The Latest Trend in Home Performance: Why You Should Be Concerned

The Latest Trend in Home Performance: Why You Should be Concerned

For the past couple of years there has been a lot of conversation in the industry about indoor air quality and the health benefits of home performance upgrades. Even the certification folks have jumped on the bandwagon, offering special certifications for home inspections that focus on health and indoor air quality. There is no question that energy upgrades can improve the indoor environment of a home or building; this has always been one of the non-energy benefits of home performance upgrades. The real question is, does this warrant a change in messaging for the home performance industry? Should we be driving the industry to focus on promoting health benefits as a way to stimulate growth and potentially spur market transformation?

To be honest I have my doubts. Here’s why.

Every couple of years we hear about something just around the corner that is going to create huge consumer demand that will push the home performance industry to the next level. These trends start with great enthusiasm but are often followed by not-so-great results.

For example, in the early part of the new millennium, Home Performance with Energy Star® was the hot ticket. The intentions were good; the results were mixed. Then came Energy Upgrade California, backed by huge dollars from the American Reinvest and Recovery Act (ARRA). If only it achieved what it could have. Then it was the Home Star legislation, affectionately known as Cash For Caulkers. That slowly faded away. More recently it’s been financial tools such as Property Accessed Clean Energy (PACE) and now the Residential Energy Efficiency Loan (REEL) program from the California state treasuries office. No doubt each of these have had positive impacts. There is no question that each of these initiatives has helped the industry grow. Unfortunately none have matched the hype or created true market transformation. Some people have called energy efficiency “the next frontier,” comparing it to where solar PV about 15 years ago. Yet we are still struggling to survive as an industry.

I hate to rain on the parade, but I personally believe the current trend of focusing on the health benefits of home performance upgrades will not create huge demand in the industry or drive it to real market transformation, no matter how much we will it to happen.


There are two ways to approach health and home performance. The first is to identify potential air quality and other concerns as part of a traditional energy audit, which makes a lot of sense. The other is to seek out health concerns as opportunities on their own—an approach that I think is risky.

Of course, it’s not uncommon to find issues in homes that are most certainly making people less healthy or potentially sick. I think most of us would agree that fixing a broken sewer line to keep waste water from pooling under a home will improve the indoor air quality. The same holds true for fixing the shower drain that the plumbers forgot to attach, leaving nowhere for the water to go except into the crawlspace. Even more common is the furnace plenum that rusts out and makes a nice warm home for critters because it’s in contact with the dirt in a crawlspace. I have seen several of these that are covered in rodent feces and other not so nice things which then get blown into homes when the HVAC system is operating. Then there’s the brand-new gas stove that had a defective burner and was producing dangerous levels of carbon monoxide, making the whole family sick when mom prepared dinner.

Each of these examples are things we’ve encountered while preforming energy audits. I think most people would agree that fixing these problems goes a long way toward improving indoor air quality and the health of the occupants of those buildings. In this capacity, I think health has real value and is a huge positive for the home performance industry.

What troubles me is the idea of using health concerns as the primary driver to promote and sell home performance. There’s no question that you can sell jobs based on improving indoor air quality, which directly affects health. I can tell you from experience these jobs can be very lucrative-- and that you can lose your shirt on them too.


The problem is, when you present yourself as someone who can fix long term health problems, you are entering a land of questionable promises and huge expectations. That’s not to say that you can’t improve conditions, but I would caution home performance contractors against creating an unrealistic sense of what they can accomplish. Often the folks who look to home performance as a cure for their health concerns are very difficult clients who have expectations that are impossible to meet.

Early on in my home performance training I was always told to use phrases like “improved indoor air quality" and making homes “healthier” vs. fixing a home that’s making you sick. This is good advice. When someone is sick and believes that their home is the cause, their expectations of your ability to fix everything are very high. If you promote your ability to fix sick homes, you’d better be able to deliver.

What happens after your customer spends tens of thousands of dollars on an upgrade and still believes the house is making them sick? Do you go back and try additional solutions? If so who pays for it? Is it “warranty” work or a change order? I can guarantee you there are some people who will never be satisfied with your results, no matter how hard you try.


I suspect the recent advent of low cost particulate monitors might have something to do with this new trend toward health. For a couple of hundred dollars you can now get a device in your home that will provide data on what is in your home and how it might affect your indoor air quality and therefore your health. Previously, instruments to do this cost in the tens of thousands of dollars. Now you can have Amazon deliver one right to your door for under $300. The problem is, how well do they really work? And which particulates are actually contributing to your health concerns?

There are as many kinds of health concerns as there are types of people in the world. I have seen home performace improvements be very effective. In my experience, fixing leaky ducts and air sealing crawlspaces and attics can be very beneficial for the health of the occupants. I have many positive anecdotal stories about huge improvements in the health of asthma sufferers, and of people not needing to use their allergy medications anymore after we fixed their homes.


I also have a few horror stories, such as the “super smeller”. A super smeller is someone who has an extremely heightened sense of smell. At first I thought the idea was a bit exaggerated, but I assure you these people do exist. In our case, we were very cautious, providing material data safety sheets (MSDS) on everything we used in her house. We also provided physical samples of all of our materials prior to installation - the ductwork, the insulation, the mastic-- you name it, she approved it all before we used it. She forbid the use of any kind of spray foam, so we ordered special IAQ (read: expensive) mastic. We air sealed her attic with mastic instead of gun foam, which was not fun. We installed a new furnace and ducts and completely air sealed her home. When the work was complete she was convinced that something we used was giving her headaches. We went back, and back again, using a blower door to isolate the source of the odors. Eventually we went so far as to install mechanical ventilation, complete with filtered supply, at our expense. No matter how hard we tried, she still suspected that our work was making her feel worse.

So where do you draw the line and how do you move on? In this case, having a relationship with an indoor air hygienist who could do some in-place air sampling and monitoring would be a good idea. Measure the results and deal with facts. The problem is, air hygienists are expensive, so who pays for it?

Some health-focused jobs can have sad endings. We worked with a Multiple Chemical Sensitivity client (MCS). He hired us to air seal his home and install a mechanical ventilation system. He was a referral from an indoor air quality specialist (hygienist). At some point in his life, he had been exposed to chemicals that altered his natural ability to process smells. Honestly I felt bad for him. He had moved out of his home and had to live elsewhere after a contractor used an epoxy finish on his outside front deck. It seems the epoxy was not mixed properly, and the off-gassing set off his immune response, giving him migraines.

He evacuated the house for nearly three years. During this period, he replaced his forced air heating system with a boiler and radiators to eliminate ductwork and made other improvements to the home. When we came on, we air sealed the entire home (again with mastic and no gun foam), insulated the attic and installed a Heat Recovery Ventilator that included a MERV 12 pre-filter. We had to put the intake for the HRV in a specific location so that the neighbor’s stinky laundry detergent would not be an issue. We installed an indoor control for the HRV so he could shut it off if there was an unwanted pollutant outside.

He was very happy with the work. After waiting two months for everything to off-gas, he moved back into the home. All seemed well and good. When I spoke to him a couple of years later, he was still very happy with the work we did, but also still had some issues with headaches and other health problems. Although we made significant improvements, his home was still presenting problems for him.


Over the years our work has improved many homes, including making them healthier. But not all of our jobs were 100 percent successful. It’s not a good feeling when you set out to help someone with their health concerns and come up a bit short. This is why I am apprehensive about the trend toward health as a new driver for home performance upgrades. It’s great when you get it right, it sucks when you don’t.

My advice: leave fixing health issues to doctors and other health professionals and concentrate on promoting the other benefits of home performance upgrades.

I would love to hear your feedback and experiences regarding health and home performance. Please share by describing your experience in the comments section below.

Charles Cormany
Executive Director
Efficiency First California

Image by iStock


Risk and Opportunity

Thank you for the post Charlie; I agree that using health benefits as a selling tool is risky business and in these situations communication and expectation-setting is vital. That said, I see the potential funding sources of insurers as a way to accelerate the industry (at least to yield more paid energy audits). Just like a prescription from the doctor, not all solutions work. Sometimes a patient needs to return and try something new. So in this regard, I agree--leave fixing health issues to the doctors, but have a mechanism for using a home performance project as a "prescription." If the customer moves forward with a project that does not substantially improve their health (which it likely will not overnight like a drug might), at least they walk away with elevated comfort and energy savings.

Thanks for your comments

Alex - I appreciate your feedback and comments.

Health & Home Performance

Charles, you make some excellent points in your blog. It is REALLY hard to be certain that any improvement is going to have a positive effect on someone looking for solutions, especially if they have health related concerns. However, we have a growing pile of evidence that suggests when occupants who are at risk of respiratory ailments have high quality home performance done on their home, triggers that contribute to their ailments are reduced usually resulting in them feeling better. Is this always the case? No, but there is much greater probability of them feeling better with home performance than without.

At DOE and Home Performance with ENERGY STAR, we are exploring ways for programs and contractors to talk about this with homeowners in ways that don't over-promise results while still suggesting that these improvements can yield better health outcomes. For example, it is completely wrong to say to any customer that the improvements a home performance contractor is making to a home will solve that customer's asthma problems. However, it is acceptable to say that home performance done well results in verifiable improvements in population health and reduces many common triggers that can lead to asthma attacks.

One of the main purposes behind this effort is to grow the evidence that home performance can yield positive health outcomes so we can work with the healthcare industry to find ways to help them achieve sustained, positive health outcomes for their patients more cost-efficiently. If we work together, then it is more and more likely the healthcare industry will see the value of home performance as a service that they want to partially subsidize for some types of patients instead of paying for hospital visits and substantial pharmaceuticals. To be clear and set expectations appropriately, this strategy is not expected to result in health insurance companies paying for millions and millions of homes to be air sealed and insulated and HVAC systems to be replaced. However, we do anticipate that more contractors and programs (and their regulators) will see the additional, quantifiable benefits of home performance and be more willing to offer it. And, we anticipate that the healthcare industry will begin seeing the value of home performance sufficiently enough that it will reduce the costs of these services to targeted populations.

Having had numerous conversations with hundreds of people interested in this topic, one thing is incredibly evident. Everyone has a horror story to tell about how something didn't go well on a particular project. That is making everyone who is working on this appropriately cautious about how to talk about it, what we're solving, and what kind of liabilities and responsibilities we share when offering health-related solutions. Fortunately, this caution results in slow but steady progress. And it forces us to be realistic about the possibilities.

Charles, you're doing the right thing! You're part of the HP industry that is holding the reigns and saying "Whoa, not so fast!". Thank you for your caution.

Great perspective

Ely - No doubt you have a bigger feedback loop on this topic than I do. I have a many examples of positive health improvements after home performance upgrades too. There is no question that contractors have the potential to make significant improvements to IAQ and the health of the occupants. My intent was to point out that we should be cautious and set realistic expectations when health is the concern. If we have a group of folks doing sub standard work and promising health improvements it could be a serious blow to the credibility of those who do good work and the industry as a whole. Setting realistic expectations is critical when the driver is a health concern. Thanks for your perspective and feedback.