Why Third-Party Testing And Acceptance Is The Way

When you purchase a new car, you expect the miles-per-gallon rating to be fairly close to what you’ll experience on the road. When you buy an appliance, you assume the Energy Star label is accurate. But when it comes to buildings—our homes, offices, and schools—the performance gap is much wider.

The reality is that buildings rarely operate at their listed efficiency. A system might be designed to achieve a certain SEER rating, a specific airflow target, or a defined energy-use intensity (EUI), but the gap between “on paper” performance and “real world” results is often significant. Research has shown that actual energy use in homes can be up to 2.5 times higher than design estimates, and as much as 3.8 times higher in non-domestic buildings (Wikipedia, Performance Gap).¹ This disconnect costs consumers money, reduces comfort, and erodes trust in contractors and manufacturers, alike. One of the most effective solutions is independent, third-party testing and acceptance.

Connor Dillon, a quality management expert for the residential construction industry, specifically in energy code and above-code programs, owns a family business that uses the mantra, “Build a house you’d be proud to have your mother live in.” When asked how he sees that value translating into today’s residential construction industry, where speed and cost often outweigh craftsmanship, he said: “I don’t think it’s an option to skip over craftsmanship for one big reason: risk. I would ask the people pushing for speed and reduced costs: do you think that will lower your risk of a lawsuit from multiple owners, or government intervention? Predatory business practices have historically reached points that the government gets involved and that means fines or potential criminal charges.

Every building owner wants efficiency, comfort and safety. But as any contractor or engineer will admit, performance varies. Even the best equipment, when improperly sized or installed, will underperform. Commissioning shortcuts mean that the “as-built” system rarely matches the “as-designed” plans. Airflow is often unbalanced, duct leakage is higher than expected and controls may not be calibrated. Over time, operational drift—such as clogged filters or failed economizers—only widens the gap. Without accountability, the promised performance only exists on paper.

Dillon says, “I know there are clauses inserted into contracts all the time to force arbitration or mandatorily ‘opt-out’ of class action lawsuits, but at some point the music stops and you won’t have a chair to sit in. So do it right the first time, failing that, fix it until it’s good to go. Don’t ever try to sweep it under the rug. We know better these days, and the lack of confidence in new construction by homebuyers these days is very telling.”

Third-party testing and acceptance is not about pointing fingers—it is about creating transparency. Independent verification ensures that systems perform to the specifications the owner paid for, not just what the contractor or manufacturer claimed. Studies have confirmed the benefits. For example, in Austin, Texas, the adoption of mandatory third-party testing for new residential buildings significantly increased code compliance.² Homes that underwent third-party verification consistently met or exceeded energy standards, while two-thirds of untested homes failed to comply (ICMA; IMT).³ This example highlights how accountability drives better performance.

Dillon commented on the most common gaps he sees between code compliance on paper and actual performance in the field: “First, HVAC installation is often far off from design documents – if they existed at all. Second, hiring third-party inspectors and not familiarizing yourself with what they do enough to call out BS when they see it. To solve these, the solution is interrelated. Builders need to have a full package of design documents before ground is broke. Bottom line, if the documents aren’t there, they shouldn’t proceed with construction. Then the third-party inspector must verify the installation against the design—and have the authority to mandate fixes before gypsum goes up.”

“Which means when you get out there—if the ducts don’t line up with [ACCA] Manual D, you can call it. But, you need to be able to call it a fail and get it fixed, without construction proceeding.” Dillon adds that, “Builders need to be more serious about holding those guys accountable. If you keep getting reports from the inspector with the same test results, or the photos look remarkably similar—maybe hire another guy to follow along. I’ve seen builders catch inspection companies passing homes with three to four times the allowed duct leakage by having another company test a couple homes here and there.”

The benefits of third-party testing are wide-ranging. Contractors and manufacturers know their work will be verified, which incentivizes them to follow best practices. Consumers are protected by proof that their investment delivers as promised. Data from testing reveals patterns—such as common installation errors—that can inform training, standards and product design. Verified systems do not just perform better at startup; they are easier to maintain and troubleshoot later. According to research, commissioning can improve a building’s energy performance by 8% to 30%, making it one of the most cost-effective efficiency strategies available (Rob Freeman, Building Commissioning; MNCEE).⁴

Methods of third-party verification include airflow and duct-leakage testing, combustion and safety testing, functional performance tests, commissioning and retro-commissioning, and continuous monitoring. Each of these methods provides a “trust but verify” approach to system delivery. Independent commissioning agents, for example, provide quality assurance throughout construction, optimize building systems, and improve occupant comfort and safety (MechTest; WBDG).⁵

While third-party testing is powerful, it is not the only way to bridge the performance gap. Alternatives and complements include enhanced contractor training, performance-based incentives, standardized commissioning protocols, and technology-enabled verification through cloud-connected equipment and remote diagnostics. However, these measures often work best when paired with independent oversight. Just as a financial auditor validates accounting, a third-party tester validates building performance.

Dillon says “You absolutely need to have a mindset of constant learning. Every day, I spend at least 20 minutes in a daily routine of just learning. There are free videos from John Maxwell, Darren Hardy, and folks like Ryan Holiday you can get in an email that simply give you solid tidbits and prime you for learning. You can obviously go with formal training, and maybe your employer has some training materials through a platform. Use it. Take the time to learn something every day.”

Too often, building owners must take efficiency claims on faith. By embracing third-party testing, the industry can move from a “trust us” model to a “show and tell” model. The difference is not only peace of mind but also measurable results—lower utility bills, reduced carbon emissions and healthier indoor environments. For contractors, welcoming verification may seem intimidating at first. But in practice, it becomes a powerful differentiator. Contractors who embrace testing signal to customers that they stand behind their work. Over time, this builds trust and repeat business.

“The last thing I want to point out,” Dillon adds, “is you need to retain a sense of honor and pride in your work. That means when an inspector comes out and shows you something is wrong, you fix it and hold the trade responsible for it, accountable. If the range hood is supposed to exhaust to the outside, then make sure the trade runs a duct to the outside. If you have bad insulation installs, make sure they come back and fix it. And if you keep seeing the exact test results from your inspector, maybe hire another guy to spot check them.”

Buildings are too important—and too expensive—to operate below their potential. Third-party testing and acceptance is not a luxury; it is an essential safeguard to ensure that customers receive the efficiency, comfort, and safety they were promised. As the building industry moves toward higher efficiency standards and greater accountability, “show and tell” should become the new normal. Customers deserve proof, and the industry deserves the credibility that comes with delivering on its promises.

References

1. Wikipedia – Performance Gap: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Performance_gap.
2. ICMA – Case Study: Third-Party Testing in Austin: https://icma.org/sites/default/files/304961_CaseStudy1Codes3rdParty.pdf.
3. Institute for Market Transformation (IMT) – Case Study on Third-Party Performance Testing: https://imt.org/resources/case-study-1-third-party-performance-testing/. MNCEE – Benefits of Third-Party Commissioning: https://www.mncee.org/benefits-third-party-building-commissioning.
4. Rob Freeman – What Is Building Commissioning?: https://robfreeman.com/what-building-commissioning/.
5. MechTest – Importance of a Commissioning Agent: https://www.mechtest.com/news/110/Importance-of-a-Commissioning-Agent-during-the-Construction-Process/. WBDG – Commissioning Authority: https://www.wbdg.org/design-disciplines/commissioning-authority.