全球智库信息集成服务系统

Findings from the Process Evaluation

• •The process for developing the plan has been reasonable. • • • • • • •
• •CEC has targeted major barriers to market viability across the five main fuel types funded by the program.
• There appears to be a general awareness about the program.
• Most project solicitations (also known as project opportunity notices) have attracted more requests for funds than the total funds available and appear to have attracted a healthy diversity of applicants.
• Survey respondents believe the criteria and weights used by CEC to evaluate award applications are appropriate, but there were some concerns.
• There were both strengths and weaknesses in how CEC oversees grants once the grants begin.
• Awardees by and large secure the proposed matching funds.
• Completing projects on time has been a challenge for many awardees.
• Awardees are by and large achieving the technical objectives most central to their projects.

Findings from the Outcome Evaluation

• •Study findings suggest that roughly one-half of the projects funded by the ARFVTP would not have proceeded otherwise. • • •
• After completing their ARFVTP projects, awardees overwhelmingly indicated they had taken steps to continue to develop, market, install, or produce the product or technology funded by the award.
• The ARFVTP has made considerable progress reducing many barriers to the market viability of alternative fuels and vehicles.
• CEC's ARFVTP project grants supported some employment both in California and elsewhere and did result in some hiring for the projects.