Develop

A high-level investigation, such as a walkthrough audit, can be a useful alternative when resources are limited or when the owner is not ready to procure a full building performance plan. This type of support can help identify low- and no-cost measures, visible system issues, straightforward upgrade opportunities, and next steps for planned equipment replacements.

A high-level investigation can provide a practical starting point, but it may not include detailed energy modeling, lifecycle cost analysis, compliance forecasting, or system optimization. A comprehensive building performance plan can later build on the findings.

An integrated building performance plan provides a comprehensive roadmap for improving energy performance, reducing emissions, supporting compliance, and coordinating upgrades with capital planning. This scope typically evaluates how measures work together and how they should be sequenced over time.

Professional support can help with key tasks: assessing technical feasibility, comparing upgrade pathways, and estimating project costs. It can also help optimize system interactions, reduce the risk of stranded assets, and align near-term actions with long-term performance goals.

Performance and lifecycle cost analysis can help compare the business-as-usual case with one or more performance improvement pathways. This analysis may include energy modeling, emissions forecasting, cost estimating, utility cost projections, maintenance cost assumptions, and long-term lifecycle cost comparisons.

Professional support can help with key tasks: comparing upgrade pathways, modeling energy and emissions reductions, and estimating long-term costs and savings. It can also help evaluate building performance standard targets over time, account for potential alternative compliance payments or penalties, and support funding, financing, board approval, or capital planning decisions.

Financial analysis can help connect the technical scope with available resources, financing options, incentive eligibility, and funding timelines. This support may include evaluating grants, incentives, tax credits, loans, reserve funds, capital planning cycles, or project phasing.

Professional support can help with key tasks: identifying applicable funding sources, comparing financing options, and coordinating funding timelines with design, procurement, and construction. It can also help layer multiple incentives or grants, prepare technical documentation, evaluate tax credits or complex ownership structures, and support board approval, lender review, or capital planning decisions.

Compliance analysis can help test whether the proposed plan aligns with applicable regulatory and policy targets, reporting requirements, and compliance timelines. This support is especially useful when compliance risk is uncertain, when the building needs to compare multiple implementation pathways, or when the plan may be used for board approval, lender review, public reporting, or regulatory submission.

Professional support can help with key tasks: modeling energy or emissions performance, evaluating Alternative Compliance Pathways, and confirming whether planned measures are sequenced ahead of key deadlines. It can also help identify stranded asset risks, address complex documentation or reporting requirements, and clarify whether compliance deadlines may affect project phasing.

Planning and sequencing support can help translate assessment findings and technical analysis into a phased long-term roadmap. This support is especially useful when multiple systems are nearing replacement, enabling work is needed before performance measures can be implemented, or projects need to be coordinated with renovations, refinancing, capital planning, funding deadlines, regulatory deadlines, or occupant needs.

Professional support can help with key tasks: determining what should happen first, identifying dependencies between measures, and coordinating projects across funding, compliance, construction, and capital planning timelines. It can also help compare near-term actions against long-term performance goals and prepare a roadmap for procurement, board approval, lender review, or implementation planning.

Begin by identifying the types of strategies that could improve the building’s performance. Building performance improvements may include operational changes, maintenance improvements, equipment upgrades, load reduction measures, electrification, renewable energy, and storage.

At this stage, the goal is to understand which options may be relevant to the building and how they could work together to reduce energy use, lower emissions, manage costs, and support compliance with applicable Building Performance Standards (BPS).

Consider strategies across the following categories:

Some measures can be pursued before a full building performance plan is complete. These are typically low-cost, high-impact actions that improve operations, reduce waste, and create a stronger foundation for future upgrades. These measures can often be implemented with limited disruption and may be eligible for utility incentives or vendor support. 

ICYMI: The Assess step outlined some Low-Cost and High Impact Actions to Prioritize Now under Review Building Systems

Some decarbonization opportunities may be relatively straightforward when they align with equipment replacement needs or existing building conditions. These opportunities should still be evaluated carefully, but they may not require the same level of whole-building redesign as more complex system conversions. When these opportunities arise, consider whether they should be included in the building performance plan or pursued as near-term implementation options.

Examples may include:

Window replacement

Window replacement at or near end of useful life: While this can be a capital intensive project with some disruption to operations there are several valuable outcomes such as reduced operational costs, improved comfort and resilience, and reduced sizes for new heating and cooling equipment.

Tech Primer: High-Performance Windows

Guides & How Tos

Why this is important: Upgrading to high performance windows improves a building’s insulation and air tightness, reducing heat transfer, drafts, and noise.

Published June 1, 2021

Room heat pumps

Room heat pumps, such as mini-splits, packaged terminal heat pumps, or window heat pumps can provide heating and cooling or could be used in conjunction with existing hydronic heat for supplemental needs and may not need additional electrical infrastructure.

Tech Primer: Mini-Split Systems

Guides & How Tos

Why this is important: Overview of mini-splits as a heating and cooling system for all mulit-family and hotels. Explains their benefits and applicability.

Published July 10, 2019

Tech Primer: Packaged Terminal Heat Pumps (PTHPs)

Guides & How Tos

Why this is important: Learn how PTHPs offer a decentralized air-source heat pump that saves energy and reduces emissions in multi-family buildings.

Published June 1, 2021

Heat pump rooftop units

Heat pump rooftop units: Replacing gas fired or electric roof top units with dual fuel RTUs can significantly decrease emissions while improving cost effectiveness. Include heat recovery and advanced controls within your selection. Dual fuel RTUs likely do not need additional electrical infrastructure upgrades

Next Gen Rooftop Units: Tools & Resources

Programs & Tools

Why this is important: Resources for contractors designed to support decision‑making and align with project requirements, performance, and customer goals.

Published July 28, 2026

Heat pump water heaters

Heat pump water heaters (HPWH) for distributed domestic hot water systems is often a straightforward and efficient way to decarbonize. Some HPWH 120V units may not need additional electrical infrastructure. Central heat pump water heaters can be more complex and will likely need engineering services to design a specific solution.

Tech Primer: Air to Water Heat Pumps (AWHPs)

Guides & How Tos

Why this is important: Upgrading to high performance windows improves a building’s insulation and air tightness, reducing heat transfer, drafts, and noise.

Published June 1, 2021

Building performance strategies are most effective when they are considered together rather than as isolated projects. The sequence of improvements can affect project cost, equipment sizing, disruption, emissions reductions, and long-term performance. As you organize strategies, consider how to:

Prioritization should consider more than energy or emissions savings alone. The most effective plan will also account for equipment condition, occupant needs, available funding, compliance timelines, implementation complexity, and opportunities to coordinate work with planned projects.

Begin by reviewing the key findings from the Assess phase, including building performance, system condition, regulatory requirements, financial context, and planned capital needs. Use these findings to identify which strategies are most urgent, most feasible, or most valuable to pursue.

Determine whether the building can make progress through moderate operational improvements or whether deeper upgrades will be needed to meet performance goals, emissions targets, or regulatory requirements.

Consider if:

• Low-cost operational improvements can address near-term performance gaps
• Existing systems can be tuned, repaired, or controlled more effectively
• Major equipment replacement or electrification will be needed
• Load reduction measures are needed before new systems are sized
• Renewable energy or storage should be considered to support long-term goals

Identify equipment that is nearing end of life, operating inefficiently, or requiring significant maintenance. These systems may create important trigger events for performance improvements. This review can help reduce the risk of emergency replacements, stranded assets, or missed opportunities to align equipment replacement with long-term performance goals.

For each major system, consider:

Identify operational constraints, access limitations, occupant needs, and opportunities to minimize disruption during implementation. Some measures may be technically attractive but difficult to complete without careful coordination. Use these considerations to sequence work in a way that reduces disruption and supports successful implementation.

Consider:

Identify planned events that may create strategic opportunities to implement improvements more efficiently. These trigger events can help determine when specific measures should be completed. Coordinating performance upgrades with planned work can reduce incremental costs, limit disruption, and improve project feasibility.

Examples may include:

Pro Tip: Tenant turnover, lease renewal, or major tenant improvement projects may create opportunities to update lease language, incorporate green lease provisions, coordinate access to tenant spaces, or align performance upgrades with planned fit-out work.

See more information in Consider green leases where tenants affect costs or savings under Identify Financing below.

Available funding and regulatory requirements may influence project timing and urgency. Identify time-sensitive opportunities and deadlines that should be reflected in the plan. Use these dates to determine whether certain measures should be accelerated, bundled, delayed, or phased.

Consider:

Once key factors have been reviewed, document why certain strategies are prioritized over others. This creates a clear rationale for the building performance plan and helps decision-makers understand the recommended sequence of work.

A simple prioritization summary may include:

Begin by grouping selected improvement strategies into short-, medium-, and long-term phases  to clarify what should happen now, what should be coordinated with future work, and how to prepare for major upgrades.

Implementation timelines should consider dependencies between measures. Some actions should happen before others to avoid oversizing equipment, stranding assets, or missing opportunities to reduce future costs.

As you sequence the plan, consider how to:

Pro Tip: Load reduction measures such as weatherization, air sealing, controls optimization, or heat recovery should often occur before major electrification projects so that new heating and cooling systems can be sized appropriately. Similarly, rooftop solar should generally be coordinated with roof condition and installed after roof replacement if the roof is nearing end of life.

A phased plan is often easiest to understand when shown as a timeline, roadmap, or package of measures. This plan should be flexible, but specific enough to guide future decisions and inform owners, managers, residents, boards, lenders, and project teams in how individual actions build toward long-term goals and what to consider along the way.

The following components support a robust phased plan outline: 

• Sequencing of implementation milestones with dates, measures, and measurable outcomes. 
• Documentation of key triggers and considerations to prepare for the right investments before urgent conditions force a rushed decision.
• Tracking of key metrics, such as energy use, emissions, costs, and compliance status in alignment with the timeline.

Check out The Building Energy Hub’s example implementation timeline for a hypothetical building with aging equipment and a planned tenant expiration.

Compare the business-as-usual case and the performance case across the full planning period, typically 10 to 25 years. This comparison should show how each case performs over time for key metrics such as energy use, emissions, utility costs, maintenance costs, capital costs, and alignment with building performance standard targets.

To compare performance over time, use an energy analysis or projections for both cases. The analysis should sequence expected savings based on the proposed implementation timeline and compare annual performance against applicable building performance standard requirements. Energy results can then be translated into anticipated emissions and cost impacts.

Pro Tip: Use the same assumptions in both cases, including escalation rates, utility rates, emissions factors, and planning period, so the comparison is consistent.

Example Analysis Chart

An analysis could look like this chart which plots estimated greenhouse gas emissions (GHG) emissions per square feet (SF) of carbon emissions intensity (CEI) over time. The shaded parts are the regulatory thresholds (if applicable) and the two lines represent possible paths of action or no action. This can be a helpful analysis to evaluate long term implications and possible benefits.

Guide to Strategic Decarbonization Planning

Guides & How Tos

Why this is important: Provides a practical framework for planning decarbonization by aligning emissions reductions with capital planning, and long-term goals.

Published May 1, 2025

For project costs, the most straightforward approach is a simple Life Cycle Cost (LCC) analysis for each scenario. A LCC documents the upfront costs and anticipated operating costs (including utilities, maintenance, and capital improvements) in today’s dollars. Then compare for each case: the business-as-usual replacement option and the optimized performance pathway. 

A more detailed LCC analysis, including discounted cash flows and financial metrics, may be helpful for comparing investment options, however, this is not always necessary to understand the long-term cost differences between the business-as-usual and the performance case.

To support long-term investment decisions, the simple payback Life Cycle Cost (LCC) should not be the only decision-making metric because it may not capture the full cost of continuing business as usual, including avoided costs, compliance risk, and future equipment replacements. A basic long-term cost comparison can be developed by estimating total costs for each case over the planning period.

In addition to the simple LCC other factors to include may include:

Pro Tip: A performance-based plan may have higher upfront costs than the business-as-usual case, but it may provide lower lifecycle costs, reduced risk, and better long-term value.

The total value of building decarbonization extends beyond conventional life cycle cost analysis. The comparison should also document benefits that may not be fully captured in a simple cost calculation.

A new equation to consider is:

Take your Strategic decarbonization investments

• Subtract Avoided cost
• Subtract Avoided risks
• Add Increased value from strategic decarbonization

Result = Total value of decarbonization

Identify value-adds such as improved comfort, resilience, equipment reliability, maintenance reductions, and potential incentives or funding sources. Highlight where early investments may reduce future risk, avoid stranded assets, or allow upgrades to be coordinated with required capital replacements. These may include the following.

Pro Tip: Here is an illustrative example to demonstrate how strategic decarbonization could lead to a net value-add:

Begin by reviewing the building’s internal financial capacity and planned capital needs. This can help determine which improvements may be feasible in the near term, which may need to be phased over time, and where outside funding or financing may be needed. Coordinating upgrades with scheduled equipment replacements, lifecycle renewals, or major renovations can help reduce incremental costs and improve project feasibility.

Consider:

Next, identify external funding sources that may apply to the planned upgrades. These may include utility incentives, state and local programs, grants, federal tax credits, green bank financing, low-interest loan programs, or housing and community development funding.

Eligibility requirements often depend on factors such as building type, ownership structure, existing equipment, projected energy savings, emissions reductions, income qualifications, or project scope. Review these requirements early so the project can be designed and scheduled in a way that preserves eligibility.

This step should answer three basic questions: 

1. What funding may be available, 
2. Which measures are eligible, and 
3. What must happen before the project begins. 

Some programs require pre-approval, approved contractors, specific equipment, energy analysis, or documentation before costs are incurred.

Different funding sources may be better suited to different types of work. Non-competitive funding, such as rebates, incentives, tax credits, and conventional financing, may be appropriate for defined measures with clear eligibility requirements. Competitive grants or special funding programs may be more useful for larger, more complex, or higher-impact projects, but they often require longer timelines, stronger documentation, and more coordination. 

As you evaluate funding options, consider:

Pro Tip: Plan differently for non-competitive and competitive funding. Rebates, incentives, tax credits, and conventional financing can often be planned around known eligibility rules. Competitive grants may require more lead time, a stronger narrative, matching funds, partner coordination, and a project scope that aligns closely with the funder’s priorities. Identify competitive opportunities early so they can shape, but not delay, the overall project strategy. 

Some programs require pre-approval, energy analysis, contractor documentation, or verification before incentives or funds can be reserved. Begin evaluating funding opportunities early and coordinate applications with project planning, design, procurement, and implementation. This can help avoid missed deadlines, ineligible costs, or project sequencing issues that could reduce the amount of funding available.

Keep organized records throughout planning and implementation to support applications, documentation, verification, incentive processing, and reimbursement. Clear records can make it easier to secure funding and demonstrate that the project meets program requirements. 

Useful records may include:

Where tenants pay utility bills, control energy use, occupy spaces affected by upgrades, or benefit from reduced operating costs, green lease provisions may help align financial incentives between owners and tenants. Green leases can clarify expectations for cost sharing, utility data sharing, access to tenant spaces, operating practices, and participation in performance goals.

This can be especially useful when building improvements require tenant cooperation or when the owner pays for upgrades but tenants receive some of the energy savings. In those cases, lease language may help establish a fair approach to sharing costs, savings, responsibilities, and benefits.

Green lease considerations may be most relevant during lease renewal, tenant turnover, tenant improvement projects, or major capital planning events. Review lease terms early so financing, implementation, and performance tracking assumptions reflect the building’s actual ownership and occupancy structure.

Net-Zero Energy Leasing

Guides & How Tos

Why this is important: Supports owners and operators to demonstrate the value proposition of net zero energy in leased buildings

Published July 28, 2026

Use the applicable policy requirements identified in the Assess phase as the basis for comparison. Review the proposed improvement plan against known performance metrics, compliance deadlines, reporting requirements, and Alternative Compliance Pathways (ACP).

At this step, confirm whether the plan:

Compare the expected performance of the proposed plan against applicable regulatory targets. If the plan is not likely to meet future requirements, identify where changes may be needed. Determine whether the plan should be adjusted, accelerated, phased differently, or paired with an interim compliance strategy. 

Potential gaps or risks may include:

Pro Tip: Add a simple compliance gap summary, such as “on track,” “needs further analysis,” or “at risk without additional measures.”

If the building may not be able to meet standard compliance requirements on the expected timeline, identify whether an Alternative Compliance Pathway (ACP) may be needed. This could include a compliance plan, hardship pathway, extension, alternative payment, or other flexibility mechanism allowed by the applicable policy. 

Pro Tip: Alternative Compliance Pathways should be evaluated as part of the overall strategy, not as an afterthought. Confirm whether the improvement plan should include actions, documentation, or milestones needed to support one of these pathways.

The building performance plan should be treated as a living document. Regulations, emissions factors, utility rates, technology options, and incentive programs may change over time. Build checkpoints into the plan so the team can revisit assumptions and update the strategy as needed. 

Consider adding regulatory checkpoints: