programs.
Q: Why is program evaluation important, and what challenges does it solve?
A: Evaluation is often misunderstood; many see it as akin to an audit or “grading” a program and then leaving. However, proper program evaluation is about understanding where the client wants to go, what challenges they face and helping answer those questions as part of their journey. When utilities invest in a clean energy program, they have goals like promoting energy efficiency, addressing stakeholder needs, achieving savings targets and addressing grid constraints. Evaluation ensures those goals are met, helps keep customers engaged, confirms contractors are promoting the right equipment and maintains transparency across the process.
Program evaluation plays a key role in making sure that a utility’s investment is worthwhile and serves stakeholders appropriately. It helps clients understand if their funds are producing intended outcomes and is a way to measure impacts beyond just savings, like customer and contractor satisfaction, program accessibility and operational efficiency.
Q: What types of evaluation are useful for energy programs?
A: Because no two energy programs are alike, and because they operate in complex, dynamic environments, choosing the right evaluation strategy is key to meeting both stakeholder and regulatory requirements. There are two main ways to categorize evaluation: by type and by approach.
On the type side, impact evaluation measures results like energy savings, utility influence and non-energy impacts like comfort or maintenance. Process evaluation examines how a program operates, including customer and trade partner experience and operational efficiency. And pilot evaluation is a specialty for fast-moving pilots that need rapid learning, often drawing on both.
On the approach side, summative evaluation assesses results after a program runs, typically for reporting or regulatory purposes. Developmental evaluation is continuous and responsive, generating insights in real time — and it’s what we recommend. Rather than concentrating research at the end, it integrates learning throughout, enabling teams to adapt, catch risks early, and keep savings claims accurate as they go.
I’m passionate about this approach because it changes the nature of the work. When I work with clients and we’re looking at energy programs through developmental evaluation, I don’t see my role as simply auditing a program, writing a report and walking away. What motivates me is helping clients meet their customers’ needs and working towards our shared goal: making the program successful. As an evaluator and research partner, the insights we generate along the way are meant to support learning in real time so that teams can make informed adjustments and deliver stronger outcomes by the end of the program.
Q: What are some best practices for developmental evaluation for energy programs?
A: Check out my LinkedIn article on this topic. Done well, developmental evaluation is a cost-effective way to meaningfully improve program performance. A few key practices make a real difference.
The first is bringing evaluators in early, ideally before launch. When evaluators are involved in program design from the start, they can help shape the program model, build out logic models, inform design decisions and research peer programs. That early investment embeds evaluative thinking from day one.
The second is staying flexible. Programs don’t unfold in a vacuum. Market conditions shift, and unexpected challenges come up. Evaluators need to respond quickly to those changes and generate timely insights that support course corrections, rather than sticking rigidly to a plan that may no longer fit.
And the third is committing to iteration. Evaluation strategies that made sense at launch may not be appropriate six months in. As feedback accumulates and the market evolves, you have to revisit your approach, identify new research questions and refine your methods. Continuous improvement isn’t just a goal for the program. It applies to the evaluation itself.
Q: What is an example where developmental evaluation made a difference?
A: In one program, the client offered customers a package of energy efficiency measures to drive engagement, without initially claiming savings. Through early customer outreach, we found that most customers valued only a few items; others were rarely used. By identifying this quickly, we eliminated unused items, reducing program costs without impacting engagement or outcomes. This cost-effectiveness wouldn’t have been discovered until much later in a summative evaluation, potentially wasting a year’s resources.
Q: How does TRC’s EM&V approach help utilities meet today’s challenges, and how does evaluation factor in?
A: When affordability becomes a major concern and regulatory scrutiny intensifies, utilities need to ensure that every investment actually delivers on its intended outcomes, whether those are energy savings, increased participation, or improved customer service. Budget constraints may tempt organizations to reduce research spending, but this can lead to greater costs if program measures turn out to be ineffective. Early testing through evaluation is far more cost-effective than implementing large-scale initiatives without validation.
Program evaluation is a critical process for regulators and stakeholders who are expecting independent verification, including Evaluation, Measurement and Verification (EM&V), for program performance claims. While metrics like kWh saved and dollar amounts are necessary, it’s often the real-life stories we help identify for our clients that resonate most with regulators. For instance, in one project, a church improved comfort for its congregation by retrofitting insulation and installing a smart thermostat, thanks to its participation in an energy efficiency program. This helped elderly members attend services again due to increased comfort in the building, strengthening the church’s ability to serve its community. Personal testimonies like these make a compelling case for continued investment and drive decisions at a deeper, more emotional level.
Measuring customer engagement is vital to ensure we’re offering easy participation, clear value and equal access. These positive experiences are revealed through process evaluation rather than engineering data alone.
Q: What do clients gain by working with TRC on clean energy evaluation?
A: TRC’s team is interdisciplinary and includes technology experts, social scientists, econometricians, data scientists and management consultants. This diversity brings innovation to our solutions, as we consider technical, operational, user and market perspectives. For example, launching a new pilot program requires engineers (to assess savings), usability experts (for customer experience), and industry analysts (to address contractor participation). We have all those specialties in-house and understand their interconnections.
Our evaluations are customized for each client, focusing on their risks, needs and goals. We offer strategic consulting layered with research, helping clients adapt programs to maximize benefits. Our approach is designed to bring clients tangible benefits for their energy programs.
In practice, that means faster, actionable insights. Clients aren’t waiting years for results. It means catching risks early, before they become expensive surprises. And it means support that drives real change, not just a report that sits on a shelf. At TRC, we embed developmental evaluation across all processes, allowing us to pivot as market conditions, laws, or leadership change. This flexibility enables us to respond to evolving goals as they happen.
Q: What are some future trends in energy programs and evaluation that you have your eye on?
A: Utilities are facing growing challenges, and the easy wins are no longer available. Demand is surging, the regulatory landscape is shifting rapidly and macroeconomic forces are impacting homes and businesses alike, crunching budgets. Finding new ways to meet affordability and customer needs is difficult, but it creates opportunities for our program and evaluation teams to deliver impactful solutions. Utilities need more help than ever as their goals grow tougher to achieve, and we’re excited to collaborate, support, and innovate with utilities as they adapt to these challenges.
Utilities are in such a unique position to drive positive change for their customers and I’m excited to continue supporting clean energy initiatives in maximizing that impact.
Related Services
