Methodology
How the Infrastructure Readiness Score works
Every U.S. public water utility gets a 0-to-100 score from ten weighted components drawn from EPA enforcement records, federal water-sector databases, financial filings, and contributor-aggregated procurement data. The composite refreshes quarterly; component inputs refresh on their own cadences.
What the score reads
- Compliance trajectory: EPA ECHO enforcement + DMR records
- Drinking water posture: EPA SDWIS violations + compliance schedules
- Federal funding flow: CWSRF and DWSRF pipelines
- Climate exposure: FEMA NHFL flood hazard overlays
- Federal designation overlays: CEJST, HUBZone, Opportunity Zone
- Bond posture: EMMA disclosures and audited financials
Why the weights are proprietary
We publish what the score reads. We do not publish the precise weighting book or the underlying normalization functions. The methodology is the analytical product; full publication would let any reader replicate the scoring without subscribing. Subscribers can request the weights under a confidentiality letter.
Candidacy and tier thresholds
Water Hawk uses two related cuts on the same 0-to-100 composite. The candidacy cut (Strong, Emerging, Not yet) is what a municipality sees on its own dashboard; the aggregate display tier (High, Medium, Low) is what investors see when comparing utilities across the corpus.
Candidacy (muni-facing)
- Strong candidate: composite 60 plus.
- Emerging candidate: composite 35 to 60.
- Not yet a candidate: composite below 35.
Aggregate display tier (investor-facing)
- High tier: composite 70 plus.
- Medium tier: composite 30 to 70.
- Low tier: composite below 30.
The candidacy cut is set tighter so an emerging case is surfaced to the municipality earlier than the aggregate-rank band would label it.
Components
Click into any component for the deep-dive: source categories, refresh cadence, importance rationale, edge cases.
Financial distress
High importanceComposite measure of capital structure pressure, credit posture, and recent issuance behavior.
Enforcement posture
High importanceRolling SDWA enforcement-action rate and exceedance trajectory against a cohort baseline.
Permit-cycle pressure
Mid importanceDays-to-renewal and renewal complexity against the cohort baseline for similar systems.
Chemical procurement load
Mid importanceThree-year chemical-procurement spend trajectory and rebid-window proximity, subject to the antitrust safeguards.
Infrastructure age
Mid importanceAsset-age and replacement-need composite from public capital plans and capital improvement schedules.
Service-area pressure
Mid importancePopulation, demographic shift, and per-capita demand against design capacity.
PFAS exposure
Mid importancePFAS detection rate, federal MCL exposure, and remediation-funding eligibility.
SRF funding readiness
Low importanceState Revolving Fund applicant status, project count, and most recent year of award.
Legislative tailwind
Low importanceState P3 enabling-statute strength and recent legislative-priority signaling.
Funding gap
Low importanceUnmet capital need versus funded plan, normalized to median household income.
Cohort safeguards
Every cohort-aggregated input respects three structural safeguards: a minimum cohort size of five contributors, a single-contributor concentration cap of twenty-five percent, and a ninety-day forward-looking time delay. The safeguards are enforced in code and described to customers at Data Disclaimers.
Common questions
How does Water Hawk score Infrastructure readiness for water utilities?
Water Hawk blends ten weighted analytical components into a single 0-to-100 Infrastructure Readiness Score per utility. Components draw from EPA ECHO compliance trajectory, SDWIS records, financial indicators, federal designations (CEJST, HUBZone, Opportunity Zone), capital pipeline signals, and consent decree posture. A qualitative analyst overlay handles cases the deterministic blend cannot. Refreshed quarterly.
What data sources does the Infrastructure Readiness Score use?
EPA ECHO effluent and enforcement data, Safe Drinking Water Information System (SDWIS) records, FEMA National Flood Hazard Layer, federal designation overlays (CEJST, HUBZone, Opportunity Zone), state revolving fund pipeline data (CWSRF, DWSRF), municipal audited financials, bond disclosures via EMMA, and consent decree filings.
What do the candidacy and tier thresholds mean?
Water Hawk uses two related cuts on the 0-to-100 composite score. Candidacy (the muni-facing label) is Strong at composite 60 plus, Emerging at 35 to 60, and Not yet a candidate below 35; that is the threshold the assessment engine uses to decide whether to proactively tell a system it may be a P3 candidate. Aggregate display tier (the investor-facing rank label) is High at 70 plus, Medium at 30 to 70, and Low below 30; that bucket is used in rollups and rankings across the corpus. Both scales sit on the same composite, with the candidacy cut set tighter so an emerging case gets surfaced earlier than the aggregate band would.
How often is the score refreshed?
Quarterly for the composite. Underlying inputs refresh on their own cadences: SDWA and ECHO monthly, permit cycles and chemical procurement quarterly, bond disclosures and audited financials annually. A freshness indicator surfaces on every utility profile.
Can subscribers request the full methodology weighting?
Yes. Subscribers can request the exact weighting book and the precise underlying-dataset construction under a confidentiality letter. Public-facing pages show component names, importance class, refresh cadence, and the analytical use case; the precise weights are proprietary.
Want the full methodology?
Subscribers can request the full methodology including the exact weighting book and the precise underlying-dataset construction under a confidentiality letter. Reach [email protected] with the request and the engagement context.