Early dispatches from the revolution

It’s been a little over two months since the Wisconsin Waterworks Excellence Project (WWEP) released the first public report cards for 572 Badger State water utilities. The WWEP publishes school-style report cards for drinking water utilities in an audacious effort to transform water sector management and governance by making these invisible systems more visible. 

Now that the dust has settled bit, it’s a good moment to look at the top-line statewide results, gauge early responses, and take up a frequently-asked question.

Statewide Performance

 Statewide WWEP results are at once reassuring and concerning. Excellent overall performance on Quality-Health shows that the vast majority of Wisconsin’s water utilities deliver safe drinking water. More than 92 percent of the state’s water utilities earned A grades according to WWEP’s demanding Health rubric. Perhaps not coincidentally, that's the one aspect of utility performance that's already reported publicly through Consumer Confidence Reports.

On the other hand, statewide results for Finance and Infrastructure & Operations raise concerns for sustainability. More than half of the state’s utilities earned A-B grades on these subjects, but around a quarter scored in the D-F range. Weak financial, capital, and/or operational performance may erode water quality and public confidence in the long run. Communications grades were mostly poor: more than half of Wisconsin’s utilities failed, and barely five percent earned A grades.* Statewide Aesthetic quality is difficult to gauge, owing to the large number utilities with incomplete data.

Buy in, not blowback

Not gonna lie, publishing these report cards made me nervous. The night the WWEP website went live, I went to bed, stared at the ceiling, and agonized.

Wisconsin’s water community welcomed me warmly; the people who lead and operate Wisconsin’s water utilities are wonderful, and I consider many of them my friends. Would they see these report cards as attacks on their work? Would the WWEP be seen as another advocacy group’s scaremongering campaign?

I braced myself for an angry maelstrom.

Instead, I’ve had almost nothing but appreciation from utility managers, regulators, policymakers, and the public. All of these exchanges have been respectful, many of them gratifying, and a few of them genuinely moving. I won’t publish comments shared with me privately, but you’ll find interesting responses from utility leaders in the news stories linked below.

Meanwhile, WWEP report cards are showing up on city council and utility board agendas. The report cards tell a story that can be hard for utility leaders to tell on their own. They’re bringing deserved honor to utilities that earned great grades according to our tough standards. Where marks aren’t so strong, leaders are using the report cards to frame conversations about efforts to improve. State regulatory agency staff see WWEP report cards as ways to set priorities and structure work with utility managers.

Naturally, I’ve also had some exchanges with utility leaders who had questions, concerns, or complaints about their utilities’ grades—all thoughtful and beneficent, none outraged or belligerent.

Wisconsin’s water leaders are picking up what we’re laying down.

Media coverage

We introduced WWEP report cards the people of Wisconsin with a televised speech, a radio show, and an Op-Ed in the Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel.  The WWEP report cards drew additional attention from statewide and local media, with stories from WPR, WTMJ, Wisconsin State Journal, Center Square, Green Bay Press Gazette, Wausau Pilot & Review, Ozaukee County News Graphic, Marinette-Menominee Eagle Herald, the Daily Cardinal, and more. Local leaders quoted in these pieces are thoughtful and considered in their responses. Most of the reporting has been even-handed and accurate, though many journalists still tend to accentuate the negative.^†

Other states' report cards and why WWEP is different

At first glance, the WWEP is similar to efforts at improving transparency for drinking water utility performance in California, New Jersey, and especially Louisiana. California's SAFER program assesses small water systems for risk of failure as a way to help prioritize state funding. New Jersey's Water Quality Accountability Act requires utilities to submit data on safety, reliability, finances, and management. New Jersey publishes these data in an online dashboard as a “report card,” but does not assign letter grades or provide evaluative guidelines. Louisiana comes closest to WWEP, as it assigns a single letter grade (A-F) to water utilities following a demerit system: utilities start with 100 points and then receive deductions based on water quality rules, financial sustainability, operations, infrastructure, and customer satisfaction.

Focus on outcomes. WWEP grading focuses solely on observable outcomes on different “subjects.” That’s different from the New Jersey and Louisiana systems, which award or deduct credit for plans and procedures. No A for effort or extra credit assignments in Wisconsin!

Emphasis on excellence. WWEP aims to highlight achievement as well as failure. California's and Louisiana's systems mainly focus on identifying failures. New Jersey's reports, while impressively detailed, don't clearly communicate overall performance to the public.

Meanwhile, rigorous research on utility performance is underway using the mountains of data we compiled while crafting the report cards. We’ve fielded some exciting experiments to study the ways that report cards shape perceptions and public discourse around water. More presentations and publications are on the agenda in the months ahead—stay tuned.

American Waterworks Excellence Project? I've had some inquiries and conversations with folks outside Wisconsin about the possibility of report cards for utilities beyond the Badger State. Much of the rubric could be applied and/or easily adapted to other places, and maybe expanded to include more or different "subjects." A nationwide grading scheme from an independent organization is worth exploring if there's sufficient interest and enthusiasm. 😉

We'll see what happens.  

* An article detailing Communications grades will hit Journal AWWA later this summer. 😎

^† Especially in TV coverage. If it bleeds, it still leads.