Specifications include, but are not limited to: A. Services Requested NYSERDAs decision on whether to develop and launch a prize competition will depend on its ability to fully understand the potential problem-solvers and participants and what strategy best addresses their motivations to overcome known barriers. An approach based on such thinking is necessary to make informed decisions about award size, participants, design criteria, and evaluation. The selected consultant will be able to address the following tasks: Determining the Feasibility of a Prize Competition The primary objective of this project will be to determine whether a prize competition framework is an appropriate vehicle to achieve deep energy savings (defined for this solicitation to be on the order of 60-80% reduction in whole-building, fuel neutral energy use) in an existing multifamily building. The first task of this project will be to identify and understand the existing barriers to deep energy savings. Once those barriers are identified, the selected consultant will need to determine whether or not a prize competition framework would effectively overcome those barriers. This analysis will include a review of materials provided by NYSERDA concerning the 3 technical demonstration of ways a multifamily building could achieve 60-80% energy savings and whether it is feasible for broader adoption. If a prize competition is deemed feasible, the contractor should continue to review and adhere to the subsequent services. If a prize competition is not deemed effective and/or feasible, the contractor would follow tasks laid out in the Exploring Alternatives section. Understanding Stakeholders Emphasis should be placed on not only identifying potential participants of a prize competition, but also how they would compete in this initiative, i.e. individually, teams, partnerships with manufacturers, etc. The contractor will begin this analysis with four questions: 1. Who might participate directly in the competition? 2. Who might directly or indirectly influence participants to get involved? 3. Who might be willing to be a co-sponsor of competitors, the process, the award, or follow-on effort? 4. Who might directly or indirectly benefit from the winning solution(s)? Additionally, which motives matter most, and in what mix, will vary depending on the problem or barrier and the problem solver. A portion of this task is to study potential participants and what would motivate them to compete in a deep energy retrofit competition. The most basic approach to this research is interviews with representative stakeholders or those that influence them. However, any number of methodologies could achieve the same understanding of defining the barriers and motivations of specific groups of potential participants. Choosing an Inducement If NYSERDA and the consultant are able to establish a clear objective and an understanding of its stakeholders, the type of prize or inducement that best fits the problem and motivates the problem-solvers will then be selected. The consultant should examine motivations both in monetary and non-monetary forms, as well as various recognition mechanisms to induce successful participation in the challenge. Exploring Alternatives If the situation analysis of the efficacy of a prize competition results in the recommendation for NYSERDA not to undertake designing such a competition, the contractor should evaluate alternative, behavioral-based methods for inducing deep energy reductions within the same building stock. Barriers identified in the first task of this RFP should influence what the contractor proposes in this section. For example, if the contractor deems New York City unfit to host such a competition, is there an alternative location where it could work? In addition to location, variables building types should be taken into coordination B. Project Schedule All work identified in this RFP must be substantially completed within a four month period. Applicants should include a detailed schedule, including dates by which the following major study milestones will be completed in relation to contract execution: Kick-off Meeting Review of Existing Market Sector Analysis Objectives and Goals Setting Stakeholder Research and Understanding Segmentation, Barriers, and Motivations4 Draft Report Final Report and Recommended Next Steps C. Proposer Qualifications This analysis and evaluation will require the contractor to be familiar with programs to encourage energy efficiency outside of traditional rebate and incentive programs, specifically behavioral programs and other non-financial motivations. Any previous experience in the evaluation or implementation of these types of programs should be highlighted. Special consideration will be given during proposal evaluation if the proposer has already demonstrated an understanding of New York City stakeholders specific to the energy industry. A Technical Evaluation Panel (TEP) consisting of NYSERDA staff and external reviewers will review proposals that meet requirements laid out in this RFP. Prior experience in the following areas shall be used when reviewing proposals: 1. Market research and segmentation 2. Behavioral initiatives, specifically competitions 3. Energy efficiency 4. Incentives, financial and otherwise 5. Experience pertaining to conducting feasibility analysis D. NYSERDA Responsibility The NYSERDA Project Manager will be responsible for overseeing and managing all tasks undertaken by the selected contractor, including but not limited to reviewing, commenting and approving tasks and subsequent deliverables coordinating with the project collaborators on such reviews and decision-making promoting coordination between the selected contractor and various project stakeholders, as needed and approving invoices promptly. The NYSERDA project managers role will include facilitating input from other project collaborators and resolving any divergent opinions or input received
