2017 Annual Report - Tennessee EESI A… · 2017 Annual Report Energy Efficient Schools Initiative...

2017 Annual ReportEnergy Efficient Schools InitiativeTennessee Department of EducationSeptember 2017

Energy Efficiency Schools Initiative: ANNUAL REPORT FY2017

Director’s Letter


Authority0520-13-1.01 AUTHORITY. Pursuant to the provisions of T.C.A. § 49-17-104(b), the Energy Efficient Schools Council (“Council”) may promulgate rules and regulations necessary for operation.

Authority: T.C.A. § 49-17-104(b).

0520-13-1.02 PURPOSE AND SCOPE. The Energy Efficient Schools Council may award loans to school systems for qualifying capital outlay projects.

Authority: T.C.A. § 49-17-104(a).

OverviewThe Energy Efficient Schools Initiative (EESI), was established by the Tennessee General Assembly in 2008 with $90 million and is administratively attached to the Department of Education. Through EESI’s grant and revolving loan programs over $99 million has been approved for projects to improve the energy efficiency in Tennessee’s public K-12 schools. Purposes of the Energy Efficient Schools Council, also created by this legislation, include providing grants and loans for capital outlay projects and establish and support energy management programs. The enabling legislation also created a twelve member council to approve guidelines, award grants and loans, verify energy efficiencies, and establish and support energy management programs.

The Council appointed a Technical Advisory Committee and Executive Director Paul Cross. Scott Slusher joined the EESI staff in July 2016 as the Energy Services Consultant. He was a council member representing the Department of Environment and Conservation before this move to the EESI staff. Scott has an extensive background in energy conservation and efficiency. Barbara Floyd is the background support for the program and staff and has been with the Department of Education for twelve years.

About Energy Efficient Schools Initiative


Improving the classroom learning environment through energy-efficient strategies and financing.

• Low interest loans for energy efficient projects. • Financial and technical options for Distressed Districts. • Energy assessments and feasibility studies. • Technical review of existing proposals and designs. • Equipment bid specifications and commissioning plans. • Utility bill tracking and analysis. • Strategic energy management planning.

• Since being established in 2008, with a one-time allotment of $90 million dollars from excess Lottery Funds, EESI has now disbursed over $99.3 million in energy efficient grants and loans to public K-12 schools in the state, and saved schools in excess of $36 million on energy costs.

• Every dollar of the original funding has gone directly to Tennessee’s public school districts and 100% of the administrative cost have been covered through interest earned on low-interest loans and treasury fund balances. As of June 2017, total administrative cost for all EESI’s programs have been less than 2.5% of the total allocation.

• The current EESI Loan Program uses a low-interest (0.75%-1.0%) revolving loan mechanism to fund energy efficient projects in Tennessee’s public K-12 schools. To date, the EESI has originated 69 loans totaling $80,050,894 across the state.

• As of June 30, 2017, loans outstanding totaled $47,502,167. Currently, principal repayments are approximately $600,000 per month. To date, over $82 million has been disbursed to borrowers and approximately $34 million in loan principal has been repaid. Six loans have been paid in full, and there have been no defaults to date.

• Completed Annual District Energy Summaries for all public K-12 school districts. The summary included data collected for the TDOE Annual Statistical Report and data collected through the EESI network. Summary and rankings were distributed to LEAs at industry and association annual meetings.

• Conducted all-day EESI strategic planning session to highlight progress since 2008 and present 3 year vision for EESI to council members and technical advisory committee. A total of 25 members participated in the meeting.

• Senate Joint Resolution 0083 (introduced by Senator Bill Ketron of Murfreesboro) – “hereby express our support for the Energy Efficient Schools Council and the expansion of opportunities in Tennessee school districts to become more energy efficient, thereby reducing the tax burden for Tennessee taxpayers.” Passed the Senate with a unanimous 32-0 vote and the House 89-0 vote and 1 present not voting.

• Met with the House and Senate Education Committee Chairs to report on EESI program progress, and attended numerous hearings in the General Assembly that have a bearing on EESI. Additionally, responded to specific legislative requests for information relative to EESI’s Mission.

Our Mission

FY2008-2017 Highlights

FY2017 Highlights


EESI CouncilCarry out the obligations prescribed in Tennessee Code Annotated, sec. 49-17-101, et seq., including the following:

• Approve the design and technology guidelines as established by the technical advisory committee;

• Award grants or loans to school systems for qualifying capital outlay projects, including projects where a provider has warranted predetermined energy use objectives under the criteria established by the technical advisory committee and approved by the council;

• Cause to be conducted verification of energy efficiencies achieved using the methodologies established by the technical advisory committee;

• To the extent feasible, establish and support ongoing energy management programs; and

• Establish compensation for members of the technical advisory committee, unless otherwise prohibited by law.

Council MembersDenny Hastings, President, Building and Land Development Contractor

Cynthia Herron, TVA, Vice President EnergyRight and Renewable Solutions

Allen Foster, Cumberland County Commissioner

Brooxie Carlton, Director, Federal Programs, Department of Economic and Community Development

Matt Stennett, Chief Engineer Middle TN Natural Gas

Gary Clardy, Assistant Superintendent of Engineering, Rutherford County Schools

Molly Cripps, Department of Environment & Conservation, Director, Office of Energy Programs

Terry Sharp, Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Building Technologies Research and Integration Center

Frank Wagster, TLM Associates, Principal, Architect

Jason Vance, Loudon County Schools Director

Bob Turner, City Administrator, Somerville, TN

Tyler Danalds, Executive Director, Operations, Department of Education


• Establish energy efficient design and technology guidelines for all kindergarten through grade twelve (K-12) school facilities, including, but not limited to, lighting and HVAC guidelines, as well as establishing criteria whereby projects that have been warranted for a predetermined energy use shall be eligible;

• Establish methodology guidelines for post-audit verification of energy efficiencies achieved, if any by qualifying capital outlay projects awarded by the council;

• Establish guidelines for commissioning verification controls to monitor on an ongoing basis the efficiency and effectiveness of qualifying capital outlay projects awarded by the council, including recommendations for utilization of energy managers where feasible; and

• Any additional duties required by the council in furtherance of the council’s goals.

TAC MembersJeromy Cotten, TVA Sr. Program Manager-Energy Efficiency

Lee Baker, Tennessee Valley Public Power Association

Terry Townsend, PE, LEED AP, President, Townsend Engineering

Kim Shinn, PE, LEED AP, Director of Sustainable Design, TLC Engineering for Architecture

James Hastings, Founding Principal & Architect, Hastings Architecture Associates

Terry Sharp, Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Building Technologies Research and Integration Center

Technical Advisory Committee (TAC)

EESI Key Partners

energyrights o l u t i o n s

®


SINCE INCEPTIONFunding Distributions to Date (June 30, 2017):

EESI Programmatic Impacts

$99.3 MILLIONSTATEWIDE

GRANTS

20%

LOANS

80%

Initial Allocation of Funding (2008)

$153.68PER STUDENT STATEWIDE

District Participants by Program# of School District Participants (142 Total)

TechnicalAssistance

EmergencyGrant

Grant

Loan

139

1

130

47

16% - 25% Energy savings across all programs

TVA Incentives

$2.74MILLION


FY2017LOAN PROGRAM

Loans by Dollar Range

# of

Loa

ns

Loan Ammount ($)

0500K - 1MM 1MM - 2MM 2MM - 3MM

1

2

3

4

5

NEW LOANPARTICIPANT

37%RETURNING

LOANPARTICIPANT

63%

New Vs. Existing DistrictParticipation (FY2017)

Loans by Energy Conservation Measure

LIGHTING51%

OTHER12%

RETROCOMISSIONING1% HEATING,

VENTILATION,AIR CONDITIONING

5%

ENERGYMANAGEMENT

SYSTEM31%

TVA Incentives

(FY17)

532,799

$13,242,992Loan Dollar Disbursements (FY2017) 10 8


SENATE JOINT RESOLUTION 83By Ketron

A RESOLUTION to express support for Tennessee’s Energy Efficient Schools Council.

WHEREAS, in 2008, the General Assembly created the Energy Efficient Schools Council pursuant to Chapter 1188 of the Public Acts of 2008; and

WHEREAS, one of the purposes of the Energy Efficient Schools Council is to award grants or loans to school systems for qualifying capital outlay projects and to establish and support ongoing energy management programs; and

WHEREAS, over $87 million has been approved for projects to improve the energy efficiency in Tennessee’s public K-12 schools; and

WHEREAS, currently two school systems in Middle Tennessee are experiencing cost savings due to the Energy Efficient Schools Council’s energy saving initiatives; and

WHEREAS, Rutherford County Schools is experiencing significant savings in utility expenses due to grants and low interest loans from the Energy Efficient Schools Initiative; and

WHEREAS, Smyrna Primary School received a “green school” designation from an independent source for being in the top twenty-five percent of schools nationwide for energy savings due to energy savings initiatives; and

WHEREAS, the Energy Efficient Schools Council requires state budget funding to expand loans, grant programs, and technical assistance for Tennessee’s public schools; and

WHEREAS, the Energy Efficient Schools Council has operated without additional state budget funding since its creation by the General Assembly in 2008 and has been using loan repayments to rebuild its initial $90 million funding from lottery proceeds; now, therefore,

BE IT RESOLVED BY THE SENATE OF THE ONE HUNDRED TENTH GENERAL ASSEMBLY OF THE STATE OF TENNESSEE, THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

CONCURRING, that we hereby express our support for the Energy Efficient Schools Council and the expansion of opportunities in Tennessee school districts to become more energy efficient, thereby reducing the tax burden for Tennessee taxpayers.

Senate FloorSJR0083 by Ketron - FLOOR VOTE: MOTION TO ADOPT 3/6/2017 Passed Aye ____________________32 Noes _________________ 0

House FloorSJR0083 by Ketron - FLOOR VOTE: PASSAGE ON THIRD CONSIDERATION 4/17/2017 Passed Aye ____________________89 Noes _________________ 0 Present and not voting________1

Legislative Activity


• Every dollar of the original funding has gone directly to Tennessee’s public school districts and 100% of the administrative cost have been covered through interest earned on low-interest loans and treasury fund balances. As of June 2017, total administrative cost for all EESI’s programs have been less than 2.5% of the total allocation.

• The current EESI Loan Program uses a low-interest (0.75%-1.0%) revolving loan mechanism to fund energy efficient projects in Tennessee’s public K-12 schools. To date, the EESI has originated 69 loans totaling $80,050,894 across the state.

• As of June 30, 2017, loans outstanding totaled $47,502,167. Currently, principal repayments are approximately $600,000 per month. To date, over $82 million has been disbursed to borrowers and approximately $34 million in loan principal has been repaid. Six loans have been paid in full, and there have been no defaults to date.

Figure 1: * Forecast assumes no early payments and execution of new loans totaling $10,000,000 per year at 0.075% and 1% for 3 years.

Financials

Forecasted Interest $ by Rate*$600,000

$500,000

$400,000

$300,000

$200,000

$100,000

2018

Administrative Cost (3% escalation) Interest $ (@0.075%) Interest $ (@1%)

2019 2020FISCAL YEAR

2021 2022$0


FUNDING, OBLIGATIONS, & DISBURSEMENTS REPORT*June 30, 2017

LOANS

Appropriation - Lottery Money for Loans $ 68,395,300.30

Increases: Principle Collected (total to date) $ 32,548,727.00 $ 32,548,727.00

$ 100,944,027.30

Decreases:

Loans Approved - Round 1 $ (68,395,300.30) Loan Agreements on file with OSFL - Round 2 $ (11,352,722.62) $ (79,748,022.92)

$ 21,196,004.38

Council Approved Allocations LEA Loan Amount Houston $ (642,459) Lawrence $ (3,000,000) Trousdale $ (1,342,896) Hawkins $ (280,000) Maury $ (1,000,000) Oak Ridge $ (3,000,000) Weakly $ (1,619,741.00) $ (10,885,096.00)

Funds Available for Loan Obligations $ 10,310,908.38

GRANTS

Appropriation - Lottery Money for Grants $ 20,604,699.70

Decreases: Prescriptive and EM Grant Disbursements $ (19,564,107.24) Emergency Grant Program $ $ 1,040,592.46 Council Approved Allocations LEA Grant Amount Sevier County $ (78,000.00)

Remaining Funds Available for Grant Obligations $ 962,592.46


* Unaudited data. This report provides the activity per Edison for Fund 38000 for the period shown. This activity reflects only the entries made by the Office of State and Local Finance for disbursements to borrowers, repayments from borrowers, interest earned on the cash in the State Pooled Investment Fund (SPIF) and transfers to/from the General Fund (Education) in/out of Fund 38000.

CONSOLIDATED FUND

EESC Appropriated Money from Lottery $ 90,000,000.00 Loans (Fund 38) $ (68,395,300.30) Prescriptive and EM Grant Disbursements (Fund 25) $ (19,564,107.24) Emergency Grant (Fund 25) $ (1,000,000.00) Reserves (Fund 25) $ (1,000,000.00) $ (89,959,407.54)

Balance $ 40,592.46

DISBURSEMENTS Loan Disbursements $ (79,748,022.92) Grant Disbursements $ (19,564,107.24) Emergency Grants $

Total EESI Disbursements $ (99,312,130.16)

CONSOLIDATED FUNDS

FUND 25 (Education)

FY 2016-17 Total Beginning Balance $ 2,831,108.52 Interest Earned from Fund 25 $ 11,402.56 Total Funds Available $ 2,842,511.08

FY 16-17 Expenditures $ (543,203.07) Balance June 30, 2017 $ 2,299,308.01

FUND 38 (Treasurer)

Interest Collected on Loans $ 1,655,210.00 Interest Earned on SPIF $ 221,173.81 Total $ 1,876,383.81

Transfers to Fund 25 $

Balance Available for Administrative Expenses $ 1,876,383.81


Map

Cred

it:


…EESI grants and loans were an awesome catalyst and springboard to help get more people on the energy conservation train. EESI funded the installation of a Building Logix system to provide real time

meter data on all Murfreesboro City Schools. The system has given us the ability to rapidly discover and troubleshoot problems…and we can do an even better job. Thanks for your continued support

and interest in Murfreesboro City Schools.”— Gary Anderson, Murfreesboro City Schools

I. Legislative: The EESI is currently working with TDOE leadership to develop a strategy to garner additional support from the Governor’s Office and the Tennessee General Assembly for the EESI Revolving Loan Program. Upon successful completion of this strategy, additional funding may be redirected to EESI for programming. We have legislators who want to celebrate the program’s success during the 2018 legislative session by recognizing the members of the General Assembly who introduced and passed the enabling legislation. We are working with them to make it happen.

II. Technical: The EESI is currently developing a state-wide public K-12 utility data management strategy, which will provide LEAs with monthly utility data and allow school boards to improve utility management, reduce utility cost, and improve the classroom learning environment. Based on anticipated recommendations from the EESI Technical Advisory Council to the EESI Council, additional funding may be reprogrammed to support the cost of implementing the utility database.

III. Programmatic: There are a lot of studies that show the behavior of students is impacted by lighting colors and intensities. The Behavioral Specialist at Greene County and Murfreesboro City Schools have observed uncooperative and agitated students calm down and complete their classwork within a few minutes of changing the color of the lighting in the room. EESI is working with a lighting vendor to develop a peer reviewed study showing the benefits of full spectrum lighting in special needs classrooms. Based on the release of this study, EESI may develop a full spectrum lighting program that could be rapidly implemented using EESI funding.

IV. Programmatic: According to the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), Children breathe more air, eat more food and drink more liquid in proportion to their body weight than adults. In recent years, comparative risk studies performed by the EPA and its Science Advisory Board have consistently ranked indoor air pollution among the top five environmental risks to public health. Proper maintenance of indoor air is more than a “quality” issue; it encompasses safety and stewardship of your investment in students, staff and facilities. EESI is on the leading edge using energy-efficient strategies that reduce energy and improve indoor air quality. In the upcoming period, EESI will continue working with public and private stakeholders to educate districts on IAQ and promote strategies that improve the classroom learning environment.

Looking Ahead

“ “


District Utility Summary (School Year 2015-16)

Energy management is the process of monitoring, controlling, and conserving energy in a building or organization and is the key to saving energy. For several years, EESI has worked through grant and loan programs to encourage Tennessee Public K-12 Schools to develop an energy management program and track their energy use, but a method to compare how districts are improving across the state has been elusive. Until now! Over the past year, EESI staff have worked with school directors, facility personnel, and fiscal offices to complete a District Square Footage Survey. This will provide, for the first time, the Department of Education and the EESI with a state-wide Public K-12 Schools square foot benchmark. With this new data, EESI will now be able to produce a high-level metric called The District Utility Summary.

The District Utility Summary is a quick reference tool which allows school districts to understand their utility use and compare their use data against other public school districts (141 districts) in Tennessee. The data presented is compiled from district reported expenditures for the Department of Education’s Annual Statistical Report and EESI’s annual square foot survey.

10 Anderson County 6061 $1,604,386.00 $4,379,993.00 7% $264.69 37% 97

11 Clinton 838 $148,867.00 $465,219.00 -35% $177.57 32% 8

12 Oak Ridge 4237 $1,696,872.84 $4,243,512.45 23% $400.50 40% 128

20 Bedford County 8021 $2,486,852.04 $4,768,840.03 19% $310.03 52% 122

30 Benton County 2027 $660,138.00 $1,255,201.00 -3% $325.65 53% 68

40 Bledsoe County 1635 $440,998.00 $965,073.00 -11% $269.80 46% 41

50 Blount County 10191 $3,344,253.28 $7,167,808.56 19% $328.16 47% 120

51 Alcoa 1821 $772,505.10 $1,504,222.67 9% $424.32 51% 103

52 Maryville 4897 $1,329,665.87 $2,553,807.04 -6% $271.54 52% 56

60 Bradley County 9456 $2,255,567.00 $4,555,601.00 21% $238.55 50% 124

61 Cleveland 5085 $1,270,112.12 $2,631,388.69 -23% $249.79 48% 20

70 Campbell County 5118 $1,157,031.28 $3,072,632.09 -11% $226.05 38% 43

80 Cannon County 1860 $526,642.00 $933,859.00 0% $283.22 56% 77

90 Carroll County 2 $68,830.97 $131,911.22 -41% N/A 52% 3

92 Hollow Rock - Bruceton 619 $104,368.00 $316,692.00 -41% $168.64 33% 2

%Difference Districts Dist from state % of Ops that pay # District Name Students All Total OPS average $/Student Spend less Utilities Expend ($1.39/SQFT) ($/SQFT)



93 Huntingdon 1137 $313,423.00 $666,918.00 -13% $275.73 47% 36

94 McKenzie 1282 $263,216.00 $584,681.00 -26% $205.39 45% 15

95 South Carroll 324 $136,022.00 $217,116.00 16% $420.31 63% 115

97 West Carroll Sp Dist 860 $220,447.00 $505,503.00 -26% $256.26 44% 17

100 Carter County 4913 $1,333,954.00 $2,571,985.00 10% $271.54 52% 107

101 Elizabethton 2327 $560,134.93 $1,323,609.73 -11% $240.71 42% 42

110 Cheatham County 5900 $1,443,535.00 $3,115,461.00 -10% $244.67 46% 45

120 Chester County 2657 $588,917.00 $1,280,886.00 -5% $221.66 46% 59

130 Claiborne County 3961 $1,151,742.12 $1,922,509.05 3% $290.74 60% 90

140 Clay County 984 $352,646.00 $721,557.00 12% $358.24 49% 111

150 Cocke County 4190 $958,645.16 $2,503,170.14 -24% $228.77 38% 18

151 Newport 678 $171,190.00 $438,949.00 -51% $252.48 39% 0

160 Coffee County 4113 $1,351,735.41 $2,325,971.13 7% $328.67 58% 98

161 Manchester 1288 $319,072.00 $769,241.00 1% $247.68 41% 84

162 Tullahoma 3299 $1,021,810.20 $2,305,302.19 3% $309.76 44% 88

170 Crockett County 1897 $423,113.00 $968,414.00 -24% $223.07 44% 19

171 Alamo 558 $82,789.00 $218,354.00 -42% $148.25 38% 1

172 Bells 360 $85,302.00 $206,024.00 10% $236.90 41% 106

180 Cumberland County 6791 $1,796,855.00 $4,781,837.00 1% $264.60 38% 81

190 Davidson County 76990 $23,494,187.00 $54,991,175.00 17% $305.16 43% 118

200 Decatur County 1506 $405,324.93 $775,425.93 -6% $269.11 52% 54

210 DeKalb County 2808 $570,356.00 $1,155,199.00 37% $203.12 49% 137

220 Dickson County 7857 $2,165,336.00 $4,566,021.00 6% $275.58 47% 96

230 Dyer County 3679 $915,297.00 $2,429,852.00 -13% $248.76 38% 35

231 Dyersburg 2486 $692,256.00 $2,249,888.00 -21% $278.51 31% 25

240 Fayette County 3020 $672,378.00 $1,563,132.00 -33% $222.67 43% 11

250 Fentress County 1980 $552,566.00 $1,045,370.00 6% $279.05 53% 95

260 Franklin County 5317 $1,439,687.91 $3,389,311.83 0% $270.77 42% 79

271 Humboldt 1004 $305,001.17 $766,432.66 -37% $303.78 40% 4

272 Milan 1869 $439,647.00 $906,669.00 -2% $235.20 48% 71

273 Trenton 1235 $389,823.00 $814,034.00 -6% $315.60 48% 57

274 Bradford 482 $128,731.00 $382,066.00 -14% $267.32 34% 34

275 Gibson Co Sp Dist 3790 $852,718.00 $1,841,947.00 -22% $225.02 46% 23



280 Giles County 3702 $1,266,282.30 $2,141,029.80 9% $342.10 59% 105

290 Grainger County 3220 $927,157.13 $1,694,496.38 -4% $287.98 55% 64

300 Greene County 6377 $1,296,281.59 $3,186,296.45 -15% $203.29 41% 32

301 Greeneville 2653 $686,091.80 $2,085,052.81 -23% $258.57 33% 21

310 Grundy County 1983 $581,393.05 $1,096,235.06 23% $293.23 53% 129

320 Hamblen County 9738 $2,544,566.55 $5,602,729.76 3% $261.29 45% 86

330 Hamilton County 40615 $10,233,404.00 $24,721,994.00 -3% $251.96 41% 69

340 Hancock County 926 $350,500.75 $595,958.61 12% $378.63 59% 110

350 Hardeman County 3385 $769,576.00 $1,747,342.00 -36% $227.34 44% 7

360 Hardin County 3253 $1,042,549.17 $2,111,113.82 22% $320.47 49% 125

370 Hawkins County 6520 $1,522,986.14 $3,891,628.63 -21% $233.60 39% 24

371 Rogersville 608 $121,959.00 $288,166.00 -35% $200.61 42% 9

380 Haywood County 2794 $726,403.00 $1,509,576.00 -20% $260.00 48% 26

390 Henderson County 3663 $838,798.69 $2,073,074.25 -3% $228.96 40% 67

391 Lexington 838 $379,423.00 $764,688.00 2% $452.96 50% 85

400 Henry County 2797 $749,874.00 $1,518,410.00 -10% $268.10 49% 47

401 Paris 1622 $353,729.00 $754,638.00 -12% $218.07 47% 40

410 Hickman County 3147 $984,461.00 $1,679,964.27 -18% $312.82 59% 27

420 Houston County 1192 $435,551.00 $751,706.00 20% $365.27 58% 123

430 Humphreys County 2733 $754,415.00 $1,496,893.00 0% $276.08 50% 78

440 Jackson County 1399 $457,458.65 $862,400.18 8% $327.04 53% 100

450 Jefferson County 6761 $1,723,569.00 $4,330,475.00 8% $254.92 40% 99

460 Johnson County 1928 $604,933.00 $1,608,985.00 -18% $313.73 38% 28

470 Knox County 54563 $12,586,598.00 $26,133,216.19 4% $230.68 48% 94

480 Lake County 728 $319,247.00 $579,757.00 15% $438.51 55% 113

490 Lauderdale County 3943 $966,538.00 $2,206,785.00 -10% $245.14 44% 46

500 Lawrence County 6520 $1,501,193.00 $3,488,589.00 8% $230.23 43% 102

510 Lewis County 1699 $403,765.88 $829,758.95 -16% $237.59 49% 29

520 Lincoln County 3615 $1,176,031.00 $1,885,110.00 22% $325.32 62% 127

521 Fayetteville 1358 $329,268.00 $650,297.73 0% $242.54 51% 76

530 Loudon County 4458 $1,255,289.72 $2,879,024.93 15% $281.57 44% 114

531 Lenoir City 2122 $822,216.00 $1,555,996.00 37% $387.44 53% 138

540 McMinn County 5185 $1,396,609.28 $2,899,614.53 24% $269.37 48% 130


541 Athens 1502 $438,236.47 $719,946.49 17% $291.82 61% 116

542 Etowah 331 $86,352.43 $179,335.18 -6% $260.69 48% 55

550 McNairy County 4138 $952,343.18 $2,000,920.64 10% $230.15 48% 108

560 Macon County 3515 $787,196.00 $2,571,319.00 4% $223.95 31% 93

570 Jackson-Madison County 11600 $2,917,705.00 $6,243,052.00 -12% $251.53 47% 37

581 Richard City 254 $83,508.42 $182,347.54 -14% $328.16 46% 33

590 Marshall County 5002 $1,340,613.00 $3,307,769.00 -6% $268.00 41% 58

600 Maury County 11240 $2,615,741.41 $6,204,489.75 -16% $232.71 42% 30

610 Meigs County 1617 $399,750.60 $897,718.41 18% $247.16 45% 119

620 Monroe County 5157 $1,536,528.42 $3,326,778.99 0% $297.94 46% 80

621 Sweetwater 1457 $368,796.59 $774,529.88 -7% $253.13 48% 52

630 Montgomery County 30567 $6,596,524.49 $15,763,433.98 -4% $215.81 42% 62

640 Moore County 810 $310,976.00 $631,134.00 -5% $384.07 49% 61

650 Morgan County 2907 $921,900.00 $1,861,645.00 31% $317.10 50% 134

660 Obion County 3232 $1,035,135.00 $2,230,990.00 1% $320.27 46% 83

661 Union City 1489 $446,422.14 $836,258.89 -28% $299.83 53% 13

670 Overton County 2943 $747,981.00 $1,887,836.00 3% $254.18 40% 92

680 Perry County 1015 $280,949.32 $580,848.05 3% $276.76 48% 89

690 Pickett County 681 $200,799.00 $369,236.00 39% $295.07 54% 139

700 Polk County 2223 $642,184.37 $1,406,233.81 9% $288.94 46% 104

710 Putnam County 10245 $3,334,480.00 $5,960,822.00 -2% $325.48 56% 72

720 Rhea County 3958 $1,285,408.00 $2,835,671.00 0% $324.79 45% 75

721 Dayton 779 $154,846.42 $329,274.58 3% $198.84 47% 91

730 Roane County 6262 $2,251,562.00 $3,936,111.00 40% $359.57 57% 140

740 Robertson County 10469 $3,171,776.00 $6,019,269.00 0% $302.97 53% 73

750 Rutherford County 41195 $11,019,173.80 $21,956,157.63 8% $267.49 50% 101

751 Murfreesboro 7692 $2,443,934.45 $5,486,434.92 37% $317.71 45% 136

760 Scott County 2713 $744,283.60 $1,488,457.99 19% $274.36 50% 121

761 Oneida 1164 $297,708.58 $860,386.79 -7% $255.68 35% 53

770 Sequatchie County 2116 $515,742.00 $1,049,587.00 28% $243.71 49% 132

780 Sevier County 13326 $3,200,537.50 $8,214,777.32 -12% $240.18 39% 38

792 Shelby County 100469 $24,896,471.31 $51,212,341.92 -3% $247.80 49% 66

793 Arlington 4794 $677,326.09 $1,732,132.45 -27% $141.30 39% 14



794 Bartlett 8108 $1,277,595.45 $3,659,706.16 -26% $157.57 35% 16

795 Collierville 7682 $1,039,974.16 $2,793,157.21 -29% $135.38 37% 12

796 Germantown 5511 $780,825.53 $1,825,937.99 -7% $141.69 43% 50

797 Lakeland 867 $104,811.03 $308,421.52 -35% $120.94 34% 10

798 Millington 2386 $600,812.45 $1,544,692.79 -8% $251.76 39% 49

800 Smith County 2925 $814,685.00 $1,590,453.00 -5% $278.54 51% 60

810 Stewart County 1896 $701,583.00 $1,292,075.00 22% $370.00 54% 126

820 Sullivan County 9329 $2,798,560.88 $6,145,048.23 -3% $299.99 46% 70

821 Bristol 3750 $993,508.63 $1,882,698.03 -4% $264.92 53% 65

822 Kingsport 6759 $1,460,711.00 $4,105,377.00 -22% $216.11 36% 22

830 Sumner County 27611 $6,550,111.85 $13,587,740.21 -12% $237.23 48% 39

840 Tipton County 10330 $1,961,765.00 $3,783,682.00 3% $189.91 52% 87

850 Trousdale County 1174 $425,384.00 $750,319.00 12% $362.45 57% 109

860 Unicoi County 2172 $677,017.00 $1,687,473.00 -7% $311.75 40% 51

870 Union County 3304 $801,742.00 $1,715,129.00 29% $242.67 47% 133

880 Van Buren County 710 $221,583.00 $558,521.00 33% $311.93 40% 135

890 Warren County 5972 $1,636,409.00 $3,477,280.00 -4% $274.02 47% 63

900 Washington County 8088 $2,373,820.11 $4,674,919.28 17% $293.51 51% 117

901 Johnson City 7391 $2,331,677.25 $4,689,956.80 25% $315.49 50% 131

910 Wayne County 2105 $718,380.00 $1,395,883.00 -10% $341.22 51% 44

920 Weakley County 3991 $1,015,106.00 $2,140,785.00 -8% $254.36 47% 48

930 White County 3699 $793,640.71 $1,856,043.17 -36% $214.55 43% 6

940 Williamson County 34908 $7,688,333.38 $13,933,912.56 0% $220.24 55% 74

941 Franklin SSD 3334 $905,665.00 $2,854,399.00 -37% $271.63 32% 5

950 Wilson County 16375 $4,696,804.05 $8,824,872.24 13% $286.82 53% 112

951 Lebanon 3505 $763,684.04 $1,599,866.55 -15% $217.86 48% 31

* All Utilities:

Electricity, Natural Gas, Fuel Oil, Water, and Sewer.



EESI Services • Low interest funding for energy efficient projects • Specialty/Emergency Grants • Financial and technical options for Distressed Districts • Energy assessments and feasibility studies • Technical review of existing proposals and designs • Best practices for navigating performance contracting • Equipment bid specifications and commissioning plans • Utility bill tracking and analysis • Strategic energy management planning

Does your school qualify? • Funding Eligible to • Public K-12 Schools • Special School Districts

Technical Assistance Eligible to: • Public K-12 Schools • Special School Districts • Private K-12 Schools • Achievement Schools Districts • Charter Schools

Contact Information

Paul Cross, [email protected]/532-9643, office615/585-1167, cell

Scott Slusher, PEM, Deputy [email protected]/741-4366, office629/203-4710, cell

Barbara Floyd, Administrative [email protected]/253-2590, office

In 2009, while School Superintendent of Putnam County Schools, we started an

energy savings competition between schools, installed high-efficient lighting,

and encouraged students to monitor light switches and plug loads resulting

in utility savings over $1,000,000. EESI provided the financial mechanism that

complemented our efforts to reduce utility cost, enabling us to allocate more

money into our classroom learning environment.

— Dr. Kathleen Airhart, Deputy Commissioner, Education

“ “

Tennessee Department of Education. Authorization No. 331036. No. ofcopies, 500. This public document was promulgated at a cost of $1.92per copy. November 2017.

Date post:	04-Nov-2020
Category:	Documents
Upload:	others
View:	1 times
Download:	0 times

2017 Annual Report - Tennessee EESI A… · 2017 Annual Report Energy Efficient Schools Initiative...

Documents