1. State Performance-Based Environmental Leadership Programs: Trends, Models, and Results Angela Vitulli Industrial Economics, Incorporated (IEc) National Environmental Partnership Summit 9 May 2006

2.  What is a “performance-based environmental leadership program?”  Half of states have an active or developing program.  State programs change frequently.  More states are integrating performance measurement into programs to demonstrate results. The Growth and Evolution of State Programs

3. Programs Across States

4.  Some states concentrate efforts on “on-ramp” programs to encourage EMS development and sustained compliance. States Vary in Targeting Participants  Many state programs have multiple tiers to accommodate facilities at different performance levels. Laggards Leaders Compliance On-Ramp Tier Leadership Tier

5.  Colorado ELP  Kentucky EXCEL  Virginia VEEP Programs Represented Today

6.  State budget pressures have created resources pressures for “innovative” programs.  General trend toward outcome-oriented measurement of government programs.  Quantifying environmental performance is key to demonstrating program benefits and highlighting how leadership programs contribute to media program goals. Quantifying Members’ Superior Environmental Performance is Increasingly Important

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

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