Summary

AI-generated

This summary is written by a language model reading the source document. It is not the publisher's words and is not a substitute for the original.

Learn more about AI enrichment

The policy brief argues that while performance incentive mechanisms (PIMs) can drive regulatory outcomes and affordability, they require intentional evaluation to ensure benefits outweigh costs. RMI recommends that PUCs implement recurring and transparent evaluations via web-based dashboards, assess PIMs as a holistic portfolio rather than in silos, create informal stakeholder dialogue spaces to reduce administrative burdens, and utilize existing design guidelines to standardize retrospective evaluations.

Key insights

AI-generated

These insights are written by a language model reading the source document. They are not the publisher's words and are not a substitute for the original.

Learn more about AI enrichment
  • To increase transparency and allow regulators to better evaluate progress, states can implement interactive web-based dashboards for metrics, scorecards, and PIMs. Examples include Hawaiian Electric’s Performance Scorecards and Metrics page, and planned dashboards in Connecticut through PURA, while Duke Energy in North Carolina provides annual reports on its website.
  • Evaluating PIMs in isolation risks duplication and wasted ratepayer funds; therefore, PUCs should coordinate PIMs as a portfolio. This can be achieved through standardized filing requirements, internal cross-training, and tracking total incentives, such as New York's practice of bounding new incentives to a maximum of 100 basis points in its REV Track 2 Order.
  • PUCs can reduce administrative burdens and gain unique perspectives by establishing informal, non-contested forums for PIM design and evaluation. For instance, Illinois used informal workshops to develop performance and tracking metrics for electric utilities following the Climate and Equitable Jobs Act.
  • Existing PIM design guidelines can be repurposed for evaluation to determine if mechanisms are advancing desired outcomes. Rhode Island uses principles to compare the cost of achieving targets against quantifiable benefits, and Illinois state law mandates that the Illinois Commerce Commission evaluate PIMs based on net benefits to customers, including societal costs and effects on delivery rates.

Cite the original document

APA
RMI (2025). How PIM Evaluation Can Level Up. https://rmi.org/resources/how-pim-evaluation-can-level-up/
Chicago
RMI. How PIM Evaluation Can Level Up. 2025. https://rmi.org/resources/how-pim-evaluation-can-level-up/.
Wikipedia
{{cite report |author=RMI |title=How PIM Evaluation Can Level Up |date=6 August 2025 |url=https://rmi.org/resources/how-pim-evaluation-can-level-up/ |access-date=17 August 2026 |via=Climate Insights Directory}}
BibTeX
@techreport{rmi2025how, author = {{RMI}}, title = {{How PIM Evaluation Can Level Up}}, institution = {RMI}, year = {2025}, month = aug, url = {https://rmi.org/resources/how-pim-evaluation-can-level-up/}, urldate = {2026-08-17}, note = {Indexed by Climate Insights Directory} }

Full text

Collected · Record updated