To achieve the goals of the Safe Drinking Water Act, state and local water authorities need to make decisions about where to direct limited funding for infrastructure improvements and currently do so in the absence of adequate evaluative metrics. We developed a framework grounded in utility theory that compares trade-offs explicitly and broadens the factors considered in prioritizing resource allocations. Relevant existing indices were reviewed to identify data applicable to drinking water decision-making. A utility-theory-based decision analysis framework was developed and applied to evaluate how different objectives affect funding decisions for lead service line replacement (LSLR) programs in Pennsylvania and Michigan, United States. The decision framework incorporates drinking water quality characteristics with community and environmental quality attributes. We compare additive and multiplicative model structures, different weights, and spatial scales. Our decision framework showed that the inclusion of additional data beyond what is usually considered in LSLR decisions could change the top 10 counties or public water systems prioritized. Further, the counties or water systems in the top 10 were influenced by the model structure and weights. Prioritization changed based on which data were included, and has implications for the use of evaluative metrics beyond traditional water system data.
© 2022 The Authors. Published by American Chemical Society.