Localized load and grid exposure
Move beyond systemwide adoption totals to customer, block-group, equipment-screening and service-area impacts.
Grid Impact Analysis Reports
Board-ready utility answers—without operating the model.
Jackson Associates applies the Grid Impact Model to your service area and delivers a focused, professionally prepared analysis of localized EV load, grid exposure, managed charging economics and other emerging planning issues.
A decision deliverable—not a generic study
Find out what is likely to happen, where it matters and what to do next
Each report converts customer-level forecasts and adjustable utility assumptions into findings that management, engineering staff and boards can evaluate.
Alternative planning strategies
Test unmanaged growth against managed charging, DSM, DER, storage, VPP or capital-investment scenarios.
Costs, benefits and priorities
Receive concise findings, scenario comparisons, decision metrics and recommended areas for further engineering or program development.
Modular report options
Start with the decision your utility needs to make
Reports may be commissioned individually or combined. Scope is organized around the planning question rather than a rigid sequence of software modules.
EV Load and Local Grid Exposure
Where will EV charging add load—and which areas warrant attention first?
Forecast localized EV ownership and charging loads, then screen selected block groups using utility-defined transformer size, current loading, households served, power factor and planning limits.
- Current, 2030 and 2035 EV adoption scenarios
- Localized unmanaged and managed 8,760 load profiles
- Block-group clustering and priority-area identification
- Planning-limit and rated-capacity screening
- Potential early transformer-replacement flags
Best for: Utilities beginning EV distribution planning or deciding where detailed equipment review should start.
Managed Charging Business Case
Will managing EV charging produce a defensible financial benefit?
Connect localized charging forecasts with G&T demand charges, co-op energy margins, program participation, customer incentives and technology costs.
- Telematics, AMI and meter-collar alternatives
- Peak charges, avoided demand costs and revenue margins
- One-time, annual and levelized program costs
- Payback, benefit/cost ratio, NPV and cash flow
- Total co-op EV cost with and without a program
Best for: Co-ops evaluating whether, when and how to launch an EV managed charging program.
Future Load and Distribution Stress
How will customer growth, electrification and weather change future grid needs?
Develop consistent current, 2030 and 2035 customer and hourly-load scenarios incorporating new construction, rebuilding, end-use technologies and weather.
- Customer and end-use load forecasts
- Heat pump and water-heating electrification
- Normal and extreme weather scenarios
- Peak timing, duration and geographic concentration
- Hourly exports for engineering and GIS workflows
Best for: Capital planning, load forecasting, grant needs assessments and engineering-study preparation.
DSM, DER and VPP Strategy
Which flexible-load and distributed-resource strategies have the greatest practical value?
Estimate available load flexibility and compare program scenarios for air conditioning, heat pumps, water heaters, batteries, EVs and other controllable resources.
- Controllable-load inventory and hourly availability
- Participation, event, recovery and performance scenarios
- Coincident peak and G&T demand-cost impacts
- Program and technology cost comparisons
- Non-wires alternative and VPP screening
Best for: Utilities prioritizing DSM/VPP opportunities before selecting a vendor or committing to deployment.
A typical report package includes
- Executive summary and decision-oriented findings
- Utility-specific inputs and transparent assumptions
- Localized maps, tables and hourly-load graphics
- Alternative adoption, loading or program scenarios
- Financial and operational decision metrics
- Planning implications and recommended next steps
- Supporting data tables and relevant exports
- Results presentation and questions review
Useful to management and technical staff
Board-ready does not mean technically shallow
The main report explains the conclusions in clear planning and financial terms. Supporting material documents the underlying assumptions, customer-level methodology, hourly results and geographic detail needed by utility analysts, engineers and consultants.
When appropriate, results can support planning narratives and cost-benefit documentation consistent with RUS and federal grant-program expectations. Final grant eligibility and required formats remain subject to the specific program and agency.
Important: Transformer and feeder results are planning-level screening and prioritization—not substitutes for utility equipment records, field measurements, power-flow analysis or detailed engineering design.
A focused engagement
From planning question to usable findings
Define the decision
Identify the board, planning, program or engineering question and the geographic scope.
Confirm assumptions
Review available utility inputs, G&T rates, equipment parameters and scenarios.
Run GIM analysis
Jackson Associates develops customer-level forecasts and evaluates the selected alternatives.
Deliver and review
Receive the findings report, supporting results and an online presentation with questions.
Utility data can improve the analysis, but extensive AMI integration and a major internal data project are not prerequisites.
Choose the right delivery approach
Report service or in-house Grid Impact Model?
The analytical foundation is the same. The difference is who runs scenarios and how often the utility expects to revisit the questions.
Best for a defined decision
Jackson Associates performs the analysis and delivers the findings.
- One or several clearly defined planning questions
- Board or management deliverable is the priority
- Limited staff time for operating an analytical platform
- Independent analysis for a planning or grant process
- Practical way to evaluate GIM before licensing software
Best for continuing scenario analysis
The utility receives the Excel-based system for recurring in-house applications.
- Frequent changes to assumptions and scenarios
- Multiple departments or planning applications
- Ongoing EV, electrification, DSM, DER or VPP analysis
- Direct access to customer, geographic and hourly outputs
- Repeated exports for engineering and GIS workflows
Information requirements
Start with what the utility knows today
GIM's identity-protected customer records and hourly-load intelligence provide the analytical base. A report can begin without collecting customer surveys or completing a large AMI-data project.
Available utility information is used where it materially improves the decision. The initial scope discussion identifies which inputs are essential and which can be represented with transparent placeholders or scenarios.
No report should imply more precision than the available inputs support. Assumptions, limitations and recommended validation steps are identified explicitly.
Service territoryZIP codes, block groups, customer counts or other geographic boundaries.
Rates and economic inputsG&T energy and demand charges, retail margins, financing assumptions and planning criteria.
Distribution assumptionsRepresentative transformer sizes, present loading, customers served and planning limits when asset screening is included.
Program assumptionsParticipation, incentives, engagement, administration and vendor or technology costs when available.
Optional detailed dataAMI, GIS, equipment records and engineering-model data can refine or validate selected applications.
Scope and investment
Pricing should follow the question—not force the question into a package
Report scope and cost depend on service-area size, geographic detail, number of scenarios, available utility data and the financial or engineering outputs required. After a brief discussion, Jackson Associates provides a defined scope, deliverables, schedule and fixed project price.
No obligation to discuss scopeFocused or combined reportsDefined deliverablesFixed project proposal
Frequently asked questions
Grid Impact Analysis Report questions
What is a Grid Impact Analysis Report?
It is a professionally prepared planning deliverable that applies the Grid Impact Model framework to a utility's service area, rates, assumptions and available data without requiring the utility to license or operate the model.
Must the report tracks be purchased in sequence?
No. The tracks are modular and may be commissioned separately or combined. The recommended scope depends on the decision the utility is trying to make and which results are needed to support it.
Why is pricing not published?
A small EV business-case assessment and a multi-scenario service-area study require very different work. A short scope discussion allows the proposal to reflect the utility's actual size, questions, data and deliverables rather than charging for unnecessary analysis or understating a complex engagement.
Does the utility need AMI or detailed circuit data?
No. MAISY customer records and hourly-load data provide the starting point. AMI, GIS, asset records and engineering models can be incorporated when available and useful, but their absence does not prevent planning-level forecasting and screening.
Can a report support a managed charging decision?
Yes. The business-case report can compare telematics, AMI and meter-collar strategies; calculate avoided demand charges, program costs, revenue effects, payback, benefit/cost ratio, cash flow and NPV; and show the total co-op EV cost with and without managed charging.
Does the report replace engineering analysis?
No. It identifies geographic priorities, scenario impacts and potential equipment exposure. Asset-specific upgrade or replacement decisions require utility records, measurements and appropriate engineering analysis.
Start with the decision you need to support
A short conversation can determine whether a focused report or the full Grid Impact Model is the better fit.