national multiple family submetering and allocation billing program ...

0.00 indicating that whatever fit does exist is statistically significant at the 95% confidence level.
This model included only 746 properties, about 22% fewer than Model #2.
Table 5.18 Model #3 summary statistics, coefficient of determination, and significance
R R Squared Adjusted R Std. Error of Degrees of
F P-value
Square the Estimate Freedom
0.519 0.269 0.260 21.235 745 30.149 0.000
Predictors: (Constant), submetering, utility’s average commodity charge for water and wastewater, cooling tower?,
play area?, is property considered a senior citizen/retirement community?, RUBS, property built before 1995
(compared to properties built 1995 or later), average number of bedrooms per unit, average rent per bedroom
Dependent Variable: Indoor water use per unit (average 2001, 2002)
The coefficients presented in Table 5.19 present the magnitude of the “effect” of the
different independent variables in the model. Of particular interest are the coefficients for RUBS
and submetering. For submetering the B coefficient was –10.1, indicating that submetered
properties 10.1 kgal per unit less water than in-rent properties after adjusting the other significant
independent variables. This effect was statistically significant at the 95% confidence level.
70
Average Annual Water Use Per Unit (kgal)
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
53.19 43.14 51.48
In-rent or HOA
N=531
Submetered
N=79
RUBS
N=136
Figure 5.14 Adjusted average annual water use per unit – Model #3
164