State Performance-Based Environmental Leadership Programs: Trends, Models, and Results

1
State Performance-Based Environmental Leadership
Programs Trends, Models, and Results

• Angela Vitulli
• Industrial Economics, Incorporated (IEc)
• National Environmental Partnership Summit
• 9 May 2006

2
The Growth and Evolution of State Programs

• What is a performance-based environmental
  leadership program?
• Half of states have an active or developing
  program.
• State programs change frequently.
• More states are integrating performance
  measurement into programs to demonstrate results.

3
Programs Across States
4
States Vary in Targeting Participants

• Some states concentrate efforts on on-ramp
  programs to encourage EMS development and
  sustained compliance.

• Many state programs have multiple tiers to
  accommodate facilities at different performance
  levels.

5
Programs Represented Today

• Colorado ELP
• Kentucky EXCEL
• Virginia VEEP

6
Quantifying Members Superior Environmental
Performance is Increasingly Important

• State budget pressures have created resources
  pressures for innovative programs.
• General trend toward outcome-oriented measurement
  of government programs.
• Quantifying environmental performance is key to
  demonstrating program benefits and highlighting
  how leadership programs contribute to media
  program goals.

7
More States are Aggregating Members
Environmental Results

• Michigan has been aggregating results since 1998.
• Texas presents both environmental achievements
  and cost savings among members in its 2004
  Performance Report.
• Georgia measured first year performance of
  members in 2005 and is estimating prospective
  improvements from member commitments.
• Virginia will begin to analyze performance across
  members in 2006.

8
Challenges of Performance Measurement

• A prescribed reporting format is needed to yield
  data that can be summed across members.
• Data entry and information management can be
  burdensome.
• Factoring in the effects of economic activity on
  environmental results is often tricky.
• It is often difficult to evaluate the quality and
  completeness of environmental data provided by
  members.