Capacity Building: Industrial Energy Audit Analysis for ... · Capacity Building: Industrial Energy...

Capacity Building: Industrial Energy Audit

Analysis for Bankable Projects

(Component I: Workshops on SE Project Financing)

CWP.05.AM (AHEF.90.AM)

INOGATE Technical Secretariat and Integrated Programme in Support of

the Baku Initiative and the Eastern Partnership Energy Goals

Contract № 2011/278827

A project within the INOGATE Programme

Implemented by:

Ramboll Denmark A/S (lead partner)

EIR Global sprl.

The British Standards Institution

LDK Consultants S.A.

MVV decon GmbH

ICF International

Statistics Denmark

Energy Institute Hrvoje Požar

April 2016

1

This report has been prepared with the support of the European Union The content of this report is the

sole responsibility of the experts and can in no way be taken as reflecting the views of the European Union

Name of the

Document

Capacity Building: Industrial Energy Audit Analysis for Bankable Projects

(Component I: Workshops on SE Project Financing), CWP.05.AM

(AHEF.90.AM)

Status of the

document

Final

Name Date

Prepared by V. Babajanyan, A. Korakan,

K.Taslakyan , A. Antonenko,

28/05/2015, 16/05/2016

Reviewed by W. Lutz, K. McCann, A. Twomey 03/10/2015, 07/10/2015, 28/10/15

Approved by P. Larsen 08/06/2016

1

Content

Abbreviations .......................................................................................................................................... 2

1. PART 1 – EUROPEAN COMMISSION ................................................................................................... 3

1.1. Background .............................................................................................................................. 3

1.2. Essence of the Activity ............................................................................................................. 3

1.3. Key Findings ............................................................................................................................. 4

1.4. Ownership and Benefits of the Activity ................................................................................... 4

1.5. Recommendations ................................................................................................................... 4

1.6. Challenges Faced...................................................................................................................... 5

2. PART 2 – BENEFICIARY........................................................................................................................ 6

2.1 Executive Summary .................................................................................................................. 6

2.2 Preparation .............................................................................................................................. 8

2.3 Implementation ..................................................................................................................... 10

2.4 Evaluation .............................................................................................................................. 14

2.5 Conclusions and recommendations ....................................................................................... 16

2.6 Expected impact..................................................................................................................... 17

Appendices ....................................................................................................................................... 18

2

Abbreviations

ECM Energy Conservation Measure

EE Energy Efficiency

EPC Energy Performance Contracting

GHG Green House Gas

IFI International Financial Institution

INOGATE Interstate Oil and Gas Transport to Europe

IRR Internal Rate of Return

ITS INOGATE Technical Secretariat

LCCA Life Cycle Cost Analysis

LFI Local Financial Institution

NPV Net Present Value

PC Partner Countries (INOGATE Partner Countries)

PSRC Public Services Regulatory Commission

R2E2 Renewable Resources and Energy Efficiency Fund

RES Renewable Energy Sources

SE Sustainable Energy

SIR Savings to Investment Ratio

SPP Simple payback period

TNA Training Need Assessment

ToR Terms of Reference

3

1. PART 1 – EUROPEAN COMMISSION

1.1.Background

Assignment Title: Capacity Building: Industrial Energy Audit Analysis for Bankable Projects (Component I: Workshops on SE Project Financing), CWP.05.AM (AHEF.90.AM)

Country and Dates: Yerevan, Armenia, February -May 2015

Beneficiary Organisation: Association of Energy Service Companies for supporting the development of the energy sector in Armenia” Alliance of legal entities (Association of ESCO)

Beneficiary Organisation - key contact persons – name and e-mail address

Mr. Mikhail Martirosyan, President of the ESCO Association, [email protected]

Deliverables Produced Developed draft legislation act, presentations and this final report

Expert Team Members J. Bani, W.Lutz, V. Babajanyan, A. Korakan, K.Taslakyan , A. Antonenko

1.2.Essence of the Activity

The Technical Assistance (TA) assignment on Industrial Energy Audit Analysis for Bankable Projects

was implemented during the period February – May 2015. The TA was requested by the Armenian

Association of ESCO and included two components: 1) Workshops on SE Project Financing and 2)

Proposals for Secondary Legislation.

While this report relates only to the first component of the TA, it is important to view both parts of

this assistance as a fully integrated and unified intervention. The technical assistance provided by the

ITS experts was carefully designed to meet the overall project objective through a two-pronged

approach that would both remove legislative and administrative barriers to ESCO development while

simultaneously increasing the capacity of ESCO personnel to implement projects.

This component of the TA aimed to improve access to finance for SE projects in Armenia by training

energy professionals on financial feasibility analysis methodologies and approaches during the first

training workshop and by facilitating the dialogue between energy professionals, policy makers, LFI

and IFIs during the second workshop. The first workshop took place in Yerevan, Armenia on February

24 to 28, 2015 and the second workshop on May 5 and 6, 2015.

As an additional activities to support the development of ESCO market in Armenia, ITS conducted a

regional combined event on lessons learned on Energy Performance Contracts (EPC), EU experience

and applicability in the Partner Countries that took place in Stockholm, Sweden, between 9 and 11

February 2016. The regional event showed the implementation of the EPC in practice and provided

participants with a set of effective tools on how to improve efficiency in buildings and promote viable

energy service markets in their countries.

The ITS fully achieved the overall and specific objectives of the TA assignment that were related to the

improvement of the capacity of participants to independently develop and assess EE and RES projects

and the reforms needed to support viable ESCO market in Armenia.

mailto:[email protected]

4

1.3.Key Findings

1. The implementation of the capacity building events in an interactive, hands-on workshop format

where participants effectively learned by doing enabled an efficient transfer of knowledge to the

participants.

2. The selection of participants based on Participant Selection Questionnaires allowed ITS to identify

participants with real SE projects that were further developed and presented to potential investors

during the second workshop.

3. Equally, the selection of topics using Training Needs Assessment Questionnaires allowed ITS to

develop a tailored capacity building event to meet expectation of participants and cover the topics to

support the implementation of the participants’ projects.

4. Presentation of the most advanced SE projects to bankers during the second workshop facilitated

the attraction of real investments in SE projects and enhanced general capacity of decision makers on

measures to mitigate the potential risks and unblock investments.

1.4.Ownership and Benefits of the Activity

The main benefits of the activity for the Beneficiaries are:

1. The Armenian experts and decision makers improved their understanding on financial

feasibility analysis methodologies and approaches in accordance with the EU best practices.

2. The policy dialogue arranged during the second workshop contributed to the removal of the

barriers and the improvement of legislation and institutional frameworks.

The Beneficiaries took ownership in the following way:

1. The Beneficiary and local stakeholders provided ITS with all requested information and

necessary support during the preparation and implementation stages.

2. 2 out of 3 SE projects developed and presented to potential investors within this assignment

were financed by local financial institutions (LFI). The total investments directly facilitated by

ITS within this assignment were 1.9 mln EUR.

1.5.Recommendations

To continue further negotiations for financing SE projects improved within this assignment, including

the projects presented to potential investors during the second workshop in May 2015:

Project #1: Residential heating system replacement, developed by Techno Eco LLC; total project

investment cost: 65,000 EUR. During the second workshop, two LFIs expressed their firm interest in

providing project financing, and requested the developer to start discussion for cooperation on the

project. As of April 2016, the project is being financed by the Converse Bank.

Project #2: Construction of a Small Hydro Power Plant (SHPP) which is being developed by Ecovill LLC;

project cost: 1,850,000 EUR. During the second workshop, two LFIs expressed their firm interest in

5

providing project financing, and requested the developer to start discussion for cooperation on the

project. As of April 2016, the project is being financed by a private investor.

Project #3: Insulation material production developed by Ecoperlit LLC; total project investment cost:

1,100,000 EUR. During the second workshop, one LFI expressed firm interest in this project and asked

the developer to provide more detailed information. As of April 2016, the project is still being

discussed with potential investors.

1.6.Challenges Faced

The ITS experts had an efficient cooperation with the beneficiary, the Association of ESCO, and did

not face any challenges during the preparation and the implementation of the TA assignment.

Table 1. Impact Matrix

Impact Area Developments 2012 (%)* Feb 2016 (%)*

Policy Facilitation of ESCO market as one of the policy instruments to support the development of SE projects

10% 20%

Regulation Support of the development and approval of ESCO Regulation

10% 50%

Technology Support of the development and utilisation of modern EE and RES technologies

5% 15%

Environment ESCO Model can provide guaranteed energy savings that might not be achieved under the normal contract conditions

5% 35%

Economics Indicators of decreased energy dependency

4% 14%

Social Better indoor climate and living conditions for citizens.

5% 45%

* The impact is estimated based on the experts’ opinion under the current circumstances and can be changed over time

Note: It is particularly difficult to quantify the impact of capacity building activities. The figures

provided in the table should therefore be considered with great caution.

6

2. PART 2 – BENEFICIARY

2.1 Executive Summary

This part of the Report presents the results of two workshops on SE Project Financing implemented in

Yerevan, Republic of Armenia, through the Ad Hoc Expert Facility (AHEF) under the EU funded

INOGATE Technical Secretariat (ITS) Project. The overall objective of the activity is to improve access

to finance for SE projects through capacity building and improved secondary legislation related to

ESCOs in Armenia and to support the ESCO Association and to develop proposals for legal acts in this

field1.

While the results of this activity are elaborated in two separate reports, each relating to the different

activities: enhancing of capacity of ESCO staff and decision makers and improvement of secondary

legislation, it is nevertheless important to view both components holistically as a fully integrated and

unified intervention. This is one project. The technical assistance provided by the ITS experts was

however, carefully designed to meet the overall project objective through a two-pronged approach,

that taken together would both remove legislative and administrative barriers to ESCO development

while simultaneously increasing the capacity of ESCO personnel to implement projects that would

flow more freely as a result of the removal of barriers. The removal of barriers without proper

capacity building and vice versa would have been unlikely to yield the desired results. What is needed

is a fully integrated concept which is well reflected in the specific objectives of the workshops, which

are to:

Increase the capacity of 30 energy professionals selected by the "Association of Energy

Service Companies of Armenia" ("ESCO Association") for developing and assessing EE and RES

projects;

Increase the number of bankable EE and RES projects through the capacity building of

engineers;

Present and discuss draft legal acts for secondary legislation and/or regulations to facilitate

the energy services market in Armenia;

Improve access to SE project financing.

The first workshop took place in Yerevan, Republic of Armenia on February 24 to 28, 2015 and the

second workshop on May 5 and 6, 2015. The beneficiary invited 30 participants for the first workshop

of whom 27 professionals were able to attend, composed of ESCO owner/directors, energy engineers,

energy managers, energy auditors, economists, and financial managers. At the end of the four-day

training seminar all participants received completion certificates.

1 This report covers the Workshops on SE Project Financing. The regulatory framework for Energy Services and Energy

Performance Contracting is covered by a separate report "Component II: Proposals for Secondary Legislation".

7

20 ESCOs/participants were invited to participate in the second workshop; 18 of them participated on

Day 1 and Day 2 sessions, and also received completion certificates. In keeping with the hands-on,

inter-active ethos of the workshops, participants were tasked with preparing four SE

homework/projects with the assistance of ITS experts. The results of these projects were presented,

evaluated and discussed at the workshop. The second day of the workshop was attended by Deputy

Minister Mr Hayk Harutyunyan of the Ministry Energy and Natural Resources, as well senior policy-

makers, energy regulators, and international project representatives of LFIs.

Figure 1 - Seminar participants together with ITS experts and the INOGATE Country coordinator after receiving their certificates, from the first workshop held in February 2015.

Figure 2–Participants of Second Workshop, May 2015.

These events successfully met the objective of improving access to finance for SE projects in Armenia

by training the energy professionals on financial feasibility analysis methodologies and approaches

during the first training seminar/workshop and by facilitating the dialogue between energy

professionals, policy makers, LFI and IFIs during the second workshop.

The SE projects presented by the participants attracted the serious interest of the financing

institutions, which strongly indicates that actual investments are expected as a direct result of the

event. Sections 2.4, 2.5 and 2.6 of this Report provide extensive details on the real and tangible

impacts of these events.

8

2.2 Preparation

2.2.1 Training need assessment

At the beginning of the assignment, a training need assessment (TNA) was carried out by ITS experts in

order to establish the baseline upon which the impact of the events would be measured.

The TNA included a Training Needs Assessment Questionnaire for candidates to identify the main

topics, preferable format and further details of the content of the first workshop. The questionnaire

included 17 questions about the workshop and teaching format, the topics and themes deemed to be

of highest priority and interest, workshop materials, presentations and exercises, and general

information about the background of the candidate, including her/his experience in SE-related

activities.

Participants were selected based on a Participant Selection Questionnaire to candidates, requesting

information about the candidate and her/his company, and including five individual and eleven

company-related scoring questions. ITS experts developed the Scoring Methodology to select the

workshop participants based on the information provided in the Participant Selection Questionnaire.

The results of the Training Needs Assessment and of the Candidate Selection are given in Appendix 6

and 7 of this Report respectively, and the Scoring Methodology is presented in Appendix 8.

2.2.2 Target audience

The Association of Energy Service Companies of Armenia and the Ministry of Energy and Natural

Resources of the Republic of Armenia work in close cooperation in the energy efficiency field. In this

respect, the Ministry recognises the need for the ESCO Association to improve the capacity of its

members in the preparation of potential SE investment projects in order to successfully obtain project

finance.

The target audience were members of the ESCO Association, as well as other stakeholders. Relevant

policy makers and representatives of IFIs and LFIs also participated at various stages of the events.

The ITS experts prepared a candidate evaluation/selection form which included five criteria for

individuals and eleven criteria for candidate companies. The invitation of the participants to the events

was based on their total scoring based on the criteria defined in the Participant Selection Questionnaire

(see Appendix 7).

2.2.3 Selection of Topics

The First Workshop

The seminars were designed and conducted in an interactive, hands-on workshop format where

participants effectively learned by doing. Following introductory lectures, the participants performed

actual case study exercises with the New ITS Project analysis spreadsheet tool. The use of this

spreadsheet tool in particular, was favourably commented on by many of the participants as a highly

effective means of transferring knowledge and know how (see evaluation section of this report).

9

Specifically, the seminars included three different activities:

• General lectures;

• Working group exercises;

• Team presentations, discussion and analysis of exercise assignments.

Lectures included an elaboration of case studies which, gradually increased in complexity as the

participants became more acquainted with the methodology and techniques demonstrated in these

studies. The case study lectures started on the first day with lighting energy conservation measures

(ECM) and were focused less on a technological approach and more on the analysis methodology. On

the second day, the case study lecture involved a comparison of different scenarios for a siphon turbine

with different turbine combinations. The final lecture studied transport ECM, with a combined EE and

RES project.

As will be shown in later sections of this Report, the seminar successfully achieved all intended

activities, including:

Training participants to apply life cycle cost analysis to develop EE/RES projects;

Developing the correct and most appropriate training material, including lecture slides and

workshop exercises;

Preparing and using of a training needs assessment questionnaire for each trainee in order to

establish an accurate baseline upon which impact of the events would be measured;

Assignment of relevant and appropriate homework assignments to participants in order to

improve the fundability of existing ESCO projects through using the skills acquired during the

training and with the aim evaluating the results during a second workshop.

The Second Workshop

The participants of the first workshop were assigned to develop SE homework/projects with the support

of the ITS experts. Four projects were presented and discussed during the workshop, with a particular

focus on the following:

The evaluation of projects from participants together with invited local banks;

Discussion and bankability assessment of the presented projects;

Discussion and identification of potential barriers to existing project financing;

Recommendations for a regulatory framework to stimulate the market for ESCOs and energy

services in Armenia.

Presentations and training material can be downloaded from the INOGATE web-portal using the

following link: http://www.inogate.org/activities/500?lang=en

2.2.4 The selection of trainers

The trainers were selected based on their sound practical knowledge and experience of energy audits,

energy management, SE financing and SE legal framework. Furthermore, the trainers also possessed

wide-ranging practical experience in establishing and implementing regulatory and investment policy

frameworks in relation to ESCOs.

http://www.inogate.org/activities/500?lang=en

10

2.3 Implementation

2.3.1 The event

The training included two workshops that took place in Yerevan on 24 - 28 February, 2015 and on 5 -6

May 2015.

The First Workshop, February 2015

Mr Hayk Harutyunyan, Deputy Minister of Energy and Natural Resources delivered a speech at the

opening session of the training workshop.

Figure 3 –Mr Hayk Harutyunyan, Deputy Minister of Energy and Natural Resources addressing the seminar participants.

The training workshop was effectively implemented: 27 of the 30 invited participants attended the

training sessions and received training completion certificates.

Figure 4 –The class of training workshop.

The lectures were provided in English or Russian, with consecutive interpretation. Also the exercises

(spreadsheet tools) were provided in both English and Russian.

11

All participants in the seminars received the training materials electronically, including the workshop

exercises and all spreadsheet tools that had been specifically designed and developed by the ITS

experts.

The participants were given a short evaluation form consisting of six questions before the lectures

started. The aim was to measure the level of general knowledge of the participants in the subject. This

exercise was repeated at the end of the training seminar to evaluate training results in terms of skills

and knowledge acquired in comparison to the baseline situation.

During the first day of the workshop the following lectures and exercises were delivered:

ЕЕ / RЕS project feasibility assessment through Life Cycle Cost analysis lecture;

Lending for EE/RES, Calculation of Project Feasibility Indicators lecture;

EE case study;

EE/RES exercises.

In the first half of the day the ITS expert Mr Vahan Babajanyan delivered two lectures to introduce ЕЕ /

RЕS project feasibility assessment through Life Cycle Cost analysis (LCCA). Financial indicators such as

NPV, IRR, SIR as well as Discount Rate, Analysis Period, SPB were all fully explained and discussed.

This was followed by a lecture on analysing an Energy Conservation Measure (ECM) case study by using

the LCCA discounted cash flow method. In the afternoon the participants were divided into four groups.

A separate financial feasibility exercise was assigned to each group. The exercises comprised of two EE

and two RES case studies. ITS experts explained the scenario for each individual exercise and provided

comprehensive explanations and assistance to each group for the assignments.

The workshop agenda for the second day included:

Presentations of the results of the EE and RES exercises by participant groups;

Discussion of the ECM, problems encountered, solutions applied and lessons learned;

RES lecture, financial comparison scenarios delivered on one and two siphon-type small hydro

turbine generator sets;

EE/RES exercises, pumps, pipe insulation, biogas and solar water heater.

The RES lecture analysed two different scenarios for siphon type hydro generator sets.

The agenda for the third day included:

Presentations of the EE/RES exercises by participant groups;

Discussion of the exercise assignment, results and recommendations;

Presentation on EE/RES Project Analysis Methodology;

Lecture on Sensitivity Analysis for EE/RES Projects;

Lecture on EE/RES Project Analysis: Cash flow management;

RES case study on transport system financial feasibility analysis.

12

Environmental problems, impact of EE and RES projects on the environment were discussed in depth.

Various transportation EE alternatives and possible results were discussed both during and after the

lectures.

The agenda for the fourth day included:

Presentations of the EE/RES exercises by participant groups;

Discussion of the exercise, results and recommendations;

Evaluation and discussion;

Ceremony for awarding Training Completion Certificates.

Mr Garik Gevorgyan, CEO of SEF International Universal Credit Organisation (SEF International UCO)

delivered a presentation on available funds and answered questions from workshop participants. SEF

International UCO is the beneficiary of the AM 103 workshop and is also founder of the Funder.am

portal.

The Task Leader of the USAID / FED Project Mr Ruben Gevorgyan, and INOGATE ITS Country Expert for

Armenia Mr Levon Vardanyan were present during the presentations.

The Second Workshop, May 2015

During the two-day workshop, four SE projects that had been prepared by the participants of the first

workshop, were evaluated by the participants and representatives of the invited local banks, in order to:

Assess the bankability of the presented projects;

Identify potential barriers to existing project financing; and

Discuss options and recommendations for a regulatory framework that will stimulate the

market for energy services and EPC in Armenia.

22 ESCOs/participants were invited to take part in the second AM90 Workshop, 18 of whom had

already participated in the Day 1 and Day 2 sessions, and received training completion certificates.

Day 1:

The workshop was opened by ITS expert Mr Vahan Babajanyan, followed by an introduction in the

event by Mr Alexander Antonenko, ITS SE Energy Policy Expert.

Four SE homework/projects were presented by ESCOs and discussed by the participants. The homework

projects were as follows:

Project #1: Residential heating system replacement, developed by Techno Eco LLC. Total project

investment cost: 65,000 EUR.

Project #2: Construction of a Small Hydro Power Plant (SHPP) which is being developed by Ecovill LLC.

Project cost: 1,850,000 EUR.

Project #3: Production of insulation material developed by Ecoperlit LLC (thermal insulation is an

important element in EE projects). Total project investment is cost: 1,100,000 EUR.

Project #4: Domestic hot water solar system developed by the Shtingen Solar Heating Solutions.

13

The ITS experts moderated the evaluation and round table discussions on the four projects presented

by the participants, and the top three evaluated projects were selected to be presented again on the

second day for consideration by the bankers and financing institutions in attendance.

Day 2:

On the second day, more stakeholders participated in roundtable discussions. Mr Hayk Harutyunyan,

Deputy Minister of Energy and Natural Resources attended the sessions and participated in the

discussions.

Seven LFIs were invited to participate in Day 2 session, of which six LFIs participated, namely:

ACBA Leasing LLC, Converse Bank, Armswiss Bank, Armbusiness Bank, Ardshin Bank and SEF

International UCO;

Four international project representatives participated in Day 2 session, including the

homework/project discussion: German-Armenian Fund (Financing by KFW), Habitat Armenia

(Financing by EU), Caucasus EE Programme and Green Energy Fund (financing by UNDP);

Policy makers and regulators who participated in Day 2 session represented: Ministry of Energy

and Natural Resources, R2E2 Fund and PSRC.

The workshop session was open by the speech of Mr. Hayk Harutyunyan, Deputy Minister of Energy and

Natural Resources. Mr Jian Bani, ITS Senior Energy Legal Expert delivered the presentation on proposals

for a regulatory framework and a draft legal act on the promotion of energy services in Armenia. This

was followed by roundtable discussions moderated by ITS experts.

The three projects selected from the previous session on Day 1 were presented to the bankers on Day 2.

The bankers showed great interest in the presented SE projects and agreed to start further negotiations

for financing these projects:

Project #1: Residential heating system replacement, developed by Techno Eco LLC; total project

investment cost: 65,000 EUR. During the session, two LFIs expressed their firm interest in providing

project financing, and requested the developer to start discussion for cooperation on the project.

Project #2: Construction of a Small Hydro Power Plant (SHPP) which is being developed by Ecovill LLC;

project cost: 1,850,000 EUR. During the session two LFIs expressed their firm interest in providing

project financing, and requested the developer to start discussion for cooperation on the project.

Project #3: Insulation material production developed by Ecoperlit LLC; total project investment cost:

1,100,000 EUR. During the session, one LFI expressed firm interest in this project and asked the

developer to provide more detailed information.

Day 2 ended with a debriefing and the award of training completion certificates to the participants who

attended both days.

As of April 2016, projects #1 and #2 are being successfully financed by the Converse Bank and a

private investor respectively. Project #3 is still at the stage of negotiation with potential investors.

14

2.3.2 Participants

The beneficiary invited 30 participants to attend the first workshop. The full list of participants is

presented in Appendix 1, while Figure 5 below illustrates the composition of the workshop according to

groups of participants.

Owner / Director 6 20%

Energy Engineer 6 20%

Energy Manager 4 13%

Energy Auditor 3 10%

Economist 5 17%

Financial manager 4 13%

Other 2 7%

Figure 5 – Composition of participants for the first training workshop.

2.4 Evaluation

2.4.1 Quantitative results

To try to achieve an objective evaluation of the training course content, ITS experts developed an

impact questionnaire for the first workshop held from February 24 to 28, 2015. The participants

anonymously completed the questionnaire at the end of the training event. The questionnaire included

an evaluation of the training topics and methods, performance of the trainers and the general

usefulness of the training. In order to verify and endorse the results of the questionnaire, the written

answers were then supplemented by a structured oral evaluation. Taken together, the evaluation

questionnaire and the oral evaluation constituted the basis for the impact assessment and provided a

high level of confidence in the accuracy of the impact results.

Experience has shown that the most effective way to evaluate the training results is by testing the

trainees both at the beginning and at the end of the capacity building event – in order to measure

impact in terms of skills, knowledge and know how acquired as a result of the events and in comparison

to the baseline situation. For this purpose, ITS experts developed a carefully designed test (Appendix 3).

The participants were given a brief evaluation form consisting of six fundamental questions concerning

the main training topics before the lectures. The aim was to measure the level of general knowledge of

the participants in the subject. The same questions and four more additional skill-related questions

based on the lectures were given to the participants at the end of the training workshop. The evaluation

of these results for the first six questions showed a significant and unambiguous progress.

Prior to the start of the course, the baseline assessment revealed that the participants were only

partially familiar with the main topics of the training course. The average score was 50% correct

answers. However, the post-event training test revealed marked improvements in the participants’ level

of knowledge. The average score rose to 91.36% correct answers (Figure 6) i.e. nearly double the pre-

event tests. Furthermore, the post-training test included four additional questions which required a

15

more in depth knowledge that could only have been acquired during the training workshop and utilising

the skills developed through familiarity with the spreadsheet tool developed by ITS experts. Figures 6

and Figure 7 are graphical representations of the results of the pre and post event training test results.

Figure 6 – Results for the 6 fundamental questions before and after the training seminar.

Figure 7 – Results for the individual questions before and

after the training seminar.

At the end of the workshop, participants were asked to complete an anonymous self-assessment

questionnaire requiring an evaluation of the quality of the workshop on a scale of 0 to 10 with 0 = worst

and 10 = best. The evaluation form is presented in Appendix 4.

This evaluation revealed that the highest scores were for the lectures, presentations and training

materials (95%) and this was followed by the experience of experts, help and guidance by experts and

translation.

The event organisation was also evaluated and the results are as below.

Venue 8.6

Meals 9.6

Technical equipment 9.0

Duration, schedule and format 7.7

2.4.2 Qualitative results

At the end of the workshop, the participants were asked to evaluate if the course topics were selected

correctly and accurately reflected their needs. The evaluation was based on 10 multi-choice questions

with different reply options.

In this evaluation, the participants’ responses indicated the following:

That the seminar was useful (81%).

That something new, interesting and relevant was learned (89%).

Lectures, presentations and training materials 9,5

Exercises, tasks, examples 9.1

Experience of experts 9.3

Help and guidance by experts 9.2

Quality of discussions 9.0

Translation 8.9

16

That the most relevant feature of the workshop was considered to be the evaluation of the

financial feasibility of projects (93%).

That EU experience in this area is applicable in the PCs but in the mid-term rather than the

immediate perspective (48%).

That the participants intended to go further in developing knowledge, know-how and skills in

this area (63%).

2.4.3 Feedback from beneficiary and participants

The official letter from the beneficiary (Appendix 5) is very positive on the impact of the workshops.

The questionnaire results showed some suggestions for possible improvement, which will be

incorporated in future ITS event planning. The main themes identified from the feedback included the

following:

A 2-day workshop was not long enough to discuss in detail all of the information that was

presented; the event should have been longer in order to make the most of the large volume

of information and materials presented;

The workshop could have provided more practical exercises with specific examples and

solutions for resolving problems encountered, which are similar to the actual situation in

Armenia (assuming a longer period available for the workshops).

In summary however, a significant majority of the participants indicated that the event was

professionally organised, and it was difficult for them to suggest other improvements. Evaluation

scores of the workshops’ organisation showed very high scores, from 9.4 to 10.0.

2.5 Conclusions and recommendations

The evaluation of the event showded conclusively and with a high degree of confidence that the ITS

team achieved the key objectives of the assignment, namely to provide the beneficiary staff with the

necessary skills, know-how and knowledge that will facilitate:

The further assessment and development of EE and RES projects as a result of the successful

capacity building of the 27 engineers selected by the ESCO association;

Direct attraction of 1.9 mln EUR in two SE projects and potential increase in the number of

bankable EE and RES projects as a result of the successful capacity building;

The development of draft legal acts for secondary legislation and/or regulations that will

unlock the energy services market in Armenia through the removal of market barriers and

constraints;

The improvement of access to SE project financing as a result of the combined benefits of the

above listed impacts.

In summary, the successful immediate impacts of the course are evidenced both through the baseline

evaluation and the very high self-assessment undertaken by the participants. The participants clearly

stated that they have improved their knowledge on issues relevant to their professional work and this

is confirmed by the baseline evaluation. The participants valued the experience and performance of

17

the trainers and appreciated the practical examples and exercises. The lesson learnt for the ITS is that

its strategy of combining theoretical presentations, practical examples and concrete tasks for the

participants is the correct one and is viewed as the optimal means of building capacity amongst the

beneficiaries in the PCs. The ITS is therefore, fully justified in basing future workshops on this proven

methodology.

2.6 Expected impact

As of April 2016, the short and mid-term assessment of the course’s impact revealed the following

results:

Project #1: Residential heating system replacement, developed by Techno Eco LLC; total

project investment cost: 65,000 EUR – the project is being financed by the Converse Bank;

Project #2: Construction of a Small Hydro Power Plant (SHPP) which is being developed by

Ecovill LLC; project cost: 1,850,000 EUR – the project is being financed by a private investor.

Project #3: Insulation material production developed by Ecoperlit LLC; total project

investment cost: 1,100,000 EUR – the project is still at the stage of negotiation with potential

investors.

The Ministry of Energy and Natural Resources used ITS recommendations for the

development of draft Regulation on the promotion of energy services in Armenia (see

Component II: Proposals for Secondary Legislation) that is currently under discussion with

interested stakeholders.

The long-term (24-60 month after the completion of the training) impact of the intervention is

expected to be a number of EE and RES projects that have been financed by local banks that received

IFI loans. Initially the beneficiary has predicted the following impacts in its application:

10-12 EE/RES of investment projects during next 5 years;

3-4.5 million EUR estimated new investment in sustainable energy projects developed by workshop participants.

In addition to the highly positive immediate impacts of this work as reflected in the evaluation

results and the bringing together EE and RES project developers and local banks and financial

institutions, the likely realisation of the beneficiary’s expected impacts would point to an

outstandingly successful result for this activity.

18

Appendices

Appendix 1 – List of participants

Yerevan, Republic of Armenia, February 24 -28, 2015

Nr. Name of participant Position

1 Andranik Stepanyan SASUNASAR LTD

2 Arpik Poghosyan Engineering Euros Ltd.

3 Haik Yesayan Engineering Euros Ltd.

4 Alina Torosyan Engineering Euros Ltd.

5 Sargis Baveyan MEP Consulting Engineers

6 Hayk Gabrielyan VINK Consulting

7 Hayk Shekyan Shtigen LLC

8 Samvel Karapetyan Caucasus Energy Efficiency Programme

9 Aram Zakaryan Scientific Research Institute of Energy

10 Edward Gevorgyan “Improving Energy Efficiency in Buildings”UNDP-GEF/00059937

Project

11 Tigran Sekoyan UNDP

12 Mikhail Martirosyan ESCO Association

13 Armen Kirakosyan Technocom Ltd.

14 Arthur Miroyan Artstrom OSC

15 Sarkis Grigoryan Termoservis Ltd.

16 Hakob Khachatryan Elektrashinarar Ltd.

17 Harutyun Ohanyan Lilanarm Ltd.

18 Hamlet Hakobyan Ecoperlit LLC

19 Vardan Hakobyan Esuen LLC

20 Sergey Abrahamyan R2E2 Fund

21 Levon Juharyan R2E2 Fund

22 Gagik Gasparyan Kingspan LLC

19

23 Tigran Parvanyan IFC

24 Levon Margaryan "Energatsantsnakhagits institut" CJSC

25 Robert Igityan "Energatsantsnakhagits institut" CJSC

26 Ruzanna Hakobyan Ministry of energy

27 Artur Tsugunyan UNDP / GEF

Yerevan, Republic of Armenia, May 5 -6, 2015

Nr. Name of participant Position

1 Hayk Gabrielyan VINK Consulting

2 Hayk Shekyan Shtigen LLC

3 Samvel Karapetyan Caucasus Energy Efficiency Programme

4 Hrant Gnuni Energy Strategy Center/ Scientific Research Institute of Energy

5 Aram Zakaryan Scientific Research Institute of Energy

6 Edward Gevorgyan Scientific Research Institute of Energy

7 Vahram Jalalyan “Improving Energy Efficiency in Buildings”UNDP-GEF/00059937

Project

8 Tigran Sekoyan UNDP

9 Arthur Tsughunyan UNDP

10 Arthur Miroyan Artstrom OSC

11 Armen Miroyan Artstrom OSC

12 Arsen Grigoryan Termoservis Ltd.

13 Hamlet Hakobyan Ecoperlit LLC

14 Levon Juharyan Renewable Energy and Energy Saving Foundation (R2E2)

15 Mariam Burnachyan Renewable Energy and Energy Saving Foundation (R2E2)

16 Tigran Okhanyan “Ecoville” LLC/ “Ost-el” LLC

17 Mikhail Martirosyan ESCO Association

18 Hakob Khachatryan Elektrashinarar

19 Luiza Vardanyan Habitat for Humanity

20 Varsenik Khloyan Habitat for Humanity

21 Andre Ohanian Habitat for Humanity

20

Appendix 2 – Agenda

AHEF AM.090 WORKSHOP: “Industrial Energy Audit Analysis for Bankable Projects”

Fist Mission

Training provided by INOGATE Technical Secretariat EU funded project

AGENDA ESCO Association, Armenia

Day 1 Tuesday, February 24, 2015

9:00 9:25 Opening: Introductions & briefing

Wolfgang Lutz, Key Expert for Sustainable Energy, INOGATE New ITS Project

Hayk Harutyunyan, Deputy Minister of Energy and Natural Resources

9:25 9:45 Presentation: "INOGATE New TS Project"


9:45 10:00 Detailed presentation of objective of the training

Vahan Babajanyan, Banking & Financial Expert, INOGATE New ITS Project

10:00 10:40 Lecture: "ЕЕ / RЕС project feasibility assessment through Life Cycle Cost analysis"

Vahan Babajanyan, banking & financial expert, INOGATE New ITS Project

10:40 11:00 Lecture: “Examples of Lending for EE/RES, Calculation of Project Feasibility Indicators”

Vahan Babajanyan, banking & financial expert, INOGATE New ITS Project

11:00 11:20 Coffee break

11:20 12:30 Lecture: "ЕЕ Analysis Example"

Ali Korakan, Senior Energy Audit Capacity Building Expert

12:30 12:40 Group exercises presentation: "LCC project feasibility analysis in 10 steps"


12:40 16:00 Group work on exercises: "LCC project feasibility analysis in 10 steps"

End of Day 1

Yerevan Physics Institute 2 A. Alikhanian Brothers Street, 0036, Yerevan, Armenia

21


Fist Mission



Day 2 Wednesday, February 25, 2015

9:10 9:40 Group 1 presentation (10 min) and discussion (15 min): "Project #1" (Biogas)

Group 1 leader

9:40 10:10 Group 2 presentation (10 min) and discussion (15 min): "Project #2" (Lighting)

Group 2 leader

10:10 10:40 Group 3 presentation (10 min) and discussion (15 min): "Project #3" (Pumping systems)

Group 3 leader

10:40 11:10 Group 4 presentation (10 min) and discussion (15 min): "Project #4" (Pipeline)

Group 4 leader


11:30 12:30 Lecture: "RES Analysis Example"


12:30 12:40 Group exercises presentation: "LCC project feasibility analysis in 10 steps"


12:40 16:00 Group work on exercises: "LCC project feasibility analysis in 10 steps"

End of Day 2


22


Fist Mission Training provided by INOGATE Technical Secretariat

EU funded project


Day 3 Thursday, February 26, 2015

9:10 9:40 Group 1 presentation (10 min) and discussion (15 min): "Project #1" (Biogas)

Group 1 leader

9:40 10:10 Group 2 presentation (10 min) and discussion (15 min): "Project #2" (Lighting)

Group 2 leader

10:10 10:40 Group 3 presentation (10 min) and discussion (15 min): "Project #3" (Pumping systems)

Group 3 leader

10:40 11:10 Group 4 presentation (10 min) and discussion (15 min): "Project #4" (Pipeline)

Group 4 leader


11:30 12:00 Presentation: "EE/RES Project Analysis Methodology"


12:00 12:20 Lecture: Sensitivity Analysis for EE/RES Projects


12:20 12:50 Presentation: "EE/RES Project Analysis: Cash flow management"


12:50 13:40 Lecture: "EE / RES Analysis Example"


13:40 16:00 Questions and answers

End of Day 3


23


Fist Mission



Day 4 Friday, February 27, 2015

9:10 9:40 Presentation: "EE/RES Business in Armenia


9:40 10:10 Presentation: "EE/RES Project Financing"


10:10 11:10 Review of whether objectives of training have been met


11:30 12:10 Closing: Debriefing, presentation of certificates


12:10 16:00 Special session: "Train the trainers (TTT)"




End of Day 4


24



AGENDA

Second Mission

May 5-6, 2015, Hotel National Armenia 4 / 3 Amiryan Str., Yerevan, 0010, Armenia

ESCO Association, Armenia

Day 1 Tuesday, May 05, 2015

9:30 9:45 Opening: Introduction & briefing on objectives of the workshop

Wolfgang Lutz, Key Expert Sustainable Energy, INOGATE New ITS Project

9:45 11:00 Short presentation of projects from participants and evaluation

(3 projects, 25 minutes each)


Vahan Babajanyan, Banking and Financial Expert


11:30 12:45 Short presentation of projects from participants and evaluation

(3 projects, 25 minutes each)


Vahan Babajanyan, Banking and Financial Expert

12:45 16:00 Round table / Selection of projects to be presented to Bankers

Discussion and identification of topics to be discussed with Bankers

End of Day 1

25


AGENDA

Second Mission

May 5-6, 2015, Hotel National Armenia 4 / 3 Amiryan Str., Yerevan, 0010, Armenia

ESCO Association, Armenia

Day 2 Wednesday, May 06, 2015

9:30 10:00 Presentation (10 min) and discussion (20 min): "Project #1"

ESCO / Participant #1






11:30 12:00 Round table: Discussion and bankability assessment of presented projects

Format: ESCO (Host) and LFI (IFI) - moderated by Vahan Babajanyan, Banking and Financial Expert

12:00 13:00 Round table: Discussion and identification of potential barriers to existing project financing

Format: Bankers, ESCOs, IFIs, Investors - moderated by Jian Bani, Senior Energy Legal Expert

13:00 14:00 Recommendations for a regulatory framework to stimulate the market for ESCOs and

energy services in Armenia

Jian Bani, Senior Energy Legal Expert

14:00 15:00 Evaluation of the training workshop

Discussion with the participants and the beneficiary whether the objectives of the training have been met

15:00 16:00 Closing: Debriefing, presentation of certificates

Wolfgang Lutz, Key Expert Sustainable Energy, INOGATE New ITS Project

End of Day 2

26

Appendix 3 – Test

"INOGATE Technical Secretariat & Integrated Programme in support of the Baku Initiative and the Eastern Partnership energy objectives"

Project

Workshop: AHEF AM.090: “Industrial Energy Audit Analysis For Bankable Projects ”, February 24 - February 27, 2015, Yerevan, Armenia

Семинар: AHEF AM.090: Industrial Energy Audit Analysis For Bankable Projects ” Февраль 24 - Февраль 27, 2015, Ереван, Армения

Test / Oпрос

1. In an Energy Conservation Measure (ECM) feasibility analysis, if the discount rate is

doubled what is the impact on IRR? / В анализе осуществимости

Энергосберегающего Мероприятия (ЭСМ), какое влияние имеет двойной рост

дисконтной ставки?

a. IRR also doubles / Внутрення норма прибыли также взрастает в два раза.

b. IRR drops to half / Внутрення норма прибыли уменьшаеться вдвое.

c. It has no effect on the IRR / Не влияет.

d. We cannot predict without calculating / Мы не можем предсказать без расчетов.

2. In an ECM feasibility analysis, if the discount rate is doubled what is the impact on SIR?

В анализе осуществимости ЭСМ какое влияние имеет двойной рост дисконтной

ставки на соотношение экономии к инвестициям?

a. SIR also doubles / Данное соотношение также возрастает в два раза.

b. SIR drops to half / Данное соотношение уменьшается в два раза.

c. It has no effect on the SIR / Не влияет.

d. We cannot predict without calculating / Мы не можем предсказать без расчетов.

3. In an ECM feasibility analysis, under which circumstances do we use a 3 year average

of the tariffs? При анализе осуществимости ЭСМ в каких условиях мы используем

средние за 3 года значения тарифа?

a. In economies with high inflation rate / В странах с высокой инфляцием.

b. Steady tariff rates / При стабильно возрастающих тарифах.

c. Bouncing tariff rates / При тарифах, которые то повышаются, то понижаются.

d. Never / Никогда.

4. In an ECM feasibility analysis, SPB is useful / Для анализа осуществимости ЭСМ

простой период окупаемости используется:

a. In economies with high inflation rate / В странах с высокой инфляцией.

b. For short-term projects (a year or two) / Для краткосрочных проектов (один-два

года).

c. Always / Всегда.


27

5. When do we make assumptions? / Когда мы используем предположения?

a. In stable economies with low and stable inflation rate / В странах с низкой и

медленно возрастающей инфляцией.

b. When we have no other means to acquire measured data / Если мы не имеем

возможности получить измеренные данные.

c. When we get correct information from the operating staff / Если получаем

правильную информацию от персонала предприятия.


6. Define the priority of repayment of interest and principal of subordinated loans in the

cash flow cascade. Укажите приоритет выплат по кредиту и процентам в отчете

движения денежных потоков:

a. Before payment of operation and maintenance cost / До выплат по

эксплуатационным и ремонтным работам.

b. Before payment of dividends / До выплаты дивидентов.

c. Before payment of interest and principal of Senior Investor / До выплат по основной

сумме долга и процентам основному инвестору.

d. Makes no difference / Не имеет разницы.

7. Semiannual recurrent cost higher than 20% of the initial investment are calculated as /

Полугодичные повторящиеся затраты выше 20% от начальной инвестиции

рассматриваются

a. O&M costs / как расходы на эксплуатацию и ремонт.

b. Reinvestment cost / как затраты на реинвестиции.

c. All of the above / как вышеуказанные затраты.

d. None of the above / ни как.

8. How do incentives, grants and subsidies effect the feasibility of ECMs? / Как

государствення поддержка, гранты и субсидии влияют на осуществимость ЭСМ?

a. They are counted as negative investment / Они рассматриваются как негативные

инвестиции.

b. They are counted as negative O&M costs / Они рассматриваются как негативные

расходы на эксплуатацию и ремонт.

c. Have no effect on the ECM feasibility / Не имеет никакого эффекта на

осуществимость.

d. They reduce the re-investments so SPB does not change / они уменьшают

реинвсетиции и простой срок окупаемости не изменяется.

9. Using the spread sheet compare the two ECMs below and decide which project to

finance. / Используя таблицы “EXCEL”, сравните два нижеприведенных ЭСМ и

определите, какое энергосберегающее мероприятие финансировать.

a. Calculate NPV, SIR, and IRR for changing 68 windows 230 EURs each including

installation. After the installation the energy cost of 14,230 EURs will go down by 20%.

The discount rate is 10% and the project life is 10 years. / Подсчитать текущую

приведенную стоимость, соотношение экономии к инвестициям и внутреннюю

норму прибыли замены 68 окон (230 евро каждое с установкой). После установки

28

новых окон энергозатраты (14230 евро) сократяться на 20%. Дисконтная ставка –

10%, срок жизни проекта – 10 лет.

b. Calculate NPV,SIR, and IRR for changing a boiler. The installed cost of the boiler is

27,630 EURs. After the installation the energy cost of 14,230 EURs will go down by

40%. The discount rate is 10% and the project life is 10 years. / Подсчитать

текущую приведенную стоимость, соотношение экономии к инвестициям и

внутреннюю норму прибыли замены котла (27 630 евро с установкой). После

установки нового котла энергозатраты (14230 евро) сократяться на 40%.

Дисконтная ставка – 10%, срок жизни проекта – 10 лет.

10. Identify the financial indicators of the project and formulate the credit conditions or

reasons for rejection / Определите финансовые индикаторы проекта и

cформулируйте условия кредитования или причины отказа.

An organization applied to your Bank for a loan worth of 420 000 Euros to renovate the

equipment. The life cycle of the equipment is 10 years. As a result, the enterprise will

be able to generate the additional income listed in the table below. The current annual

net cash flow is 14600 Euros. The proposed interest rate is 12%. / Организация

обратилась в Банк за кредитом в EUR420,000, с целью обновления

производства. Срок службы приобретаемого оборудования 10 лет. В результате

реализации данного мероприятия, предприятие сможет дополнительно

генерировать ежегодно приведенные ниже в таблице суммы. Текущие

ежегодные чистые финансовые потоки предприятия EUR14,600.

Предполагаемая ставка финансирования - 12% годовых.

Year /

Год 1

Year /

Год 2

Year /

Год 3

Year /

Год 4

Year /

Год 5

Year /

Год 6

Year /

Год 7

Year /

Год 8

Year /

Год 9

Year /

Год 10

69,200

70,800

67,300

60,600

82,300

89,200

91,100

96,300

88,500

94,200

29

Appendix 4 – Evaluation form – Participant Questionnaire

AHEF АМ.090: “Industrial Energy Audit Analysis for Bankable Projects” Workshop

February 24-27, 2015, Yerevan, Armenia

FINAL EVALUATION

27 Number of participants interviewed %

1

22 Yes 22 81%

1 No 1 4%

4 More or less 4 15%

2

24 Learned something new and interesting 24 89%

22 Learned the experience of the EU countries 22 81%

18 Refreshed the knowledge 18 67%

3 Provided management's task 3 11%

15 Met with colleagues 15 56%

3

25 Evaluation of financial feasibility of projects 25 93%

22 Feasibility in investments and introduction to case studies 22 81%

18 New and important information 18 67%

20 Importance of practical skills and discussions 20 74%

17 Financial calculations 17 63%

16 Skills to find alternative solutions 16 59%

19 International experience 19 70%

4

10 Yes 10 37%

13 Yes, but in the mid-term perspective 13 48%

4 Not sure 4 15%

5

22 Yes 22 81%

2 Not sure 2 7%

3 Already used 3 11%

Most relevant features of the workshop were

Was the seminar useful?

Benefits

Is EU experience in this area applicable in your country?

"INOGATE Technical Secretariat & Integrated Programme in support of the

Baku Initiative and the Eastern Partnership energy objectives" Project

Would you recommend including this topic in your Bank /

30

6

5 Individual work 5 19%

5 Lectures 5 19%

7 Discussions of results and problems 7 26%

8 Group work and presentations 8 30%

2 Tests 2 7%

7

21 Yes 21 78%

4 Probably 4 15%

2 Not sure 2 7%

8

9Creating a template / standard approach for evaluating

prospective projects9 33%

5 Working with and training other employees 5 19%

8 Convincing investors and clients 8 30%

5 Developing a risk management system 5 19%

9

17 Yes 17 63%

5 Probably 5 19%

4 Not sure 4 15%

10

6 No improvement necessary 6 22%

2 Longer seminars 2 7%

6 Shorter seminars 6 22%

4 More practical exercises 4 15%

9 More focus on other financial / investment solutions 9 33%

11

232 Venue 86%

258 Meals 96%

244 Technical equipment 90%

209 Duration, schedule and format 77%

B. Training

257 Lectures, presentations and training materials 95%

247 Exercises, tasks, examples 91%

252 Experience of experts 93%

249 Help and guidance by experts 92%

242 Quality of discussions 90%

239 Translation 89%

What was the most interesting seminar activity?

Workshop Quality (scale: 0 = worst, 10 = best)

A. Event organisation

Do you intend to continue learning this topic?

Suggested improvements

Will you apply the new knowledge to your work in the

How will you use the new skills in the future?

31

Appendix 5 – Training Needs Assessment

"INOGATE Technical Secretariat & Integrated Programme in

support of the Baku Initiative and the Eastern Partnership energy

objectives" Project

AHEF АМ.090: “Industrial Energy Audit Analysis for Bankable Projects”

Workshop


TRAINING NEEDS ASSESSMENT SPREADSHEET FOR PARTICIPANTS

SELECTEDTOTAL SHARE

1. Background 45

a. Technical 22 48.89%

b. Financial 11 24.44%

c. Other 12 26.67%

2. Reasons for attending the workshop? 91

a. To learn something new and interesting 26 28.57%

b. To learn the experience of the EU countries 23 25.27%

c. To refresh the knowledge 20 21.98%

d. My management sent me to attend 7 7.69%

e. To meet with colleagues 15 16.48%

3. What do you think this workshop is about ? 104

a. How to implement an energy audit 18 17.31%

b. How to present energy audit data to potential lenders 26 25.00%

c. Types of Energy Efficiency measures 22 21.15%

d. Finance with regard to the EE measures 14 13.46%

e. How to write a business plan for funding 24 23.08%

4. Your choice of the most important topic for the workshop? 79

a. Requirements of the banks, lending Institutions to a potential borrower 17 21.52%

b. General crediting terms and conditions of the local banks 26 32.91%

c. The features of a successful Bankable Project 22 27.85%

d. Relations with banks during the loan period 14 17.72%

5. Evaluate own knowledge, skills and experience in this field? 30

a. Beginner 5 16.67%

b. Intermediate 14 46.67%

c. Advanced 11 36.67%

6. What professional competence level do you expect to achiever? 30

a. Basic level 3 10.00%

b. Intermediate level 11 36.67%

c. Advanced level 16 53.33%

7. Do you expect to gain deeper knowledge in: 55

a. A field familiar to you 14 25.45%

b. A sphere new to you 17 30.91%

c. Both 24 43.64%

32

8. You are more interested to learn about: 88

a. Local experience 9 10.23%

b. European experience 26 29.55%

c. International experience 24 27.27%

d. All of the above 29 32.95%

9. What kind of visual aids are helpful to your learning? 108

a. Video 11 10.19%

b. Pictures 12 11.11%

c. Graphs 19 17.59%

d. Power Point Presentation 23 21.30%

e. Handouts 28 25.93%

f. Manual 15 13.89%

10. What is your preferred language for conducting a workshop? 53

a. Armenian 19 35.85%

b. Russian 23 43.40%

c. English 11 20.75%

d. Other 0 0.00%

11. What type of interpretation do you prefer? 45

a. Simultaneous interpretation 19 42.22%

b. Consecutive translation 24 53.33%

c. Don’t need translation 2 4.44%

12. What is your preferred learning format during the workshop? 152

a. Lecture 18 11.84%

b. Group exercises 22 14.47%

c. Discussions 23 15.13%

d. Interactive (role-plays) games 19 12.50%

e. Presentations 24 15.79%

f. Videos 13 8.55%

g. Case studies 18 11.84%

h. Test 15 9.87%

13. Would you like to receive training materials? 30

a. Yes 30 100.00%

b. No 0 0.00%

14. What kind of training materials would you like to receive? 92

a. Handouts 27 50.94%

b. Guide 22 41.51%

c. Digital presentations 24 45.28%

d. Textbooks 19 35.85%

15. Do you need a Certificate of completion of the workshop? 30

a. Yes 30 100.00%

b. No 0 0.00%

16. Position / Status 30

a. Owner / Director 6 20.00%

b. Energy Engineer 6 20.00%

c. Energy Manager 4 13.33%

d. Energy Auditor 3 10.00%

e. Economist 5 16.67%

f. Financial manager 4 13.33%

g. Other 2 6.67%

33

Appendix 6 – Candidacy Evaluation / Selection List Sheet

Q 1 Q 2 Q 3 Q 4 Q 5 Q 1 Q 2 Q 3 Q 4 Q 5 Q 6 Q 7 Q 8 Q 9 Q 10 Q 11

1 Andranik Stepanyan ,,SASUNASAR,, LTD 7 8 6 7 5 33 6 8 6 6 8 7 10 8 8 10 6 83 116 Invited

2 Arpik Poghosyan Engineering Euros Ltd. 6 7 5 6 5 29 6 10 5 8 7 8 9 10 5 8 6 82 111 Invited

3 Haik Yesayan Engineering Euros Ltd. 7 8 6 6 5 32 7 8 6 5 5 7 8 8 6 5 8 73 105 Invited

4 Alina Torosyan Engineering Euros Ltd. 6 7 8 6 6 33 6 8 9 6 6 6 8 8 9 6 7 79 112 Invited

5 Tatevik Aghasaryan Engineering Euros Ltd. 6 8 5 6 5 30 7 6 5 7 7 5 8 6 5 7 8 71 101 Invited

6 Sargis Baveyan MEP Consulting Engineers 7 8 6 7 7 35 6 9 7 8 8 10 7 9 7 8 8 87 122 Invited

7 Hayk Gabrielyan VINK Consulting 6 8 6 5 7 32 6 5 6 8 7 7 8 5 6 8 8 74 106 Invited

8 Hayk Shekyan Shtigen Llc 6 8 6 6 5 31 7 10 5 8 6 8 8 10 5 8 6 81 112 Invited

9 Roffi Petrossian CEWP, USAID 5 7 6 7 7 32 6 7 5 7 7 8 8 7 10 7 9 81 113 Invited

10 Samvel Karapetyan Caucasus EE Programme 7 8 6 8 8 37 6 9 7 7 8 8 6 8 7 8 6 80 117 Invited

11 Hrant Gnuni Research Institute of Energy 7 7 7 8 5 34 5 6 8 9 10 5 8 6 10 5 8 80 114 Invited

12 Aram Zakaryan Research Institute of Energy 5 6 5 8 6 30 7 7 7 8 8 6 5 8 8 6 5 75 105 Invited

13 Edward Gevorgyan Research Institute of Energy 7 7 6 7 6 33 7 6 6 8 8 9 10 7 8 9 10 88 121 Invited

14 Tigran Sekoyan UNDP / GEF 8 6 7 8 6 35 5 6 8 8 6 5 7 8 6 5 7 71 106 Invited

15 Mikhail Martirosyan Technoeko Ltd. 9 6 9 6 10 40 7 9 10 7 9 7 8 8 9 7 8 89 129 Invited

16 Armen Kirakosyan Technocom Ltd. 7 6 6 6 7 32 6 5 7 8 5 6 8 8 5 6 8 72 104 Invited

17 Arthur Miroyan Artstrom CSC 5 6 6 6 5 28 6 7 8 8 10 5 8 6 10 5 8 81 109 Invited

18 Sarkis Grigoryan Termoservis Ltd. 7 7 6 6 6 32 7 6 8 8 7 10 6 7 7 7 8 81 113 Invited

19 Hakob Khachatryan Elektrashinarar Ltd. 7 5 7 7 7 33 8 5 8 6 8 7 7 6 6 8 8 77 110 Invited

20 Harutyun Ohanyan Lilanarm Ltd. 5 8 5 5 8 31 5 10 7 9 8 7 5 7 7 8 8 81 112 Invited

21 Hamlet Hakobyan Ecoperlit LLC 7 8 6 7 7 35 7 7 8 6 8 8 7 10 8 8 6 83 118 Invited

22 Vardan Hakobyan Esuen LLC 8 8 6 9 6 37 7 7 6 6 8 6 8 9 10 5 8 80 117 Invited

23 Sergey Abrahamyan R2E2 Fund 5 8 8 8 7 36 5 8 6 8 6 6 7 8 8 6 5 73 109 Invited

24 Levon Juharyan R2E2 Fund 7 6 6 8 6 33 7 6 6 7 6 6 6 8 8 9 10 79 112 Invited

25 Gagik Gasparyan Kingspan LLC 8 6 6 8 8 36 8 6 7 5 7 7 5 8 6 5 7 71 107 Invited

26 Tigran Parvanyan IFC 9 9 7 8 8 41 8 9 9 7 10 8 10 7 6 6 8 88 129 Invited

27 Levon Margaryan "Energatsantsnakhagits institut" CJSC 7 5 5 6 6 29 6 6 7 8 8 10 7 8 7 5 8 80 109 Invited

28 Robert Igityan "Energatsantsnakhagits institut" CJSC 8 8 6 6 7 35 5 7 6 8 8 7 10 7 8 10 7 83 118 Invited

29 Ruzanna Hakobyan Minisry of energy 5 8 7 7 5 32 7 1 5 8 6 8 7 8 7 7 8 72 104 Invited

30 Artur Tsugunyan UNDP / GEF 7 8 6 7 8 36 7 1 10 7 9 8 7 6 7 10 7 79 115 Invited

31 Yeghishe Gevorgyan Gevorgyan & Nersisyan Ltd. 7 6 5 7 5 30 7 8 6 5 5 8 6 6 6 7 7 71 101 Rejected

32 Vardan Mirzoyan Harsnazor Ltd. 6 6 6 7 5 30 7 5 5 6 5 7 6 7 7 5 6 66 96 Rejected

33 Andranik Sargsyan Interenergy Ltd 7 7 6 6 6 32 5 6 5 8 6 8 6 8 5 5 7 69 101 Rejected

34 Gyulnara Poghosyan Engineering Euros Ltd. 5 5 7 5 7 29 7 7 6 7 6 7 7 5 5 5 6 68 97 Rejected

35 Arman Hovhannisyan Arbak and Sons Ltd 5 5 6 6 5 27 4 6 7 8 6 6 5 8 6 6 6 68 95 Rejected

36 Artak Grigoryan Termoservice Ltd 6 7 6 5 6 30 7 6 5 6 8 8 7 5 5 7 6 70 100 Rejected

37 Vardan Khudoyan Jerm shin Ltd 5 5 7 6 4 27 7 6 6 6 8 6 5 4 6 5 6 65 92 Rejected

38 Tigran Davtyan Anergo 2 Ltd 7 6 8 6 5 32 5 6 6 7 5 6 6 6 8 7 6 68 100 Rejected

39 Ashot Sargsyan Termoservice Ltd 5 6 6 5 6 28 7 5 6 5 7 6 7 7 6 7 5 68 96 Rejected

40 Sargis Pusharyan Hazarashen IE 4 5 6 7 5 27 4 5 6 5 5 6 8 5 6 6 6 62 89 Rejected

41 Rafik Khachatryan Hartutyun Ltd 6 5 5 6 5 27 9 9 7 4 7 7 5 5 6 4 5 68 95 Rejected

42 Gagik Tovmasyan Diliamak Ltd. 6 6 7 7 6 32 7 5 5 6 6 5 4 6 4 5 7 60 92 Rejected

#

"INOGATE Technical Secretariat & Integrated Programme in support of the Baku Initiative and the Eastern

Partnership energy objectives" Project

AHEF АМ.090: “Industrial Energy Audit Analysis for Bankable Projects” Workshop


INDIVIDUAL SCORING

TOTAL

COMPANY SCORING

CANDIDACY EVALUATION / SELECTION LIST SHEET

TOTAL TOTAL STATUSCOMPANY / ORGANIZATIONNAME

34

Appendix 7 – Participant Selection Scoring methodology

Description of the Scoring Methodology

for the selection of participants for the “Industrial Energy Audit Analysis for Bankable Projects”

workshop within the “INOGATE Technical Secretariat & Integrated Programme in support of the

Baku Initiative and the Eastern Partnership energy objectives” Project

The scoring method for selection of the workshop participants is based on the checklist answers

weighing approach and is aimed to generate a draft short list of participants from the large pool, for

further approval.

According to this method the respondents (potential participants) answer all the questions of the

questionnaire, developed specifically with purpose of identifying the best eligible candidates whose

participation in the workshop will be efficient and most beneficial both in terms of developing

knowledge and skills and contributing to the workshop by sharing/exchanging their own experience,

as well as contributing to the setting for promoting networking with other participants. Diversity in

gender and background will be considered as supplementary selection criteria.

It is internally agreed that each of the questions of the questionnaire is granted a certain value on the

scale from 1 to maximum 10, depending on the priority and degree of importance of the question for

the screening process. For example, a Question on “Years of experience in the field” is highly

important as a criteria for screening of potential participants, therefore its max value is 10 (on the

scale of 1-10), while the Question on “Geographical location of organization” is less important,

therefore it is scaled 1 to 5, where 5 is the max score. Following this principle, the answers are scored

and the results are compared horizontally with those of other respondents. Then, the Total scores

(value sum for all the answers) of every candidate are compared in order to identify the best

“qualified” (the first 25 respondents with comparably high total scores) candidate suitable to

participate in the workshop. Between two candidates, although the Total score might be higher, but

the respondent who received the higher score for the profiling priority questions will be selected.

The table below presents scoring system for each respondent, based on responses to the qualitative

questions. The descriptive/informative questions are Italicized in this table and do not have a scoring

value. The questions in the Questionnaire are differentiated into three types: “General” (with

subsections on General Individual and General Company Related Information), “Individual Scoring

Information” and “Company Related Scoring Information”.

The Questionnaire consists of total 26 questions, of which 16 are qualitative scoring questions. The

Total maximum score for all the qualitative Questions constitutes 131 points.

If a respondent reaches at least 51% of it, i.e. 67 points, then he/she is successfully admitted for

participation in the workshop.

35

Appendix 8 – Scoring methodology

Scoring table for each respondent: Name, Last name ____________________________________

N Question Answer A Answer B Answer C Answer D Scoring scale

Grade points

INDIVIDUAL QUESTIONS

1. Name & Last name

2. Contact information

3. Education

4. Your Position

5. Your vision of the problems in the field

6. Reasons for attending the workshop

7. Your activities after the workshop

8. Formal professional education in this field

Yes 5

No 1

1-5

9. Professional Experience in this field Yes 10

No 1

1-10

10. Your work experience duration in this field

1 to 5 years 5

5 to 10 years 8

More than 10 yrs 10

1-10

11. Number of projects you have personally participated in

Less than 5 5

5 to 10 8

More than 10 10

1-10

12. Personal experience of participation at International projects

Yes 7

No 1

1-7

COMPANY RELATED QUESTIONS

13. Company title

14. Sustainable energy business profile

15. Company’s plans for future

16. Staff type Fix 8

Temporary 1

Combination of both 5

1-8

17. Staff size Up to 5 empl1 5 to 15 empl. 5

15 to 40 empl. 8

More than 40 empl.

1-8

18. Location Yerevan 1

Region 3

Borderline zone 5

1-5

19. Licenses Yes 10

No 3

No need 1

1-10

20. Production facility Own 5

Rented 1

Outsourcing 3

Other 1-5

21. How long your company operates in this field

1 to 5 years 1

5 to 10 years 5

More than 10 years 8

1-8

22. Number (and amount) of projects implemented up to date

Less than 5 1

5 to 10 8

More than 10 10

1-10

23. Current projects’ portfolio (and its value)

Less than 5 1

5 to 10 8

More than 10 10

1-10

24. Company’s experience of participation at International projects

Yes 8

No 1

1-8

25. Company’s experience of working with banks and financial institutions

Yes 10

No 1

1-10

26. Credits experience No 1

Current credits 5

Past credits completed 7

1-7

16-131 TOTAL XX out of 131

Date post:	15-Mar-2020
Category:	Documents
Upload:	others
View:	4 times
Download:	0 times

Capacity Building: Industrial Energy Audit Analysis for ... · Capacity Building: Industrial Energy...

Documents