National Solar Schools Program
Evaluation Report
November 2013
grosvenor management consulting
a level 7 15 london circuit canberra act 2601 t (02) 6274 9200 abn 47 105 237 590
e grosvenor@grosvenor.com.au
w grosvenor.com.au
Table of contents
Table of figures ............................................................................................................. 5
Table of tables ............................................................................................................... 7
List of abbreviations ...................................................................................................... 8
1
2
3
4
Executive Summary............................................................................................ 9
1.1
Introduction .............................................................................................. 9
1.2
Input and design .................................................................................... 11
1.3
Process and implementation ................................................................ 12
1.4
Achievements against the NSSP objectives (impacts and outcomes)
13
1.5
Value for money .................................................................................... 17
1.6
Sustainability .......................................................................................... 18
1.7
Implications for the future ................................................................... 19
1.8
Recommendations ................................................................................. 20
Introduction ....................................................................................................... 21
2.1
Background............................................................................................. 21
2.2
Scope and objectives .............................................................................. 22
2.3
The National Solar Schools Program .................................................. 23
Approach and method ..................................................................................... 29
3.1
Evaluation resources ............................................................................. 29
3.2
Evaluation limitations ........................................................................... 30
Structure of the evaluation report .................................................................. 32
PART A – Input & Design ........................................................................................ 33
5
Funding Approach ........................................................................................... 33
Department of Resources Energy and Tourism
grosvenor management consulting
2
5.1
Conclusions - funding approach ......................................................... 38
PART B – Process & Implementation ..................................................................... 39
6
7
NSSP implementation ...................................................................................... 39
6.1
Roles and responsibilities of the NPA ................................................ 45
6.2
Conclusions – NSSP implementation ................................................. 46
Performance against milestones ..................................................................... 47
7.1
Performance milestones ........................................................................ 47
7.2
Performance against each milestone ................................................... 48
7.3
Delays and challenges in completing projects .................................. 50
7.4
Conclusions – performance against milestones ................................ 52
PART C – Impacts & Outcomes ............................................................................... 53
8
Achievement of NSSP objectives .................................................................... 53
8.1
Energy efficiency & renewable energy ............................................... 53
8.2
Rainwater ................................................................................................ 78
8.2.1
8.3
8.3.1
8.4
9
Educational Benefits .............................................................................. 85
Conclusions – educational benefits ................................................. 96
Supporting industry growth ................................................................ 98
Value for money ............................................................................................. 105
9.1
10
Conclusions - rainwater .................................................................... 84
Conclusions – value for money ......................................................... 109
Sustainability of NSSP ................................................................................... 110
10.1
Achieving behavioural change ...................................................... 110
10.2
Maintenance of PV systems ............................................................ 115
10.3
Conclusions – sustainability ........................................................... 119
Department of Resources Energy and Tourism
grosvenor management consulting
3
11
Implications for the future ............................................................................ 120
12
Recommendations .......................................................................................... 122
Attachment A: NSSP Review Terms of Reference ................................................ 123
Attachment B: Activities undertaken by DRET following the interim evaluation
...................................................................................................................................... 124
Attachment C: Further information ........................................................................ 127
Attachment D: National Partnership Agreement ................................................. 129
Attachment E: Evaluation design and methodology ........................................... 139
Attachment F: Related programs implemented by the States and Territories . 141
13
References ........................................................................................................ 144
Department of Resources Energy and Tourism
grosvenor management consulting
4
Table of figures
Figure 1: NSSP timeline .................................................................................24
Figure 2: Number of survey responses ............................................................30
Figure 3: Project completion time for non-government schools ...........................44
Figure 4: Systems installed by state and sector ................................................54
Figure 5: Geographical distribution of installed PV systems ................................55
Figure 6: PV electricity generated by QLD schools in FY2010 ..............................59
Figure 7: Performance of NSW PV systems versus CER Zone 3 estimates ............60
Figure 8: Size of systems installed ..................................................................65
Figure 9: Cost per Watt of NSSP systems installed by year ................................66
Figure 10: Average kW of PV installation by state/territory for government schools
and non-government sector ...........................................................................67
Figure 11: Range in cost of systems................................................................68
Figure 12: Cost of abatement as compared to benchmarks ................................71
Figure 13: Total and imported energy consumption – median per NSSP QLD school
..................................................................................................................75
Figure 14: Students enrolled and floor area .....................................................75
Figure 15: Median energy intensity of QLD schools ..........................................76
Figure 16: Percentage of NSSP schools installing rain water tanks ......................79
Figure 17: Average rainfall, tank capacity, roof area and harvesting potential per
school .........................................................................................................81
Figure 18: Purposes for which rainwater tanks were connected ..........................83
Figure 19: Collaborations and associated behavioural change .............................89
Figure 20: Schools incorporating DCSVS data into lessons plans (by funding year)
..................................................................................................................92
Figure 21: NSSP installed PV capacity as a proportion of total market installed
capacity ......................................................................................................98
Figure 22: Commonwealth, state/territory and non-government financial
contributions .............................................................................................. 102
Department of Resources Energy and Tourism
grosvenor management consulting
5
Figure 23: Pathway from NSSP inputs to outcomes ......................................... 110
Figure 24: Behavioural change as a result of the NSSP .................................... 111
Figure 25: Implementation of maintenance plan (by sector) ............................ 117
Figure 26: Evaluation design ........................................................................ 139
Department of Resources Energy and Tourism
grosvenor management consulting
6
Table of tables
Table 1: Implementation approach by states and territories ...............................39
Table 2: Energy generation systems installed ...................................................53
Table 3: Types of energy generation systems installed ......................................55
Table 4: Capacity of PV systems installed (kW) ................................................56
Table 5: Electricity displaced (MWh) by year ....................................................56
Table 6: Theoretical annual electricity generation from PV systems installed (MWh)
..................................................................................................................57
Table 7: Performance of systems in SA and WA ................................................61
Table 8: May 2012 Audit findings of DCSVS operation. ......................................62
Table 9: Industry standard price (AU$/W) for solar panels .................................69
Table 10: Australian trends in typical system prices for grid applications up to 5
kWp compared to NSSP PV system prices paid (AU$ ex GST) .............................69
Table 11: NSSP schools installing energy efficiency items ..................................72
Table 12: Number of schools installing energy efficiency items by type ...............73
Table 13: Energy efficient lighting expenditure and quantity installed ..................73
Table 14: Rainwater tank installations by state, sector and year .........................78
Table 15: Average rainfall, installed tank capacity, roof area and harvesting
potential by state and sector ..........................................................................80
Table 16: Cost per litre of tanks installed .........................................................84
Table 17: Key findings of the interim evaluations of the NSSP ............................85
Table 18: NSSP installers as a proportion of industry providers .........................99
Table 19: Key findings of the interim evaluations of the NSSP .......................... 103
Table 20: Approved projects by state and sector ............................................ 128
Department of Resources Energy and Tourism
grosvenor management consulting
7
List of abbreviations
ABS – Australian Bureau of Statistics
ACT – Australian Capital Territory
AuSSI – Australian Sustainable Schools Initiative
Black data – Net energy consumed from the grid
CEC – Clean Energy Council
CER – Clean Energy Regulator
COAG - Council of Australian Governments
DCCEE – Department of Climate Change and Energy Efficiency
DCSVS – Data Collection Storage and Visualisation System
DEEWR – Department of Education, Employment and Workplace Relations
DRET – Department of Resources, Energy and Tourism
Green data – Renewable energy generated
IPART – Independent Pricing and Regulatory Tribunal of New South Wales
kW / MW– Kilowatt / Megawatt, a unit of power
kWh / MWh – Kilowatt hour / Megawatt hour, a unit of energy
KWp / MWp- the peak (nameplate) output power in kilowatts / megawatts
NAPLAN – National Assessment Program – Literacy and Numeracy
NPA – National Partnership Agreement
NSSP – National Solar Schools Program
NSW – New South Wales
NT – Northern Territory
PM&C – Department of Prime Minister and Cabinet
PV – Photovoltaic
QLD – Queensland
SA – South Australia
SEWPaC – Department of Sustainability, Environment, Water, Population and
Communities
SHW – Solar Hot Water
STC – Small-scale Technology Certificate
TAS – Tasmania
VIC – Victoria
WA – Western Australia
Department of Resources Energy and Tourism
grosvenor management consulting
8
1
Executive Summary
1.1
Introduction
This report documents the final evaluation of the National Solar Schools
Program (NSSP).
The NSSP is part of the Australian Government’s 2007 ‘Solar Schools – Solar
Homes’ election commitment. The NSSP commenced on 1 July 2008, and
closed on 30 June 2013. The NSSP offered eligible primary and secondary
schools the opportunity to compete for grants of up to $50,000, to install
solar and other renewable systems, rainwater tanks and a range of energy
efficiency measures.
The stated objectives of the NSSP were to:
NSSP

allow schools to:
generate their own electricity from renewable
sources
OBJECTIVES

-
improve their energy efficiency and reduce their
energy consumption
-
adapt to climate change by making use of rainwater
collected from school roofs
-
provide educational benefits for school students and
their communities
support the growth of the renewable energy industry.
Key statistics for the program include:
$217 million
Commonwealth funding 2008/09 – 2012/13
8,300
schools registered (88% of all Australian schools)
5,300
schools awarded a grant (56% of all Australian schools)
4,897
photo voltaic (PV) systems funded (92% of NSSP projects)
279
33,082 kW
$196.52
1,559
61,063 litres
2,640 ML
other renewable energy systems funded
of PV system capacity funded equivalent to 2.4% of school
consumption and meeting needs of 6,075 homes
per tonne of Carbon emissions offset for PV systems
separately funded energy efficiency projects
rain water tank capacity funded
of theoretical rain water harvesting potential
Department of Resources Energy and Tourism
grosvenor management consulting
9
This report evaluated the NSSP against the program design, the
management of the program, and importantly, the outcomes achieved
against the stated objectives as represented in the following diagram.
Process &
Implementation
Impacts & Outcomes
• How effective was the
program implementation in
respect to its stated
objectives?
• To what extent have NSSP
objectives been achieved,
including allowing schools
to:
Input & Design
• How appropriate was the
NPA funding mechanisms
(performance milestones
and associated payments)
for achieving the
objectives?
• How appropriate was the
maximum amount of
funding for each school?
• How appropriate was the
annual funding allocations
for each state and
territory, introduced in July
2010?
• How appropriate were the
eligible items that schools
could install?
• What were the key
challenges and successes
in the implementation of
the NSSP?
• To what extent have
DCCEE and the States
fulfilled their roles and
responsibilities under the
NPA?
• Are approved project items
in proportion to the funding
obtained?
• Has value for money in
delivering the objectives
been achieved?
• Have project milestones
been achieved and if not,
why?
- Improve energy efficiency
and reduce energy
consumption
- Generate own electricity
from renewable sources
- Adapt to climate change
by making use of
rainwater collected from
school roofs
- Provide education
benefits for school
students and their
communities
- Support the growth of the
renewable energy
industry?
• Is there still a need or
priority for Commonwealth
and State Government
activity and/or
collaboration in this policy
area?
The evaluation considered information sourced from:
1

stakeholder interviews including state and territory government
agencies responsible for the implementation of the Program within
government schools

a survey of NSSP funded schools

data collected by NSSP

selected case studies1
Conducted by staff within DRET.
Department of Resources Energy and Tourism
grosvenor management consulting
10
1.2
Input and design
The Program was initially established within the (former) Commonwealth
Department of Environment, Water, Heritage and the Arts, transferred to the
(former) Department of Climate Change and Energy Efficiency (DCCEE), and
then transferred to the Department of Resources, Energy and Tourism
(DRET) since the winding up of DCCEE in 20132.
The program was initially a demand based program which faced oversubscription in 20093. While the move to a competitive, merit-based
selection arrangement was a positive and effective development, the
Program may have benefitted from such a model being in place from the
outset in the event demand exceeded available funding.
The funding model for government schools with states and territories under
the National Partnership Agreement (NPA) was consistent with the typical
approach of other programs funded by the Commonwealth and implemented
by the states and territories under the Federal Financial Relations Act.
The funding model for non-government schools was a grant model and may
have benefited from a payment model where part of the payment was
withheld until successful completion as is recommended in the ANAO’s Better
Practice Guide to Administration of Grants.
The amount of the grant for each school 4 was generally seen as adequate by
most stakeholders. The amount enabled schools to install adequate sized
systems, with system sizes increasing as costs of PV systems reduced across
the period of the NSSP. With the exception of ACT and QLD government
schools, very little additional funding was invested by the school or
state/territory to top up project funds.
Concerns were raised by many states/territories about the lack of funding
for administrative and ongoing maintenance costs; however, it is reasonable
to expect that the states/territories make some contribution, particularly
given most would have benefited from reduced energy and water costs.
2
The term DRET is used throughout this report to refer to the Department administering the
NSSP.
3
NSSP applications exceeded available funding. The program had to be temporarily suspended
to enable changes to be put in place, including the merit based competitive process and
additional arrangements with the states and territories.
4
$50,000 although some states and territories elected to reduce the funding per school during
the Program so that more schools could be funded.
Department of Resources Energy and Tourism
grosvenor management consulting
11
1.3
Process and implementation
The NSSP was implemented within the context of many existing and prior
state and territory policies and programs. The states and territories also took
very different approaches to implementing NSSP. The flexibility afforded
under the NSSP was appropriate to accommodate the differences between
states and territories, including ensuring alignment with their existing
program and education models.
However, the differences created some challenges, notably in achieving
consistency in data capture, timing to implement projects, and consistency
in implementation within the curriculum of government schools.
The flexibility also afforded to schools to apply for a range of eligible items
allowed for schools to address their varying needs. However, initial
consultation with the states and territories about the type of eligible energy
efficiency items would have further assisted in meeting the local design
requirements and climatic conditions.
The NSSP led to the development of a range of practical resources
(factsheets/case studies). Some schools and stakeholders raised issues with
the program guidelines and supporting material. However, 80% of schools
who responded to the survey indicated program guidelines and supporting
material were useful and easy to understand. The website was particularly
mentioned as a valuable source of information. Similar programs should
seek to make these resources available as early as possible, ideally from the
onset of the program.
All states and territories met milestones I – III under the NPA. There were a
range of factors that led to delays in finalising projects, primarily relating to
delays in agreeing the NPA, installation issues for PV systems including
ensuring a fully operational DCSVS5 (refer further detail in 1.4 below). This
also meant that many states and territories struggled to meet the planned
due dates for milestone IV under the NPA 6.
While some issues were raised with regard to the clarity in roles and
responsibilities between DRET and the states and territories under the NPA,
generally it was found that the roles and responsibilities were appropriate
and clear. Improvements were made to various guidance material during the
NSSP to improve the understanding of the roles and expectations of
states/territories and schools.
5
The DCSVS is the technical term used by the NSSP to describe the data monitoring system,
which displays green data (electricity generated from the solar PV system) and black data
(electricity consumed by the school).
6
Only NSW and WA met the expected due date for milestone IV in 2011/12.
Department of Resources Energy and Tourism
grosvenor management consulting
12
1.4
Achievements against the NSSP objectives (impacts and
outcomes)
There have been significant achievements against the NSSP objectives. The
evaluation has also identified some lessons learned that might inform future
policy considerations and actions by the Australian Government and states
and territories. These are summarised below.
Achievements
Lessons learned
Generate electricity from renewable sources, improve energy
efficiency and reduce energy consumption
 4,897 PV systems funded (91% of
NSSP schools and 94.5% of
renewable energy systems funded)








 Not all PV systems operating at
expected performance7
 Many DCSVS systems are not
reporting both green (PV electricity
279 other renewable energy
generated) and black (electricity
systems funded
consumed) data, which could impact
33,082 kW of PV capacity funded
educational and behavioural change
outcomes. Action is progressively
44,354 MWh theoretical electricity
being taken to address DCSVS
generated per annum by PV systems
reporting issues8.Changes were
1,250 MWh electricity displaced by
made to guidance material to
solar hot water and heat pumps
incentivise completion including fully
operational DCSVS
PV meeting 2.4% of school needs
 Many non-government schools and
PV electricity equivalent to meeting
some states and territories
needs of 6,075 homes
capitalised on significant reduction
in PV system prices to install larger
PV electricity estimated at 1.62% of
capacity systems than was approved
total Australian PV generation
in their NSSP application
Performance of PV systems largely
in line with CER deemed estimates
 Costs of PV systems in line with
industry benchmarks, with small
premium appearing to reflect
purchase of higher quality
components
 Cost of abatement for PV systems
well below equivalent solar
programs
 1,559 energy efficient projects
 Estimated 225,640 lights replaced
7
25 systems were referred to state and territories for investigation.
The DCSVS sample data indicates that approximately 20% of schools do not have a fully
operational DCSVS.
8
Department of Resources Energy and Tourism
grosvenor management consulting
13
Achievements
Lessons learned
with energy efficient lights,
estimated at reducing electricity
consumption by an estimated
10,541 MWh, accounting for 0.9%
of school consumption for those
schools
 While floor space of schools
increased across NSSP, energy
efficiency improved measured in
reductions in median energy
intensity
Adapt to climate change by making use of rainwater collected from
school roofs
 5,310 rain water tanks funded
 424,932 litres of capacity
 2,640 ML of rain harvesting
potential
 Evidence suggests that more than
half of installations are using rain
water collected for purposes other
than small scale irrigation
 Some states and territories
maximised water harvesting
potential by maximising tank
capacity and area of roof connected
to tanks
 Greater use of water for purposes
other than small-scale irrigation
reduces water loss
 Greater focus could have been
placed on water efficiency by
including water saving measures
such as dual flush toilets as an
eligible item and providing
educational resources on water
saving initiatives
 Some states and territories took the
opportunity to include water, in
addition to energy, when
implementing the DCSVS product in
their schools (ACT, NSW). Including
the requirement for the DCSVS to
monitor water consumption, in
addition to energy, may have
contributed to reductions in water
consumption
Provide educational benefits for school students and their
communities
 Program integrated into other
state/territory and federal (e.g.
Department of Resources Energy and Tourism
 Challenges in achieving consistent
and widespread adoption of
grosvenor management consulting
14
Achievements
AuSSI) environmental education
initiatives, enhancing educational
benefits
 Many schools implementing
renewable energy/energy efficiency
into lessons plans, leveraging
DCSVS and practical hands on
learning. Many believed this was the
most important benefit of the NSSP
 Many educational materials
developed by states/territories,
DRET and industry
 Instances where educational
materials leveraged the resources,
knowledge and experience of PV
suppliers
 Significant amount of promotion
occurred within communities around
the ‘launch’ of NSSP school projects
 Evidence that the NSSP led to
change in behaviour amongst
students and staff
Lessons learned
sustainability in lesson plans of
schools9
 Need to ensure personnel
responsible for NSSP at a
state/territory level collaborate with
those responsible for curriculum
development
 Monitoring, collection and utilisation
of DCSVS data was key in driving as
well as measuring the effects of
behavioural change and facilitating
the educational activities
 Uptake at a school level is heavily
dependent on:
- maintaining momentum when
delays in installation are being
experienced
- quality of educational materials
provided and staff resources to
embed in lesson plans
- turnover in staff responsible for
NSSP and knowledge transfer
- competing priorities overtake NSSP
- ensuring DCSVS is fully operational
and utilised
- technical understanding of
teachers/staff responsible for
NSSP, ensuring support and
training is provided
Support the growth of the renewable energy industry`
 >$255 million including NSSP funds
and co-contributions
 Represented between 0.56% and
7.44% of installed Australian
capacity between 2009-2012
 NSSP utilised between 3-14% of
industry installers across 2009-2013
 Panel arrangements provided
administrative benefits and
consistency in installation standards
to states and territories, however,
they did contribute to the low
proportion of industry installers
participating in the Program
9
Sustainability is now incorporated as a cross-curriculum priority in the Australian Curriculum
with, in particular, solar power forming part of the science and history education syllabus. The
Sustainability Curriculum Framework was established in 2010 and is expected to improve
consistency and adoption.
Department of Resources Energy and Tourism
grosvenor management consulting
15
Achievements
Lessons learned
 Represented a much larger
proportion of mid-range (>2kW)
market
 Provided valuable experience in roof
installations for mid-range market,
including insights to resolving a
range of technical issues
 First ever official on roof inspections
led to development of inspection
checklist which has now been
adopted across the industry
 Two new products/services
developed, including further
development of data monitoring and
visualisation products and services
Overall, the Program has made identifiable, and in some cases, significant
contributions towards the achievement of the NSSP objectives.
Department of Resources Energy and Tourism
grosvenor management consulting
16
1.5
Value for money
The costs of PV systems funded were largely in line with industry
benchmarks, but slightly above industry prices in the most recent years 10.
Analysis suggests that NSSP projects used better quality systems than
industry norms which should translate to better performance and reliability,
and a longer life.
The cost of abatement for funding PV systems in $ per tonne of carbon
emission offset ($ / t CO2-e) was at the lower end of schemes and programs
subsidising small scale solar and renewable energy11.
NSSP funded PV system, $196
Combined SRET and Feed In Tariffs, $177-$497
Small scale component Renewable Energy Target (SRET) $152-$525
150
175
200
225
250
275
300
550
[A$/t CO2]
The competitive grant process and criteria ensured funding was directed
towards the projects delivering best value within each state/territory.
Most states and territories put in place state wide contracts and preferred
supplier arrangements using competitive processes. These arrangements
typically included installation, warranty and maintenance standards to obtain
consistency in quality outcomes.
The lessons learned documented earlier and following had some impact on
the achievement of value for money. These included the challenges in
getting the DCSVS reporting black and green data and the opportunities to
improve the embedding of sustainability/energy into lesson plans of schools.
10
It should be noted that the NSSP PV cost included the cost to install the DCSVS.
At the lower end or below the cost of small scale solar and renewable energy generation, for
example, the Solar Homes and Communities Program and that delivered by the Small Scale
component of the Renewable Energy Target (SRET) and state based feed in tariffs. Sources:
Productivity Commission, Carbon Emission Policies in Key Economies: Research Report, May
2011; Carbon Emission Policies in Key Economies: Responses to Feedback on Certain Estimates
for Australia: Supplementary Research Report, December 2011.
11
Department of Resources Energy and Tourism
grosvenor management consulting
17
1.6
Sustainability
NSSP has funded a range of systems and items that will continue to deliver
benefits well into the future. For example, PV systems can have a useful life
of up to 30 years. These systems and items, and the supporting program
material, will continue to deliver:

reduced energy being imported from the grid

reduced energy consumption

reduced reliance on mains water

infrastructure and materials for teaching students about climate
change

flow on impacts in behavioural change

experience for the industry in mid-range PV system installations, and
data monitoring and visualisation systems
To ensure these ongoing benefits are maximised, a range of areas may
require further action:

continued effort to engender commitment from more schools to embed
sustainability into lesson plans

encouraging greater adoption and integration with AuSSI across NSSP
schools

continuation of efforts by DRET, states and territories to resolve
outstanding issues on DCSVS not fully operational, including reporting
black and green energy data

maintenance strategies and plans will need to be finalised by some
states to ensure the systems installed achieve expected useful life and
performance
To ensure the above is achieved, and with the closure of the Program,
consideration will need to be given to the ongoing role of the Australian
Government (if any). However, much of the residual responsibility for the
above now rests with the states and territories.
Department of Resources Energy and Tourism
grosvenor management consulting
18
1.7
Implications for the future
The achievements and lessons learned are summarised in Section 11. This
includes any potential improvement opportunities to the service delivery
model for future program development.
Some pertinent points in addition to those covered in 1.4 above include:

The installation of a visible asset, such as solar panels and water
tanks, provided the impetus for awareness raising activities that
extended beyond the students to staff and the wider community. This
highlights that funding of physical infrastructure can have benefits
beyond programs involving a focus purely on education and awareness
raising.

Monitoring, collection and utilisation of DCSVS data was key in driving
as well as measuring the effects of behavioural change and facilitating
the educational activities

Quality and consistency of data collected is important to inform
whether the Program’s objectives have been achieved. This could have
been improved, particularly collection of electricity consumption data
pre and post implementation.

Development and implementation of a Monitoring and Evaluation
Framework at the start of the program would have further assisted
with the establishment of a credible baseline data and in measuring the
impacts attributable to the NSSP. Evaluation activities by individual
state government agencies would have further supported the
evaluation efforts on a national level.

While NSSP expenditure and PV systems installed only represented a
small proportion of the market, the typical size of NSSP PV installations
(ie. larger than residential) provided new learnings and experience, as
well as new products, which will help to further develop the mid-range
PV sector. This indicates the value of government programs such as
this targeting a less mature industry segment to stimulate growth.

The NSSP provided an opportunity for federal and state/territory
government collaboration and as such a forum for exchanging
experiences and lessons learned in the area of climate change
adaptation and renewable energy policy, including as it relates to
school education.
Department of Resources Energy and Tourism
grosvenor management consulting
19
1.8
Recommendations
The following recommendations have been made to ensure the sustainability
of NSSP outcomes.
1. States and territories actively pursue and implement a maintenance
plan/strategy to ensure the longevity of the installed systems/items
and to maximise the return on the investment made
2. States and territories encourage and support regional and national
networking of NSSP government schools, in collaboration with other
sustainability partners, to enhance communication and assistance
between schools to maximise program outcomes.
3. States and territories continue to lead efforts to embed energy and
water efficiency into school curriculum
4. DRET continue to host the educational resources for schools on their
website or alternatively make them available through alternative
channels. For example, in Scootle.
5. DRET together with the states and territories continue to work to
resolve the issues with the operation of DCSVS, ensuring green and
black energy data is reported
6. Given smart meter products, such as the DCSVS, are now available
and being utilised as a result of the NSSP, the option of including a
module on data monitoring systems in the training of accredited
installers by the Clean Energy Council should be explored by DRET.
7. DRET together with the states and territories consider the
development and implementation of an ongoing monitoring, reporting
and evaluation approach to ensure the outcomes achieved through the
NSSP project are kept alive and continue to be progressed. Promoting
the regular collection of data and information on the schools impacts
and outcomes, including cross school, jurisdiction and sector
benchmarking, should form part of these activities. The data collected
should be consistent across Australia and provided to each school as
feedback on performance.
8. To ensure the technical aspects of the NSSP project are understood,
states and territories and non-government schools should consider
professional development for teachers/school staff. Consideration
needs to be given to the resources and approach required to
appropriately manage the items installed.
Department of Resources Energy and Tourism
grosvenor management consulting
20
2
Introduction
2.1
Background
The Commonwealth, represented by the Department of Climate Change and
Energy Efficiency (DCCEE) at that time, engaged Grosvenor Management
Consulting (Grosvenor) to undertake a review of the National Solar Schools
Program (NSSP).
Following the Machinery of Government change in March 2013,
responsibilities for Energy Efficiency matters (including the NSSP) moved to
Minister Gray, and staff associated with these functions merged with the
current Department of Resources, Energy and Tourism (DRET). The use of
DRET throughout this report includes reference to the former DCCEE.
In December 2011, an independent interim evaluation of the NSSP was
conducted with a focus on the evaluation of the Program against its stated
objectives.
The objectives of the NSSP are to:


allow schools to:
-
generate their own electricity from renewable sources
-
improve their energy efficiency and reduce their energy
consumption
-
adapt to climate change by making use of rainwater collected from
school roofs
-
provide educational benefits for school students and their
communities
support the growth of the renewable energy industry.
With the Program coming to a close in June 2013, the purpose of this final
evaluation is to assess the effectiveness, efficiency and appropriateness of
the NSSP in achieving its stated objectives and to analyse any lessons
learned in order to inform future policy and program development. This
includes evaluating the National Partnership Agreement on National Solar
Schools Program (NPA) (delivery mechanism for government school
projects), as well as analysing the non-government school component of the
NSSP, managed directly by the Commonwealth.
Department of Resources Energy and Tourism
grosvenor management consulting
21
2.2
Scope and objectives
The overall objective of the final evaluation is to assess the effectiveness,
efficiency and appropriateness of the NSSP.
The evaluation’s objective will be met through an analysis of the Program’s
funding approach and implementation activities of the Commonwealth and
the States & Territories. Particular emphasis will be given to examining the
extent to which NSSP achieved its policy objectives, taking into account the
results of the interim evaluation.
Relevant parts of the NSSP review’s Terms of Reference can be found at
Attachment A of this report.
This report brings together the quantitative and qualitative analyses that
commenced in March 2013 and concluded with the delivery of this report in
June 2013. The evaluation included an analysis of the outcomes of all NSSP
funding rounds. For the final 2012/13 funding round, it was assumed that all
items approved will be installed.
Evaluation approaches and outcomes of the NSSP interim evaluation were
utilised for the final evaluation of the Program, where appropriate. In
addition, at the time of the interim evaluation, the Australian National Audit
Office (ANAO) undertook an independent performance audit of the Program
and its operations. This included an assessment of the effectiveness of the
design and the administrative arrangements.
As a result, findings, conclusions and recommendations of the final
evaluation make reference to the NSSP interim evaluation report as well as
the ANAO’s Audit Report No.39 2011-12 Management of the National Solar
Schools Program.
The outcomes of the evaluation activities will be key determinants for the
need or priority of continued Commonwealth and State Government
activities and collaboration in this policy area.
Interim report
The NSSP interim evaluation, conducted between October 2011 and
February 2012, provided a number of conclusions and recommendations
about the Program and its ongoing effectiveness. DRET undertook various
activities to address the recommendations within the report in order to
maximise the benefits achieved through the Program. Details of the
activities undertaken by DRET following the interim evaluation are outlined
in Attachment B.
Department of Resources Energy and Tourism
grosvenor management consulting
22
ANAO performance audit
The ANAO performance audit assessed the Program’s establishment,
implementation and administration against relevant policy and legislative
requirements, and the progress towards achieving the NSSP objectives.
Despite having identified a number of shortcomings in the design of the
Program and the available data, the ANAO audit confirmed the Program’s
achievements in meeting its objectives.
In addition, the audit concluded that the 2010/11 and 2011/12 funding
rounds were well designed and effectively implemented.
The ANAO made two recommendations:

Recommendation 1 sought refinements to the content of future NSSP
guidelines

Recommendation 2 focused on clearly identifying, in program
documentation and advice to decision-makers, the relationship
between the application scores and the assessment of proposals with
respect to efficient, effective and economical use of public money.
DRET agreed with both recommendations and took according actions.
2.3
The National Solar Schools Program
Overview of the program
The NSSP is part of the Government’s 2007 ‘Solar Schools – Solar Homes’
election commitment. It replaced the Green Vouchers for Schools Program
and the schools’ component of the Photovoltaic Rebate Program. The NSSP
commenced on 1 July 2008, and closed on 30 June 2013, two years earlier
than initially planned. Savings generated were reinvested in new proposals
to move Australia to a clean energy future, a Commonwealth initiative
seeking to cut pollution and drive investment in clean energy sources
(including solar and wind)12.
The 2012–13 funding round was the last opportunity for schools to apply for
funding.
12
Refer to http://www.cleanenergyfuture.gov.au/clean-energy-future/our-plan/ for further
information.
Department of Resources Energy and Tourism
grosvenor management consulting
23
The NSSP offered eligible primary and secondary schools the opportunity to
compete for grants of up to $50,000, to install solar and other renewable
power systems, solar hot water systems, rainwater tanks and a range of
energy efficiency measures.
NSSP uptake
According to the latest data provided by DRET over 8,300 schools (88% of
all schools) registered to participate in the Program. Over the life of the
Program more than 5,300 schools have been awarded a grant (56% of all
schools)13, totalling more than $217 million in funding.
Table 20 in Attachment C provides a summary of approved projects by state
and sector.
In 2012, according to the ABS, there were 9,427 schools in Australia. This
included approximately 6,693 government (71%), 1,716 catholic (18.2%)
and 1,018 independent schools (10.8%).14
Timings of NSSP activities
Since its inception, the NSSP has been subject to a number of evaluation
and audit activities and government reviews. The timeline below shows the
key events and decisions throughout the life of the NSSP.
24 JAN 2012
Grants
announced
20 AUG 2010
Applications
close
15 JUL 2010 15 DEC 2010
Applications
Grants
open
announced
1 AUG 2011
Applications
open
13 FEB 2012
Applications 30 AUG 2012
open
Grants
announced
30 SEP 2011
Applications
close
18 MAY 2012
Applications
close
OCT 2009 – JUL 2010
Grants temporarily
suspended due to Funding round 2010/11
Funding round 2012/13
program
oversubscription
Funding round 2011/12
YEAR I
FY2008/09
YEAR II
FY2009/10
YEAR III
FY2010/11
1 JUN 2008
NSSP
commences
MAR 2010
NSSP
transitioned to
DCCEE
15 JUL 2010
Program reopens as
competitive
based program
YEAR IV
FY2011/12
AUG 2011
NPA commences
MAY 2011
Program
funding reduced
and program to
close two years
earlier on
30/06/2013
FEB 2012
Interim
evaluation
complete
30 JUN 2013
NSSP
concludes
YEAR V
FY2012/13
JUN 2013
NSSP final
evaluation
report
JUN 2012
ANAO NSSP
Audit report
MAR 2013
NSSP
transitioned
to DRET
Figure 1: NSSP timeline
13
http://www.abs.gov.au/AUSSTATS/abs@.nsf/Latestproducts/4221.0Main%20Features202012
The ABS values involve all schools including those that are not eligible for NSSP funding (e.g.
other special school).
14
Department of Resources Energy and Tourism
grosvenor management consulting
24
Changes to the NSSP
The NSSP commenced as a demand driven program where schools were able
to submit a claim and were awarded funding if they met the eligibility
requirements of the Program.
The NSSP was over-subscribed in 2009/10 which led to the temporary
suspension of the Program in October 2009. The Program re-opened as a
competitive merit-based program on 15 July 2010 and the funding was
capped for each financial year at a level aligned with the jurisdiction’s share
of funding to manage demand.
Under the revised process, schools were required to apply in annual funding
rounds and compete for funding based on three criteria including value for
money, environmental benefits and educational benefits.
To address potential duplication, schools that were approved to receive
funding for solar power systems under any other Australian Government
program since the NSSP commenced on 1 July 2008 were only able to apply
for a grant of up to $15,000 for the installation of eligible items. 15
In addition, the Cabinet agreed to the establishment of a NPA with the states
and territories to improve the delivery of the NSSP to eligible government
schools.16
As part of the 2011-12 Budget (10 May 2011), the Government announced
that the NSSP would close on 30 June 2013, and has two remaining funding
rounds. Savings generated ($156.4 million) were reinvested in new
proposals to move Australia to a clean energy future. Approximately $50
million in funding remained available under the program.
The following changes came into effect from 1 July 2011:

applications from schools located in remote or low socio-economic
areas received additional assessment weighting to allow funding to be
directed to the most disadvantaged schools

multi-campus schools previously eligible for $100,000 had their
eligibility amount reduced to up to $50,000, consistent with single
campus schools. This allowed a greater number of schools to be
funded under the NSSP in the final two years

for government schools - state and territory government education
authorities could request that the maximum grant amount available
15
For example, schools that were approved to receive solar panels through the Building the
Education Revolution (BER) program were eligible for up to $15,000 of grant funding.
16
The NPA is required under the Federal Financial Framework agreed by the Council of
Australian Governments (COAG) in 2009.
Department of Resources Energy and Tourism
grosvenor management consulting
25
to government schools in their jurisdiction be reduced to allow more
schools to receive funding.
Schools that were approved for NSSP grant funding prior to the 2011/12
funding round were not affected by these changes to the program.
The National Partnership Agreement
As part of the Program’s re-design in July 2010, the Commonwealth required
that the NSSP funding to government schools be delivered under the Council
of Australian Government’s NPA arrangements.17 Prior to 2010, some state
departments had a cooperative funding agreement in place with the
administering Commonwealth Department, including VIC, NSW, SA, WA and
QLD. Government schools could also apply directly to the NSSP through
lodgement of a claim form, in the same way as non-government schools.
The NPA was formalised between the Commonwealth of Australia and the
states and territories, and commenced with the first jurisdiction to sign the
agreement on 5 August 201118. The NPA applied from the 2010-11 funding
round.
The agreement outlines information relating to the implementation of NSSP,
including:

the roles and responsibilities of the Commonwealth, and the states
and territories

performance milestones and associated payments

reporting, financial and governance arrangements.
The NPA is included at Attachment D.
The Commonwealth continued to directly manage non-government school
projects. Successful non-government schools received their funding once an
agreement had been put in place between DRET and the individual schools.
17
The NPA is available at:
http://www.federalfinancialrelations.gov.au/content/npa/education.aspx.
18
ACT was the first jurisdiction to sign the NPA in 5 August 2011 with the last, VIC, agreeing to
the NPA four months later on 28 November 2011.
Department of Resources Energy and Tourism
grosvenor management consulting
26
Application and assessment
The NSSP Guidelines (July 2011)19 together with the National Solar Schools
Administrative Arrangements20 and Application Form Instructions provided
information on the assessment process to assist schools in preparing a NSSP
application.
Applications were scored against the assessment criteria and ranked from
highest to lowest. Funding was then approved based on the established
rankings until the funding allocation for each state and sector was fully
committed.
In instances where the number of applications exceeded the funding
available, those schools were ranked (highest to lowest) and included in a
reserve list.
For further information refer to http://ee.ret.gov.au/energyefficiency/grants/national-solar-schools-program.
Governance of the NSSP
Until March 2010, the Department of the Environment, Water, Heritage and
the Arts21 was responsible for the management and governance of the NSSP.
Subsequently in 2010, DCCEE together with respective education
departments of the states and territories, managed the administration of the
Program22.
DRET has the following role:

assessment of non-government school applications

management of all grants for non-government schools

communication of opening and closing dates for each annual round
and announcement of successful school applications

provision of funding to the states and territories upon achievement of
performance milestones
19
The National Solar Schools Program Guidelines July 2011 set out the policy parameters for
the merit assessment process.
20
http://ee.ret.gov.au/sites/climatechange/files/documents/03_2013/NSSPAdministrativeArrangements-20120502-PDF.pdf
21
Now being referred to as the Department of Sustainability, Environment, Water, Population
and Communities (SEWPaC).
22
Following the Machinery of Government change in March 2013, responsibilities for Energy
Efficiency matters (including the NSSP) moved to Minister Gray, and staff associated with these
functions merged with the current Department of Resources, Energy and Tourism (DRET).
Department of Resources Energy and Tourism
grosvenor management consulting
27

all aspects of program management (including developing and
maintaining guidelines, development and maintenance of the NSSP
grants management system, approving project variations and
managing risk through implementation of a compliance plan).
State/territory governments are responsible for the management and
delivery of NSSP government school projects. This involved the assessment
of government school applications for their jurisdiction and managing
delivery of projects in accordance with the NPA.
Department of Resources Energy and Tourism
grosvenor management consulting
28
3
Approach and method
To support the evaluation activities of the NSSP, Grosvenor developed an
Evaluation Strategy to provide guidance and a summary for the proposed
evaluation approach.
As part of the development of the Evaluation Strategy, interview guidelines
and a survey was designed and any relevant documentation, such as NSSP
guidelines and reports were reviewed and assessed.
The Evaluation Strategy included:

scope and objective of the evaluation

key evaluation questions

success criteria and key indicators

key information and data sources required to assess success

outline of the evaluation methods proposed to answer the identified
evaluation questions.
A graphical representation of the evaluation design, including evaluation
questions, is provided at Attachment E of this report.
The evaluation was undertaken between February and May 2013.
3.1
Evaluation resources
Findings, conclusions and recommendations for the evaluation report are
based on the information collected and analysed from a number of sources
and stakeholders (see Attachment C for details). In addition, case studies
produced by DRET with government and non-government schools across
Australia, both in text and video format, were also considered and
incorporated, where appropriate, in this report.23
Stakeholder consultations
Information from a variety of key stakeholders was gathered through semistructured interviews to maximise the gathering of the information. A
comprehensive set of interview questions was carefully developed that
addressed the evaluation questions and also probed for the information each
interviewee can uniquely provide.
23
These case studies are available on the Department’s website at
www.ret.gov.au/nationalsolarschools/resources.
Department of Resources Energy and Tourism
grosvenor management consulting
29
School survey
A total of 745 schools participated in the NSSP final evaluation survey. Only
complete responses (591) were considered as part of this evaluation of
which 66.8% were government, 21% catholic and 12.2% independent
schools. Figure 2 provides a breakdown of the number of schools in each
sector and state/territory that completed the survey.
160
140
120
100
80
60
40
20
0
ACT
NSW
NT
QLD
Government
Catholic
SA
TAS
VIC
WA
Independent
Figure 2: Number of survey responses
The survey was conducted online and encompassed a mix of 33 close-ended
questions with listed choice, dichotomous and open-ended questions. The
latter was mainly utilised to gather information about the sustainability of
the Program and to provide respondents with the opportunity to further
elaborate on the ratings which they provided.
3.2
Evaluation limitations
Despite the overall confidence in the methodology and tools utilised, the
evaluation must be viewed in the light of the following constraints.
Availability and quality of data
Reporting on consumption data to measure reductions in energy
consumption as a result of energy efficiency measures was one area where
there was considerable inconsistencies in the quality and completeness of
information provided to the Grosvenor evaluation team. This information
was not collected in sufficient detail as part of the application or acquittal
process and thus the NSSP relied on obtaining this information from states
and territories for government schools (representing approximately 70% of
all NSSP schools). The quality of data provided by states and territories
varied and as a result limited the conclusions that could be drawn.
Department of Resources Energy and Tourism
grosvenor management consulting
30
WA and NT consumption data was not obtained in time to be included in the
energy consumption analysis.
Grosvenor cannot verify the accuracy of the data provided; however,
quantitative and qualitative information has been triangulated to ensure the
establishment of robust and tenable conclusions and recommendations.
Attributing outcomes to the NSSP
States and territories have implemented various other programs related to
the subject of energy efficiency/renewable energy, as well as initiatives such
as the Australian Sustainable Schools Initiative (AuSSI), a school-based
environmental education program. As a result, the range of outcomes
observed in NSSP schools and across jurisdictions will be, in some areas,
indicative of achievements of the NSSP more generally, rather than
achievements that can be directly attributed to the work of the NSSP. This
means that the evaluation explored the contribution of the NSSP, where
possible, as other programs also were working towards similar goals.
Evaluating long-term impacts
Evaluating long-term impacts and outcomes achieved as a result of the
NSSP is beyond the ability and scope of this evaluation because of
methodological limitations and the timings of the evaluation activities.
For example, the realising of sustainable behavioural changes by individual
schools and their assessment as part of this evaluation has proven to be
challenging. Conclusions were drawn based on the activities and the effects
NSSP has made throughout the lifetime of the Program.
Department of Resources Energy and Tourism
grosvenor management consulting
31
4
Structure of the evaluation report
The final evaluation report consists of three main parts, aligned with the
evaluation design. Each part contains a number of sections in accordance
with the evaluation questions. Sections will draw upon the findings,
conclusions and recommendations of the evaluation, incorporating the data
analysis, information from stakeholder interviews, case studies and the
results of the survey.
The parts and relevant sections of the report are as follows:
Part/section
Description
Part A – Input & design
Section 5 – Funding approach
Appropriateness of the funding mechanism
Part B – Process & implementation
Section 6 – NSSP
implementation
Effectiveness of the NSSP implementation
including realisation of roles and responsibilities
under the NPA
Section 7 – Performance
against milestones
Achievement of performance milestones I-IV
under the NPA
Part C – Impacts & outcomes
Achievement of each NSSP objective:
Energy efficiency & renewable energy
-
Objective 1 – allow schools to generate their
own electricity from renewable sources
-
Objective 2 – allow schools to improve their
energy efficiency and reduce their energy
consumption
Rainwater
Section 8 – Achievement of
NSSP objectives
-
Objective 3 - allow schools to adapt to climate
change by making use of rainwater collected
from school roofs
Educational benefits
-
Objective 4 – allow schools to provide
educational benefits for school students and
their communities
Supporting industry growth
-
Objective 5 – to support the growth of the
renewable energy industry.
Section 9 - Value for money
Achievement of value for money
Section 10 – Sustainability
Longevity of NSSP objectives and potential
outcomes post-NSSP
There is some overlap between sections.
Department of Resources Energy and Tourism
grosvenor management consulting
32
PART A – Input & Design
This part of the report focuses on the findings in relation to the
appropriateness of the funding mechanism for achieving the NSSP
objectives.
In particular, the evaluation examined the appropriateness of:

annual funding rounds for each state and territory, introduced in July
2010

the maximum amount of funding for each school

payments aligned with performance milestones in the NPA.
Processes related to the assessment of applications were not assessed in
detail in this report; however were reviewed as part of the ANAO audit.
5
Funding Approach
Annual funding rounds
Annual funding rounds were suitable and consistent with the approach of
other grant programs
From the 2010-11 funding round, at the commencement of each annual
funding round, each year’s total funding budget was allocated between the
government and non-government sectors based on the proportion of eligible
schools in each sector. Funding for government schools and non-government
schools in each state and territory was then allocated on a similar proportion
basis, taking into account any NSSP grants already awarded to schools in
each state and territory. This allowed each state/territory (government and
non-government sector) to receive its proportional share of funding over the
life of the NSSP.
An annual competitive funding round model was established for government
and non-government schools in each state and territory.
Schools competed for grants only within their state and sector. For example,
New South Wales government schools only competed against other New
South Wales government schools.
This approach allowed funding to be proportionally distributed to schools
across the country, ensuring that all states and territories (and sectors)
benefited from the Program.
Department of Resources Energy and Tourism
grosvenor management consulting
33
Budget cuts to the Program reduced the funds available for the 2011/12 and
2012/13 funding rounds by $49.8 million.24 This resulted in significantly
fewer projects being able to be approved in the subsequent funding rounds.
For example in the 2011/12 funding round, nearly 2,000 schools submitted
applications totalling $64 million for the $25 million in funding that was
available. Of those schools that applied for the NSSP grant, 787 were
successful. This represented a 36% drop in the 2011/12 funding round
compared to the previous year.
Feedback from stakeholders suggested that annual funding rounds were
suitable and consistent with the approach of other grant programs. However,
some interviews believed that the decision-timeframes for approving
applications caused various challenges. For example, by the time
applications were approved and the project was able to commence,
quotations in many cases were expired and/or the product (e.g. panels) was
no longer available. States and schools had the flexibility to seek new quotes
to account for this delay. The variation process required that any new quote
that was submitted, delivered at least the outcome that was approved and
therefore, the competitiveness of the application was not reduced.
The most significant delay occurred in the 2010/11 funding round due to
delays in agreeing the NPA, further detailed in Section 7.2 of this report.
DRET believed that the period in which applications were assessed,
approximately six weeks, was appropriate, as it provided assurance that
applications were correctly assessed and the most meritorious applications in
each state and sector were awarded funding.
However, it is acknowledged that the announcement of successful schools
was noticeably deferred, following the completion of the assessment
process. For example, successful schools for the 2011/12 funding round
were announced by the responsible Minister on 24 January 2012, almost
four months after the application closing date. Similarly, the outcomes of the
2012/13 funding round were announced three months after the application
closing date, on 30 August 2012.
Four jurisdictions were affected by spring holidays in the 2011/12 funding
round.25 While this abbreviated the period in which schools could apply, it
allowed approximately six weeks for the submission of applications.
24
$25mil for the 2011/12 funding round and $24.8mil for the 2012/13 funding round
Holidays TAS: 3 Sep – 18 Sep 2011; QLD: 19 Sep – 30 Sep 2011; NSW: 24 Sep – 9 Oct
2011.
25
Department of Resources Energy and Tourism
grosvenor management consulting
34
State and territory education departments were responsible for all aspects of
the project implementation for government schools with Commonwealth
funding only provided for the on-grounds works. For that reason, most
state/territory interviewees suggested that a NSSP administrative budget
would have been of benefit to assist with the management and
implementation of the Program. Education authorities struggled to provide
sufficient support, as they were impacted by competing priorities from other
programs and most notably cuts to their own agency’s budget.
Dedicated personnel were identified as a key success factor in enabling the
achievement of the Program’s outcomes, in particular in achieving the
educational benefits.
The majority of states/territories were able to provide as a minimum a parttime employee (three days a week) dedicated to the management and
implementation of the NSSP with some additional assistance from other staff
members of the department.
However, stakeholders stated that greater financial assistance would have
helped with the administration, promotion and reporting for the Program, as
well as supplying educational support to ensure NSSP objectives are being
achieved.
Funding amount
The maximum grant amount was considered appropriate
The NSSP offered grants up to $50,000 for single campus schools and, prior
to the 2011/12 funding round, up to $100,000 for eligible multi-campus
schools to install solar power systems, rainwater tanks and range of
renewable energy efficiency measures.
Schools that planned to install less than 2kW or no solar power system were
eligible to apply for up to $30,000 for the installation of eligible items. In
addition, those schools that received Green Vouchers for Schools funding
had this amount deducted from their NSSP grant.
From the 2010-11 funding round onwards, schools that were approved to
receive funding for solar power systems under the BER were eligible for up
to $15,000 in NSSP funding.
Department of Resources Energy and Tourism
grosvenor management consulting
35
ACT, QLD, NSW and SA requested that the maximum grant amount for their
government schools be reduced, following the reduction in budget
announced in May 2011. ACT and QLD government schools were eligible to
apply for maximum funding of $25,000. Similarly, NSW government schools
are eligible to apply for up to $33,000; and SA government schools,
$30,000.
All stakeholders interviewed believed that the maximum grant funding
amount was appropriate for schools to secure solar power systems (and/or
other items) of sufficient size to have a positive impact on the school’s
environmental footprint and to educate students and the wider community
about renewable energy and energy efficiency.
As detailed in Section 8.1, the cost per kW for a solar power system
decreased significantly over the duration of the Program. Those schools
participating in later funding rounds were therefore able to purchase larger
solar PV systems.
The maximum amount of grant funding was not influenced by school size,
therefore smaller schools experienced greater visible benefits in reducing
their energy bills, in comparison to larger schools, who whilst achieving an
offset in their electricity usage, generally did not notice a significant
difference in their electricity bills.
A third of all NSSP schools (government and non-government) received
additional government and/or private funding over and above the maximum
NSSP grant amount. The decision by some states to combine state funding
with the NSSP funding increased benefits obtained by the school. Over the
life of the NSSP, QLD, WA, ACT and VIC had programs in place that
supplemented NSSP funds. Details of these programs can be found in Table
1 in Section 6 of this report.
Payments aligned with performance milestones
Under the NPA, states and territories obtained 50% of the annual funding
amount up front upon the provision of a list of approved government school
projects for the funding round, and the remaining 50% of funding, once all
approved projects in the state and territory were completed.
Once the milestone was achieved, payments were scheduled with the
Treasury, who made payments to the states and territories on the 7 th day of
each month.
Department of Resources Energy and Tourism
grosvenor management consulting
36
The 50/50 payment model attached to the performance milestones
represented the most contentious element of the funding approach. State
and territory education representatives reported that the approach was not
practical, causing additional financial and administrative burden to the state
and territory government agencies.
While many stakeholders felt that the approach should have been identical
to the non-government payment model, detailed below, the milestone
payments were consistent with the agreed NPA framework. During NPA
negotiations, administrative reporting for states and territories was reduced
and the value for the first payment increased. In addition, it is the
Commonwealth’s view that states/territories were in an appropriate position
to effectively manage the cash flow and meet the costs associated with the
implementation of NSSP projects.
In contrast, non-government school grants were directly administered by the
Commonwealth. One-off grant payments were made by DRET to respective
non-government schools, once a funding agreement was signed. The
funding agreement required non-government schools to complete the
project within a specified time period and included reporting requirements
during and upon completion of NSSP projects. A range of controls allowed
the Commonwealth to recover any funds if necessary in the event the
funding agreement with the school was breached.
However, it should be noted that his approach was not aligned with the
principles of the ANAO’s Better Practice Guide Administration of Grant (May
2002).26 The guide outlines that it is good practice to retain a portion of the
grant funds until the recipient has completed and fully acquitted the project
as this provides an incentive for funding recipients to comply will all
obligations set down in the funding agreement. It can be argued that a
model for non-government schools closer aligned to the ANAO’s Better
Practice Guide would have been more appropriate for the management of
the NSSP.
26
http://www.anao.gov.au/uploads/documents/Administration_of_Grants.pdf.
Department of Resources Energy and Tourism
grosvenor management consulting
37
5.1
Conclusions - funding approach
As expected the budget reduction in May 2011 resulted in not all schools
being able to benefit from the NSSP. However, the move from a demanddriven grant program to a competitive, merit-based selection arrangement
was a positive and effective development. The design of the program could
have considered a merit based model from the outset to account for the
possibility that demand exceeded funds available in a given financial year.
The annual allocation of funds allowed each state and territory (and sector)
to receive a proportional share of funding over the life of the Program. While
prolonged timeframes for announcing successful applications caused a
variety of challenges, the guidelines provided the flexibility for new quotes to
be sourced.
The maximum NSSP grant amount per school was sufficient in that schools
were able to install PV systems and other energy efficiency items that
resulted in a reduction of the schools’ environmental footprint. Where NSSP
funding was supplemented by state/territory or school contributions, greater
benefits were achieved.
Smaller schools noticed a more visible impact on their electricity bills, whilst
larger schools with significant energy consumption did not notice a material
change.
While the states and territories raised concerns about the lack of funding of
administration, it is not unreasonable to expect that some contribution
should be made by the states and territories, particularly given the potential
for a reduction in energy and water costs and the benefits obtained for
government schools.
Department of Resources Energy and Tourism
grosvenor management consulting
38
PART B – Process & Implementation
Part B outlines the findings in relation to the effectiveness of the NSSP
implementation in respect to the Program’s stated objectives, considering:
 delivery of the NSSP by DRET, and the states and territories
 key challenges (barriers and/or delays) and successes
 realisation of roles and responsibilities by DRET and the states and
territories
 achievement of NPA performance milestones I-IV.
6
NSSP implementation
Different approaches to the NSSP delivery between states and territories
The achievement of the NSSP objectives rested on the effective
implementation by the Commonwealth, state and territory government
agencies and schools. The Australian Government department with the
policy responsibility, DRET (former DCCEE) played a central role to ensure
the overall implementation was meeting the objectives of the
Commonwealth.
States and territories were responsible for the delivery of NSSP projects to
government schools and had flexibility in their delivery approach, within the
parameters of the NPA.
States and territories applied different approaches to the delivery of the
NSSP. This was in part due to prior and existing or parallel programs at a
state level. These are further outlined in Attachment F.
Table 1 summarises the different approaches to implement the NSSP in each
state and territory.
Table 1: Implementation approach by states and territories
ACT


ACT schools commenced lodging applications for NSSP in 2010/11

NSSP funding was combined with funding from the ACT Solar Schools
Program to install up to a 30kW PV system in each ACT school and secured a
premium rate of a Feed in Tariff income that schools capture and invest into
further ESD initiatives
ACT chose to reduce the maximum grant amount for the remaining two
rounds from $50,000 to $25,000 to enable more schools to receive funding
Department of Resources Energy and Tourism
grosvenor management consulting
39

ACT also included water and gas in their DCSVS

ACT Education and Training provided support to schools in completing their
NSSP application

ACT established relationships with local universities to analyse the solar
output

ACT undertakes a sample of inspections of solar PV installations to confirm
compliance with standards

ACT delivers the projects on behalf of the schools, with all schools using the
same data monitoring system to view energy generated from their solar PV
system and energy consumed, allowing for comparison with other schools.
This system also displays data on the schools water and gas usage.
NSW

NSW entered into a co-operative funding agreement with the Commonwealth
for 260 schools in 2009

For the final two rounds, NSW chose to reduce the maximum grant amount
from $50,000 to $33,000 to enable more schools to receive funding

NSW provided curriculum support including learning materials for NSSP
schools and operated a panel arrangement of suppliers

NSW schools were encouraged to use suppliers from the NSW panel

NSW delivered NSSP projects on behalf of the schools

The majority of NSW schools that installed a solar power system used the
same data monitoring product to monitor the energy generated from the
system and energy consumed by the school, allowing for comparison with
other schools. This system also allows schools to view their water and gas
usage.
QLD

QLD implemented the NSSP in parallel with the state’s $60 million Solar and
Energy Efficiency Program which commenced in July 2008 and was completed
in June 2011. Over the three years of the program, 2Kw solar systems, smart
meters, and energy efficient lighting have been installed in over 1,200
Queensland state schools and Education Centres.

Prior to 2010/11, quotes were managed through a supplier panel
arrangement and all NSSP projects were delivered by the Department of
Education, Training and Employment via a co-operative funding agreement
with the Commonwealth.

QLD established a panel arrangement for the 2010/11 and subsequent
rounds; however, schools were responsible for sourcing quotes (from panel or
alternative contractor) and for delivery of their projects.

All QLD schools that installed solar PV installed the same data monitoring
system to view energy generated from the system and consumed by the
school. This also allows comparison with other schools.
VIC

In VIC, 53 schools piloted the NSSP via a co-operative funding agreement
with the Commonwealth with VIC managing NSSP projects on the
Department of Resources Energy and Tourism
grosvenor management consulting
40
government schools behalf. During this period, the majority of VIC
government schools were funded directly by the NSSP through the claim
process (2008/09 to 2009/10).

Prior to 2010, schools that received NSSP funding, received an additional
$5,000-15,000 from the Victorian Solar in Schools Program to be spent on on
solar PV. The Victorian Solar in Schools Program included $5milliion over four
years to support 500 schools and community building to install gridconnected PV systems, interactive energy monitoring systems and to develop
educational materials on renewable energy and energy demand.

Following the implementation of the NPA, all VIC government schools were
responsible for managing their own project, with support from VIC

Schools approved for a NSSP grant in 2010/11 were also eligible for a $5,000
grant for the development of educational material under the Victorian Solar in
Schools Program.
SA

SA entered into a co-operative funding agreement with the Commonwealth
for 89 schools where SA managed the projects on the schools behalf

Following the implementation the NPA, all SA government schools were able
to manage their own project. Schools were encouraged to use the
department’s facility management contract to manage the project on their
behalf; preferred contractors were engaged through a tender process
conducted by facility management organisations
TAS

In earlier funding rounds of the NSSP, TAS conducted a tender process for a
sole provider to design, supply, install and maintain energy and rain water
storage solutions under the NSSP. Tenderers were also required to propose
and provide educational activities and materials, and, upon request, assist in
the development of educational plans for renewable energy, energy efficiency
and climate change.

Following the implementation of the NPA, all TAS government schools were
responsible for managing their own project with support from TAS
Department of Education.
WA

WA entered into a co-operative funding agreement with the Commonwealth
for 128 schools where WA managed the projects on the schools behalf

WA Solar Schools Program supported the installation of solar power systems,
contributing up to $12,500 (ex GST) for metropolitan schools and up to
$13,000 (ex GST) for regional schools. The program ran until June 2012.

WA government schools were encouraged to utilise suppliers from the
established panel.

WA delivered NSSP projects on behalf of government schools

A sample of NSSP funded solar PV systems were inspected in cooperation
with the School of Engineering and Energy at Murdoch University.
NT
Department of Resources Energy and Tourism
grosvenor management consulting
41

NSSP projects of government schools were centrally managed by the NT
Department of Education and Training

NT established a preferred contractor panel
State panels were established through a tender process, where potential
installers and services providers were required to demonstrate their ability
to effectively provide the services to government schools. In addition,
minimum standards in the installation and quality of PV systems had to be
met by panel applicants.
Some surveyed government schools located in the jurisdictions with
centrally established panels or suppliers stated that they would have liked to
engage a local supplier. It was believed that some of the subsequent delays
and issues experienced by schools with suppliers sourced from the panel
could have been avoided. In addition, some survey respondents felt strongly
about the missed opportunity to support local businesses.
Nevertheless, the flexibility in the implementation provided by the
Commonwealth enabled states and territories to adapt their approach to
their specific policy environment and school governance system.
Panel arrangements did allow states and territories to manage the quality of
installations and future maintenance.
Promotion and assistance provided in implementing NSSP projects
Feedback varied in regards to the appropriateness of the support provided
by the Commonwealth to non-government schools and by education
authorities to their respective government schools. When asked to rate the
assistance given in implementing the NSSP project, the majority of schools
rated the support provided as ‘good’.
“Very helpful in organising approvals and guiding me through the
application process” (government school)
“The NSSP team were able to help in completing paper work and in
discussing problems in interpreting information requirements” (nongovernment school)
Main reasons for providing ‘fair’ or ‘poor’ ratings were lack of communication
and guidance provided before and/or after the system’s installation as well
as difficulties in understanding the formal acquittal process.
“Some of the terminology and requirements for sign off is difficult to
understand for someone who is curriculum based. More support,
easier and more user friendly guidelines”
Department of Resources Energy and Tourism
grosvenor management consulting
42
However, some participating schools recognised that the support provided
during application rounds was limited due to the high demand for assistance
by schools.
Over 80% of survey respondents believed that the Program guidelines and
supporting material were useful and easy to understand. Those schools that
encountered difficulties stated that guidelines were too complex and
technical; indicating that additional support, for example, in form of
professional development sessions or workshops would have been helpful.
ACT AuSSI regularly undertook a professional development course for school
staff in order to overcome this issue and familiarise school staff with the
technical aspects of their energy efficiency/sustainability project27.
The workshop covered subjects such as:
 how to reduce energy consumption in schools
 overview of the capital works programs in ACT schools and impact of
the Carbon Price on schools
 how to use a lux meter and infrared thermometer
 renewable energy teaching resources
 solar power systems for teaching and learning.
In the past, the workshop also included an update on the NSSP from the
National Coordinator and provided the opportunity for principals and
teachers to ask questions. This initiative has been well received by ACT
stakeholders. It is acknowledged that similar approaches in larger states
with remote areas would have been more challenging to put into practice.28
Implementation challenges and delays
The implementation of NSSP projects were affected by a range of factors.
These included changes in the initial timeframes arising from delays in
finalising and signing the NPA, as well as practical delays on the ground.
Challenges and delays led to frustrations by schools across the regions and
sectors.
27
Energy efficiency in schools – getting the most out of your solar power system conducted on
23 October 2012.
28
The course will continue to be run by ACT AuSSI after the closure of the NSSP in collaboration
with the local energy provider and other renewable energy experts.
Department of Resources Energy and Tourism
grosvenor management consulting
43
“We were informed (about winning) the grant at the end of 2011 [...]
but everything only got finished and started operating late April
2013”
However, completion periods of over one year were the exception amongst
government and non-government schools. Figure 3 below outlines that the
majority of non-government schools completed their NSSP project for the
2010/11 and 2011/12 funding round within 12 months.
45%
182
40%
35%
146
30%
25%
20%
75
15%
10%
25
5%
8
4
24 months
More than 36
months
0%
On time
(within 6
months)
9 months
12 months
21 months
Figure 3: Project completion time for non-government schools
The SA Department of Education and Child Development faced challenges
due to schools having autonomy for the management of their project and in
many instances were unable to assist with the installation problems, as
services providers needed to directly liaise with the school. Similarly, VIC
faced challenges with the timely completion of projects due to the
decentralised system with schools having autonomy for their own project as
well as delays with electricity distributors connecting solar PV systems to the
grid.
Section 8 Performance against milestones explains further the various
challenges and reasons for delays in relation to the implementation of NSSP
projects.
According to the survey and stakeholder consultations, despite the
challenges and delays experienced with implementation at a government
and school level (government and non-government sector), the Program
was overall positively perceived. Identified outcomes and benefits are
further provided in Part C: Impact and Outcomes of this report.
Department of Resources Energy and Tourism
grosvenor management consulting
44
6.1
Roles and responsibilities of the NPA
NPA roles and responsibilities were fulfilled by all parties to the agreement
The delivery of the NSSP was underpinned by governance structures and
clear lines of accountability. The NPA detailed the individual and joint roles
and responsibilities of the Commonwealth and state/territory government
agencies in the administration of the Program (see Attachment D of this
report).
According to DRET, all states and territories fulfilled their roles and
responsibilities under the NPA.
The evaluation sought feedback from each jurisdiction regarding the
appropriateness of the prescribed roles and responsibilities. The majority of
states and territories believed that the reporting requirements of the NPA
were straight forward and reasonable. However, state education
departments reported a lack of clarity about the provision of particularly
ad hoc data requirements, suggesting that the reporting of data should have
been clearly defined in the NPA to manage expectations and avoid delays in
responding to data requests.
DRET noted that the states and territories were asked to provide data on
energy consumption and energy generation, where available, as part of the
agreed Terms of Reference for the final evaluation. Furthermore under the
agreed compliance plan, state/territory education agencies had to submit a
list of completed NSSP projects from which a sample was chosen for
inspecting the compliance with Australian standards.
States and territories were also required to report on the installation status
of data monitoring systems, a mandatory requirement with the installation
of a solar PV system. According to DRET, the reporting was necessary to
confirm the completion of NSSP projects.
As part of the NPA, states and territories were required to use the NSSP Web
Application to assess applications and submit the list of approved schools,
manage variations and submit the end of round report. All stakeholders
stated that the NSSP Web Application was practical and user-friendly,
highlighting improvements to the assessment process from earlier funding
rounds under the CFA/Claims model.
However, some felt that the application process was often an onerous task
for schools, indicating that all applications should have been completed by
the state/territory. This was considered inappropriate by the Commonwealth
on the basis that the program is competitive based with all schools being
eligible to apply.
Department of Resources Energy and Tourism
grosvenor management consulting
45
The provision of personnel and other resources to enable the administration
of the Program varied between jurisdictions. Evidence suggested that
generally less support was provided in the last funding round with the
winding down of the Program and due to state/territory budget cuts.
Qualitative feedback indicated that the specific roles and responsibilities of
the Commonwealth were also satisfied, demonstrating the Australian
Government’s commitment to the NPA.
6.2
Conclusions – NSSP implementation
Overall, it can be concluded that the NSSP was well implemented.
As indicated at 5.1, the over-subscription of the Program in the initial rounds
could have been envisaged and the Program may have benefited from a
merit based model to be in place from the outset in the event demand
exceeded available budget in a financial year. However, the subsequent redesign of the Program and implementation of the NPA provided an effective
and more structured approach.
Use of the NSSP Web Application for schools to apply and for DRET and
states and territories to administer the program proved effective.
The NPA provided a certain amount of flexibility to the states and territories
in their implementation approach, which was appropriate as each
state/territory operated in different contexts and had pre-existing and/or
parallel programs at a state level. However, this mixture of a prescribed as
well as a flexible approach entailed some challenges for the Commonwealth
and the state and territory government agencies. These were, for example,
reflected in the lack of consistent evaluation data available. Greater
prescription on consumption data to be retained over the duration of the
program would have improved the consistency and ability to draw
comparisons on energy efficiencies achieved across the states and
territories.
Survey responses highlighted that schools without the support from DRET
and state government agencies would have been less likely to successfully
and adequately implement their NSSP project. As a result, adequate support
from the states/territories (to government schools) and the Commonwealth
(to non-government schools) was of fundamental importance throughout all
stages of the NSSP installation.
Department of Resources Energy and Tourism
grosvenor management consulting
46
7
Performance against milestones
As part of the evaluation, Grosvenor assessed the performance of each state
and territory against the project milestones as set out in the NPA. This
section presents a summary of this assessment, along with some
background information on the approach of each state and territory in
managing the completion of projects as well as any challenges and delays
that were experienced in finalising NSSP projects.
7.1 Performance milestones
Pursuant to clause 17(h) of the NPA, states and territories agreed to meet
four performance milestones. The completion of these milestones was linked
to the payments made to each jurisdiction by the Commonwealth
Treasury.29
Performance milestone I-III required states and territories to provide a list
of approved government school projects (within allocated budget) for the
funding round to the Commonwealth, derived through applying the
competitive merit assessment process. In return, states and territories
obtained 50% of the annual funding up front to assist with the initial costs of
progressing the NSSP projects. As part of the final milestone (IV), states and
territories received the remaining 50% of funding once the Commonwealth
accepted the end-of-funding round report, detailing the completion of 100%
of approved projects.
Approach to managing completion of projects
States and territories were provided with the flexibility to determine their
own arrangements to deliver government school projects including whether
they considered it appropriate to enter into an agreement with schools,
payment arrangements and acquittal processes to confirm that funds had
been spent on approved items and to confirm project completion.
The majority of states and territories aligned their acquittal process to that
of the Commonwealth. QLD, NT, WA and VIC utilised the NSSP installation
report, developed by DRET for the acquittal of non-government schools. WA,
for example, also required schools to provide a Certificate of Practical
Completion together with the provision of electrical drawings and photos of
the installation. QLD government schools had to fill in and submit the Solar
Buyer’s Checklist, developed by the Clean Energy Council.
29
Refer to Attachment D for an overview of the performance milestones and associated
payments.
Department of Resources Energy and Tourism
grosvenor management consulting
47
Jurisdictions that delivered the projects on the schools behalf followed their
own acquittal process to ascertain the completion of school projects.
The delivery approach (centralised delivery by the state or decentralised
with delivery by the school) and external factors outside the control of
states/territories and schools such as connection to the grid, all contributed
to difficulties in meeting the expected due date for completion of all funding
round projects. This is further outlined below.
7.2
Performance against each milestone
States and territories had most difficulties in meeting milestone IV –
completing 100 % of projects in each annual funding round
Performance against each milestone of the NPA varied between states and
territories.
Milestone I
Milestone
Funding round
Due date
Payment amount
Approval of projects
2010/11
Agreement
to the NPA,
expected
mid 2011
50% of annual
funding
The process for drafting the NPA with representatives from states and
territories, PM&C, Treasury and DCCEE commenced in August/September
2010 after the Program reopened on 15 July 2010. However, finalisation of
the NPA was delayed due to potential changes to the Program which were
announced in the May 2011 Budget. A revised draft NPA was issued for
negotiations in late May 2011.
ACT was the first jurisdiction to sign the NPA on 5 August 2011, with the last
being VIC who agreed to the NPA four months later on 28 November 2011.
Payments for Milestone I differed for each state and territory as it was
dependant on the timing when the NPA was signed.
The delays in reaching an agreement to the NPA significantly impacted the
timings of the start and finish of projects, approved in the 2010-11 round,
which subsequently caused delays with delivery of later round projects.
Department of Resources Energy and Tourism
grosvenor management consulting
48
Milestone II & III
Milestone
Funding round
Due date
Payment amount
II - Provision of a list of
approved projects for the
Commonwealth
2011/12
16 Nov 2011
50% of annual
funding
III - Provision of a list of
approved projects for the
Commonwealth
2012/13
2 Jul 2012
According to DRET, all states and territories received their payments for
milestone II and III at the same time as it was based on the timeframes
specified during the relevant assessment periods, outlined in the NPA.
States and territories had approximately six weeks to complete milestone II
with applications closing on 30 September 2011. States were required to use
the NSSP Web Application to apply the merit assessment process to each
application received from government schools in their state/territory in order
to determine the most meritorious projects to receive funding within their
allocated budget. This list of approved schools was then submitted to the
Commonwealth for announcement. Similarly, states and territories had
approximately six weeks to complete milestone III with applications closing
on 18 May 2012.
Milestone II and III were met by all states and territories by the due date.
No problems or concerns were raised by stakeholders regarding the states
and territories ability to meet Milestones II and III.
Milestone IV
Milestone
Funding round
Expected
by
Payment amount
Acceptance by the
Commonwealth of an endof-round report
2010/11
15 Jun 2012
50% of annual
funding
2011/12
15 Sep 2012
2012/13
15 Jun 2013
States and territories had difficulties with meeting the deadlines for
milestone IV of the NPA.
No state or territory met the 2010/11 expected due date for 10/11 projects
due to delays in agreeing the NPA. Further, the delay in completing 10/11
projects had a cascading effect contributing to delays in completing
subsequent round projects.
Department of Resources Energy and Tourism
grosvenor management consulting
49
No state and territory also met the 2011/12 expected due date for 11/12
projects
Three of the eight states and territories were still working on the acquittal of
2010/11 projects past the planned expected due date for the second funding
round (2011/12), noting that 100% of projects must be complete to achieve
the milestone.
At the time of writing the report, government projects for the final funding
round were not yet due for completion. However during the stakeholder
consultations, at least half of the state/territory government agencies
anticipated that they would be unable to meet the expected due date (15
June 2013) and considered that September 2013 was a more realistic
timeframe.
The following sub-section expands on the specific challenges and reasons for
delays experienced by states and territories in completing all funding round
projects.
7.3
Delays and challenges in completing projects
The extent of challenges and reasons for delays differed amongst states and
territories.
For example, variations required as a result of the effects of natural
disasters in QLD, contributed to the delay of the state in meeting the original
timeframes (milestone) for the 2010/11 funding round.
Interviewees stated that resource constraints at a state/territory level were
also a contributing factor in meeting the completion timeframes of NSSP
projects.
The prolonged completion of NSSP projects was also attributable to internal
challenges and performance of individual schools. In VIC, schools submitted
incomplete Solar Power Installation Reports, requiring follow up by the
Department of Education and Early Childhood Development and inhibiting
the completion process.
Follow up was often required with schools and installers to ensure the data
monitoring system (DCSVS) was operational. This appeared to be a common
source for delays, particularly in instances where the installer was not fully
aware of the data monitoring requirements or the school’s IT person was not
available to resolve technical issues.
In addition, changes to the Installation Report template created some delays
as often an old version of the report would be returned to the states and
territories, which then required follow up to obtain additional information.
Department of Resources Energy and Tourism
grosvenor management consulting
50
Challenges and issues associated with installation and functionality of DCSVS
were identified and outlined in the interim evaluation report. DRET
subsequently undertook a range of activities to address these issues,
summarised at Attachment B.
The different delivery approaches also seemed to have impacted on the
timing to complete projects. As mentioned in the previous section,
approaches were either centralised (managed by the state/territory) or
decentralised, where schools were responsible for implementation of their
NSSP project. In the case of VIC, the decentralised approach hindered the
State in completing the projects within the expected timeframes.
On a school level, survey participants stated unforseen difficulties with the
installation of PV systems contributed to the significant delays in completing
NSSP projects. For example, government schools in NT and WA stated that it
took two years or longer to complete the project due to issues with service
providers. In the case of one government school in VIC, poor performance
and lack of commitment by the PV installer led to continuing problems with
the system and thus, affected the ability of the school to benefits from its
NSSP project.
Other contributing factors for the delays in completing NSSP projects
included:
 service providers going out of business during the project period
 insufficient/unclear communication of expectations to government
schools regarding their obligations on when projects needed to be
completed
 lack of technical understanding and/or ownership by schools to monitor
appropriate functioning of installed systems
 issues surrounding the connection to the grid (e.g. response from
network providers)
 rain/bad weather conditions
 school holidays.
Department of Resources Energy and Tourism
grosvenor management consulting
51
7.4
Conclusions – performance against milestones
While the performance against each milestone of the NPA varied between
jurisdictions, all states and territories met the agreed performance
milestones I-III. Completing 100% of projects in each funding round was the
most difficult milestone (milestone IV) for each state and territory.
The flexibility provided for in the implementation of NSSP and delays in
finalisation of the NPA, impacted on overall Program timelines. However, the
primary causes for delays to the finalisation of milestone IV were a range of
issues in being able to classify a PV installation as complete, including having
an operational DCSVS. Many of these issues reflect issues with suppliers and
installers, however, some of these could have been managed more tightly by
all parties.
Overall, only a small proportion of installations were being materially
delayed with most installations complete within one year. While concerns
were raised about the impact the delay in finalising all installations had on
the payment of funding to states and territories, the funding model is in line
with the NPA framework.
The evaluation highlighted a variety of contributing factors for the delays in
completing NSSP projects. In some cases the lack of a centralised
implementation approach for the state/territory seemed to have impeded
the completion of all relevant NSSP projects within the prescribed timeframe
and thus, meeting milestone IV.
While other contributing factors were beyond the control of schools and/or
the government, close collaboration and support from state government
agencies and/or DRET were critical in resolving the issues related to the
completion of NSSP projects.
Department of Resources Energy and Tourism
grosvenor management consulting
52
PART C – Impacts & Outcomes
8
Achievement of NSSP objectives
8.1
Energy efficiency & renewable energy
This section of the report outlines the findings in accordance with objective 1
and 2 of the NSSP, which are to allow schools to:
 generate their own electricity from renewable sources
 improve their energy efficiency and reduce their energy consumption.
Renewable energy systems installed and funded
Overwhelming majority of systems installed were PV
Table 2 below sets out the type of energy generation systems installed.
Table 2: Energy generation systems installed30
State
NSSP funded
schools
ACT
Other renewable
energy system
installed
PV installed
103
102
2
1,494
1,286
59
104
98
4
1,331
1,277
66
SA
460
383
19
TAS
148
142
21
VIC
1,128
1,081
72
WA
542
528
36
5,310
4,897
279
NSW
NT
QLD
Total
The overwhelming majority of systems installed were PV systems,
accounting for 94.5% of renewable energy systems installed with 91% of all
NSSP funded schools installing PV systems.
Figure 4 below outlines the relative uptake of PV and other renewable
energy systems by state and sector. As can be seen, Tasmania was the only
state to have any significant uptake of other renewable energy technologies.
30
A number of QLD schools received NSSP funding twice. This was possible under the
arrangements agreed with QLD. The total number of NSSP projects was 5,444.
Department of Resources Energy and Tourism
grosvenor management consulting
53
It also shows that NSW31 and South Australian Government schools had a
lower uptake of PV systems than for all other states and sectors.
Figure 4: Systems installed by state and sector
31
There were a large number of government schools that installed PV systems under the BER.
Department of Resources Energy and Tourism
grosvenor management consulting
54
The map below shows the location and relative size of PV systems installed
across Australia by postcode.
Figure 5: Geographical distribution of installed PV systems
Table 3 below identifies the types of renewable energy systems installed.
Solar Hot Water (SHW) was the next most common system installed after PV
but only accounted for 4% of NSSP funded schools.
Table 3: Types of energy generation systems installed
Total other
renewable
energy
systems
SHW
Heat Pump
Wind
Hydro
ACT
0
0
0
0
0
NSW
59
49
9
1
0
3
3
0
0
0
QLD
71
57
12
2
0
SA
18
13
1
4
0
TAS
29
17
7
5
0
VIC
69
51
3
14
1
WA
38
21
6
11
0
287
211
38
37
1
State
NT
Total
Department of Resources Energy and Tourism
grosvenor management consulting
55
Electricity generated from renewable sources
While a significant quantity of electricity was generated, it still only
represented a small proportion of most school’s total electricity consumption
Table 4 below sets out the capacity (kW) of PV systems installed.
Table 4: Capacity of PV systems funded (kW)
State
ACT
NSW
NT
QLD
SA
TAS
VIC
WA
Sector
2009
2010
Government
2011
2012
2013
Sector
total
199
277
318
794
Non-Government
23
53
94
34
44
248
Government
1,032
89
995
911
950
3,977
Non-Government
284
1,080
1,069
752
925
4,110
Government
12
18
259
93
218
600
20
18
42
48
128
903
1,027
1,420
5,873
Non-Government
Government
2,523
Non-Government
127
642
445
241
303
1,758
Government
326
86
469
193
226
1,300
Non-Government
94
312
216
55
65
742
Government
13
210
239
62
146
670
Non-Government
7
48
91
46
88
280
Government
657
1,933
2,025
257
606
5,478
Non-Government
123
854
586
639
863
3,065
Government
752
820
761
642
2,975
Non-Government
145
415
262
128
134
1,084
Capacity
6,118
5,760
8,690
5,518
6,996
33,082
Total
State
total
1,042
8,087
728
7,631
2,042
950
8,543
4,059
33,082
It has not been possible to estimate the electricity generated from the Wind
and Hydro systems. Solar Hot Water and Heat Pumps generate heat energy,
not electricity. However, an estimate of the electricity equivalent (MWh) of
the energy generated by Solar Hot Water and Heat Pumps has been
calculated in Table 5 below.
Table 5: Electricity displaced (MWh) by year32
2009
Electricity equivalent (MWh)
288
2010
55333
2011
278
2012
93
2013
38
Total
1,250
Table 6 below sets out the estimated electricity produced (MWh) from PV
systems in each year, and the total annual generation from systems
installed across the Program.
32
Based on each STC issued displacing 1 MWh of electricity produced from non-renewable
resources, and useful life of system being 15 years which aligns with the CER’s deeming
provisions.
33 Adjusted to remove extraneous figures.
Department of Resources Energy and Tourism
grosvenor management consulting
56
Table 6: Theoretical annual electricity generation from PV systems funded
(MWh)34
State
ACT
Year Paid: Financial Year Ending
2009
2010
2011
2012
2013
Grand Total
32
74
405
429
500
1,440
1,818
1,616
2,876
2,317
2,601
11,228
18
60
430
213
412
1,133
3,681
887
1,868
1,767
2,421
10,625
582
550
938
342
400
2,812
TAS
24
306
391
128
278
1,127
VIC
936
3,366
3,152
1,092
1,796
10,343
WA
1,238
575
1,492
1,240
1,100
5,645
Grand
Total
8,330
7,435
11,552
7,529
9,508
44,354
NSW
NT
QLD
SA
The proportion of energy consumed by schools, which is met by onsite
generated renewable energy, is a useful measure of the extent NSSP schools
were able to generate electricity from their own renewable energy sources.
Since July 2010, NSSP applicants were required to state the school’s
electricity consumption. This information was utilised to compare the
school’s consumption needs with the CER deemed solar electricity
generated35 based on the kW installed.
Based on consumption data supplied by schools across 2011-2013, 2.4% of
the total annual electricity needs of NSSP schools was being met by NSSP
funded PV systems. This demonstrates that while a significant quantity of
electricity was generated, it still only represented a small proportion of most
school’s total electricity consumption.
The analysis shows that electricity generated from NSSP funded PV systems
made some contribution to the electricity consumption requirements of
schools, but the overall net reduction in the grid-supply of electricity was
quite low. Detailed analysis in the interim evaluation indicated that the
percentage contribution to a school’s electricity needs is a factor not only of
the size of PV system installed, but more particularly the size of school and
its electricity consumption. NSSP funded PV systems were supplying a large
proportion of a small number of smaller schools’ electricity needs.
34
The theoretical electricity generation is a predicted figure based on the capacity of each
school’s system, the CER postcode zone for the school and the expected performance of PV
systems in that postcode zone. This calculation is based on that used by the CER for the
purpose of awarding STCs for PV systems.
35
An analysis of QLD actual data for the interim report indicated that the estimated
consumption data provided by schools was quite accurate.
Department of Resources Energy and Tourism
grosvenor management consulting
57
While the amount of electricity generated may appear to be small in
proportion to most school’s electricity needs, the total estimated PV
electricity generation capacity to be installed from all funding rounds up to
2013 is 33.07 MW with annual electricity generation estimated at 44.35 GWh
based on CER’s deemed annual production for each zone36. This would be
equivalent to meeting the electricity consumption needs of 6,075 homes 37. It
represents approximately 1.62% of total solar electricity generation in
Australia38. It should be noted that solar is only one small part of total
renewable electricity generation in Australia.
Performance of systems
Performance of PV systems in line with expectations
The performance of a PV system in terms of actual electricity generated
based on installed capacity can vary for many reasons, including orientation
to the sun, shading, local variances in annual solar radiation and other
climatic variables. Performance can also vary due to accuracy of measuring
equipment and/or quality of system components and installation. For
example, this includes whether systems were flush-mounted with roof pitch
or elevated for optimal orientation with the sun. Such small changes can
account for a 7.3% reduction in performance, with the effect of flush-mount
installations being even greater at lower latitudes.
A comparison of actual performance of NSSP funded PV systems, where
known, against the CER deemed production figures39 identified that largely
NSSP funded systems were performing at expected levels.
The interim evaluation conducted further analysis on system performance of
PV installations using DCSVS data obtained for the FY2010 from the QLD
government. The analysis indicated that performance of systems installed in
QLD was above the CER deemed Zone 3 median performance of 3.79
kWh/kWp/day. This is illustrated in Figure 6 below.
36
REC Zone 1: 1.622MWh/kWp/year; Zone 2: 1.536 MWh/kWp/year; Zone 3: 1.382
MWh/kWp/year; Zone 4: 1.185 MWh/kWp/year.
37
Assuming 20kWh/day for an average household based on 3.6 kW per kWp installed. These
were the figures used in the interim report. They may not reflect current industry benchmarks.
38
It has been estimated that 2,725,265 MWh of PV energy was generated in Australia across
2012.
39
The CER expected performance is based on 30 year climatic averages.
Department of Resources Energy and Tourism
grosvenor management consulting
58
Figure 6: PV electricity generated by QLD schools in FY2010
Median system performance = 3.856 kWh/kWp/day
Upper quartile performance = 4.068 kWh/kWp/day
Lower quartile performance = 3.406 kWh/kWp/day
It should be noted that the tail end of performance typically drops away
more steeply than the lead end as the lead end of performance is physically
limited by technology and maximum available sunlight, while the tail end of
performance is impacted mostly by installation location and quality.
Downtime of systems from faults and other causes can also reduce system
performance. As a result, a small proportion of systems are operating well
below CER deemed performance.
Whilst the interim evaluation identified that system performance in NSW was
below the expected CER deemed performance, further investigation was
completed post the report which concluded that performance was generally
in line with the CER expected performance and consistent with performance
of other systems installed in NSW (Median system performance of 3.68, as
reported on PVoutput.org) .The data for NSW has since been updated and is
represented in Figure 7 below40.
40
It should be noted that this analysis has removed months with partial readings where the
system was not fully operational. It also excludes December 2011, a typically sunny month. As
such the small difference from CER estimates may be due to seasonality bias in the data used.
Department of Resources Energy and Tourism
grosvenor management consulting
59
Figure 7: Performance of NSW PV systems versus CER Zone 3 estimates41
Median system performance = 3.65kWh/kWp/day
Upper quartile performance = 3.86 kWh/kWp/day
Lower quartile performance = 3.34 kWh/kWp/day
A small number of systems (15) were found to be performing below the
expected level and were referred to NSW for investigation. NSW have
reviewed each case and committed to rectification work where it is feasible
to do so, e.g. tree lopping where panels are shaded. NSW advised that for
some schools there are limited roof space options available which
constrained the design and thus ability to achieve optimum output.
41
A range of data issues were identified following the interim evaluation which are resolved in
the graph, however, manual cleansing of data has resulted in some seasonal bias. The figures
were generated for all systems older than 12 months since their installation.
Department of Resources Energy and Tourism
grosvenor management consulting
60
Following the interim evaluation, detailed analysis was conducted by DRET
on system performance for a sample of schools in SA and WA for schools
where generation data was available. This analysis is summarised below.
Table 7: Performance of systems in SA and WA
SA
Schools examined
Number of schools performing better than expected
Number of schools performing as expected
Number of schools performing poorer than expected
Totals
WA
No.
%
No.
%
2
4%
0
0%
40
80%
35
95%
8
16%
2
5%
50
100%
37
100%
As can be seen WA schools were largely performing as expected with
explanations for the two schools performing below expectations. While SA
had more systems underperforming, 84% of schools were still performing at
or above expectations. Reasons for underperformance in the 8 schools could
not be determined and were raised with SA. SA is reviewing the 8 systems
that are underperforming to rectify where it is feasible to do so.
Overall, the above analysis indicates that system performance can vary
materially, and can vary between states. Quality of installation is a
significant factor that can impact performance. Vigilance is also required
post implementation to ensure all systems are performing as expected,
including addressing downtime of the entire PV systems or monitoring
systems.
Installations of Data Collection, Storage and Visualisation System
(DCSVS)
Many DCSVS were not reporting green and black energy, potentially limiting
educational and behavioural change outcomes
A DCSVS42 is a devise for measuring and monitoring electricity consumed by
the school and electricity generated from a school’s PV system. It can be an
important tool in monitoring performance, facilitates educational activities
and can aid in influencing further changes in behaviour around electricity
consumed.
A DCSVS was a mandatory requirement under the NSSP for schools which
installed PV systems. A number of states and territories (NSW, ACT, QLD)
42
The DCSVS is the technical term used by the NSSP to describe the data monitoring system,
which displays green data (electricity generated from the solar PV system) and black data
(electricity consumed by the school).
Department of Resources Energy and Tourism
grosvenor management consulting
61
have implemented a preferred DCSVS product and required their schools to
connect to this system. This allows those states/territories to have ongoing
access to the DCSVS data for monitoring purposes and to assist schools in
resolving issues.
In July 2009 it became a requirement that the DCSVS report both green
(solar electricity generated) and black (electricity consumed from the grid)
energy data. Prior to this requirement systems installed were only required
to report green data. The objective of reporting both was to improve the
ability to monitor electricity consumed from the grid, and therefore carbon
emissions offset, for use in education and promoting behavioural change. A
transition period was implemented to allow states/territories, schools and
suppliers/installers to adjust to the changed requirements.
Following the findings of the interim evaluation, DRET initiated an audit of
DCSVS operations in May 2012. 3,393 schools were included in the audit.
This data was sourced from DCSVS providers. Table 8 sets out the results of
the audit.
Table 8: May 2012 Audit findings of DCSVS operation.
Status
Number
Total sample size
Percentage
3,393
Unknown – data not visible
1,20143
Number assessed
2,19244
Working: Displays both back and green data45
35%
1,244
57%
Partially working: Displays only black or green data
603
27%
Not working
345
16%
A significant proportion of DCSVS were not reporting green and black data,
with many not working at all. Installations prior to Jul 2009 did not have to
comply with the requirement for black data. The data analysed indicates that
many46 installations in the following year (2009-10) did not comply, most
likely through a lack of awareness in the change of requirement. However,
43
Schools were allowed to use an intranet based DCSVS. The audit only looked at DCSVS
systems where there was evidence that the data was hosted and displayed on a web portal.
Many of the ‘unknown’ may have had an active DCSVS but data could not be seen external to
the school.
44
This sample included approximately 700 projects approved in 2010-11 and 2011-12 that
were not acquitted at the time of the audit.
45
Or green data in the case of 2008/09 installed systems.
50% partially working and 28% not working47 The results are not directly comparable to the
earlier audit, however, in excess of 80% of the sample were now reporting both green and
black data.
46
Department of Resources Energy and Tourism
grosvenor management consulting
62
this does not account for the still relatively high proportion not reporting
green data and the number not working at all.
Analysis of DCSVS data has shown that the system can be displaying both
green and black data but subsequently stops working. This can be caused by
a range of issues, for example, an IT upgrade at the school that
subsequently blocks access to the DCSVS web portal.
The failure of systems to report data may be limiting the educational and
behavioural change benefits (this is further addressed against the
assessment of the educational objective in Section 8.3).
Following the audit, DRET and the states and territories undertook a range
of activities to assist schools in rectifying issues with their DCSVS, to ensure
future projects had an operational DCSVS and to promote the use of the
data to educate students about renewable energy and energy efficiency. This
included:
 advising states that they need to ensure that the DCSVS was
operational (where PV is installed) before marking project as complete.
The final 50% instalment of funding under the NPA to the states and
territories is payable upon completion of 100% of projects, including
an operational DCSVS where a PV system is installed.
 DRET strengthening the acquittal process for future projects for nongovernment schools, requiring schools to provide evidence that the
DCSVS was displaying green and black data including providing the
DCSVS web portal link and a screen shot
 states and territories adopted similar acquittal processes with suppliers
and schools, requiring evidence that the DCSVS was operational
 regular meetings with states and territories to work through causes of
why systems were not working and agreed actions to resolve, with
follow up with schools
 distributing factsheets to schools to promote the use of the DCSVS in
achieving educational outcomes and information on how to resolve
issues if their DCSVS was not working
 distributing an information booklet to all schools that included
information on utilising the DCSVS data in lesson plans and how to
resolve issues if the school is unable to access their data, referring to
additional resources available on the NSSP website
 bulk email to schools with completed projects where the DCSVS was
not working or status unknown, to prompt schools to rectify, with
Department of Resources Energy and Tourism
grosvenor management consulting
63
DRET providing further assistance via phone to a large number of
schools
 DRET and states and territories engaging with DCSVS providers to
assist schools and installers in resolving DCSVS issues
 the providers for the most commonly used DCSVS products produced
troubleshooting guides for publication on the NSSP website
 producing case studies (word and video format) to further promote the
benefits of the DCSVS to prompt schools to take action to rectify
problems
DRET advised that a significant number of schools responded to the
correspondence and have taken action to resolve their DCSVS issues.
However, it is acknowledged that not all schools will have acted on the
advice. The NSSP has provided the supporting documentation indicated
above to enable schools to rectify issues and to promote the educational
benefits.
As a result of the changes to the acquittal process it is understood that all
projects completed since the audit have an operational DCSVS.
DRET has since further analysed DCSVS operation to monitor if there had
been improvements since the 2012 audit. The results indicate that there has
been a material improvement in the percentage of systems 47 reporting both
green and black data.
The states and territories and DRET continue to work with schools and
suppliers to ensure that outstanding projects have an operational DCSVS.
47
The results are not directly comparable to the earlier audit, however, in excess of 80% of the
sample were now reporting both green and black data.
Department of Resources Energy and Tourism
grosvenor management consulting
64
Size and costs of systems installed
Size of PV systems installed increased across NSSP
As was found in the interim evaluation, the average size of PV systems
installed grew dramatically across the period of the Program. This is set out
in Figure 8 below.
Figure 8: Size of systems installed
Cost of PV systems declined, including relative to other renewable energy
systems
The growth in size of systems installed is most likely to be attributed to the
significant reduction in costs of PV systems across this period. This reflects
the overall reduction in industry costs of PV corresponding with the growth
in the market. This is represented in Figure 9 below.
Department of Resources Energy and Tourism
grosvenor management consulting
65
Figure 9: Cost per Watt of NSSP systems installed by year
The above analysis shows that schools took advantage of the decline in
prices, using the $50,000 grant to install ever increasing size of systems,
with many schools even installing larger systems than was approved in their
application for funding. As is demonstrated in Figure 10, this was particularly
the case for non-government schools.
As average system size installed grew, the relative cost per Watt also further
improved due to the economies of scale associated with installing larger
systems.
Figure 9 also highlights the improvement in relative cost per Watt of PV
systems versus other renewable energy systems. This justifies the much
higher uptake of PV systems.
Some states and sectors installed larger systems
Further analysis of the data indicates that the non-government sector on
average installed larger systems including taking greater advantage of the
reduced PV system prices by having a much greater increase in size of
installed PV system over the period of NSSP. Figure 10 below indicates the
differential in average system size across the NSSP between state/territory
government schools and the non-government sector.
Department of Resources Energy and Tourism
grosvenor management consulting
66
Figure 10: Average kW of PV installation by state/territory for government
schools and non-government sector
The differential in system size was in part a reflection of the approach
adopted by various states and territories and the maximum grant amount
that schools were eligible for over the life of the Program. For example:
 ACT installed more systems in later funding rounds, enabling it to take
advantage of lower prices to install larger system sizes. Additional
funding was also contributed by the ACT government.
 NSW, SA and QLD reduced the funding available to schools such that
more schools could be funded, which meant only smaller system sizes
could be installed48
 Prior to the 2011/12 funding round a larger proportion of nongovernment schools received a grant of up to $100,000 than
government schools49. The average value of NSSP grants for nongovernment schools was $52,481 compared to government schools of
$37,39850. This would have enabled larger PV systems to be installed
contributing to the higher kW of PV installation in the non-government
sector
 Some states tended to install larger systems than was approved in the
government school’s application, which particularly benefited those
48
NSW also had the largest number of schools eligible for reduced funding of $15,000 due to
schools being approved to receive funding under BER.
49
134 non-government schools received up to $100,000, in comparison to 51 government
schools.
50
ANAO Audit Report No.39 2011/12 p.118.
Department of Resources Energy and Tourism
grosvenor management consulting
67
states where delays were experienced between application and
receiving funding
Cost of systems became more consistent
As was found in the interim evaluation, there was a considerable range in
cost per Watt for systems installed across Australia. However, not only did
system costs reduce across the period of NSSP, the range in cost of systems
reduced with costs becoming more consistent across the period of the NSSP.
This is represented in Figure 11.
Figure 11: Range in cost of systems
Department of Resources Energy and Tourism
grosvenor management consulting
68
Cost of PV systems generally consistent with industry benchmarks
The comparison of costs paid for NSSP systems versus available industry
benchmarks is a useful measure of the value for money achieved. The
comparison of solar panel module costs versus industry benchmarks is
presented below51.
Table 9: Industry standard price (AU$/W) for solar panels52
Year
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
Typical module price
8.00
6.00
3.20
2.10
1.80
Best price
5.00
3.00
2.00
1.20
0.90
NSSP median price (FY
ending)
6.86
6.11
3.16
2.20
2013
1.45
The comparison of total PV system prices (ie. panels, inverters, frames,
installation etc.) is included in Table 10 below.
Table 10: Australian trends in typical system prices for grid applications up
to 5 kWp53 compared to NSSP PV system prices paid (AU$ ex GST)
2012 2013
Year (calendar)
2008
2009 2010 2011
$/W
12.00
9.00
6.00
3.90
3.00
NSSP median PV system prices
7.19
9.80
5.98
4.97
3.67
($/W) (FY ending)
The comparisons highlight that while panel and total system costs were
largely in line with industry benchmarks, NSSP funded systems were slightly
above ‘typical’ prices in some years. For example, total system prices (Table
10) were slightly above benchmarks in the final two funding rounds.
Investigations indicate that many of the component costs were above
benchmarks, with a much higher proportion sourced from Europe as
compared to the much higher proportion sourced from China in the wider
market. This suggests that NSSP funded higher quality systems which will
hopefully translate into better performance and reliability, and longer life.
ANAO found that the cost of PV systems was comparable between
government and non-government schools. For example, in the 2011-12
funding round, there was only around 3 % cost difference per kW in favour
51
A direct comparison is not available due to the industry benchmarks being based on a
calendar year and NSSP data on financial year. Note that all prices are pre-STC discount.
52
Australian PV Association www.apva.org.au. The Australian PV Association currently
represents the most appropriate and reliable publicly available source consisting of companies,
agencies, individuals and academics.
53
Australian PV Association www.apva.org.au.
Department of Resources Energy and Tourism
grosvenor management consulting
69
of non-government schools, where government and non-government schools
were planning to install 5 to 10 kW PV systems 54.
Cost of abatement
The cost of abatement is a useful measure in assessing cost effectiveness of
NSSP. The cost of abatement measures the cost spent under the NSSP to
offset each tonne of carbon that would have been consumed from nonrenewable sources. Again, it was only possible to measure the carbon offset
through the installation of PV systems, which would have represented the
bulk of the offset.
It should be noted that not only does this analysis not take into account
carbon offsets achieved through other renewable energy systems and
energy efficiency items installed, but it also excludes any offsets achieved
through reduction in energy consumption via education and changed
behaviour.
DRET conducted calculations on the cost of abatement in line with the
approach taken for the interim evaluation report and DCCEE policy 55.
The calculated total cumulative abatement of NSSP PV installations was
0.476Mt CO2-e over the useful lifetime of the PV systems, which is 1.6% of
the abatement to be delivered by the Renewable Energy Target by 2020
(29.9 Mt CO2-e)11.
Estimates provided by DRET have suggested that the resource cost of
abatement for NSSP PV is in the vicinity of $196 per tonne carbon dioxide
equivalent56.
A number of variables can have a significant impact on the calculated cost of
abatement including the cost of electricity offset (cents/kWh), indexation of
electricity prices, significant differences in feed in tariffs between states and
territories, performance of the systems in terms of electricity generated,
installation costs and useful life of the system.
The analysis performed estimated a resource cost of abatement within the
range of $104 -$359/tCO2-e. The large range highlights the sensitivity of
the cost to the impact of the variables.
However, the above estimates prepared by DRET appear to be very
conservative, including when compared to the methodology used by the
54
55
56
ANAO Audit Report No.39 2011-12 p.30.
Estimating the cost of abatement, Framework and practical guidance. October 2011, DCCEE.
Dollars reported in terms of the base year 2009.
Department of Resources Energy and Tourism
grosvenor management consulting
70
Productivity Commission57, and the actual cost of abatement may well be at
the lower end.
The NSSP’s cost of abatement compares favourably with Productivity
Commission benchmarks, which calculated the Australian small-scale PV
offset emissions to be $177-497/tCO2-e. It also compares favourably to
other small scale renewable energy programs. 58
The comparison to the cost of other similar carbon reduction policy
measures involving small scale renewable energy is set out below using the
Productivity Commission benchmarks.
Figure 12: Cost of abatement as compared to benchmarks59
As for the NSSP figures, these calculations ignore any flow on energy offsets
such as education, behavioural change and industry development.
57
For example, the Productivity Commission in its document ‘Carbon Emission Policies in Key
Economies: Responses to Feedback on Certain Estimates for Australia’ (Supplementary
Research Report, December 2011) acknowledged that useful life of PV systems may well be
longer than the original estimate used of 20 years, utilising 30 years in the revised estimates.
DRET has used 10-20 years in its estimates, and 15 years for the ‘Best’ estimate.
58
At the lower end or below the cost of small scale solar and renewable energy generation, for
example, the Solar Homes and Communities Program and that delivered by the Small Scale
component of the Renewable Energy Target (SRET) and state based feed in tariffs.
59
Sources: Productivity Commission, Carbon Emission Policies in Key Economies: Research
Report, May 2011; Carbon Emission Policies in Key Economies: Responses to Feedback on
Certain Estimates for Australia: Supplementary Research Report, December 2011.
Department of Resources Energy and Tourism
grosvenor management consulting
71
Energy efficiency systems installed and funded
Table 11 below sets out the proportion of NSSP schools which installed
energy efficiency items using NSSP funding.
Table 11: NSSP schools installing energy efficiency items
Financial Yr ending
NSSP schools
2010
2011
1,429
1,188
1,229
787
811
5,310
378
397
428
186
170
1,559
26%
33%
35%
24%
21%
29%
Energy Efficient items
installed
% Energy Efficient items
installations
2012
2013
Grand
Total
2009
As can be seen, there has been a decline in the number and proportion of
schools installing energy efficiency items in recent years. Further analysis
has identified that in the initial years of NSSP, many schools applied for both
PV and energy efficiency installations, while in more recent years there was
a tendency to only apply for a PV installation OR the installation of energy
efficiency items.
Historically, energy efficiency items have been more likely to deliver better
returns in terms of reductions in electricity consumed from the grid per
dollar invested than PV systems. However, no conclusion can be drawn that
more of the NSSP funding and projects could have been directed towards
energy efficiency items. Schools may well have already implemented energy
efficiency measures within their school prior to or independent of the NSSP,
particularly given they are typically lower cost. Schools may well have
sought to apply the NSSP funding towards PV systems to cover the more
significant capital cost that otherwise could not be afforded.
The significant reduction in the cost of PV systems may also have
contributed to the trend to increasingly install PV systems.
Department of Resources Energy and Tourism
grosvenor management consulting
72
Table 12 below sets out what sorts of energy efficient items were installed
using NSSP funding.
Table 12: Number of schools installing energy efficiency items by type
Financial Yr
ending
2009
2010
2011
2012
2013
Grand
Total
NSSP $
Ceiling Fans
30
76
56
21
21
204
365,222
Door Closers
19
73
49
19
18
178
450,565
Draught Seals
16
59
45
14
11
145
48,141
231
296
342
145
137
1,151
13,396,855
External Window
Fittings
35
84
55
18
10
202
922,815
Insulation
41
74
2
0
0
117
453,839
169
149
202
63
62
645
2,540,329
Shade Awnings
62
123
97
29
21
332
2,215,701
Sky Lights
28
75
67
22
22
214
670,286
Solar Thermal
14
50
43
12
12
131
140,151
Energy Efficient
Lighting
Sensors, timers,
thermostats, etc
Energy efficient lighting was the most popular energy efficiency item
installed. Energy efficiency lighting accounted for 63% of NSSP expenditure
on energy efficiency items. Note that insulation was removed from being an
eligible item under the NSSP in the last three funding rounds.
Table 13 sets out the expenditure on energy efficient lighting by year, and
the actual number of lights installed, to replace existing lights, for the final
three years (information on numbers of lights was not available for earlier
years). An estimate of the total number of lights replaced has been
generated using the average cost per light replacement for the final three
years ($59.37/fitting).
Table 13: Energy efficient lighting expenditure and quantity installed
Expenditure on
Energy Efficient
Lighting ($)
2009
2010
2011
2012
2013
Grand
Total
2,579,125
3,384,713
4,322,110
1,554,597
1,556,310
13,396,855
69,992
29,406
25,795
Actual number of
Lights Replaced
Estimated number
of lights replaced
Department of Resources Energy and Tourism
225,640
grosvenor management consulting
73
Other findings from the data provided include:
 expenditure on energy efficient lighting reduced materially in 2012
 South Australian non-government schools and West Australian
government schools spent a significantly lower proportion on lighting
but more money on sensors, timers and thermostats
 Queensland government schools spent significantly more on shade
awnings
NSSP funding applications and guidelines did not focus on any particular
energy efficiency item as being preferable, which provided the flexibility for
schools (and state/territory agencies) to make their own decisions about
which energy efficiency items best met their needs, within the context of
their own climate, facilities and past energy efficiency measures.
Energy efficiencies and offsets
Energy efficiency (intensity) of schools improved across the period of NSSP
While electricity consumption of NSSP funded schools typically increased
across the period of the NSSP, this increase would have been more
significant if it were not for NSSP funded renewable energy systems
installed60. The electricity (kWh/year) imported grew at a lesser rate than
total energy consumption.
This is best illustrated by the data from QLD which is presented in Figure 13
below. The graph identifies the median electricity imported from the grid per
school versus total electricity consumed, including electricity generated by
NSSP funded systems.
60
Climatic variables have not been considered in terms of the impact on consumption.
Department of Resources Energy and Tourism
grosvenor management consulting
74
160,000
140,000
120,000
100,000
80,000
60,000
40,000
20,000
0
2009
2010
Median Consumption (Net Import) - kWh/year
2011
2012
Median Consumption (Gross) - kWh/year
Figure 13: Total and imported energy consumption – median per NSSP QLD
school
Factors such as student numbers and size of school buildings impact on
energy consumption. Size of schools, in particular, grew during NSSP, in part
driven by other capital funding programs such as the ‘Building the Education
Revolution’. Figure 14 demonstrates the increase in floor space of buildings
across the period of NSSP funding for all states and territories.
Figure 14: Total Australian students enrolled and floor area
Department of Resources Energy and Tourism
grosvenor management consulting
75
45.0
45.0
40.0
40.0
35.0
35.0
30.0
30.0
25.0
25.0
20.0
20.0
15.0
15.0
10.0
10.0
5.0
5.0
0.0
0.0
2009
2010
Median Net kWh/year/m2
2011
2012
Median Gross kWh/year/m2
Figure 15: Median energy intensity of QLD schools
Energy efficient lighting alone reduced electricity consumption by 0.9%
As indicated in Table 14 earlier, NSSP funded an estimated 225,640 energy
efficient lights. Prior analysis conducted for the interim evaluation 61
suggested that these can be expected to reduce energy consumption by an
estimated 46.72 kWh/year/fitting, which would equate to 10,541,941 kWh
offset per annum. This equates to a 0.9% saving in electricity consumption
for NSSP funded schools62.
1.1.1 Conclusions – energy efficiency and renewable energy
NSSP funded a significant amount of renewable energy installations with a
significant emphasis on PV systems, with 91% of NSSP funded schools
61
62
Calculated using QLD data.
Based on total consumption of 1,213,822,469 kWh per annum for all NSSP funded schools.
Department of Resources Energy and Tourism
grosvenor management consulting
76
Median Gross kWh/year/m2
Median Net kWh/year/m2
Energy intensity, the average energy consumed per square metre
(kWh/year/m2) is the best measure of change in energy efficiency as it
separates out increases in energy associated with increases in building size.
Once again using data from QLD, Figure 15 demonstrates that there was a
particular reduction in the median energy intensity reflecting that energy
efficiency in QLD schools improved over the period of NSSP. This may have
been contributed to by both the energy efficiency improvements resulting
from NSSP funded projects, and from improvements in building energy
efficiency from the new facilities which would more likely be using modern
energy efficient designs and equipment. It may also have been impacted by
changes in behaviour which may have been influenced by educational and
awareness activities generated from NSSP and other similar programs.
installing PV systems. 33,082 kW of PV system capacity was installed with a
further 1,250 kW for solar hot water and heat pump systems.
The estimated electricity generation of systems installed to 2013 as 44,354
MWh which is estimated at representing 2.4% of those school’s electricity
consumption needs.
A range of issues have been identified as impacting on performance of some
PV systems. These issues are being further explored by relevant states.
However, overall systems appear to be operating in line with expectations. A
significant proportion of DCSVS were identified as not reporting both black
and green energy data, which potentially limits the impact on educational
outcomes and behavioural change. DRET and the states and territories have
implemented a number of measures to address this issue for all PV
installations in recent funding rounds, and are progressively working to
address any systems still identified as not fully operational.
The NSSP could have chosen to require schools to install one specific DCSVS
product and have access to the central database to view performance of
NSSP funded systems and provide alerts to schools if the system was not
reporting green or black data. Whilst this would have provided a valuable
dataset for program analysis and sharing with other institutions interested in
PV installations, establishing an approved list of DCSVS providers allowed
the data monitoring system market to develop and gave schools and states
and territories the flexibility to choose a product that best met their needs.
Those states who chose to require their schools to install a particular product
and have ongoing access to data are well placed to maintain systems and
maximise the benefits of systems installed.
The energy efficiency measures installed have enabled schools to further
reduce electricity consumption. Energy efficiency lighting, the most popular
energy efficiency item installed, is estimated to have reduced electricity
needs by 0.9%.
Energy intensity, a measure of energy efficiency, of school facilities has been
shown to have improved across the period of NSSP, with evidence to
suggest that NSSP funded renewable energy systems and energy efficiency
measures making some contribution to this.
The cost of abatement of the Program compares favourably to other
equivalent programs focussing on solar generation.
Department of Resources Energy and Tourism
grosvenor management consulting
77
8.2 Rainwater
The following section outlines the findings against the NSSP objective 3 allowing schools to adapt to climate change by making use of rainwater
collected from school roofs.
The key indicators used to assess NSSP schools adapting to climate change
were:

the uptake in the installation of rainwater tanks

the degree to which rainwater collected was maximised through
appropriate sizing and connection of the tanks

the degree to which the schools’ reliance on mains water was
reduced through the appropriate use of harvested rainwater.
Rainwater tanks installed and funded
Overall low uptake of rain water tank installations
Table 14 below details the number of rain water tank (RWT) installations
funded under NSSP.
Table 14: Rainwater tank installations by state and sector
Government
ACT
NSW
NT
QLD
SA
Non-Government
Total
1
2
3
162
61
223
4
2
6
134
31
165
73
13
86
TAS
12
4
16
VIC
141
62
203
WA
91
18
109
Overall, there was a relatively low uptake of rainwater tanks by schools as
compared to energy efficiency measures, particularly PV systems. It is
possible, at least in part, that this is a factor of economics whereby the
economic benefit of rain water tank installation is lower than that of PV due
to the differential between energy and water costs. It could be argued that
solar and energy related measures were inferred as being more of a focus of
the NSSP which biased applications towards energy related projects. The
NSSP guidelines encouraged schools to install solar PV systems, as schools
were eligible for $50,000 if they installed at least 2 kW.
Department of Resources Energy and Tourism
grosvenor management consulting
78
If they chose to install less than 2 kW or other eligible items, schools were
then only eligible for $30,000.
In addition, this is likely to be a reflection of the differing policies and focus
between the states and territories. For example, the ACT had implemented a
program prior to NSSP installing rain water tanks at all government schools.
Queensland had a similar program. A number of states also provided
subsidies for installation in which schools would have been eligible to apply.
Additionally, the Commonwealth Community Water Grants funded water
tanks in schools. Such measures would have reduced demand for rain water
tank installation funding under NSSP.
Government schools installed more rainwater tanks than non-government
schools
Further analysis indicates that adoption levels for rainwater tank installations
vary dramatically between state and sector. This is illustrated in the Figure
16 below.
Figure 16: Percentage of NSSP schools installing rain water tanks
Figure 16 highlights that overall government schools had a higher
installation rate for rainwater tanks than non-government schools in many
states.
The level of uptake also varied materially between the states and territories
for non-government schools.
Department of Resources Energy and Tourism
grosvenor management consulting
79
Rainwater harvested
Amount of water harvested would improve by increasing area of roof
collection, and an increased tank size will reduce water loss
Rainwater harvested is a function of annual rainfall, installed tank capacity
(litres) and surface area of roof connected to the rain water tank. It should
be noted that timing of rainfall and consumption of water can impact on rain
water harvested. For example, periods of low water consumption tend to
correspond with high rainfall due to high use of water for irrigation purposes.
As such, much of the theoretical rain water that could be harvested may well
still be wasted via tanks filling beyond capacity in high rainfall and low water
consumption periods with the balance often going down the drain. As such it
is only possible to look at the correlation between rainfall, catchment size
and tank capacity to test whether schools funded were maximising rain
water harvested.
Table 15 below sets out for each state and territories the litres of installed
tank capacity, annual rainfall for locations where tanks were installed and
the area of roof connected to the rain water tanks. It also details the
theoretical, estimated rain water harvesting capacity in litres collected off
the roof space from the annual rainfall63.
Table 15: Average rainfall, installed tank capacity, roof area and harvesting
potential by state and sector
3
2
School
State
Avg. Annual
4
Water harvesting
potential per
school
Avg.
Annual 5
Rainfall
(mm)
6
Avg. Catchment Size
(sq meters)
Avg. Tank
Capacity
(L)
7
ACT
8
185
9
664
10
337
11
65,333
12
NSW
13
502
14
966
15
623
16
36,242
17
NT
18
376
19
1,148
20
464
21
81,594
22
QLD
23
460
24
1,155
25
518
26
37,537
27
SA
28
222
29
521
30
563
31
66,132
32
TAS
33
273
34
794
35
452
36
27,044
37
VIC
38
428
39
702
40
738
41
49,987
42
WA
43
194
44
772
45
322
46
61,063
Figure 17 overleaf compares the above information as an average per school
funded for rain water tank installations by state.
63
This amount is loss adjusted for losses in roof wetting and other forms of loss.
Department of Resources Energy and Tourism
grosvenor management consulting
80
Figure 17: Average rainfall, tank capacity, roof area and harvesting potential
per school
The graph demonstrates:

NT, Qld and NSW achieved higher average water harvesting rates
primarily through higher rainfalls

QLD and NSW installed smaller capacity tanks but connected to
larger areas of roof space, which in combination with higher rainfalls
would likely translate to higher loss rates through overflow

NT installed much larger average tank sizes which would minimise
loss

VIC still achieved very high water harvesting levels with a much
lower annual rainfall by connecting to larger roof areas

TAS installed the smallest average tank sizes which would increase
their loss, and given the lower rainfall, connection to larger roof
areas would have improved water harvesting potential

SA primarily harvest less water due to having the lowest rainfall
Department of Resources Energy and Tourism
grosvenor management consulting
81

While the ACT installed very few tanks, their water harvesting
potential was limited by connecting to smaller roof spaces in a
location involving low rainfall

WA’s water harvesting potential was also limited by connecting the
tanks to smaller roof areas.
Overall, larger tank sizes will minimise loss through higher rainfall periods
and maximise storage capacity. Connection to larger roof areas will
maximise water harvesting, which will be particularly important in lower
rainfall zones. The ability to connect to larger roof areas, and the
justification for larger tanks attaching to this, is of course influenced by size
of school, with small schools having less ability to connect to larger areas
and justify larger tanks.
The hypothetical water harvesting potential of the total NSSP funded
installed tank capacity was approximately 6.5 of annual water consumption
of those schools installing a rain water tank 64.
Use of harvested rainwater
Water loss would be reduced through use of water for purposes other than
just small-scale irrigation
As indicated above, while increasing the water harvesting potential is one
measure of reducing the reliance on mains water, the other measure would
be reducing the loss of harvested water through tanks overflowing. As
indicated previously, where rainfall is seasonal, it makes sense that using
harvested rain for small scale irrigation purposes during high rainfall periods
will reduce loss. Using harvested rain for small scale irrigation only will
obviously increase loss as irrigation will be occurring during low rainfall
periods and rain harvesting will be occurring when no irrigation is required
(tanks will overflow as they are full).
Many might argue that irrigation in itself is not an appropriate use of water
in a dry climate; however, it is not the remit of this evaluation to consider
the appropriateness of the use of water.
Figure 18 overleaf sets out the use of water by state for data collected by
NSSP during the periods 2011-2013.
64
Consumption is based on estimates provided in 2011-2013 funding applications.
Department of Resources Energy and Tourism
grosvenor management consulting
82
Figure 18: Purposes for which rainwater tanks were connected65
Many schools where tanks were installed were not connected to mains water
and therefore any water capture will aid in adapting to a dryer climate as it
provides additional water harvesting and storage potential for all purposes. A
significant proportion of schools still utilised their collected water for flushing
toilets. Low connections for laundry use are likely to be a function of many
schools not operating laundries. Low levels of connection for potable use will
likely be a reflection of health policies and concerns.
From the data provided it is not possible to accurately identify what
proportion of schools are only using the rainwater tanks for small-scale
irrigation purposes. From the survey responses received it would appear that
more than a third, but less than half of the respondents have their rain
water tanks connected for small-scale irrigation purposes only. Once schools
which are not connected to mains water (ie. have no choice) are removed
from the analysis, a higher proportion would only be using water from the
rain water tanks for small-scale irrigation.
Cost of installations
The comparison of installation costs is provided in Table 16 overleaf.
65
Not connected to mains water.
Department of Resources Energy and Tourism
grosvenor management consulting
83
Table 16: Cost per litre of tanks installed
School
State
Government
ACT
$/tank
Litre
17,723
32,000
0.55
2,635,517
5,454,500
0.48
101,894
380,562
0.27
QLD
1,374,733
4,469,199
0.31
SA
1,107,811
4,869,750
0.23
TAS
116,414
277,084
0.42
VIC
2,297,567
6,801,189
0.34
WA
1,535,330
6,035,199
0.25
33,874
164,000
0.21
1,131,689
2,555,054
0.44
42,175
109,000
0.39
QLD
816,528
1,649,358
0.50
SA
227,271
817,621
0.28
TAS
41,266
155,616
0.27
VIC
1,151,352
3,296,113
0.35
WA
181,027
620,641
0.29
NSW
NT
NonGovernment
Installed
Capacity
(litres)
Expenditure
($ ex GST)
ACT
NSW
NT
The above analysis shows that there was considerable difference in
installation costs per litre. This may be attributed to a range of factors such
as average tank size, number of tanks installed and area of roof space
connected to the tank. It is not possible to draw further conclusions on cost
comparisons between states and sectors.
8.2.1
Conclusions - rainwater
NSSP funded just under 38 million litres of installed capacity and 2,640 ML
of water harvesting potential. However, the actual amount of mains water
offset will be influenced by water loss.
While no conclusions can be drawn on the effectiveness of NSSP in
minimising water loss the analysis does highlight that to further minimise
loss and maximise mains water offset, NSSP, states and territories would
need to have:

maximised the area of roof to which tanks are connected

ensured tank sizes are appropriate to both the roof catchment area
and annual rainfall to maximise storage capacity

maximised the use of water for purposes involving consumption
during higher rainfall periods i.e. uses other than small scale
irrigation.
Department of Resources Energy and Tourism
grosvenor management consulting
84
8.3 Educational Benefits
One of the five key objectives of the NSSP is to allow schools to provide
educational benefits for school students and their communities.
Key findings of the final NSSP evaluation are by and large consistent with
the findings of the interim evaluation. For the purpose of completion, key
themes and associated findings of the interim evaluation are summarised
below together with additional information ascertained through the final
evaluation of the NSSP.
Key outcomes and any new findings, identified through the final evaluation,
in achieving the educational objective of the NSSP are explored following
Table 17 below.
Key findings of the interim evaluation
The introduction of the NSSP contributed to a variety of educational
initiatives in the form of changes to lesson plans and other activities to
promote the NSSP at a school and state level. States and territories,
individual schools, commercial PV installers/renewable energy providers as
well as DRET contributed in different ways and to varying degrees to the
achievement of educational benefits, demonstrated by the findings of the
interim and final evaluations of the NSSP.
The following table outlines the key findings of the interim evaluation and
validation based on the evidence collected for the final evaluation.
Table 17: Key findings of the interim evaluations of the NSSP
Key message
Interim evaluation
Final evaluation
States and territories
Contribution
of states and
territories of
fundamental
importance for
the realisation
of educational
benefits under
the NSSP

linked the NSSP with their own state-based
energy efficiency and solar programs to
leverage funds for the realisation of
educational benefits

drew on the resources, knowledge and
experience of commercial PV service
providers

undertook a range of activities to launch
and promote the NSSP, while the approach
and extent of promotions varied

utilised the NSSP as a vehicle to promote
the state’s own climate change policies and
Department of Resources Energy and Tourism

Confirmed

the
program’s
connection
to AuSSI
was seen as
beneficial in
achieving
educational
benefits
grosvenor management consulting
85
Key message
Interim evaluation
Final evaluation
programs plus related federal programs
such as AuSSI.
Key message
Interim evaluation
Final evaluation
Schools
Hands-on
learning
approach
important for the
understanding
and promotion of
climate change

experienced both benefits and
challenges in realising their educational
gains with existing financial and human
resources constraints

undertook numerous events to raise
awareness and promote the
environmental and educational benefits
being achieved through their NSSP
project to students and their local
community

NSSP installations set a practical and
tangible example, and were a
contributing factor in raising awareness
and promoting sustainability
 Confirmed
 the extent
and type of
promotional
activities
between
schools
varied,
almost all
schools
conducted an
event and/or
placed an
article in the
local
newspaper
about their
NSSP project
 summary of
educational
activities
undertaken
by schools
are further
outlined in
the section
following.
Industry
Support by
industry
importance for
achieving
educational
benefits


PV system installers in some states
developed additional service offerings
to assist schools in meeting the
educational requirements of the
NSSP
smart meter devices and their
associated tracking websites were
geared towards educational
outcomes
Department of Resources Energy and Tourism

Confirmed

note: the
assessment of
the industry in
relation to the
achievement of
educational
benefits was
limited in the
grosvenor management consulting
86
Key message
Interim evaluation
Final evaluation

a number of non-government
organisations provided assistance
with ideas and resources for teaching
activities on water and energy
conservation

engaged in a variety of
promotional events and activities
including media coverage to
promote the NSSP
final evaluation
DRET
DCSVS data
requirement key
in achieving
educational
benefits for
students and the
wider community

encouraged schools to conduct
energy and water use efficiency
audits which supported a greater
awareness for the need of
renewable energy sources and
measures

provided a variety of learning
and teaching materials on the
NSSP website, improving the
understanding of school staff
about the NSSP project

Confirmed

additional
educational activities
and information
provided by DRET
following the interim
evaluation are
outlined in the
section following.
Additional and supporting findings of the final evaluation
Differences in educational outcomes for NSSP schools
A central aim of the NSSP was to educate students and the wider community
about renewable energy and the importance of conserving energy and water
resources.
Many stakeholders considered the educational aspect of the NSSP the real
benefit and most important part of the program.
The extent to which educational benefits were achieved varied amongst
schools.
When asking schools to describe their activities to teach students about
renewable energy/energy efficiency, survey results showed that NSSP
schools engaged in a range of educational activities.
In line with the findings of the interim evaluation, educational activities
included, amongst others:

use of DCSVS data in lessons
Department of Resources Energy and Tourism
grosvenor management consulting
87



incorporation of environment and sustainability topics in science and
geography
teachings on solar and water conservation
participation of the school in world environment day.
Almost 50% of surveyed schools incorporate the subject of energy efficiency
in their learning materials as a result of the NSSP.
“The NSSP was a great starting point for our school to develop a
sustainability program. We now have a dedicated renewable energy
program in our curriculum”
While in many cases, teachings about renewable energy/energy efficiency
were primarily driven by the requirements of the national curriculum 66, other
schools seized the opportunity presented through their NSSP project to
engage in extra-curricular activities.
For example in some schools student committees and clubs were established
where students actively analysed data, identified alternative energy saving
measures and then presented their findings back to the class. Through these
clubs and committees, students, in contrast to teachers, promoted
sustainability to their peers.
Schools participating in the NSSP were also involved in a number of interschool competitions to increase the awareness of renewable energy sources
and promote energy efficiency. For example, in WA schools took part in an
area-based competition to be the school with the highest reduction in
electricity consumption over a period of six weeks. In QLD a competition
encouraged students to develop strategies to reduce water usage.
The achievement of educational outcomes was clearly linked to the
promotional activities as well as collaborations established to raise the
profile of the NSSP project within the school and wider community. While the
extent and type of promotional activities between schools varied, almost all
schools who responded to the survey conducted an event and/or placed an
article in their school’s newsletter about the NSSP project
Over 35% of schools who responded to the survey advised that,
collaboration had taken place with the wider community, students’ parents
or the states and territories. Many schools engaged with community partners
such as the local council and involved parents in their NSSP project.
66
Sustainability is incorporated as a cross-curriculum priority in the Australian Curriculum with,
in particular, solar power forming part of the science and history education syllabus. The
Sustainability Curriculum Framework was established in 2010.
Department of Resources Energy and Tourism
grosvenor management consulting
88
Figure 19 identifies whether any collaboration took place with entities or
people outside the schools and the level of behavioural change of
students/teachers as a result of the NSSP project, as reported in survey
responses.
100%
80%
60%
40%
20%
0%
Yes - collaboration
Noticeably changed
No - collaboration
Somewhat changed
Not at all
Figure 19: Collaborations and associated behavioural change
Note: Responses indicating that the school did not know whether any collaboration
had been undertaken or whether a behavioural change had occurred have been
removed from this figure.
Of those schools which reported no change in student behaviour as a result
of the NSSP, 62% did not undertake any collaboration to promote their
NSSP project. As this figure indicates, schools that conducted promotional
activities and engaged parents and/or the wider community in their NSSP
project were more likely to report behavioural changes.
According to the survey, 6.3% of participating schools stated that the
behaviour of staff and students noticeably changed, 62.4% of schools
reported that it somewhat changed, and in 15.6% of cases the behaviour did
not change at all.67 Behavioural changes that have been achieved as a result
of the NSSP are further explored in Section 10 of this report.
Achieving educational outcomes takes continuous effort
Throughout the survey responses it was evident that some schools were
continuously updating and tailoring their lessons and sustainability plans to
attract and maintain the interest of students. For example, a school in VIC
indicated that it was continuously looking for new ways to involve students
67
A further 15.7% of surveyed schools responded that they did know whether a behavioural
change had occurred.
Department of Resources Energy and Tourism
grosvenor management consulting
89
in environmental activities. Another school in NSW noted that it had adopted
activity and experiment based projects to attract the interest of its teenage
students.
“Our challenge will be to keep their interest and excitement and
continuing the various programs we will be putting in place”
Sustainability and energy efficiency activities were often a focus for schools
at the commencement of their NSSP project. However overtime, the interest
and initial enthusiasm faded due to competing educational commitments.
For example, one government school claimed that the state education
department’s increasing focus on the National Assessment Program –
Literacy and Numeracy (NAPLAN) and standardised testing results had
pushed sustainability from the classroom. This meant that schools were
prevented from incorporating energy efficiency into lessons due to time and
resource constraints.
The difficulty of being continuously committed was also demonstrated by
those schools that encountered significant delays with their NSSP project
installation. In those instances, schools reported that the momentum and
motivation for the project was lost.
“In the scheme of all our other demands, requirements and
obligations, this project is well down the list”
Declining commitment and student interest, and competing educational
priorities created barriers to the achievement of the NSSP’s educational
objectives for many schools. This emphasises the continuous effort required
by teachers and school staff to overcome these barriers and achieve the
desired educational outcomes.
DCSVS implementation in educational plans
DCSVS data collection and usage remains a key contributing factor in
achieving educational benefits
To advance learning outcomes under the NSSP, schools were obliged under
the NSSP to install a DCSVS with their solar power or renewable energy
system. The installation of DCSVS was a key component for obtaining
educational benefits, as it allowed schools to track their electricity
generation and usage, including against other schools. The system’s features
assisted schools to develop an increased understanding of their energy
management processes, and subsequently, through greater awareness,
encouraged positive behaviours (further details in Section 10).
Department of Resources Energy and Tourism
grosvenor management consulting
90
“The monitoring system shows the environmental benefits of the
energy produced in a form that has more meaning, particularly for
the student”
As smart meters varied in features and price, DRET developed a set of
requirements and specifications to ensure consistency in the information
collected by schools and to clarify the requirements for the meters.68 In
addition, DCSVS providers, states and territories and DRET developed
DCSVS information products to assist schools in managing their DCSVS and
utilising the data. This assisted teaching staff to integrate DCSVS data in
lesson plans.
Based on survey responses, 27.5% of schools, which monitored their
DCSVS, displayed the data in a way which was accessible to their students
and the wider community. For instance, some streamed DCSVS data directly
onto a TV screen in the school’s library to show its students and staff how
much electricity their PV system had been generating and how much carbon
had been offset. Another school in VIC displayed their DCSVS data on a
screen in the foyer.
While only 35% of survey respondents utilised the DCSVS data in their
lessons plans, almost 50% of schools were planning to do so in the near
future.
One contributing factor in the lack of data usage was the technical issues
that schools experienced relating to the set up and connection of the
school’s DCSVS.
According to the survey, schools participating in earlier NSSP funding rounds
were less likely to record both their electricity generated and consumed with
their DCSVS compared to later funding rounds. This possibly contributed to
the finding that the number of schools that did not utilise DCSVS in lessons
plans was significantly higher of those schools that were funded in earlier
funding rounds, illustrated in Figure 20 overleaf.
68
DRET developed the Data Collection, Storage and Visualisation Systems Requirements and
Specifications and Data Collection, Storage and Visualisation System Approved Components List
from which DCSVS components had to be sourced in order to be eligible under the NSSP.
Department of Resources Energy and Tourism
grosvenor management consulting
91
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
30%
Yes
Not yet, but
planning to
in the near
future
20%
No
50%
40%
10%
0%
2008/09
2009/10
2010/11
2011/12
2012/13
Figure 20: Schools incorporating DCSVS data into lessons plans (by funding
year)
The above figure also highlighted that the majority of schools in later
funding rounds have yet to incorporate their DCSVS data in lesson plans and
thus, are yet to receive the full educational benefits of the Program.
Following the NSSP interim evaluation, DRET undertook a variety of actions
to address the issues constraining the wider use of DCSVS data.
Most recently, the Department developed text and video case studies and a
customised information booklet, which all government and non-government
schools received in May/June 2013, to further promote the benefits of the
DCSVS and information on how to resolve technical issues, tailored by
DCSVS product type.
The information booklet has been tailored to each state/territory and
contains information about:
 the school’s NSSP project (includes prepopulated information from the NSSP
database plus space for schools to add
extra details such as warranty details), a
section for schools to record electricity
utility details, DCSVS details and history
of school contacts involved in the
project.
 a maintenance log for schools to record
maintenance undertaken
 educational materials and other
resources
Department of Resources Energy and Tourism
grosvenor management consulting
92
 school case studies from schools across Australia on the benefits
obtained from their solar schools project.
 factsheets (e.g. solar power system lifetime & warranties).
Whilst the DCSVS factsheets were available and distributed to schools in
October 2012, all interviewees acknowledged that earlier availability of the
information booklet would have been of great benefit.
Nevertheless, it can be argued that the information booklet together with
text and video case studies of successful NSSP projects 69 will further assist
in the promotion of educational benefits that can be obtained by schools
through their DCSVS. This may also lead to more schools utilising their
DCSVS data in class and encourage those schools with DCSVS functionality
problems to take corrective actions.
Sufficient support (in form of training and tools) is key in achieving
educational benefits
Some surveyed government and non-government schools reported a desire
for a higher level of support throughout the NSSP. This entailed, for
example, the provision of information about the Program and how it could be
used to achieve educational benefits.
Many survey respondents indicated that they did not have the technical
expertise necessary to conduct and implement the NSSP project. As the
onus was often on the individual teacher to implement sustainability
education in the classroom, it was imperative that he or she had a firm
grasp of the topic and the installed technology.
Support in form of the development of classroom material and guidance
documentation was provided, although to varying degrees, by the
Commonwealth and the states and territories through the NSSP. For
example, the NSW Department of Education and Training developed and
distributed learning materials to its government schools. 70
The VIC Department of Education and Early Childhood Development, for
instance, linked its Victorian Solar in Schools Initiative (VSiS) with the NSSP,
providing additional educational materials on renewable energy and energy
demand.
In TAS, schools were able to obtain support in incorporating sustainability
topics associated with the NSSP installation in their curriculum through the
Sustainable Schools Support Service (SSSS). This included the development
69
Published in the NSSP website at www.ret.gov.au/nationalsolarschools.
Further details can be found at
www.curriculumsupport.education.nsw.gov.au/env_ed/programs/solar/index.htm.
70
Department of Resources Energy and Tourism
grosvenor management consulting
93
of a DVD with recommended teaching resources and activities on water and
energy conservation.
DRET published a variety of educational resources including solar power and
data monitoring system information on the NSSP website. The resource page
on the NSSP website aims to make existing educational materials about
renewable energy and energy/water efficiency more accessible by providing
links to relevant databases such as Scootle 71.
In addition, a number of survey respondents indicated that they had
employed a specialist person in their school with the knowledge and
capability to address subjects of energy efficiency and sustainability.
“We have appointed an „outdoor teacher‟ two days a week, who will
use the information available to develop children‟s learning”
While it was difficult to ascertain through the survey response whether these
positions were created as a result of the NSSP, it can be assumed that
through these initiatives the educational outcomes of the NSSP were further
enhanced.
As would be expected, the use of DCSVS to monitor electricity consumption
and generation was highly influenced by the school’s understanding of the
Program rules and guidelines. Of the schools which installed a PV system
and found the rules easy to apply, 61% monitored their DCSVS data and
85% had used, or were planning to use, the data in lessons plans.
Conversely, of those schools that did not understand the rules or found them
difficult to apply, only 38% monitored their DCSVS data and 57% had or
were planning to utilise the data in class.
Another aspect of the school’s ability to obtain the maximum benefits from
their solar power system was the DCSVS product installed. Some DCSVS
products included links to educational material in addition to the green and
black data which improved the useability and understanding of the data
being displayed. Some schools and jurisdictions, however, commented about
the need to improve the user-friendliness of one of the DCSVS products, as
it was difficult to navigate.
Lack of collaboration between NSSP personnel and curriculum teams at a
state level is a barrier for achieving educational outcomes
As highlighted by the interim evaluation, state/territory departments
engaged in a variety of educational initiatives including the development of
teaching materials and guidelines to assist schools in meeting the education
71
Scootle is a database maintained by Education Services Australia and includes over 15,000
digital curriculum resources across a range of areas fir P-12 years.
Department of Resources Energy and Tourism
grosvenor management consulting
94
specific requirements of the NSSP grant application. Despite this, the final
evaluation found that the extent to which state NSSP project officers
collaborated with the states curriculum staff varied in each jurisdiction.
For example in the ACT Department of Education and Training, the NSSP
implementation team and curriculum area of the department worked closely
together to prepare and integrate the learning materials into the school
curriculum.
In contrast, in other states/territories stakeholders felt that greater
collaboration between the team within the state’s department would have
increased the uptake of the use of the DCSVS system. This could have been
achieved through a greater ‘championing’ of the integration of the DCSVS
data into the school’s learning programs and environmental management
plans by the curriculum area.
One jurisdiction stated that perhaps with an increased involvement of the
curriculum team, schools would have better understood the core goals of the
Program. Consequently, a decreased number of schools would have
contacted the states and territories with queries, for example, relating to the
financial impact of the Program and/or the installation of solar power
systems.
The above indicated that irrespective of the approach taken by the
state/territory, ongoing collaboration is of fundamental importance for the
successful implementation and realisation of the educational outcomes.
Success factors in achieving educational benefits
Based on the analysis presented above and the findings of the interim
evaluation, the following success criteria/factors have been identified for the
achievement of educational objectives of the Program:
Achieving educational benefits - success factors

Transfer of knowledge amongst school staff

Educational materials provided by the states and territories/DRET

Technical understanding by school staff about the system installed

Ongoing passion and extra-curricular activities (promotions) by schools

Monitoring and usage of DCSVS data
Department of Resources Energy and Tourism
grosvenor management consulting
95
8.3.1 Conclusions – educational benefits
The findings have shown that the NSSP has had material impact in educating
future generations about alternative energy sources and raising the
awareness about climate change.
While the educational outcomes for schools across Australia differed, schools
showed a certain degree of enthusiasm and commitment to achieve
educational benefits. This was demonstrated by schools implementing not
only DCSVS data and/or environmental topics into lesson plans, but also
conducting various extra-curricular or even intra-school activities.
The achievement of educational outcomes was clearly linked to the
promotional activities as well as collaborations established to raise the
profile of the NSSP project within the school and wider community. In
particular, promotional activities of the NSSP and collaborations with
student’s parents and the community partners were strongly associated with
achieving behavioural changes amongst students and teachers. However,
evidence from the survey suggests that some NSSP projects lost their
momentum. As such, continuous attention and effort is required to ensure
the NSSP project remains front of mind and is being utilised to achieve
educational outcomes.
In addition, the adequacy of support and guidance from DRET and the state
and territory government agencies was critical to achieve the educational
outcomes of the Program. In particular, addressing the apparent lack of
understanding of the technical aspects of the PV installation represented a
barrier for schools to engage in educational activities. DRET, in combination
with states and territories and PV suppliers, implemented a number of
measures to address these issues including working directly with schools and
providing a range of guidance material and other information.
The evaluation has shown that the requirement to install DCSVS remains a
key factor in achieving the educational outcomes of the Program. The
DCSVS data represented a primary source for demonstrating the practical
applications and effects of renewable energy sources. It could be argued
that the absence of a smart meter system, such as DCSVS, would have
significantly reduced the overall benefits of the NSSP. Therefore,
encouraging and supporting the continued collection and usage of DCSVS
data is of fundamental importance for achieving educational as well as
positive behavioural changes in the long-term.
Based on the stakeholder consultations it can be concluded that the close
collaboration between NSSP project officers and curriculum staff of states
and territories improved not only the educational objectives, but also all of
the NSSP objectives.
Department of Resources Energy and Tourism
grosvenor management consulting
96
There are some opportunities to further improve educational outcomes of
the NSSP and ensure schools continue to benefit from their NSSP project in
the future. These are detailed in Section 12 Recommendations.
Department of Resources Energy and Tourism
grosvenor management consulting
97
8.4 Supporting industry growth
The final objective of the NSSP is the Program’s support to the growth of the
renewable energy industry.
The key indicators used to assess NSSP support for industry growth were:

NSSP’s overall contribution to the market

the level of installation activity and participation by industry

whether the NSSP funding was further leveraged with other private
and state/territory based investment

whether industry obtained other benefits that were at least in part
contributed to by NSSP.
NSSP’s contribution to the market
Figure 21 below indicates NSSP funded PV capacity installed as a proportion
of the entire market installations by year and state. The heat map shows the
proportion of total PV capacity installed in each state/territory for that year.
Market share details for other renewable energy systems were not available
but represent a very small proportion of NSSP funded installations.
Proportion of PV Market by
Capacity
Figure 21: NSSP installed PV capacity as a proportion of total market
installed capacity
Department of Resources Energy and Tourism
grosvenor management consulting
98
Overall NSSP funded PV systems did not represent a significant proportion of
total industry installations. This is not surprising given the significant growth
in residential PV installations over the corresponding period. At certain points
within certain states/territories it did represent a reasonable proportion of
the market, such as QLD in 2009. The proportion represented by NSSP
declined over time due to higher number of installations in earlier years, but
more particularly, the rapid growth in industry installations.
An important factor not considered in the above figure is that NSSP on
average funded much larger systems than the average residential system
installed. As such, NSSP funded PV systems would have represented a much
larger percentage of the larger PV system market (eg. >5kW). The
relevance of this is further explored in Section 10.4.2 below. Conversely,
NSSP would have represented a much smaller percentage of the total
number of industry installations.
Participation
Industry participation can be measured in terms of:

the proportion of installers who were involved in NSSP

the impact this had on those involved in installations

the origin of installed components.
Table 18 below sets out the percentage of installers who participated in
installing NSSP PV systems.
Table 18: NSSP installers as a proportion of industry providers
2009
2010
2011
2012
2013
No. PV installations
1,384
1,140
1,067
673
681
No. of industry installers72
1,619
3,081
4,487
4,484
N/A
228
374
257
154
109
14%
12%
6%
3%
N/A
No. of NSSP installers
% involved in NSSP
installations
Across the period of NSSP, the number of installers in the industry increased
dramatically corresponding with the rapid growth in the industry, particularly
for residential installations. At the same time, the number of installers used
for NSSP installations declined.
72
Source: CEC.
Department of Resources Energy and Tourism
grosvenor management consulting
99
Department of Resources Energy and Tourism
grosvenor management consulting
100
This was partly contributed to by the reduced numbers of installations;
however, the number of NSSP installers declined at a faster rate suggesting
further concentration of suppliers occurred.
This may have been influenced by states and territories rationalising the
number of preferred suppliers used for government schools.
The interim evaluation found that between 42%-53% of PV providers
installed only one NSSP funded system between 2009-2011, and that
approximately a quarter of these installers were responsible for 80% of the
work.
The manufacturers of solar panels and inverters are largely foreign
companies. The NSSP funded PV installations utilised a range of
manufacturers primarily from the standard countries of origin including
Europe, India and other parts of Asia, most particularly China. The data
indicates that a higher proportion of components was sourced from Europe
than for the wider Australian market, indicating that NSSP installations on
average used higher quality components.
The tendering arrangements and supplier panels established by various
states would have influenced this, as well as providing centrally negotiated
warranty conditions for ongoing maintenance purposes.
NSSP also provided incentives for schools to invest in the installation of
additional solar panels and energy efficiency measures such as classroom
movement sensors.
Additional private and state/territory investment
In total, in excess of $213 million was spent on renewable energy systems
under the NSSP.
The NSSP funding was further leveraged with varying levels of additional
contributions from the states and territories. For example, the ACT
government combined NSSP funding with ACT funds to install up to 30kW
systems on each ACT school.
In addition, many non-government schools contributed further amounts,
presumably to install larger systems.
Figure 22 overleaf illustrates the total funds contributed towards NSSP
projects by the Commonwealth, the states and territories, and nongovernment schools.
Department of Resources Energy and Tourism
grosvenor management consulting
101
Overall, the non-Commonwealth contribution remained relatively low for
most states/territories and the non-government sector73. This may in part
be a reflection that the NSSP funding per school provided sufficient funds to
install suitable systems.
Figure 22: Commonwealth, state/territory and non-government financial
contributions
73
Note that many states and territories invested significant amounts in their own renewable
energy programs.
Department of Resources Energy and Tourism
grosvenor management consulting
102
Development of other benefits
The interim evaluation identified a number of additional benefits to industry
arising from the NSSP. These benefits continue to provide support for
industry growth and are set out in Table 19 below.
Table 19: Key findings of the interim evaluations of the NSSP
Key message
Interim evaluation
Final evaluation
NSSP provided
support to the
development of a
market installing
systems larger
than residential
systems


NSSP provided industry with more
extensive experience in larger, noncommercial system installations
which may help further growth in
that sector.
NSSP compliance
and inspection
activities led to the
identification and
subsequent
resolution of a
range of technical
issues

DRET implemented various
compliance and assurance activities,
including the first official on-roof
inspection of PV systems in Australia

NSSP only represented a small
proportion of a rapidly growing
market, dominated by residential
installations
On-roof inspections highlighted a
range of installation shortcomings
that were previously less well
understood and thus, contributed to
identifying further improvements to
PV systems and their installation

Findings were also reported to states
and territories responsible for
electrical safety in their
state/territory and to the CEC

DRET developed a comprehensive
inspection checklist, which is now
being utilised by the state and
territory governments as well as CEC,
contributing to higher standards in
the PV industry

Other technical and installations
issues were also identified by schools
Department of Resources Energy and Tourism

Confirmed

This market still
represents a much
smaller proportion of
installations with NSSP
accounting for a
significant proportion.
The mid-range market
still represents a
growth opportunity for
industry with
installations on
commercial and
community buildings

Confirmed

These activities still
represent important
contributions to
improving installation
practices in industry

DRET has engaged the
Clean Energy
Regulator to conduct
inspections which has
achieved efficiencies
for the Commonwealth
and consistency in
reporting to state and
territory regulators
and the CEC
grosvenor management consulting
103
Key message
Interim evaluation
Final evaluation
and stakeholders that would have led
to valuable lessons for installations of
this size across all parts of Australia
PV
installers/suppliers
developed new
products and
services as a result
of the NSSP,
establishing an
additional source
of income

The issues detected provided the
opportunity for rectification work and
progress in the development of
sound and appropriate technologies
and installation practices. The level of
compliance with Australian standards
identified through the inspection
program has continued to improve
over time, demonstrating that action
taken by regulators and industry is
improving the quality of installations.

Eco Community (and other providers)
offered a new service by assisting
schools in completing their NSSP
application and provided support in
the sourcing of quotations for PV and
other renewable energy installations
under the Program.

NSSP’s metering and educational
requirements fostered further
product development in Australia.
The NSSP approved 20 DCSVS
products for inclusion on the
approved DCSVS list. Of those, 14
DCSVS product types were installed
under the Program in over 4,800
schools.

Confirmed

NSSP was a primary
driver of these new
products which
represent
opportunities for
expansion to other
sectors
46.1.1 Conclusions
NSSP contributed towards industry growth in more ways than simply
injecting funds into the industry. NSSP only represented a small proportion
of the overall PV industry, and NSSP only used a small proportion of industry
installers. However, when NSSP was established, much of the focus and
growth in the PV industry was in the residential market. NSSP represented a
more significant proportion of the mid-range sector involving larger PV
systems than typically associated with the residential market.
NSSP has provided a valuable experience, and helped to resolve many
technical and installation issues in the mid-range sector. NSSP also led to
improved inspection practices and helped develop a small number of niche
products and services.
Department of Resources Energy and Tourism
grosvenor management consulting
104
9 Value for money
In order to assess the efficiency of the delivery of the NSSP, the evaluation
examined whether value for money in delivering the objectives of the
Program had been achieved. Given the educational aspect of the NSSP, key
findings, outlined in this section, consider not only the monetary elements of
the Program but also intangible outcomes.
In addition, the ANAO analysed the Program’s value for money in relation to
the assessment process of funding recipients 74 applied by DRET and the
states and territories. As a result, it was decided to confine the analysis in
this evaluation to the:
 cost of solar power installations
 cost of abatement (carbon emissions offset)
 other factors in achieving value for money
 educational and other flow on benefits for schools and the broader
community.
Cost of solar power installations and electricity consumption
NSSP funded renewable energy systems and energy efficiency items has
contributed to reducing the electricity consumed from the grid, which in turn
would have reduced NSSP schools’ energy costs.
The savings in electricity costs for SA government schools was impacted by
demand tariffs, as solar is considered by the state network provider as an
intermittent generation source and cannot guarantee a demand reduction.
Essentially, the demand tariff payment is a payment for demand capacity
should the generation fail. Some schools installing solar power systems that
also have a demand capacity of greater than 100Amps are placed on a
demand tariff. Schools with less than 100Amps capacity are also moved to a
different tariff.
Prices paid for items installed continue to reflect market/industry prices but
were slightly above industry benchmarks in recent years. This appears to
have been a reflection of installing better quality systems which should
translate into better performance and reliability, and longer life.
74
Refer to the ANAO’s Audit Report No.39 2011-12 Management of the National Solar Schools
Program report Section 5: Progress Towards Program Objectives.
Department of Resources Energy and Tourism
grosvenor management consulting
105
Cost of abatement
As indicated at section 8.1, it has only been possible to measure the offset in
carbon emissions for PV installations. It is important to note that NSSP
funded a small proportion of other renewable energy systems and a
significant number of energy efficiency measures. In line with the objectives
of NSSP, the Program also sought to achieve further reductions in energy
consumed and therefore carbon emissions through education and
behavioural change.
The cost of carbon abatement achieved was calculated by DRET to be in the
range of $104.46 to $359.93 tonnes of Carbon emitted ($ / t CO 2-e), with
the ‘best’ estimate being $196.52 t CO2-e. As indicated at section 8.1, this
estimate is conservative and likely to be at the lower end of the range. This
compares very favourably with the Productivity Commission’s benchmarks
from 2010 and other comparable programs (refer details at section 8.1).
While costs of abatement for PV systems has steadily declined (improved)
over recent years with the falling costs in PV systems, this benchmark
analysis indicates NSSP has achieved very good value relative to other
similar programs dominated by solar energy generation.
Other factors in achieving value for money
Panel arrangements and quality of installation contributing factors in
achieving value for money
A number of state/territory education departments established supplier
panel arrangements for the installation procurement of NSSP solar power
systems. In accordance with the ANAO audit report, the data analysis found
that there were no discernible differences in the mean cost per kW spent by
government schools compared to those states without a panel.
State/territory education authorities indicated that the central team would
be able to be a more informed buyer and that the supplier panels they
established would provide the ability to ensure consistency in product and
service for a large number of schools. 75
The evaluation also provided evidence that a commitment to achieving value
for money was given a high priority throughout the duration of the Program,
both from an accountability/assessment but also a performance
management level. This is demonstrated, for example, by the continuous
75
Refer to ANAO report No.39 (2011-12) Management of the National Solar Schools Program,
pg122.
Department of Resources Energy and Tourism
grosvenor management consulting
106
effort of the NSSP team (DRET) to understand and address the issues
constraining the wider utilisation of DCSVS data.
Educational and other flow on benefits
Continuous educational activities important for achieving value for money in
the long-term
In addition to being part of the criteria for assessing NSSP grant applications
and selecting suppliers, value for money for the taxpayer is also influenced
by the ongoing benefits delivered in adapting to climate change. The latter
was demonstrated by the educational benefits for schools as a result of the
NSSP. Case studies and the survey revealed that the NSSP project
stimulated great interest amongst the students and an improved outlook on
protecting the environment.
Despite this, outcomes, benefits and perceptions of the Program’s worth
varied amongst schools. A number of schools indicated that they felt that the
NSSP project was of limited value. For example, one government school in
NSW noted that the Program costs were too high, particularly around the
system’s maintenance; while another school noted that the project was too
time-consuming.
Department of Resources Energy and Tourism
grosvenor management consulting
107
As outlined in Section 8.3, some NSSP participants experienced a number of
challenges including delays and/or issues surrounding the installation of the
funded system/item and thus in those cases, the Program had not yet
generated the expected benefits for many schools.
Nevertheless, evidence showed that with the resolution of the installation
problems and issues, schools were anticipating to benefit from their NSSP
project in the future.
While many schools surveyed
focused on cost savings when
considering the benefits obtained
through their participation in the
NSSP, numerous schools highlighted
the value of increased awareness
about renewable energy and energy
efficiency. Some survey
respondents specifically felt that the
increased awareness about
achieving energy efficiency often
provided more value than cost
savings.
Heritage College, Perth

Approx 110 students

7.92kW solar power system

Energy efficient lighting

Increased solar power system to
10.2kW
Reduced energy costs:
The college noted a dramatic
reduction in its energy bills as a
result of the solar power installation
with reductions of up to 41% of
electricity used per day.
Besides the educational benefits,
the NSSP analysis has shown that
value to the school was derived to
varying degrees from:
 a reduction in energy costs (see case study on the right)
 a reduction in water usage
 increased recycling and reduced school waste
 use of rain water for school gardens and/or grounds, and care of
animals.
It should be noted that additional impacts and outcomes, resulting from the
NSSP project, often only become visible in the long-term. This was
particularly evident when schools were considering their students energy
efficient behaviour. Some stakeholders acknowledged that significant
behavioural changes would be unlikely to occur until the students were
older.
Department of Resources Energy and Tourism
grosvenor management consulting
108
From this viewpoint, strengthening the school’s capacity to continuously
educate students about renewable energy and energy efficiency will further
add to the achievement of value for money.
9.1 Conclusions – value for money
Within the context of a program funding smaller scale renewable energy and
energy efficiency, NSSP has achieved very good value with costs of systems
and the cost of abatement comparing favourably to available benchmarks.
The comparative value for money of investing in alternate policy measures is
not considered in this report.
NSSP delivered other benefits beyond the direct carbon offset, most notably
the educational benefits. While there remains room for improvement in fully
incorporating energy efficiency into the curriculum of schools, there has
been considerable uptake in education of students.
Importantly, evidence suggests that there has already been reported change
in behaviour of students and staff, and some impact on raising community
awareness.
Department of Resources Energy and Tourism
grosvenor management consulting
109
10
Sustainability of NSSP
This section of this report outlines the findings regarding the longevity of
NSSP objectives and potential outcomes after the conclusion of the Program.
Based on the analysis presented below, the potential for future
Commonwealth and/or State Government activity and collaboration in this
space will also be addressed.
10.1 Achieving behavioural change
Ongoing educational effort and commitment by schools required to achieve
sustainable behavioural change
Achieving behavioural change is important for a sustainable energy future.
Based on the consultations and survey responses, it can be argued that the
adoption of a renewable energy source together with educational activities
provided a starting point for changing the behaviour of individuals and
organisations associated with the school.
Stakeholders considered this instrument-and-learning-oriented approach as
being a positive and unique feature of the Program, which is depicted in the
following diagram:
NSSP
Education
NSSP
system/
item
+
(about energy
efficiency and
renewable
energy)
Increased
awareness
& incentive
to change
Inputs
Behaviour
change
Energy
efficiencies
Sustainable
future
Effects and outcomes
Figure 23: Pathway from NSSP inputs to outcomes
Against this background, whilst it was difficult to evaluate which behaviour
changes were sustainable in the absence of a longitudinal study of the NSSP
participants, it was possible to indicate if and what changes occurred as a
result of the Program.
Figure 24 illustrates the survey respondents’ perception about the extent to
which the behaviour of students and/or teachers has changed in relation to
energy and water efficiency as a result of the school’s NSSP project.
Department of Resources Energy and Tourism
grosvenor management consulting
110
Figure 24: Behavioural change as a result of the NSSP
The above figure showed that 68% of schools stated that the behaviour of
students and/or the school’s teachers had noticeably or at least somewhat
changed as a result of the NSSP.
As previously highlighted by the interim evaluation, stakeholders stated that
the visibility of solar panels and/or rain water tanks on the school’s
ground/roof was a contributing factor for promoting sustainability and
renewable energy sources amongst students, parents and the wider
community. Installations served as visible practical demonstrations of how to
be energy efficient and reduce greenhouse gas emission.
In addition, evidence suggested that the educational benefits accomplished
by individual schools supported and enhanced the adoption of sustainable
practices.
Schools reported changes in the environmental awareness and behaviours of
students, which adopted practical behaviours to reduce the energy use of
the school. For example, a number of NSSP schools noted that students
were increasingly turning off electrical appliances when they were not in the
classroom and increasingly reported water waste (for instance, leaking
taps). In some cases students also monitored the energy use of their peers
and teachers, reminding them to adopt energy efficient behaviours such as
turning off the lights. This implied that students took greater ownership of
their actions and the usage of resources.
“Our school has embraced a sustainable culture and NSSP has been a
major part of our program”
Department of Resources Energy and Tourism
grosvenor management consulting
111
“The opportunity to be involved [...] has brought great
benefits so far and will ensure a long-term return to the
school as well as the environment”
That the Program has become a
basis for some schools to pursue
other sustainability practices is
further illustrated by the case
study on the right.
The case study also shows that
bringing about behavioural
change offers considerable
potential for energy
conservation.
Effects of educational outcomes
led in some instances to the
installation of PV system by
school staff on their own homes.
In a case study of Bungwhal
Public School, school staff stated
that as a result of the exposure
to the solar power system some
staff approached the local
supplier about installing systems
at their homes.
Victory Lutheran College
(North East Victoria)

Approx 600 students

9.1kW solar power system

Energy efficient lighting, draught seals,
sensors and timers
Sustainable practices:
As a result of NSSP the college has seen a
reduction in its energy bills and a greater
awareness of sustainable practices. This has
resulted in:
•
Greater student and staff discussion
about further improvements
•
More classes involved in sustainable
practices and education
•
Greater understanding of the reasons
for sustainable practices
•
Improved efficiency of classroom power
usage including shutting down
computers and turning off lights.
Surveyed schools also reported increased assistance from parents with
environmental activities of the school, including through the maintenance of
school gardens and the implementation of additional environmental activities
around the school. In addition, parents from a QLD government school
monitored the DCSVS data as part of the schools maintenance plan. This
resulted, according to stakeholders, to an increased environmental
awareness and noticeable changes in the behaviour of student’s parents at
home.
“The short term changes have been most noticeable but
importantly, the long term changes in relation to our
behaviours are paramount”
Department of Resources Energy and Tourism
grosvenor management consulting
112
While positive behavioural changes can be attributed to the activities of the
NSSP project, the effects and impacts of other sustainability/environmental
education programs should be also taken into account.
Stakeholder feedback suggested that the Program’s connection to AuSSI 76
was particularly seen as beneficial. The Australian Government’s AuSSI
program has a strong focus on sustainability and environmental educational
benefits and offers a range of teaching materials and activities.
The advantage of linking the NSSP to AuSSI was also recognised by DRET
during the development of the NSSP in early 2008 as a way to support the
achievement of long-term educational benefits for schools. This was due to
the fact that schools participating in AuSSI would have access to useful
resources for advancing the school’s sustainability and would incorporate
sustainability education in their lessons/educational activities.
Furthermore, AuSSI does not replace other environmental or sustainability
educational activities in schools, but rather the Program connects to and
complements existing programs that are implemented within schools.
Consequently since July 2010, DRET encouraged schools to participate in
AuSSI through the allocation of additional points for their educational benefit
criteria in the assessment of their NSSP application, if they were registered
with AuSSI.
In spite of this, NSSP data showed that only approximately 55% (2,968) of
total schools funded registered with AuSSI at the time of their application to
the NSSP. In addition, only a total of 3,53277 schools across Australia are
registered with AuSSI. This indicates that further promotion about
participating in AuSSI would be of benefit, as it amplified the educational
benefits of the NSSP.
A key point acknowledged by stakeholders was that attaining lasting
behavioural change and thus, energy efficiencies, takes time.
“Students find the learning activities engaging and consequently are
learning from them. No doubt this will translate into changes in
behaviour which may not become evident until later in life”
76
AuSSI’s vision is for all Australian schools and their communities to be sustainable, and aims
to educate and encourage participation in environmentally sustainable practices. AuSSI involves
experiences, improvements in a school’s management of resources and facilities including
energy, waste, water, biodiversity, landscape design, products and materials. Further
information can be found on the AuSSI website
http://www.environment.gov.au/education/aussi/index.html.
77
As at end of March 2012. This is approximately 35% of the total number of schools in
Australia
http://www.abs.gov.au/AUSSTATS/abs@.nsf/Latestproducts/4221.0Main%20Features202012.
Department of Resources Energy and Tourism
grosvenor management consulting
113
This underlined the importance of the sustainability of the NSSP system/item
installed and the ongoing educational effort and commitment required by
schools.
Continuous data monitoring, collection and usage
While understanding the impact and potential outcomes of the NSSP is often
complex and challenging, the NSSP project together with the DCSVS
provided the opportunity for schools and their communities to become more
aware of their energy use.
“The monitoring system shows the environmental benefits of the
energy produced in a form that has more meaning, particularly for
the students”
The evaluation showed that DCSVS data provides a reinforcing factor to
change the behaviour of students, teachers and people of the wider
community. Through the monitoring system and the associated tracking
websites, schools are able to see the impacts of their past behaviour and
thus, the positive or negative consequences resulting from their actions
through, for example, an increase or lowering of their energy consumption.
DCSVS data collection has also benefited other programs and initiatives.
CSIRO, for example, utilised the data collected from government schools in
ACT for atmospheric monitoring activities. DCSVS data has therefore the
potential to inform future government and academic programs and projects.
To achieve continual and sustainable outcomes, NSSP schools must be able
to clearly understand the impacts of their NSSP project and associated
efforts. This highlights that it is of fundamental importance to continuously
encourage schools to collect and utilise their energy generation and
consumption data throughout the lifetime of their installed system.
Future state and territory activities
Following the closure of the NSSP, states and territories stated that they will
now focus on enhancing the educational outcomes of the Program. The VIC
Government will build on the existing AuSSI framework and provide one-off
grant payments of up to $10,000 to schools to undertake energy audits
and/or related energy saving activities, and to purchase energy efficient
infrastructure.78 This will give particularly those schools that were unable to
obtain a NSSP grant the chance to install energy efficient items and engage
in energy efficiency/sustainability education.
78
For more information refer to:
http://www.education.vic.gov.au/about/programs/infrastructure/pages/energygrant.aspx.
Department of Resources Energy and Tourism
grosvenor management consulting
114
In addition, stakeholders commented on the value of the state/territory
government agencies playing facilitation role and providing a platform for
NSSP schools to share information and their learnings.
Overall, this indicated that the focus of the Program is now shifting to
become an education program with support from the states and territories.
10.2 Maintenance of PV systems
Views and approaches about maintenance of installed systems varied
amongst states and territories
PV systems are generally made from durable materials and arguably present
a robust form of technology.
A typical solar power system consists of a number of key parts with varying
life expectancies including:
 PV modules (solar panels)
 inverter
 array frame
 others including meters, web box and temperature sensors.
In addition to the quality of systems, different environmental and
operational conditions impact the life of each of the above components.
PV modules have a life expectancy of approximately 25 years, while
inverters most likely need to be replaced after approximately 10 years.
Schools that installed a solar power system during the first funding round of
the NSSP in 2008 are therefore almost half-way through their inverter’s
expected working life. Other parts such as meters and temperature sensors
have generally shorter warranty periods and as such, may need replacing
during the lifetime of the solar power system.
Maintenance of the installed system contributes to the sustainability and
longevity of NSSP outcomes. States and territories, individual schools as well
as DRET have addressed in different ways and to varying degrees the
maintenance of PV systems, as demonstrated by the following findings.
Department of Resources Energy and Tourism
grosvenor management consulting
115
States & Territories
Most states and territories identified the maintenance and subsequent
replacement of NSSP funded systems as a key issue for the sustainability of
the Program.
While warranties to varying extent are provided by system installers, regular
maintenance requirements and associated replacement of the system’s
components raised financial concerns. The majority of interviewees stated
that the maintenance component should have formed part of the NSSP and
its funding arrangement to ensure replacement costs are adequately
covered.
Nevertheless, all states and territories are planning to assist schools in their
maintenance efforts of the NSSP installation; however, plans and strategies
differed between the jurisdictions.
For instance in NSW and SA, repairs and maintenance of the PV systems
form part of existing Facilities Management contracts with government
schools.
ACT also had existing arrangements. This included a four year-maintenance
and monitoring agreement with the installers of inverters.
The maintenance activities and/or plans of other jurisdictions were still to be
implemented. For example:
 VIC is planning to assign the responsibility to the regional offices,
which will be made available to answer any queries regarding the
maintenance of installed NSSP systems/items
 TAS is planning to contact schools and provide information about the
upcoming maintenance/replacement requirements for inverters
 in NT, the aim is to tender for an annual maintenance contract of NSSP
systems.
The above implies that, with the exception of NSW, SA and ACT,
maintenance and with it budgetary arrangements are still to be determined
and put into action.
Schools
Over 70% of schools have implemented or are planning to implement a
maintenance plan/strategy in the near future.
Department of Resources Energy and Tourism
grosvenor management consulting
116
Figure 25 shows the percentage of schools in each sector that have
incorporated (yes), are planning to implement (not yet) or have not
implemented (no) a maintenance plan of their PV system.
80%
60%
40%
20%
0%
Government
Yes.
Catholic
Independent
Not yet, but planning to in the near future
No
Figure 25: Implementation of maintenance plan (by sector)
Adoption of a maintenance plan was the lowest amongst government
schools with 36% of schools were not planning to implement a plan. This is
likely to have been influenced by the existing or planned maintenance
activities by state/territory government agencies. Comparatively, only 13%
of non-government schools are not planning to implement a plan (16% of
catholic and 8% of independent schools).
Maintenance approaches to enhance the lifetime of their installed system
were either driven by state or, as in the majority of cases, by a school in
collaboration with their installer. Regular maintenance activities conducted
by the installer or another contractor included:
 regular cleaning of solar panels to reduce the effects of dust,
particularly in areas with low average rainfall
 monitoring data from the PV system on tracking websites to highlight
any anomalies or performance issues
 annual maintenance checks by installers or other contractors.
However, a small proportion of surveyed schools which had implemented, or
planned to implement a maintenance plan explained that they were confused
about the ongoing maintenance requirements. One school indicated that they
are uncertain of the maintenance requirements as they are no longer
involved with the company which installed the system.
Department of Resources Energy and Tourism
grosvenor management consulting
117
One school highlighted that the costs associated with maintaining the system
were prohibitively large, noting that annual servicing would cost more than
the school saved as a result of the system. Despite this, some schools were
budgeting for the systems future maintenance costs or funding maintenance
through the school’s council.
The reliance on installers, electricians and contractors to service the system,
as well as the lack of understanding about maintenance requirements (even
in those schools which have implemented a plan) highlighted that schools
require ongoing support to maintain their PV systems.
DRET
To inform and assist government and non-government schools with the
maintenance requirements of their installed solar power system, DRET
produced various specifications and guidelines under the NSSP.
For example, fact sheets, contained in the NSSP Information Booklet, outline
the system’s lifetime and expected warranties together with contact details
for further questions or concerns.
In addition, schools were required to obtain performance warranties from the
supplier for a minimum of ten-years for solar panels and at least a five year
warranty for solar or heat pump hot water systems installations.
Barriers to sustainability
From the evaluation, the following barriers and challenges have been
identified that need to be overcome in order to achieve sustainable and
lasting outcomes from the NSSP:
Sustainability – barriers

school’s expectations and drivers to participate in the NSSP as being merely a
cost-savings measure

lack of staff interest and/or knowledge transfer within schools

insufficient buy-in from principals

insufficient financial resources and lack of time

lack of ownership of the NSSP project and its associated system/items

lack of knowledge/expertise by schools in terms of:
-
technical aspects of the NSSP project
-
agreements struck with installers/service providers.
Department of Resources Energy and Tourism
grosvenor management consulting
118
10.3 Conclusions – sustainability
In June 2013 the NSSP closed. However, schools as well as state and
territory government agencies can and should continue to benefit from their
NSSP installations and the associated educational activities.
Aside from the renewable energy generated, encouraging and achieving
changes in everyday behaviour among students, school staff and possibly
the wider community to adjust to a more sustainable way of life will
contribute to the sustainability of the Program. This is arguably the most
significant outcome of the NSSP in the long-term.
The sustainability of the Program faces a variety of challenges and barriers
which need to be addressed and overcome. This includes, for example,
offsetting the declining interest in some schools where delays in the
implementation of their NSSP project were experienced. Given the closure of
the Program at a national level, the states and territories play a critical role
in ensuring that any barriers and challenges for government schools are
overcome and that the momentum of the NSSP project is kept alive. The
continuing uptake of AuSSI by NSSP schools together with the ongoing
accessibility and updating of educational resources will assist with ensuring
sustainable educational outcomes can be achieved. This includes resolving
issues of DCSVS reporting for use in educational activities.
As the installed systems and/or items come towards their end of warranties
and lifetimes, states and territories and non-government schools will need to
review their investment strategies to maximise the useful life of items
installed.
Department of Resources Energy and Tourism
grosvenor management consulting
119
11
Implications for the future
Based on the findings, analysis and conclusions of both the interim and this
final evaluation of NSSP, the achievements and lessons learned against each
NSSP component are summarised in the table below. This includes any
potential improvement opportunities to the service delivery model for future
program development.
NSSP
component
Achievements and lessons learned
 The NSSP provided an opportunity for schools to reduce their
environmental footprint and educate future generations about
renewable energy and climate change
 The combination of installing a renewable energy system/energy
efficiency item together with educational activities presented a key
factor in achieving behavioural changes amongst students, parents
and the wider community
 Monitoring, collection and utilisation of DCSVS data was key in
driving as well as measuring the effects of behavioural change and
facilitating the educational activities
 PV systems and rainwater tanks provided a highly visible and
Objectives
practical example of adapting to climate change which raised
awareness across the school and wider community, with evidence
that it resulted in the uptake of renewable energy systems by
parents and school staff. This highlights that funding of physical
infrastructure can have benefits beyond programs involving a focus
purely on education and awareness raising
 The Program’s connection to AuSSI, an environmental education
program, enhanced the educational benefits of the NSSP
 While NSSP expenditure and PV systems installed only represented a
small proportion of the market, the typical size of NSSP PV
installations (ie. larger than residential) provided new learnings and
experience, as well as new products, which will help to further
develop the mid-range PV sector. This indicates the value of
government programs such as this targeting a less mature industry
segment to stimulate growth
 The flexibility to apply for a range of eligible items allowed for
Implementation
schools to address their varying needs. However, initial consultation
with the states and territories about the type of eligible energy
efficiency items would have further assisted in meeting the local
design requirements and climatic conditions
 The flexibility afforded to the states and territories in applying NSSP
to government schools in their state enabled them to combine the
NSSP with local programs, further leveraging benefits of NSSP and
state programs, including enhancing energy efficiency and
Department of Resources Energy and Tourism
grosvenor management consulting
120
NSSP
component
Achievements and lessons learned
educational outcomes
 The formal agreements between the Commonwealth and the states
and territories evolved, resulting in the NPA mid-way through the
program. The evolving nature and timeframes taken to finalise the
model and agreements via the NPA was a reflection in part of the
flexibility afforded within the program as well as the inherent
challenges of reaching agreement with multiple jurisdictions.
However, the timelines and changes created challenges for all
parties demonstrating the need to reach a model and agreement to
provide clarity for all
 The NSSP led to the development of range of practical resources
(factsheets/guidelines). Similar programs should seek to make these
resources available as early as possible, ideally from the onset of the
program
 The NSSP provided an opportunity for federal and state/territory
government collaboration and as such a forum for exchanging
experiences and lessons learned in the area of climate change
adaptation and renewable energy policy, including as it relates to
school education
 NSSP conducted an interim evaluation with many of the lessons
incorporated into improvements to the program
 The evaluation demonstrated that the program has been relatively
successful in achieving its objectives, and the results of the ANAO
audit would suggest the NSSP was well administered in the context
of results of other program audits
Monitoring &
evaluation
 Quality and consistency of data collected is important to inform
whether the Program’s objectives have been achieved
 Development and implementation at the commencement of the
program of a Monitoring and Evaluation Framework would have
further assisted with the establishment of a credible baseline data
and in measuring the impacts attributable to the NSSP
 Evaluation activities by individual state government agencies would
have further supported the evaluation efforts on a national level
Department of Resources Energy and Tourism
grosvenor management consulting
121
12
Recommendations
Based on the findings and conclusions of this evaluation, the following
recommendations have been made to ensure the sustainability of NSSP
outcomes.
1. States and territories actively pursue and implement a maintenance
plan/strategy to ensure the longevity of the installed systems/items
and to maximise the return on the investment made
2. States and territories encourage and support regional and national
networking of NSSP government schools, in collaboration with other
sustainability partners, to enhance communication and assistance
between schools to maximise program outcomes.
3. States and territories continue to lead efforts to embed energy and
water efficiency into school curriculum
4. DRET continue to host the educational resources for schools on their
website or alternatively make them available through alternative
channels. For example, in Scootle.
5. DRET together with the states and territories continue to work to
resolve the issues with the operation of DCSVS, ensuring green and
black energy data is reported
6. Given smart meter products, such as the DCSVS, are now available
and being utilised as a result of the NSSP, the option of including a
module on data monitoring systems in the training of accredited
installers by the Clean Energy Council should be explored by DRET.
7. DRET together with the states and territories consider the
development and implementation of an ongoing monitoring, reporting
and evaluation approach to ensure the outcomes achieved through the
NSSP project are kept alive and continue to be progressed. Promoting
the regular collection of data and information on the schools impacts
and outcomes, including cross school, jurisdiction and sector
benchmarking, should form part of these activities. The data collected
should be consistent across Australia and provided to each school as
feedback on performance.
8. To ensure the technical aspects of the NSSP project are understood,
states and territories and non-government schools should consider
professional development for teachers/school staff. Consideration
needs to be given to the resources and approach required to
appropriately manage the items installed.
Department of Resources Energy and Tourism
grosvenor management consulting
122
Attachment A: NSSP Review Terms of Reference
The scope of this review includes:
 assessing the effectiveness of the NSSP in achieving the policy objectives (as
defined in the NSSP guidelines and objective and outcomes defined in the
NPA), including:
- the extent to which the policy objectives have been achieved
- the assessment of performance against project milestones in the NPA and
reasons for any issues/delays
- the extent to which implementation arrangements assisted or hindered
the achievement of policy objectives
 assessing the efficiency of the delivery of the NSSP program including:
- the extent to which the parties to the NPA fulfilled their agreed roles and
responsibilities
- whether approved outputs (project items) that have been delivered
commensurate with financial contributions paid
- if value for money in delivering the objectives has been achieved
- whether there have been barriers to implementation or delays, and if so
how these have been managed
 assessing the appropriateness of the delivery of the NSSP program
including:
- whether the funding mechanisms in the NPA were appropriate for
achieving its objectives
- if there is still a need or priority for Commonwealth and State
Government activity and/or collaboration in this policy area.
Department of Resources Energy and Tourism
grosvenor management consulting
123
Attachment B: Activities undertaken by DRET following the
interim evaluation
Performance of PV systems and DCSVS
The interim report identified a number of discrepancies in the performance of PV
systems. In responding to the conclusions in the report, NSSP conducted
investigations into the causes of these discrepancies. This included analysis of a
sample of installations in NSW which had not achieved expected levels of output to
identify possible causes. Discussions were held with key stakeholders including the
NSW Department of Education and CEC to address these issues. As a result of the
investigations, it was determined that the PV systems were performing as
expected, however, some issues had been identified as a result of shade on a small
number of school’s panels and some systems were not reporting full month data.
Further analysis was conducted on a sample of systems installed in WA and SA,
which supported the finding that largely systems were performing as expected. The
small number of systems not performing at the expected level were referred to
states and territories who have or are in the process of rectifying where it was
feasible to do so.
The interim report also recommended that NSSP should work with states and
territories, and non-Government schools, to understand and address any issues
which were preventing, or limiting, the utilisation of DCSVS data. In addressing this
recommendation, NSSP:

changed the acquittal process for non-government schools and government
school projects to ensure that the DCSVS was correctly installed for future
projects

undertook an audit to establish the number of projects where their DCSVS
was not operating correctly

corresponded with, and provided support to, non-Government schools to
address DCSVS issues

worked with states and territories and suppliers to resolve issues. States
engaging directly with suppliers and schools to address DCSVS issues for
government school projects. Suppliers for the most commonly used DCSVS
products produced troubleshooting guides for publication on the NSSP
website.

distributed DCSVS information to schools and used video case-studies to
promote the benefits of DCSVS in the classroom
Department of Resources Energy and Tourism
grosvenor management consulting
124

engaged with the CEC regarding suggestions to include data monitoring
system training in the installer accreditation program
NSSP believes that the issues associated with the DCSVS have been significantly
reduced as a result of the actions undertaken following the interim evaluation.
DRET and states and territories are continuing to progress the acquittal of
remaining projects, including resolution of outstanding DCSVS issues.
Program benefits and benchmarking
The interim report also made a number of recommendations around reinforcing
behavioural changes, improving educational outcomes and promoting
benchmarking of information. DRET, in consultation with state and territory
education departments and AuSSI representatives, implemented the following
activities:

produced factsheets to assist schools in understanding their solar power
system and data monitoring system (DCSVS)

improved the accessibility of sustainability resources, such as educational
material on energy and water, by making them available on the NSSP
website and promoting to schools

distributed a personalised information booklet to all NSSP schools to
consolidate their project information and encourage further action to educate
students about renewable energy and energy efficiency.

Produced video case studies, published on website and promoted through
correspondence to schools, state and territory authorities and Living Greener
site, to communicate the benefits obtained by schools and encourage further
action.

Additional work with states and territories to obtain extensive consumption
data for schools pre and post installation of their project. This was designed
to measure the program objective to allow schools to improve their energy
efficiency and reduced their energy consumption.
Areas not addressed
The interim report made additional recommendations about raising community
awareness to generate behavioural changes, considering the merit of alternative
technologies to PV (such as solar hot water systems) and potential funding for
water efficiency measures and associated educational material. As the final funding
round opened shortly after completion of the interim evaluation, a decision was
taken not to implement or promote alternative and additional technologies.
Additionally, while the educational benefits achieved by the NSSP in schools and the
community were noted, Government investment in other programs such as Low
Department of Resources Energy and Tourism
grosvenor management consulting
125
Carbon Communities were identified as seeking to raise broader awareness and
generate behavioural changes.
Department of Resources Energy and Tourism
grosvenor management consulting
126
Attachment C: Further information
NSSP stakeholders
Due to the nature of NSSP, numerous stakeholders have a direct, or indirect, role in
the program. This particularly includes bodies and Government Departments with
an educational or environmental focus. Key stakeholders include:
 State and territory education departments
 the Clean Energy Council (CEC)
 Department of Education, Employment and Workplace Relations (DEEWR)
 Department of Sustainability, Environment, Water, Population and
Communities (SEWPaC) through the Australian Sustainable Schools Initiative
(AuSSI)
 State and territory AuSSI representatives
 Clean Energy Regulator (CER)
 government and non-government schools.
Meetings (either in person or via phone) were held with all stakeholders to
obtain input to the final evaluation.
Department of Resources Energy and Tourism
grosvenor management consulting
127
Table 20: Approved projects by state and sector
Sector
School State
ACT
NSW
NT
Government
Application
78
CFA
Claim
-
-
695
77
Government
268
-
QLD
622
471
SA
219
89
Total
Non-Government
Application
Claim
Non-Government
Grand Total
Total
Total
78
12
13
25
103
30
993
231
270
501
1,494
9
86
11
7
18
104
1,093
87
151
238
1,331
42
350
28
82
110
460
57
109
25
14
39
148
-
TAS
52
VIC
237
53
499
789
149
190
339
1,128
WA
258
128
2
388
41
113
154
542
2,238
1,009
639
3,886
584
840
1,424
5,310
Grand Total
Department of Resources Energy and Tourism
grosvenor management consulting
128
Attachment D: National Partnership Agreement
Department of Resources Energy and Tourism
grosvenor management consulting
129
Department of Resources Energy and Tourism
grosvenor management consulting
130
Department of Resources Energy and Tourism
grosvenor management consulting
131
Department of Resources Energy and Tourism
grosvenor management consulting
132
Department of Resources Energy and Tourism
grosvenor management consulting
133
Department of Resources Energy and Tourism
grosvenor management consulting
134
Department of Resources Energy and Tourism
grosvenor management consulting
135
Department of Resources Energy and Tourism
grosvenor management consulting
136
Department of Resources Energy and Tourism
grosvenor management consulting
137
Department of Resources Energy and Tourism
grosvenor management consulting
138
Attachment E: Evaluation design and methodology
Figure 26: Evaluation design
NSSP lifecycle
Start
Input & Design
• How appropriate was the
NPA funding m echanisms
(perform ance m ilestones
and associated payments)
for achieving the
objectives?
• How appropriate was the
m axim um am ount of
funding for each school?
• How appropriate was the
annual funding allocations
for each state and
territory, introduced in July
2010?
• How appropriate were the
eligible item s that schools
could install?
Finish
Process &
Implementation
Impacts & Outcomes
• How effective was the
program im plementation in
respect to its stated
objectives?
• To what extent have NSSP
objectives been achieved,
including allowing schools
to:
• What were the key
challenges and successes
in the im plem entation of
the NSSP?
• To what extent have
DCCEE and the States
fulfilled their roles and
responsibilities under the
NPA?
• Are approved project items
in proportion to the funding
obtained?
• Has value for m oney in
delivering the objectives
been achieved?
• Have project m ilestones
been achieved and if not,
why?
Department of Resources Energy and Tourism
- Im prove energy efficiency
and reduce energy
consumption
- Generate own electricity
from renewable sources
- Adapt to clim ate change
by m aking use of
rainwater collected from
school roofs
- Provide education
benefits for school
students and their
com munities
- Support the growth of the
renewable energy
industry?
• Is there still a need or
priority for Com m onwealth
and State Governm ent
activity and/or
collaboration in this policy
area?
grosvenor management consulting
139
Survey Design and interview guide
Information provided separately.
Department of Resources Energy and Tourism
grosvenor management consulting
140
Attachment F: Related programs implemented by the
States and Territories
ACT
ACT Solar Schools Program
(2009 – 2011)
$2.0 million program funded over 3 years (shown in the ACT Budget papers as
‘Environment – Solar Schools’). The program funded pilot solar panel and data
monitoring trials at two ACT public schools and the installation of 30kW systems at
new public schools. The Program is now focussed on supplementing the funds
approved under NSSP to install 10kW at primary schools, 20kW at high schools
and 30kW systems at ACT colleges.
Public Schools – Water Tanks
(2009 – 2012)
$2.0 million program funded over 3 years. The program will ensure that all ACT
public schools have non-potable water supply for toilet flushing and/or irrigation.
NOTE: rainwater tanks at ACT public schools have also been funded through the
‘Building the Education Revolution’ initiative.
2010 Energy Audits in ACT Schools program
(2010 – 2012)
Energy audits to establish baseline energy performance data and identify
recommendations to improve energy efficiency of each school with a focus on the
behaviour of staff and students in reducing energy consumption.
Environmentally Sustainable Design (ESD) support
(2008 – 2012)
ACT Government has allocated $1.6 million over four years ($400k/year) to nongovernment schools to undertake a range of ESD initiatives (eg. energy efficient
items).
ACT Smart Schools
(Current)
The ACT Government has implemented the AuSSI program through ACTSmart
Schools.
Department of Resources Energy and Tourism
grosvenor management consulting
141
NSW
NSW Government Schools Energy Efficiency Program
provides support for schools when implementing the Environmental Education Policy
Sustainable Schools NSW
Assists schools integrate environmental learning and awareness into all aspects of
school life including the classroom, the canteen, school grounds, travel to and
from school, the office, workshops and sports carnivals.
QLD
Solar and Energy Efficiency Program
(July 2008 - June 2011)
Solar panels, smart meters, IT systems and energy efficient lighting have been
installed in almost every Queensland state school and Education Centre. Curriculum
programs have also been developed and implemented in public schools.
NOTE: Rainwater tanks were installed in QLD public schools as part of a separate QLD
state program preceding NSSP
VIC
Victorian Solar in Schools Program
(2007 - 2011)
Installation of PV power systems, interactive energy monitoring systems and
provision of educational materials on renewable energy and energy demand.
Energy Efficiency Grants
(2011 to present)
Provides a one-off payment of up to $10,000 for 400 schools which are new to the
Resource Smart AuSSI Vic framework. The grants are provided to enable schools to
undertake energy audits, purchase energy efficient or sustainable infrastructure and
undertake energy saving activities.
Schools Water Efficiency Program
(2006 – present)
Provision of data loggers to all Victorian schools to demonstrate, and educate about,
water efficiency in practice.
Green Light Lighting Upgrade Project
(2011 - 2012)
Identify strategies and opportunities to increase the energy efficiency of lighting in
Department of Resources Energy and Tourism
grosvenor management consulting
142
school buildings. Eleven schools were identified to participate in the project during the
2011-12 financial year.
Greener Government Schools Pilot
(2012)
70 schools were identified to participate in the pilot program to improve the energy
efficiency of existing school buildings.
SA
SA Solar Schools Program
(ceased in 2008)
Funded the installation of PV system ($1.25 million) in 111 schools
TAS
No other related programs have been identified
WA
WA Solar Schools Program
(May 2004 – present)
Funding is available for both new solar power systems and additions to existing
systems
NT
Environment grants
(2013-2014)
Grants of up to $2000 for NT schools for environmental activities and projects.
Department of Resources Energy and Tourism
grosvenor management consulting
143
13
References
Australian Bureau of Statistics, Commentary on schools,
http://www.abs.gov.au/AUSSTATS/abs@.nsf/Latestproducts/4221.0Main%2
0Features202012
Australian National Audit Office’s Audit Report No.39 (2011-12) Management
of the National Solar Schools Program
http://www.anao.gov.au/Publications/Audit-Reports/20112012/Management-of-the-National-Solar-Schools-Program
Australian National Audit Office’s Better Practice Guide Administration of
Grant (May 2002)
http://www.anao.gov.au/uploads/documents/Administration_of_Grants.pdf
Australian Curriculum Assessment and Reporting Authority, Australian
Curriculum
http://www.australiancurriculum.edu.au/CrossCurriculumPriorities/Sustainab
ility
Australian Government, Securing a clean energy future: The Australian
Government‟s Climate Change Plan 2011, Australian Government Canberra,
viewed 10 June 2013, http://www.cleanenergyfuture.gov.au/clean-energyfuture/our-plan/
Australian School Holidays 2011, viewed 20 June 2012,
http://www.drivenow.com.au/travel-centre/australia-school-holidays.jspc
Clean Energy Council, viewed 25 June 2012,
http://www.cleanenergycouncil.org.au/
Department of Climate Change and Energy Efficiency, October 2011,
Estimating the cost of abatement Framework and Practical Guidance,
http://www.climatechange.gov.au/reducing-carbon/carbon-pricingpolicy/estimating-cost-abatement%E2%80%94framework-and-practicalguidance
Department of Resources, Energy and Tourism National Partnership
Agreement on National Solar Schools Program
http://www.federalfinancialrelations.gov.au/content/npa/education.aspx
Department of Resources, Energy and Tourism, National Solar Schools
Program, viewed 25 June 2012, http://ee.ret.gov.au/energyefficiency/grants/national-solar-schools-program
Department of Resources, Energy and Tourism, National Solar Schools
Administrative Arrangements
http://ee.ret.gov.au/sites/climatechange/files/documents/03_2013/NSSPAdministrativeArrangements-20120502-PDF.pdf
Department of Resources Energy and Tourism
grosvenor management consulting
144
Government of Western Australia, Department of Finance, WA Solar Schools
Program Guidelines
http://www.finance.wa.gov.au/cms/uploadedFiles/Public_Utilities_Office/Ho
mes_and_Communities/Schools/WASSP-Guidelines-April-2012.pdf
NSW Department of Education and Training 2011, Environmental Education
– Energy: Teaching strategies and student investigations, viewed 10 June
2013,
www.curriculumsupport.education.nsw.gov.au/env_ed/programs/solar/index
.htm
Sustainability Victoria, ResourceSmart Australian Sustainable Schools
Initiative Victoria, viewed 10 June 2013,
http://www.sustainability.vic.gov.au/www/html/3457-resourcesmart-aussivic.asp?intLocationID=3457#anchor3457
VIC Department of Education and Early Childhood Development, Energy
Efficiency Grants Program, viewed 10 June 2013,
http://www.education.vic.gov.au/about/programs/infrastructure/pages/ener
gygrant.aspx
VIC Department of Environment and Primary Industries, Community Solar,
viewed 10 June 2013 http://www.dpi.vic.gov.au/energy/sustainableenergy/solar-energy/community
Department of Resources Energy and Tourism
grosvenor management consulting
145