| Resource Type | Toolkit |
| Author / Source | Rural Power Coalition (RPC) |
| Publication Date | June 2026 |
| Location | United States (framework applicable nationally) |
| Initiative Type | Program, Partnership, Policy |
| Project Complexity | Intermediate |
| Recommended For | Board, Staff, Community Organizations |
Estimated reading time: 15 minutes
Why This Matters for Rural Electric Co-ops
A Community Benefits Plan is a written commitment describing what a community gains from a project and how the co-op will be held to it. This guide breaks that work into five process steps and five target outcomes, so a co-op is not inventing the practice from scratch. The usefulness is not limited to funding applications. Any time a co-op needs community buy-in for a new project, such as a solar array or a battery storage site, the same process surfaces concerns early, reduces siting and permitting friction, and creates a visible record of what was promised.
The federal program context has changed. New ERA and PACE are closed to new applicants, so the guide's original purpose as an application aid no longer applies to new work. Co-ops holding approved awards still carry CBP obligations, and this remains a practical roadmap for meeting them. For everyone else, it stands on its own as a community engagement framework.
Key Takeaways
| › | Five process considerations and five target outcomes give co-ops a repeatable structure for community engagement rather than a blank page. |
| › | Accessibility decides who actually participates: translation, transportation, childcare, ADA access, virtual options, and at least one meeting outside business hours. |
| › | Written commitments (letters of intent, MOUs, contracts) plus a public evaluation schedule turn stated benefits into obligations members can track. |
| › | Two outcomes are marked required, affordable bills for low-income and marginalized members and sustainably generated energy. Four more are suggested, covering governance transparency, tangible community benefits, host community compensation, and workforce development. |
Implementation Considerations
- Member Buy-In: The guide asks co-ops to publicly respond to stakeholder recommendations, including the ones they decline, and to commit to no eminent domain for site acquisition. That builds trust, but boards should discuss the commitments before staff make them.
- Staffing or Technology Requirements: Genuine engagement runs across months, not a single public meeting. Accommodations such as translation, childcare, and stipends for community organizations carry real cost. Smaller co-ops may need local partners or shared regional coordination capacity.
- Time-Sensitive Information: The guide is built around New ERA and PACE, both closed to new applicants. Funding for CBP work was bundled into New ERA awards, so co-ops without an approved award should not count on that support and should not treat this as a live funding pathway. The named PACE award amounts, and the RESP, EECLP, and direct pay references at the end, may also have shifted.
Notable Examples
- Rural Power Coalition: Authored the guide and offers direct support to co-ops developing CBPs.
- Roanoke Electric Cooperative (NC): Inclusive utility investment program cited as an affordability model.
- Tri-State Generation and Transmission Association (CO): Renewable energy commitment and inclusive utility investment work, cited as a sustainability model.
- Trico Electric Cooperative: PACE forgivable loans supporting expanded solar and battery storage.
- Rappahannock Electric Cooperative (VA): Inclusive utility investment program named among existing affordability models.
Estimated reading time: 15 minutes
Related to
Comments
0 comments
Please sign in to leave a comment.