DOI: 10.3886/e240121v1
title: Partnerships and Small Community Water Systems

description: The research examines the response of small community water systems (CWS) in the USA to policies seeking to steer development of water system partnerships. All states in the USA have adopted one or more policies to encourage partnership formation by small CWS. Those policies adopt varied approaches to steering: enabling, authority-based, information-based, incentive-based and mandates. The research analyzes the effects of state steering policies, as well as how those effects and the critical barriers to partnership formation vary with the institutional structures of small CWS (e.g., municipal, special district, community-owned, private) and with the forms of partnership that may be developed (e.g., informal, contracting, joint powers, consolidation). A mixed-methods approach is utilized: data collection entails interviews with state-primacy agencies and a survey of small CWS across the USA. Results from the research will provide insights regarding the points of intervention that serve to catalyze differing forms of partnerships and the impacts of linking multiple concurrent policies.
description: Response Rates: Interviews with state primacy agencies: representatives from 44 out of 50 states participated in interviews.<br>Survey of small community drinking water suppliers: survey responses encompass 5,661 systems, representing 12.6% of small
drinking water systems in the United States.
description: <b>Interviews with state primacy agencies</b>: As part of the Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA), all states are required by the federal government to have a capacity development program, which supports drinking water suppliers. Agency websites were used to identify the person(s) responsible for state capacity development program (or its equivalent). Where websites did not include contact information, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) regional office that covers that state was asked who to contact at the state-level about their capacity development program and support for small drinking water systems. The identified individuals were contacted by email and phone and asked to participate in a semi-structured interview.<br><b>Survey of small community drinking water suppliers: </b> A mixed mode survey was conducted. Small CWS were identified through the EPA’s Safe Drinking Water Informational System (SDWIS) database. Some owners or managers operate multiple systems, to avoid those individuals receiving multiple surveys we identified small CWS with the same contact information and randomly selected one system per duplicate contact information as the system for which a survey was sent. Survey recruitment followed the Dillman Tailored Design Method - including advance notice and reminders. An on-line (Qualtrics) survey was sent to systems for which email addresses were available. Following the full on-line survey procedure, mail surveys were sent to a sample of systems in state for which the response rate for the electronic survey was less than 10% of the small systems in that state. Sampling for the mail surveys involved random selection of small CWS that had not responded to the on-line survey. Secondary data from the SDWIS database and the US Census Bureau (American Community Survey data published in 2023) was used to determine key socio-economic characteristics of a supplier’s service area.
description: Representatives from state agencies overseeing drinking water systems.  Owners, managers, and operators of small community drinking water systems.
description: mixed mode; telephone interview; Three types of data were collected: interview data, survey data, and secondary data. Data collection followed the methods outlined below. <br><b></b><br><b>DATA ORGANIZATION</b><b> <br></b><br><b>Interview Data Folder contains:  </b><br>"Interview Script - State Agencies Water Systems Partnerships.pdf" is the interview script.47 pdfs titled “Interview##_XxXX202X” contain data from interviews with officials from 44 states.  Most interviewees consented to their interviews being recorded. For these interviews, the de-identified transcript is included in the archive. For 5 interviews, interviewees did not consent to being recorded and de-identified notes, rather than transcriptions, are included in the archive. For 3 of the 44 states, more than one interview was undertaken in order to obtain information from the individual most knowledgeable about that specific state policies. "EPA_2017_State_Policies_and_Programs_Water_System_Partnerships.pdf" is a copy of the US Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) 2017 inventory of state programs and policies promoting water system partnerships. <b><br>Survey Data Folder Contents: </b><br>"Alabama State Survey.pdf" is an illustrative copy of the mail survey (from one state). Except question 13, which asks about state-specific policies, survey questions were the same for all states. Surveys were the same across the electronic and mail survey. <br>"WSP_Oct_2025_Survey_Data_All_States.csv" contains de-identified survey data combined with SDWIS data, US Census data, and interview data. "WSP_Oct_2025_Survey_Data_Dictionary.xlsx" includes a table which defines each variable and connects it to the survey instrument. Citations for and methods used for secondary data are also included."WSP_Dec_2025_State_Policy_Data_and_Dictionary.xlsx" contains a dataset of the policies used by each state to steer formation of partnerships.  The file includes a data dictionary.  <b>DE-IDENTIFICATION OF DATA</b>Data included in this archive has been de-identified to the extent possible.  The following steps were taken to de-identify the data and prepare it for public and long-term archival.   <br><b>De-identification of Interview Data:<br><br></b>1) All recordings were transcribed using an automated voice recognition software. <br>2) Transcriptions were lightly edited manually for accuracy and
consistency.  Speech fillers and double
words were retained.  

<br>3) Files were named using the following template: InterviewX_MMDDYYY.  <br>X = Interview number (reflects a state)MMDDYYYY = is the date of the interview 4) Identifying information was removed and replaced with anonymized and generalized names or locations. All replacements are indicated with <b>bold</b> text.<br><br><b>De-identification of Survey Data: <br><br></b>1) PWSID, service connections, population served, number of violations, number of facilities, and number of site visits were removed.2) Open-ended survey responses were removed (as many contained identifying information)<br>