Thinking
Outside the Bill:
A Utility Manager’s Guide to Assisting
Low-Income Water Customers
A study sponsored by the AWWA Water Utility Council
p marks
Second Edition
Blank Page
Thinking
Outside the Bill:
A Utility Manager’s Guide to Assisting
Low-Income Water Customers
A study sponsored by the AWWA Water Utility Council
Second Edition
Thinking Outside the Bill: A Utility Manager’s Guide
to Assisting Low-Income Water Customers
Copyright © 2014 American Water Works Association.
All rights reserved.
Printed in the United States of America
No part of this publication may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means,
electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, or any information or retrieval
system, except in the form of brief excerpts or quotations for review purposes, without the
written permission of the publisher.
ISBN 978-1-62576-021-0
AWWA Headquarters
AWWA Washington Office
6666 West Quincy Avenue
1300 Eye Street NW
Denver, CO 80235-3098
Suite 01W
Washington, DC 20005-3314
303.794.7711
202.628.8303
www.awwa.org
This project was funded by the Water Industry Technical Action Fund (WITAF). WITAF is managed
by the AWWA Water Utility Council to support projects, studies, analyses, reports and presentations
in support of AWWA’s legislative and regulatory agenda. WITAF is funded by a portion of every
organizational member’s dues.
Contents
ivAcknowledgments
1Introduction
2Key Facts About Water Customers in the United
States
Information about the ability of low-income customers to afford water service.
3Learning About Your Community
Some of the tools you need to determine if there is a serious affordability
problem in the community you serve.
7Types of Water Affordability Programs
The types of programs that water utilities are using to help their low-income
customers better afford water service, plus some simple tools utilities can
implement in the short term.
10Thinking Outside the Bill
Steps that you can take right now—even if your utility does not already have a
low-income assistance program—to enhance the ability of low-income customers to
afford water service.
13 Conclusion
14 References and Bibliography
15 Appendix—US Demographic Profiles
© 2014 American Water Works Association iii
Acknowledgments
This report was funded by the Water Industry Technical Action Fund and overseen by the Water
Utility Council. This edition was updated and revised by the following people:
Adam T. Carpenter, AWWA, Washington, D.C.
Tom Curtis, AWWA, Washington, D.C.
Gay Porter DeNileon, AWWA, Denver, Colo.
Scott Rubin, Public Utility Consulting, Bloomsburg, Pa.
The following people were on the Project Team for first edition:
Jan Beecher, Beecher Policy Research, Haslett, Mich.
John Cromwell, Stratus Consulting, Inc., Washington, D.C.
Cindy Datig, Dollar Energy Fund, Pittsburgh, Pa.
Marca Hagenstad, Stratus Consulting, Inc., Boulder, Colo.
Jeff Lazo, Stratus Consulting, Inc., Boulder, Colo.
Bob Raucher, Stratus Consulting, Inc., Boulder, Colo.
Scott Rubin, Public Utility Consulting, Bloomsburg, Pa.
The following people were on the Project Advisory Committee for the first edition:
Julius Ciaccia, Cleveland Division of Water, Cleveland, Ohio
Dennis Diemer, East Bay Municipal Utility District, Oakland, Calif.
Joe Gehin, Wausau Water Works, Wausau, Wis.
Mike Hooker, Onondaga County Water Authority, Syracuse, N.Y.
Christine Hoover, Pennsylvania Office of Consumer Advocate, Harrisburg, Pa.
Howard Neukrug, Philadelphia Water Dept., Philadelphia, Pa.
iv
© 2014 American Water Works Association
Introduction
Clean safe drinking water and reliable sanitary
wastewater disposal services cost money to provide.
Although most people understand that concept, the
fact is not everyone can afford these services.
More than 24 percent of all US households had an
annual income of less than $25,000 in 2012. Meanwhile,
the average consumer’s monthly water bill increased
6.3 percent each year between 2008 and 2010. While
water rates in much of the US have historically been
maintained below full cost, the trend is toward
increases above the rate of inflation to meet the full
cost of service, according to the Water Research
Foundation (WRF and USEPA 2010).
For most customers and utilities alike, this situation
is not sustainable. Low-income consumers may find
themselves choosing between paying their water
bills or buying food or paying rent. Utilities may be
caught with increased utility costs for collections and
bad debt while juggling a budget that already must
accommodate the increased demands of infrastructure
replacement and regulatory mandates.
American Water Works Association (AWWA)
and the AWWA Water Utility Council (WUC)
continue to be concerned about this topic. In 2013,
in cooperation with U.S. Conference of Mayors
and the Water Environment Federation, AWWA
published Affordability Assessment Tool for Federal
Water Mandates, which discusses how the US
Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) qualifies
a community for relief from expensive mandates.
“When communities face expensive water mandates,
and associated deadlines, the impact of the required
expenditures can be extremely difficult for all who
pay water bills, but particularly for those with lower
incomes,” the report states.
© 2014 American Water Works Association Because water and sanitary services are lifeline
issues, water and wastewater utilities have a public
health obligation to find a way to provide services to
low-income customers while still maintaining
sustainable finances. Many water utilities have
policies that allow minimal quantities or an amount
for essential needs to customers who cannot fully
afford water service. Other utilities have programs
that take a proactive approach through conservation,
rate discounts, and alternative rate structures or
payment plans to assist customers who have trouble
paying their bills.
“
Nationally about 15% of residential
water customers are low-income
households … are constantly at risk
of payment problems, ... the best
customer assistance programs are
ones that offer a complete approach
to the problem.
”
These programs are explored in depth in various
publications, particularly the 2010 WRF and the
USEPA report Best Practices in Customer Payment
Assistance Programs, which states, “Nationally about
15% of residential water customers are low-income
households … are constantly at risk of payment
problems,” and advises that “the best customer
assistance programs are ones that offer a complete
approach to the problem.”
This second edition of Thinking Outside the Bill
updates vital demographic and programmatic
information as well as references and resources.
Like the first edition, which was released in
November 2004, this edition provides an overview
of proven tools that utilities can use to identify
and assist low-income customers. It is intended
as a quick reference to introduce utilities to
alternative approaches to the issue of affordability
and is meant to supplement, not supplant, the
more thorough works by AWWA and WRF. This
publication is a handy resource for utilities that do
not have an established low-income assistance program
and need to educate board members and others in the
community about the possibilities.
1
Several administrative, low-cost, effective actions
to assist low-income customers are available
to utilities. These include providing outreach
or assistance to community programs for the
disadvantaged, particularly those designed to
maximize the use of existing assistance programs,
and reviewing billing procedures and existing
conservation programs to determine if they could be
revised to better address the concerns of low-income
customers. In any approach to meeting community
needs, it is important for a utility manager to “think
outside the bill.”
Using this guide, a utility may choose to adopt or
improve its own assistance program or develop an
effective partnership with energy utilities, local
organizations, or government agencies. The guide is
based on US law and practices, but utilities in
Canada and Mexico, as well as in other nations, may
find ideas to help their own lower-income customers.
AWWA and its Water Utility Council hope that you
find this publication useful. We are grateful for the
support of AWWA’s organizational members whose
contributions to the Water Industry Technical Action
Fund made this report possible.
Key Facts About Water Customers
in the United States
The federal poverty level in 2014 was $19,790
for a family of three and $23,850 for a family
of four. (US Dept. of Health and Human Services)
2000 and 2012. In contrast, consumer prices in
general increased by only 33% during that same
time period. (Craley and Noyes 2013)
At least 28 million US households have
difficulty consistently paying for their
necessities because their incomes are so low.
This is equivalent to the number of households
with incomes less than $25,000 per year. By
comparison, there were approximately 115 million
households in the United States in 2012.
(US Bureau of Labor Statistics)
Most water utilities are unable to collect
between 0.5% and 1.5% of billed revenues.
While not all of these uncollectible accounts
are low-income residential accounts, this does
provide a general indication of the magnitude
of nonpayment problems for many water
utilities. (Rubin et al. 2004)
In 2011, the typical household paid about $500
per year for water and wastewater services.
This compares to typical telephone and energy
bills of approximately $1,200 and $2,000 per year,
respectively. (US Bureau of Labor Statistics)
Lower-income households tend to spend less
than the average household for all utility
services. In 2011, a household with incomes
between $10,000 and $27,000 per year spent
about 20% less than the average household for
all utility services, including water and
wastewater. (US Bureau of Labor Statistics)
The average cost of water and wastewater
services has increased faster than the rate of
inflation for at least two decades. Indeed, one
study found that median household water and
wastewater costs increased about 100% between
2
The median affordability percentage for water
and wastewater customers with 1,000 cf (7,480
gallons) of usage is 0.71% and 0.90%,
respectively. This is well below USEPA’s
affordability guidelines of 2.5% for water
service and 2% for wastewater service, which
relies heavily on median household income
and underestimates the effect of rising water
bills on low-income, fixed-income, and
renter-occupied households (AWWA 2013 and
AWWA et al. 2013). There has been considerable
debate in recent years as to whether median
household income is an appropriate statistic to
measure affordability, and if not, what should
be used in its place. Utilities, therefore, will
need to explore the unique conditions of their
communities to help assess how this metric may
or may not apply in their areas.
© 2014 American Water Works Association
Learning About Your Community
A first step in assessing a utility’s need for a low-income
program is to gather information about the community
and begin a dialogue with community organizations and
agencies that work with low-income people. Through this
information-gathering process, a utility manager can
develop a deeper understanding of the community’s needs
and identify ways to help address some of these needs.
To determine the extent of the need for low-income assistance
in your community you’ll want to answer these questions:
➤ What is the extent of poverty in my community?
➤Are my customers having trouble paying their
water bills?
➤How do my utility and community compare
with others in terms of the number of low-income
households?
The data sources described here provide an excellent starting point
for accurately answering these questions and learning more
about your community’s needs.
US Census Data
The US Census Bureau collects detailed economic
and demographic data about each community in
the United States. Each year, the Census Bureau
conducts the American Community Survey (ACS) to
collect information about income, housing, and other
characteristics from a scientific sample of the American
population. The result is detailed data about hundreds
of population and housing
parameters. Frequently
requested information is
available in Demographic
Profiles (DPs) for each
community. The DP is
divided into four parts:
➤
DP-3 is the economic profile, with
information about income levels, unemployment,
and poverty in a given community.
➤DP-4 is the housing profile, which
contains information on age, size, value,
cost, and occupancy of housing units
in a specific area.
➤
DP-1 includes basic
information
about number
of people and
households,
including gender,
age, and race.
➤
DP-2 is the social
profile, containing
information on
education, marital
status, disability,
and language.
© 2014 American Water Works Association 3
US Census Data (continued)
To create a community-specific DP, go to the Census
Bureau’s website, factfinder2.census.gov,
and take these steps:
1. Select Advanced Search.
2.For DP-1, select Topics  People  Basic
Count/Estimate  Household & Family.
Close that window.
3.For DP-2, select Topics  People  Education
 Educational Attainment. Close that
window and follow steps 2. a. and 2. b., but
select DP02, “Select Social Characteristics
in the United States,” in step b.
& Earnings  Income/Earnings (Households).
Follow the above steps but choose DP03,
“Selected Economic Characteristics.”
a.Select “Geographies” and choose the
desired cities, towns, counties, or other
relevant geographic data points. (Note
there are four tabs with different ways to
seek out specific information.) Close that
window.
b.Select DP-1, “Profile of General Population,”
for the relevant time period. Be sure to
select the title and not just check the box
for a full profile to be revealed.
4.For DP-3, select Topics  People  Income
5.For DP-4, select Topics  Housing  Physical
Characteristics  Bedrooms. Then follow the
same steps, selecting DP04, “Selected Housing
Characteristics.”
Notes: Once a geographic area is chosen, you don’t have to
keep adding it; just delete the options you don’t want before
adding new data points. The menu at the top of the results
page has options for printing and downloading the data
from the selected tables.
The appendix reproduces each DP for the United States. The appendix not only shows what each
profile contains, it also provides an important basis for comparing your community in terms
of poverty rate, income level, and other characteristics to the country as a whole.
Although the profiles contain a wealth of important information, you may want to first learn
about some of your community’s key economic and housing characteristics from DP-3 and DP-4,
including those characteristics shown in Table 1. The table includes US statistics from the
2012 American Community Survey (ACS); fill in information from your utility in the blank column.
Table 1 Key economic and housing characteristics from 2012 American Community Survey
United States
Percent of people in civilian workforce
who are unemployed
9.4
Percent of households with incomes
less than $25,000 per year
24.1
Median household income
Your Community
$51,371
Percent of individuals below poverty level
15.9
Percent of households lacking complete
plumbing facilities
0.4
Percent of households with no
telephone service
2.6
Depending on the community, data from other profiles, such as poverty statistics for the elderly
or households with children, may be particularly important. Additional measures of economic need include:
1.Percentage of residents receiving public
assistance income and/or food stamps
2. Average annual unemployment rates
3.Number/percentage of households that are
delinquent in paying their water bills
4.Number/percentage of households enrolled
in utility low-income assistance programs
(AWWA et al. 2013)
ACS survey data from multiple years can also be used to identify local trends.
4
© 2014 American Water Works Association
Data From Your Own Utility
Your utility’s accounting system, billing system,
and customer service center are likely to have
information that you can use to understand your
customers and determine whether they are having
problems paying their water bills. To obtain
statistical data, review your utility’s level of
uncollectible accounts, also termed “doubtful
accounts” by some utilities. Although not all
uncollectible accounts are low-income customers, the
number of such accounts for residential customers
is an important indicator of the extent to which your
customers are having problems paying their bills.
Cautionary note: Low-income customers in many
communities, particularly those where residential
water service can be disconnected for nonpayment,
are likely to pay their water bill and rent (or mortgage)
before any other bill. This means that a low number of
uncollectible accounts does not necessarily mean that
water is affordable throughout the community. A high
number of uncollectible bills (generally more than
2% of revenues), however, is usually a sign that there
is a serious problem.
There is no national database for this type of
water utility data; however, industry surveys and
published sources provide a general range for
uncollectible accounts. For example, WRF estimates
“that, over time, as much as 15% of the customer base
nationally” may be in arrears on their utility bills
and undergo the collection process (WRF and USEPA
2010). A 2004 survey of AWWA utility members
(Rubin et al. 2004) confirmed that most utilities
had uncollectible accounts in the range of
1% of revenues or less (see Table 2). Of the 278 utilities
that responded to the survey, 176 (63%) stated that
between 0.1% and 1.0% of their residential revenues
were not collected. It is likely, however, that the
downturn in the economy between 2008 and 2013
caused the level of uncollectible accounts to increase
for many utilities. Data collected in 1996 from 554
water utilities (AWWA, WATER:\STATS database,
1996) showed that on average, slightly more than
1% of revenues were not collected from customers,
regardless of utility size.
Table 2 AWWA water utility members’ average percent of uncollected residential revenues
Percent of residential revenues uncollected
No. of Respondents (%)
None
26 (9%)
0.1 to 1.0
176 (63%)
1.1 to 2.0
43 (15%)
2.1 to 3.0
17 (6%)
More than 3.0
16 (6%)
Source: AWWA WITAF, March 2004
In addition to examining uncollectible or unpaid
accounts, review your utility data on late payments,
including the number of delinquent accounts
committed to payment plans and the number of
overdue accounts that are repeatedly late in making
payments. In many utilities, the business office
periodically generates a report of aged accounts
receivable. Aged receivables, particularly from
residential accounts, can be a key indicator of a
potential affordability problem.
In addition to financial data, obtain information from
your customer service department or customer call
center. Anecdotal information from customer service
representatives, such as concerns customers express
regarding payments, as well as on the number
and types of customers who are having payment
© 2014 American Water Works Association problems, can help shape a program to assist
low-income customers.
Consider the current data as well as how the data
have changed over the past three to five years,
especially if your utility’s rates have increased during
that time period. A time-series analysis could
provide early warning of an impending problem.
For example, in the 2004 AWWA survey discussed
earlier, 22% of respondents believed that
“nonpayment of water bills is a big problem for
our utility,” and 30% of respondents believed that
nonpayment “is a growing problem for our utility.”
That is, although affordability concerns have not
reached the crisis point for many utilities, nearly one
third of water utilities recognize the problem is
growing and could become serious in the future.
5
Community Contacts
Most communities have a variety of community
resources available that routinely work with
low-income households. For example, rural
communities may not have local branches of
national organizations such as the Salvation Army,
but often a combination of local religious or nonprofit
organizations and county or regional programs serve
the community. In large urban areas, dozens of
organizations are likely to provide some type of
community assistance. In these communities, a
utility may need to find an umbrella organization or
some other group that can help the utility work more
efficiently with the numerous organizations spread
throughout the community.
Rather than “reinventing the wheel,”
a utility can maximize the impact
of its resources, and minimize
its administrative and outreach costs,
by working with these existing
community organizations.
These resources can provide a wealth of useful
information, and ideas on how your utility can
help serve the community’s needs. Rather than
“reinventing the wheel,” a utility can maximize
the impact of its resources, and minimize its
administrative and outreach costs, by working with
these existing community organizations.
In addition, many energy utilities run assistance
programs for their low-income customers, nationally
known as LIHEAP (Low-Income Home Energy
Assistance Programs). Water utility managers may
want to approach their counterparts at energy utilities
in their area to gain further insight into low-income
households and existing aid programs in the community.
The specific organizations that work with lowincome people in each community will vary.
However, the following list is a useful starting point
6
for identifying such organizations in your utility’s
service area, even if your utility is very small or
serves a rural community.
➤Local or state government offices with departments such as human services, public welfare,
housing, community development, or aging
➤Veteran’s Administration, Head Start programs,
and other governmental or quasi-governmental
organizations that target specific types
of low-income individuals
➤Legal Services office that represents lowincome people in noncriminal matters
➤United Way, Salvation Army, Habitat for
Humanity, or similar organizations that assist
low-income people, primarily through local
offices
➤Homeless shelters, soup kitchens, food
pantries, neighborhood centers, and similar
local organizations that work directly with
low-income people
➤Programs and centers for seniors or persons
with disabilities
➤Councils of churches and other religious
organizations
It may be helpful to approach these local organizations
as a potential partner or resource for their clients,
instead of merely an entity seeking information. If
your utility and another organization agree to partner,
the assistance your utility provides will not be limited
to utility programs alone. For example, a utility can
make an important and very cost-effective contribution by including bill stuffers that support an existing
organization’s work in utility mailings, by having field
personnel identify homes where the occupants may
need assistance, or by making a portion of the utility’s
call center available during certain hours for an
organization’s fund-raising or outreach efforts.
This is an opportunity to be creative.
© 2014 American Water Works Association
Types of Water Affordability Programs
Water utilities assist their low-income customers or
otherwise enhance customers’ ability to pay their
bills on time in a variety of ways. This section
briefly outlines several proven water affordability
programs, based on information from published and
unpublished sources, including member surveys
conducted by the Association of Metropolitan Water
Agencies in 2003 and AWWA in 2004.
Remember, each utility has different needs and faces
different constraints, including legal provisions that
might affect a utility’s ability to offer certain types
of programs. A program that is effective and
appropriate in one community may not be in another.
Bill Discounts
Lifeline rates. Some utilities offer “lifeline” rates
that establish a low rate for a relatively small amount
of water (e.g., the first 2,000 gallons per month). Lifeline rates typically apply to all customers, with the
expectation that low-income customers will have a
high percentage of their consumption covered
by the lifeline rate. Like conservation or inclining
block-rates, after consumption of the first block (the
2,000 gallons), rates rise, sometimes dramatically, for
each subsequent block consumed, so that the utility
can recover the full cost of service from the rest of its
customer base.
Because of legal or financial
constraints, some utilities offer
discounts only to certain types
of low-income customers.
Discount based on income threshold. A rate
discount can also be based on the customer’s income.
For example, some utilities have discount programs
for customers whose income is lower than a certain
threshold, enabling the customer to pay a lower rate
for service. In some instances, the discount is applied
to the customer (or meter) charge only. Other utilities
discount the entire bill.
Variable discount based on income. A somewhat
different approach to providing discounts to
low-income customers would be to offer a system
of tiered discounts, rather than applying a fixed
discount to the bill for customers who meet an
income threshold.
© 2014 American Water Works Association Bill based on income. A percentage-of-income-payment plan (PIPP) sets the utility bill at a percentage
of the customer’s income, as long as consumption
remains below a given level. These programs go by
names such as PIPP, Customer Assistance Program
(CAP), or other variants, and are often established
by state law. For example, in Illinois, qualified
low-income residents pay 6 percent of their monthly
income toward their energy bill each month. Current
information on energy assistance programs in your
state can be obtained from the LIHEAP Clearinghouse (http://liheap.ncat.org/) or your state public
service commission. No records of any water utilities
adopting a PIPP were available.
Because of legal or financial constraints, some
utilities offer discounts only to certain types of
low-income customers. For example, state law may
permit a water utility to offer a different rate only
to senior citizens or disabled veterans.
Leak Repairs and Other
Conservation Measures
Conservation and leak-repair programs targeted to
low-income customers, either as a separate program
or in conjunction with a rate-discount program, are
designed to help lower the bills of low-income
customers by reducing water consumption, resulting
in lower water bills. For example, a utility may
provide minor leak repairs, conservation devices
(such as low-flow showerheads), and other
conservation assistance to low-income customers.
Some utilities couple conservation assistance with
rate discounts, while others provide conservation
assistance but no change in rates.
7
Community and Local
Government Assistance
Programs
Based on industry surveys, more than 60% of water
utilities partner with community organizations or
local government agencies, such as those listed
earlier, to help low-income water customers. Rather
than developing and administering separate
programs, utilities throughout the United States are
working with existing agencies and organizations
to develop programs to assist water customers.
In many instances, the utility pays the cost of the
program and the partner organization or agency
is responsible for verifying applicants’ eligibility
and for administering the program. In other
communities, the utility provides other types of
assistance, such as soliciting donations and holding
fundraising events without providing direct
funding to the local organization.
Communities may have funds available
to help low-income residents meet
an imminent crisis in utility service.
Arrearage Forgiveness
Water utilities may incorporate arrearage
(past due amount) forgiveness into their low-income
assistance programs. Arrearage forgiveness provides
an additional incentive to customers to participate
in the assistance program and to pay their bills on
time. Specifically, if a customer meets the program’s
requirements, whether for usage reduction, timely
payment, or other criteria, the utility will forgive
some of the arrearage that the customer has
accumulated. For example, each time a participating
customer pays his or her bill on time, the utility
may reduce the customer’s arrearage by $10.
customers with a referral to a local government
agency or community organization that has crisis
funding available.
Simple Tools: Monthly
Billing, Budget Billing,
and Conservation
Implementing a low-income assistance program
takes a considerable amount of time and study.
And if the program involves changes in the rates
paid by customers, important legal and policy
questions (such as the fairness of the program
to nonparticipating customers) must be addressed
before implementation.
However, a utility can easily make some changes
to its internal procedures and existing programs
that could have a significant impact on low-income
customers. Adjusting how and when customers are
billed can be a short-term, easy-to-implement action
that could help some low-income customers pay their
water bills on time. These types of changes usually
can be adopted in a relatively short period of time
and with few, if any, legal or policy impediments.
Monthly billing. It can be very difficult for low- or
fixed-income customers to ensure they have
sufficient funds set aside to pay water bills that are
issued bimonthly or quarterly. These customers often
find it easier to budget for and pay bills that arrive at
the same time each month.
Although converting to monthly billing can increase
the administrative costs, Saunders and colleagues
(1998) suggest that these costs could be reduced by
sending bills at the normal frequency (bimonthly
or quarterly) but with payment stubs that can be
returned monthly. This can be done by sending the
quarterly bill with three payment stubs, allowing
Crisis Funding
Communities may have funds available to help
low-income residents meet an imminent crisis in
utility service. For example, if a customer is
facing disconnection for nonpayment or must
make major plumbing repairs, the customer is
provided funding to address the crisis. Some utilities
include crisis funding as part of their low-income
assistance programs. Other utilities provide their
8
© 2014 American Water Works Association
the customer to pay one
third of the quarterly bill
each month. In essence, the
water bill becomes a routine part of the customer’s
monthly budget, rather
than a large “bump” every
two or three months.
Saunders et al. also suggest
that use of monthly
billing for low- and
fixed-income customers
may reduce the utility’s
collection costs, perhaps
offsetting some of the
increased billing costs.
Some utilities already offer
low-income customers the
option to receive bills on
a monthly basis (the offer
may be extended to all
customers), even if there is no change in the
meter-reading frequency. Another option,
particularly for fixed-income customers, is
to implement “pick-a-date” billings that allow
customers to choose to receive the bill at a time
of the month when they know they will have
adequate cash flow to pay the bills.
Budget billing. Utilities with strong, seasonal
consumption patterns (for example, areas with very
high summer consumption) can use budget billing
to keep bills more affordable for low-income
customers. Budget billing averages the anticipated
annual consumption over a 12-month period and
allows the customer to pay one twelfth of the total
each month. This smooths out the billing amounts
and makes it easier for a low- or fixed-income
customer to budget for water bills. However, if a
utility has seasonal rates to encourage conservation
during high-demand months, budget billing may be
contrary to the conservation goals of the seasonal
rate design. The utility must be careful in balancing
these competing goals.
Conservation program review. If your utility has
an existing conservation program, review the
program to determine if it is reaching low-income
customers. Beecher and colleagues (2001) caution
that the design of a conservation program could have
unintended consequences on low-income customers.
For example, a program that includes rebates for
installing efficient plumbing fixtures or appliances
might effectively exclude many low-income
© 2014 American Water Works Association customers who cannot afford the upfront
investment to qualify for the rebate.
When a utility considers its low-income customers,
it may find that a simple redesign of its conservation
program, often at very low cost, might make the
program much more accessible to those customers.
For example, if the customer’s initial investment can
be reduced or eliminated, the program becomes
feasible for many more low-income households.
Utilities with strong, seasonal
consumption patterns (for example,
areas with very high summer
consumption) can use budget billing
to keep bills more affordable for
low-income customers.
As noted previously, conservation programs that
target low-income customers, such as leak repair
programs, can be highly cost-effective for both the
utility and the customer. This type of program not
only eliminates a source of wasted water but it also
reduces bills for customers who are most likely to
have difficulty paying, thereby reducing the utility’s
collection costs and working capital requirements.
9
Thinking Outside the Bill
Once you have gathered information about your community, met with local organizations and officials,
and become familiar with various low-income assistance programs, it is time to “think outside the bill”
about other tools. This section briefly outlines tools your utility can use in the short term and with
a relatively small investment.
Help Conduct Outreach
for Existing Programs
With very little time or resource investment your
utility can help maximize the benefits low-income
consumers receive from existing government
assistance programs. Three assistance programs
are highlighted here. However, community experts
may identify other programs that could help your
customers afford their water bills.
As of 2013, LIHEAP provided
approximately $3.2 billion per year
to help low-income households pay
for heating and cooling their homes ...
The Low-Income Home Energy Assistance Program
(LIHEAP). LIHEAP is a federal program administered
at the state level. Each state sets specific eligibility
criteria and application procedures that are subject
to certain federal requirements. As of 2013, LIHEAP
provided approximately $3.2 billion per year to help
low-income households pay for heating and cooling
their homes, usually with annual grants in the range
of $200 to $500 per year per household, though in
some states the benefit can exceed $1,000 per year.
to have some customers direct their grants to the
water utility. To receive LIHEAP funds, your
utility must register with your state LIHEAP office.
A list of state offices and other information about
the program is on the LIHEAP Clearinghouse’s
website: http://liheap.ncat.org.
Second, even if your utility cannot receive LIHEAP
funds directly, you can promote the program in
your community. This can be done by sending a bill
stuffer, instructing your customer service personnel
to inform payment-troubled customers about LIHEAP,
and assisting with local outreach efforts. Presently,
LIHEAP reaches only about 20% of households that
are eligible for assistance. By working with local
organizations and agencies, your utility can help
promote the LIHEAP program, thereby bringing
additional federal assistance into your community.
Although this second approach may not directly
benefit your water utility, the indirect benefits could
be substantial. A low-income household that is able
to reduce its energy bill by $300 could be better able
to pay its water bill in a timely manner. This is
particularly true in communities where water service
can be disconnected if a bill is not paid.
The LIHEAP program requires the customer to apply
for a grant, with the funding going directly to the
utility for the customer’s account. The customer must
designate a single utility as the recipient of the funds.
LIHEAP also provides crisis funding to customers
facing service disconnection or those who need
immediate repairs to their heating or cooling system.
Your water utility could use LIHEAP to help
low-income customers in two ways. First, if you
have low-income customers who use their water
for heating or cooling purposes (for example, a
hot-water heating system), your utility is eligible to
be a LIHEAP recipient and can register with LIHEAP
10
© 2014 American Water Works Association
For households in these communities, payment of the
water bill is a very high priority. By increasing their
financial resources, households are able to free up
funds to pay their high-priority bills.
Telephone Lifeline program. The Federal
Communications Commission (FCC) requires all
telephone customers to contribute to the federal
Universal Service Fund (USF). The USF collects in
excess of $8 billion per year, and this money is used
to make telephone service more affordable to
low-income customers, schools and libraries, and
customers of high-cost, rural telephone companies.
Although your water utility cannot directly benefit
from enhanced use of the Lifeline program in
your community, the indirect benefits can be
substantial. Lifeline can provide low-income
households with more than $100 per year, which
could enhance the household’s ability to pay for
other necessities, including water service. It may be
worthwhile therefore for your water utility to assist
with Lifeline outreach, using efforts similar to those
described for the LIHEAP program.
The assistance program for low-income customers
is known as the Lifeline program. As of 2014, the
minimum federal Lifeline payment to a qualifying
low-income customer is $9.25 per month. States
and local telephone utilities also may provide
additional funding.
Lifeline can provide low-income
households with more than $100 per
year, which could enhance the
household’s ability to pay for other
necessities, including water service.
Unfortunately, relatively few eligible households
participate in the Lifeline program. The FCC
estimates that only 33% of eligible households
receive Lifeline funds, but in some states, the
figure is probably closer to 10%. In most states the
program depends on telephone utilities to advertise
availability of the program and to perform outreach
to their eligible customers.
The Earned Income Tax Credit (EITC). Qualifying,
low-income households are eligible for the EITC,
which is a special credit that is claimed on the
federal income tax return. The EITC goes beyond a
tax refund and can provide funds in excess of those
paid in federal income taxes by an eligible household.
Generally, households with incomes less than $40,000
© 2014 American Water Works Association 11
per year and at least one child qualify for the EITC,
though the exact amount of the credit varies with
income level and family size. In 2013, the average
EITC was more than $2,300 per household; 27 million
households received more than $63 billion through
the EITC.
Unfortunately, many households do not know that
they are eligible for this sizeable federal payment.
The Internal Revenue Service estimates that only
79% of eligible households receive EITC.
The EITC can increase a household’s
available income by 10% or more, enabling
consumers to pay for necessities and to
make significant improvements in their
quality of life.
Again, additional outreach efforts are needed
to encourage low-income households to take
advantage of this federal program. The EITC can
increase a household’s available income by 10% or
more, enabling consumers to pay for necessities
and to make significant improvements in their
12
quality of life (for example, moving to a larger
apartment). As with the other federal programs
mentioned earlier, your utility may be able to help
with EITC outreach efforts, which could provide
substantial benefits to your low-income customers.
Ultimately, if and when your utility adopts a
low-income assistance program, effectively getting
the message out to your customers about the
program will be critical to its success. This can be as
simple as posting the utility’s customer service phone
number on the website and encouraging customers to
call for assistance in resolving missed payments to as
elaborate as a full communications plan. “Many
utilities also indicate [online] the types of payment
and settlement options available to customers
through granting extensions, creating new payment
arrangements, administering budget billing options,
and allowing customers to pay online and over the
phone (WRF and USEPA 2010).”
Don’t forget bill stuffers and other messaging
platforms, such as public meetings, community fairs,
and other events. The community partners you’ve
already enlisted may be able to reciprocate by
inviting a utility representative to speak to their
clients, handing out literature explaining the
utility’s program, or providing space in a community
newsletter to explain the program.
© 2014 American Water Works Association
Conclusion
As utilities face the increasing costs of maintaining
and replacing infrastructure and treating increasingly
diminishing water supplies to higher and higher
standards, the call for full-cost pricing of water and
wastewater services is rising in amplitude and
necessity. However, “The truth is that a subset of
ratepayers will always need to be subsidized,” states
Greg Baird (2010), managing director and chief
financial officer of AWI Consulting. He goes on to
say, “A subsidy is not an entitlement, but a grant of
assistance provided by an enterprise because it is
deemed advantageous. The advantage of providing
such assistance benefits the utility’s financial
operation by minimizing the negative impact
of shut-offs, collections, and uncollectible accounts
on the remaining residential customer class. Other
intangible advantages are maintaining an acceptable
level of public health and community esthetics.”
In the years ahead, water rates are likely to continue
to increase, making affordability an ongoing issue
that utilities must help their customers address. The
tools offered in this publication should provide a
solid start toward addressing those needs.
In addition, the US Census Bureau has excellent
online tools for learning about a community’s
economics. This information, combined with the
local data already collected by most utilities, can
reveal the extent of local affordability issues. Many
drinking water utilities have already adopted affordability programs that can be models for adoption
© 2014 American Water Works Association by others. And, various administrative tools can be
easily implemented without creating new programs
that will ease the affordability burden on low-income
customers. These include monthly billing, budget
billing, and conservation programs.
“
The need to make sure that
drinking water is safe and that
wastewater is clean is important
to everyone—whether they fall
above or below the median. ...
”
AWWA encourages utilities to “think outside the
bill.” By helping low-income customers access
existing assistance programs, such as those for home
heating and telephone service, a local utility can
improve its customers’ overall economic well-being,
thus making the water bill more affordable.
AWWA Executive Director David LaFrance (2013)
said it best, “The need to make sure that drinking water
is safe and that wastewater is clean is important to
everyone—whether they fall above or below the
median. As providers and managers of the most
precious resource on earth, we … need to ensure that
the price of water remains affordable for all
customers—not just the top half of earners.”
13
References and Bibliography
AWWA. 2012. Manual M1, Principles of Water Rates, Fees, and Charges,
6th ed. Denver, CO: American Water Works Association (AWWA).
AWWA. 1996. WATER:\STATS 1996 WATER UTILITY DATABASE CD-ROM. Denver, CO: AWWA.
AWWA and RFC, Inc. 2013. 2012 AWWA Water and Wastewater Rate Survey.
Denver, CO: AWWA.
AWWA, U.S. Conference of Mayors and the Water Environment Federation. 2013.
Affordability Assessment Tool for Federal Water Mandates. www.awwa.org/Portals/0/files/resources/water%20
utility%20management/affordability/AffordabilityAssessmentTool.pdf. Accessed March 24, 2014.
Baird, G.M. 2010. Water Affordability: Who’s Going to Pick Up the Check? Jour. AWWA, 102(12):16–23.
Beecher, J.A. 1994. Water Affordability and Alternatives to Service Disconnection. Jour. AWWA, 86(10):61.
Beecher, J.A., et al. 2001. Socioeconomic Impacts of Water Conservation. Denver, CO: Water Research Foundation.
Craley, R. and C. Noyes. 2013. Water and Wastewater Rates on the Rise. Jour. AWWA, 105(8):41.
Hasson, D.S. 2002. Water Utility Options for Low-Income Assistance Programs. Jour. AWWA, 94(4):128.
LaFrance, D. 2013. Price, Value, and Affordability—What If Only Half of Us Could Afford Water?
Jour. AWWA. Open Channel. 99(7):6.
Maxwell, S. 2012. Water Is Still Cheap: Demonstrating the True Value of Water. Jour. AWWA, 104(5):31.
Mumm, J. 2012. Accepting the Affordability Challenge. Jour. AWWA, 104(5):25.
Pontius, F. 2008. Are Drinking Water Regulations Affordable? Jour. AWWA, 100(10):24.
Rubin, S.J. 1994. Are water rates becoming unaffordable? Jour. AWWA, 86(2):79.
Rubin, S.J. 2003. The Cost of Water and Wastewater Service in the United States.
Duncan, OK: National Rural Water Association.
Rubin, S.J., R. Raucher, C.J. Datig, and J.A. Beecher. 2004. Background Information and Perspectives on
Low-Income Water Assistance Programs. AWWA Water Industry Technical Action Fund Project 792.
Saunders, M., et al. 1998. Water Affordability Programs. Denver, Colo.: Awwa Research Foundation
and American Water Works Association.
US Bureau of Labor Statistics. 2013. Consumer Expenditure Survey. www.bls.gov/cex/csxstnd.htm.
Accessed 1/21/2014.
US Department of Health and Human Services. 2014. Annual Update of the HHS Poverty Guidelines.
Federal Register, 79(14):3593-94 (Jan. 22, 2014).
USEPA. 2005. Case Studies of Sustainable Water and Wastewater Pricing.
Office of Water (4606M) EPA 816-R-05-007. water.epa.gov/infrastructure/sustain/upload/guide_smallsystems_fullcost_pricing_case_studies.pdf. Accessed March 10, 2014.
USEPA. 1997. Combined Sewer Overflows: Guidance for Financial Capability Assessment and Schedule
Development. Publication 832-B-97-004. Available for download at cfpub.epa.gov/npdes/cso/guidedocs.cfm.
Water Environment Federation. 2007. Affordability of Wastewater Service.
Alexandria, VA: Water Environment Federation.
Water Research Foundation (WRF) and USEPA. 2010. Best Practices in Customer Payment Assistance
Programs. Project #4004. Denver, CO: Water Research Foundation.
14
© 2014 American Water Works Association
US Demographic Profiles
Profile of General Population and Housing Characteristics: 2010
2010 Census Summary File 1— Geography: United States
NOTE: For information on confidentiality protection, nonsampling error, and definitions, see
http://www.census.gov/prod/cen2010/doc/sf1.pdf.
Subject
Number
Percent
308,745,538 (r35836)
100.0
Under 5 years
20,201,362
6.5
5 to 9 years
20,348,657
6.6
10 to 14 years
20,677,194
6.7
15 to 19 years
22,040,343
7.1
20 to 24 years
21,585,999
7.0
25 to 29 years
21,101,849
6.8
30 to 34 years
19,962,099
6.5
35 to 39 years
20,179,642
6.5
40 to 44 years
20,890,964
6.8
45 to 49 years
22,708,591
7.4
50 to 54 years
22,298,125
7.2
55 to 59 years
19,664,805
6.4
Sex and Age
Total population
60 to 64 years
16,817,924
5.4
65 to 69 years
12,435,263
4.0
70 to 74 years
9,278,166
3.0
75 to 79 years
7,317,795
2.4
80 to 84 years
5,743,327
1.9
85 years and over
5,493,433
1.8
37.2
(X)
16 years and over
243,275,505
78.8
Median age (years)
18 years and over
234,564,071
76.0
21 years and over
220,958,853
71.6
62 years and over
49,972,181
16.2
65 years and over
40,267,984
13.0
151,781,326
49.2
Under 5 years
10,319,427
3.3
5 to 9 years
10,389,638
3.4
Male population
10 to 14 years
10,579,862
3.4
15 to 19 years
11,303,666
3.7
20 to 24 years
11,014,176
3.6
25 to 29 years
10,635,591
3.4
30 to 34 years
9,996,500
3.2
35 to 39 years
10,042,022
3.3
40 to 44 years
10,393,977
3.4
© 2014 American Water Works Association 15
Subject
Number
Percent
45 to 49 years
11,209,085
3.6
50 to 54 years
10,933,274
3.5
55 to 59 years
9,523,648
3.1
60 to 64 years
8,077,500
2.6
65 to 69 years
5,852,547
1.9
70 to 74 years
4,243,972
1.4
Sex and Age
Male population (continued)
75 to 79 years
3,182,388
1.0
80 to 84 years
2,294,374
0.7
85 years and over
1,789,679
0.6
Median age (years)
16 years and over
(X)
38.3
18 years and over
113,836,190
36.9
21 years and over
106,880,414
34.6
62 years and over
22,015,876
7.1
65 years and over
17,362,960
5.6
156,964,212
50.8
Under 5 years
9,881,935
3.2
5 to 9 years
9,959,019
3.2
10 to 14 years
10,097,332
3.3
15 to 19 years
10,736,677
3.5
20 to 24 years
10,571,823
3.4
25 to 29 years
10,466,258
3.4
30 to 34 years
9,965,599
3.2
35 to 39 years
10,137,620
3.3
Female population
40 to 44 years
10,496,987
3.4
45 to 49 years
11,499,506
3.7
50 to 54 years
11,364,851
3.7
55 to 59 years
10,141,157
3.3
60 to 64 years
8,740,424
2.8
65 to 69 years
6,582,716
2.1
70 to 74 years
5,034,194
1.6
75 to 79 years
4,135,407
1.3
80 to 84 years
3,448,953
1.1
85 years and over
3,703,754
1.2
38.5
(X)
16 years and over
124,960,128
40.5
18 years and over
120,727,881
39.1
21 years and over
114,078,439
36.9
62 years and over
27,956,305
9.1
65 years and over
22,905,024
7.4
Median age (years)
16
35.8
118,315,377
© 2014 American Water Works Association
Subject
Number
Percent
308,745,538 (r35836)
100.0
299,736,465
97.1
Race
Total population
One Race
223,553,265
72.4
Black or African American
White
38,929,319
12.6
American Indian
and Alaska Native
2,932,248
0.9
Asian
14,674,252
4.8
2,843,391
0.9
Asian Indian
Chinese
3,347,229
1.1
Filipino
2,555,923
0.8
Japanese
763,325
0.2
Korean
1,423,784
0.5
Vietnamese
1,548,449
0.5
2,192,151
0.7
540,013
0.2
156,146
0.1
Guamanian or Chamorro
88,310
0.0
Samoan
109,637
0.0
185,920
0.1
Some Other Race
19,107,368
6.2
Two or More Races
9,009,073
2.9
1,432,309
0.5
White; Asian [3]
1,623,234
0.5
White; Black or African
American [3]
1,834,212
0.6
White; Some Other Race [3]
1,740,924
0.6
Other Asian
[1]
Native Hawaiian and Other
Pacific Islander
Native Hawaiian
Other Pacific
Islander [2]
White; American Indian
and Alaska Native [3]
Race alone or in combination with one or more other races [4]
White
231,040,398
74.8
Black or African American
42,020,743
13.6
American Indian and Alaska
Native
5,220,579
1.7
Asian
17,320,856
5.6
Native Hawaiian and Other
Pacific Islander
1,225,195
0.4
Some Other Race
21,748,084
7.0
© 2014 American Water Works Association 17
Subject
Number
Percent
308,745,538 (r35836)
100.0
50,477,594
16.3
Mexican
31,798,258
10.3
Puerto Rican
4,623,716
1.5
Hispanic or Latino
Total population
Hispanic or Latino (of any race)
Cuban
1,785,547
0.6
Other Hispanic or Latino [5]
12,270,073
4.0
Not Hispanic or Latino
258,267,944
83.7
308,745,538 (r35836)
100.0
Hispanic or Latino and Race
Total population
Hispanic or Latino
50,477,594
16.3
White alone
26,735,713
8.7
Black or African American
alone
1,243,471
0.4
American Indian and Alaska
Native alone
685,150
0.2
Asian alone
209,128
0.1
Native Hawaiian and Other
Pacific Islander alone
58,437
0.0
Some Other Race alone
18,503,103
6.0
Two or More Races
3,042,592
1.0
Not Hispanic or Latino
258,267,944
83.7
White alone
196,817,552
63.7
Black or African American
alone
37,685,848
12.2
American Indian and Alaska
Native alone
2,247,098
0.7
Asian alone
14,465,124
4.7
481,576
0.2
Native Hawaiian and Other
Pacific Islander alone
Some Other Race alone
604,265
0.2
5,966,481
1.9
Total population
308,745,538 (r35836)
100.0
In households
300,758,215 (r25980)
97.4
Two or More Races
Relationship
18
Householder
116,716,292
37.8
Spouse [6]
56,510,377
18.3
Child
88,820,256
28.8
Own child under 18 years
64,778,147
21.0
Other relatives
20,411,239
6.6
Under 18 years
7,779,796
2.5
65 years and over
2,941,638
1.0
© 2014 American Water Works Association
Subject
Number
Percent
18,300,051
5.9
1,325,848
0.4
Relationship (continued)
Nonrelatives
Under 18 years
65 years and over
794,726
0.3
Unmarried partner
7,744,711
2.5
7,987,323 (r24091)
2.6
Institutionalized population
3,993,659
1.3
Two or More Races
9,009,073
2.9
White; American Indian
and Alaska Native [3]
1,432,309
0.5
White; Asian [3]
1,623,234
0.5
White; Black or African
American [3]
1,834,212
0.6
White; Some Other Race [3]
1,740,924
0.6
In group quarters
Race alone or in combination with one or more other races: [4]
White
231,040,398
74.8
Black or African American
42,020,743
13.6
American Indian and Alaska Native
5,220,579
1.7
Asian
17,320,856
5.6
Native Hawaiian and Other
Pacific Islander
1,225,195
0.4
Some Other Race
21,748,084
7.0
308,745,538 (r35836)
100.0
50,477,594
16.3
Mexican
31,798,258
10.3
Puerto Rican
4,623,716
1.5
Cuban
1,785,547
0.6
Hispanic or Latino
Total population
Hispanic or Latino (of any race)
Other Hispanic or Latino [5]
12,270,073
4.0
258,267,944
83.7
308,745,538 (r35836)
100.0
50,477,594
16.3
White alone
26,735,713
8.7
Black or African American
alone
1,243,471
0.4
American Indian and Alaska
Native alone
685,150
0.2
Asian alone
209,128
0.1
Native Hawaiian and Other
Pacific Islander alone
58,437
0.0
Some Other Race alone
18,503,103
6.0
Two or More Races
3,042,592
1.0
Not Hispanic or Latino
Hispanic or Latino and Race
Total population
Hispanic or Latino
© 2014 American Water Works Association 19
Subject
Number
Percent
258,267,944
83.7
White alone
196,817,552
63.7
Black or African American
alone
37,685,848
12.2
American Indian and Alaska
Native alone
2,247,098
0.7
Asian alone
Relationship (continued)
Not Hispanic or Latino
14,465,124
4.7
Native Hawaiian and Other
Pacific Islander alone
481,576
0.2
Some Other Race alone
604,265
0.2
5,966,481
1.9
Total population
308,745,538 (r35836)
100.0
In households
300,758,215 (r25980)
97.4
Two or More Races
Relationship
Householder
116,716,292
37.8
Spouse [6]
56,510,377
18.3
Child
88,820,256
28.8
64,778,147
21.0
20,411,239
6.6
7,779,796
2.5
Own child under 18 years
Other relatives
Under 18 years
65 years and over
Nonrelatives
Under 18 years
65 years and over
Unmarried partner
In group quarters
Institutionalized population
Male
Female
2,941,638
1.0
18,300,051
5.9
1,325,848
0.4
794,726
0.3
7,744,711
2.5
7,987,323 (r24091)
2.6
3,993,659
1.3
2,716,877
0.9
1,276,782
0.4
3,993,664
1.3
Male
2,141,333
0.7
Female
1,852,331
0.6
116,716,292 (r426)
100.0
77,538,296
66.4
34,743,604
29.8
56,510,377
48.4
23,588,268
20.2
5,777,570
5.0
2,789,424
2.4
Noninstitutionalized population
Households by Type
Total households
Family households
(families) [7]
With own children
under 18 years
Husband-wife family
With own children
under 18 years
Male householder, no wife present
With own children
under 18 years
20
© 2014 American Water Works Association
Subject
Number
Percent
15,250,349
13.1
8,365,912
7.2
Relationship (continued)
Female householder,
no husband present
With own children
under 18 years
Nonfamily households [7]
39,177,996
Householder living alone
31,204,909
26.7
Male
13,906,294
11.9
3,171,724
2.7
17,298,615
14.8
65 years and over
Female
7,823,965
6.7
Households with individuals
under 18 years
65 years and over
38,996,219
33.4
Households with individuals 65
years and over
29,091,122
24.9
Average household size
2.58
(X)
Average family size [7]
3.14
(X)
Housing Occupancy
Total housing units
131,704,730 (r14151)
100.0
Occupied housing units
116,716,292
(r426)
88.6
Vacant housing units
14,988,438 (r9916)
11.4
4,137,567
3.1
For rent
Rented, not occupied
206,825
0.2
1,896,796
1.4
421,032
0.3
For seasonal, recreational,
or occasional use
4,649,298
3.5
All other vacants
3,676,920
2.8
Homeowner vacancy rate
(percent) [8]
2.4
(X)
Rental vacancy rate (percent) [9]
9.2
(X)
116,716,292 (r426)
100.0
75,986,074
65.1
201,278,493
(X)
2.65
(X)
40,730,218
34.9
99,479,722
(X)
2.44
(X)
For sale only
Sold, not occupied
Housing Tenure
Occupied housing units
Owner-occupied housing units
Population in owner-occupied
housing units
Average household size
of owner-occupied units
Renter-occupied housing units
Population in renter-occupied
housing units
Average household size
of renter-occupied units
© 2014 American Water Works Association 21
2010 Census Summary File 1— Geography: United States
(r35836)
his count has been revised. Revised count:
T
308,745,858 Revision date: 10-18-2013
(r25980)
his count has been revised. Revised count:
T
300,758,465 Revision date: 10-18-2013
(r24091)
his count has been revised. Revised count:
T
7,987,393 Revision date: 10-18-2013
(r426)
[6] “Spouse”
represents spouse of the householder.
It does not reflect all spouses in a household.
Responses of “same-sex spouse” were edited
during processing to “unmarried partner.”
[7]
“ Family households” consist of a householder and
one or more other people related to the householder by birth, marriage, or adoption. They do not
include same-sex married couples even if the marriage was performed in a state issuing marriage
certificates for same-sex couples. Same-sex couple
households are included in the family households
category if there is at least one additional person
related to the householder by birth or adoption.
Same-sex couple households with no relatives of
the householder present are tabulated in nonfamily households. “Nonfamily households” consist of
people living alone and households which do not
have any members related to the householder.
[8]
he homeowner vacancy rate is the proportion
T
of the homeowner inventory that is vacant “for
sale.” It is computed by dividing the total number
of vacant units for sale only by the sum of
owner-occupied units, vacant units that are for sale
only, and vacant units that have been sold but not
yet occupied; and then multiplying by 100.
his count has been revised. Revised count:
T
116,716,391 Revision date: 10-18-2013
(r14151)
(r9916)
his count has been revised. Revised count:
T
131,704,868 Revision date: 10-18-2013
his count has been revised. Revised count:
T
14,988,477 Revision date: 10-18-2013
For more information on revised counts, see 2010
Census Count Question Resolution.
(X) Not applicable
[1]
Other Asian alone, or two or more Asian categories
[2]
ther Pacific Islander alone, or two or more Native
O
Hawaiian and Other Pacific Islander categories
[3]
ne of the four most commonly reported
O
multiple-race combinations nationwide in
Census 2000
[4]
I n combination with one or more of the other races
listed. The six numbers may add to more than the
total population, and the six percentages may add
to more than 100 percent because individuals may
report more than one race.
[5]
his category is composed of people whose origins
T
are from the Dominican Republic, Spain,
and Spanish-speaking Central or South American
countries. It also includes general origin responses
such as “Latino” or “Hispanic.”
22
[9] The
rental vacancy rate is the proportion of the
rental inventory that is vacant “for rent.” It is
computed by dividing the total number of vacant
units “for rent” by the sum of the renter-occupied
units, vacant units that are for rent, and vacant
units that have been rented but not yet occupied;
and then multiplying by 100.
Source: U.S. Census Bureau, Census 2010 Summary
File 1, Tables P5, P6, P8, P12, P13, P17, P19, P20, P25,
P29, P31, P34, P37, P43, PCT5, PCT8, PCT11, PCT12,
PCT19, PCT23, PCT24, H3, H4, H5, H11, H12, and H16.
© 2014 American Water Works Association
DP02—Selected Social Characteristics In The United States
2012 American Community Survey—1-Year Estimates
Supporting documentation on code lists, subject definitions, data accuracy, and statistical testing can be found
on the American Community Survey website in the Data and Documentation section. Sample size and data
quality measures (including coverage rates, allocation rates, and response rates) can be found on the American
Community Survey website in the Methodology section.
Although the American Community Survey (ACS) produces population, demographic and housing unit
estimates, it is the Census Bureau’s Population Estimates Program that produces and disseminates the official
estimates of the population for the nation, states, counties, cities and towns and estimates of housing units
for states and counties.
Note: Data are as presented by U.S. Census Bureau and may not adhere to column headers in all cases.
United States
Subject
Estimate
Margin of Error
Percent
Percent Margin
of Error
Total households
115,969,540
+/-150,555
115,969,540
(X)
Family households (families)
76,509,262
+/-122,329
66.0%
+/-0.1
33,612,973
+/-72,569
29.0%
+/-0.1
55,754,450
+/-142,830
48.1%
+/-0.1
22,423,949
+/-76,687
19.3%
+/-0.1
5,578,212
+/-43,046
4.8%
+/-0.1
With own children
under 18 years
2,697,636
+/-28,396
2.3%
+/-0.1
Female householder, no
husband present, family
15,176,600
+/-53,498
13.1%
+/-0.1
8,491,388
+/-40,891
7.3%
+/-0.1
39,460,278
+/-82,851
34.0%
+/-0.1
Householder living alone
32,256,217
+/-90,665
27.8%
+/-0.1
65 years and over
11,513,067
+/-45,037
9.9%
+/-0.1
Households with one or more
people under 18 years
37,555,698
+/-70,588
32.4%
+/-0.1
Households with one or more
people 65 years and over
30,193,187
+/-54,865
26.0%
+/-0.1
Average household size
2.64
+/-0.01
(X)
(X)
Average family size
3.25
+/-0.01
(X)
(X)
Households by Type
With own children
under 18 years
Married-couple family
With own children under
18 years
Male householder, no wife
present, family
With own children under
18 years
Nonfamily households
© 2014 American Water Works Association 23
United States
Subject
Estimate
Margin of Error
Percent
Percent Margin
of Error
Population in households
305,885,362
*****
305,885,362
(X)
Householder
115,969,540
+/-150,555
37.9%
+/-0.1
Relationship
Spouse
55,722,213
+/-140,281
18.2%
+/-0.1
Child
93,933,535
+/-103,866
30.7%
+/-0.1
Other relatives
22,275,332
+/-129,327
7.3%
+/-0.1
Nonrelatives
17,984,742
+/-147,789
5.9%
+/-0.1
6,960,357
+/-42,248
2.3%
+/-0.1
123,174,537
+/-27,552
123,174,537
(X)
Never married
44,291,637
+/-88,580
36.0%
+/-0.1
Now married, except
separated
61,355,023
+/-132,935
49.8%
+/-0.1
Separated
2,301,054
+/-25,122
1.9%
+/-0.1
Unmarried partner
Marital Status
Males 15 years and over
Widowed
3,129,475
+/-24,810
2.5%
+/-0.1
Divorced
12,097,348
+/-58,687
9.8%
+/-0.1
129,570,612
+/-22,581
129,570,612
(X)
Never married
38,367,449
+/-79,824
29.6%
+/-0.1
Now married, except
separated
60,019,246
+/-124,012
46.3%
+/-0.1
Separated
3,285,688
+/-30,065
2.5%
+/-0.1
Widowed
11,865,679
+/-40,443
9.2%
+/-0.1
Divorced
16,032,550
+/-55,357
12.4%
+/-0.1
Number of women 15 to 50
years old who had a birth in
the past 12 months
4,125,353
+/-34,597
4,125,353
(X)
Unmarried women (widowed, divorced, and never
married)
1,483,976
+/-20,585
36.0%
+/-0.4
Per 1,000 unmarried
women
35
+/-1
(X)
(X)
Per 1,000 women 15 to 50
years old
54
+/-1
(X)
(X)
Per 1,000 women 15 to 19
years old
21
+/-1
(X)
(X)
Per 1,000 women 20 to 34
years old
95
+/-1
(X)
(X)
Per 1,000 women 35 to 50
years old
26
+/-1
(X)
(X)
Females 15 years and over
Fertility
24
© 2014 American Water Works Association
United States
Subject
Estimate
Margin of Error
Percent
Percent Margin
of Error
Number of grandparents
living with own
grandchildren under 18 years
7,065,539
+/-57,489
7,065,539
(X)
Responsible for
grandchildren
2,743,282
+/-30,337
38.8%
+/-0.4
+/-15,726
8.2%
+/-0.2
Grandparents
Years responsible for grandchildren
Less than 1 year
579,224
1 or 2 years
629,585
+/-15,261
8.9%
+/-0.2
3 or 4 years
456,263
+/-12,694
6.5%
+/-0.2
1,078,210
+/-19,159
15.3%
+/-0.2
2,743,282
+/-30,337
2,743,282
(X)
Who are female
1,727,097
+/-19,983
63.0%
+/-0.3
Who are married
1,927,479
+/-27,997
70.3%
+/-0.5
83,085,860
+/-89,455
83,085,860
(X)
Nursery school, preschool
5,040,851
+/-35,593
6.1%
+/-0.1
Kindergarten
4,246,155
+/-30,368
5.1%
+/-0.1
Elementary school
(grades 1-8)
32,875,346
+/-46,544
39.6%
+/-0.1
High school (grades 9-12)
17,013,441
+/-41,341
20.5%
+/-0.1
College or graduate school
23,910,067
+/-66,963
28.8%
+/-0.1
208,731,498
+/-63,262
208,731,498
(X)
Less than 9th grade
12,072,306
+/-65,170
5.8%
+/-0.1
9th to 12th grade, no
diploma
16,409,962
+/-72,538
7.9%
+/-0.1
High school graduate
(includes equivalency)
58,495,661
+/-91,039
28.0%
+/-0.1
Some college, no degree
44,399,937
+/-90,064
21.3%
+/-0.1
Associate’s degree
16,611,110
+/-66,837
8.0%
+/-0.1
Bachelor’s degree
37,969,084
+/-104,778
18.2%
+/-0.1
Graduate or professional
degree
22,773,438
+/-88,114
10.9%
+/-0.1
Percent high school
graduate or higher
(X)
(X)
86.4%
+/-0.1
Percent bachelor’s degree
or higher
(X)
(X)
29.1%
+/-0.1
5 or more years
Number of grandparents
responsible for own grandchildren under 18 years
School Enrollment
Population 3 years and over
enrolled in school
Educational Attainment
Population 25 years and over
© 2014 American Water Works Association 25
United States
Subject
Estimate
Margin of Error
Percent
Percent Margin
of Error
Civilian population 18 years
and over
239,178,768
+/-30,500
239,178,768
(X)
Civilian veterans
21,230,865
+/-57,501
8.9%
+/-0.1
308,896,460
(X)
Veteran Status
Disability Status of the Civilian Noninstitutionalized Population
Total Civilian Noninstitutionalized Population
With a disability
Under 18 years
With a disability
18 to 64 years
With a disability
65 years and over
With a disability
308,896,460
+/-13,901
37,633,020
+/-94,880
12.2%
+/-0.1
73,577,504
+/-31,899
73,577,504
(X)
3,018,315
+/-28,712
4.1%
+/-0.1
193,478,987
+/-25,377
193,478,987
(X)
19,606,506
+/-67,395
10.1%
+/-0.1
41,839,969
+/-18,303
41,839,969
(X)
15,008,199
+/-49,325
35.9%
+/-0.1
Residence 1 Year Ago
Population 1 year and over
310,212,755
+/-25,814
310,212,755
(X)
Same house
263,612,596
+/-229,733
85.0%
+/-0.1
Different house in the U.S.
44,766,942
+/-223,193
14.4%
+/-0.1
Same county
27,913,580
+/-187,831
9.0%
+/-0.1
Different county
16,853,362
+/-104,977
5.4%
+/-0.1
Same state
9,783,017
+/-83,977
3.2%
+/-0.1
Different state
7,070,345
+/-58,599
2.3%
+/-0.1
Abroad
1,833,217
+/-32,633
0.6%
+/-0.1
Total population
313,914,040
*****
313,914,040
(X)
Native
273,089,382
+/-111,594
87.0%
+/-0.1
Place of Birth
Born in United States
268,703,379
+/-107,321
85.6%
+/-0.1
State of residence
184,556,088
+/-156,997
58.8%
+/-0.1
Different state
84,147,291
+/-124,538
26.8%
+/-0.1
Born in Puerto Rico, U.S.
Island areas, or born
abroad to American
parent(s)
4,386,003
+/-41,520
1.4%
+/-0.1
Foreign born
40,824,658
+/-111,594
13.0%
+/-0.1
40,824,658
+/-111,594
40,824,658
(X)
U.S. Citizenship Status
Foreign-born population
26
Naturalized U.S. citizen
18,686,237
+/-68,651
45.8%
+/-0.2
Not a U.S. citizen
22,138,421
+/-109,661
54.2%
+/-0.2
© 2014 American Water Works Association
United States
Subject
Estimate
Margin of Error
Percent
Percent Margin
of Error
Population born outside the
United States
45,210,661
+/-107,321
45,210,661
(X)
Native
4,386,003
+/-41,520
4,386,003
(X)
Year of Entry
Entered 2010 or later
294,506
+/-13,678
6.7%
+/-0.3
Entered before 2010
4,091,497
+/-39,344
93.3%
+/-0.3
Foreign born
40,824,658
+/-111,594
40,824,658
(X)
Entered 2010 or later
2,851,714
+/-43,079
7.0%
+/-0.1
Entered before 2010
37,972,944
+/-100,281
93.0%
+/-0.1
40,824,553
+/-111,624
40,824,553
(X)
Europe
4,809,392
+/-38,353
11.8%
+/-0.1
Asia
11,931,658
+/-53,141
29.2%
+/-0.1
Africa
1,723,895
+/-33,353
4.2%
+/-0.1
World Region of Birth of Foreign Born
Foreign-born population,
excluding population born
at sea
Oceania
Latin America
Northern America
239,861
+/-9,226
0.6%
+/-0.1
21,311,457
+/-78,036
52.2%
+/-0.1
808,290
+/-12,461
2.0%
+/-0.1
294,003,714
+/-18,345
294,003,714
(X)
Language Spoken at Home
Population 5 years and over
English only
232,126,499
+/-132,907
79.0%
+/-0.1
Language other than
English
61,877,215
+/-129,197
21.0%
+/-0.1
Speak English less than
“very well”
25,088,697
+/-94,992
8.5%
+/-0.1
38,325,155
+/-95,145
13.0%
+/-0.1
16,149,456
+/-74,106
5.5%
+/-0.1
11,034,625
+/-79,281
3.8%
+/-0.1
Speak English less than
“very well”
3,461,929
+/-43,058
1.2%
+/-0.1
Asian and Pacific Islander
languages
9,752,336
+/-52,271
3.3%
+/-0.1
Speak English less than
“very well”
4,618,474
+/-35,556
1.6%
+/-0.1
2,765,099
+/-43,668
0.9%
+/-0.1
858,838
+/-22,686
0.3%
+/-0.1
Spanish
Speak English less than
“very well”
Other Indo-European
languages
Other languages
Speak English less than
“very well”
© 2014 American Water Works Association 27
United States
Subject
Estimate
Margin of Error
Percent
Percent Margin
of Error
313,914,040
*****
313,914,040
(X)
American
23,567,147
+/-90,901
7.5%
+/-0.1
Arab
1,798,991
+/-35,987
0.6%
+/-0.1
Czech
1,507,815
+/-23,682
0.5%
+/-0.1
Ancestry
Total population
Danish
1,296,751
+/-25,129
0.4%
+/-0.1
Dutch
4,350,633
+/-43,932
1.4%
+/-0.1
English
25,261,814
+/-102,997
8.0%
+/-0.1
French (except Basque)
8,475,331
+/-55,608
2.7%
+/-0.1
French Canadian
1,992,174
+/-32,854
0.6%
+/-0.1
German
46,875,013
+/-113,136
14.9%
+/-0.1
Greek
1,296,119
+/-27,039
0.4%
+/-0.1
Hungarian
1,427,110
+/-22,143
0.5%
+/-0.1
Irish
34,148,645
+/-130,918
10.9%
+/-0.1
Italian
17,343,394
+/-88,194
5.5%
+/-0.1
Lithuanian
680,912
+/-13,465
0.2%
+/-0.1
Norwegian
4,398,608
+/-37,483
1.4%
+/-0.1
Polish
9,500,696
+/-66,115
3.0%
+/-0.1
Portuguese
1,380,877
+/-28,735
0.4%
+/-0.1
Russian
2,895,912
+/-41,054
0.9%
+/-0.1
Scotch-Irish
3,117,627
+/-32,277
1.0%
+/-0.1
Scottish
5,379,735
+/-48,537
1.7%
+/-0.1
Slovak
742,738
+/-17,871
0.2%
+/-0.1
Subsaharan African
3,008,961
+/-51,662
1.0%
+/-0.1
Swedish
3,980,614
+/-41,929
1.3%
+/-0.1
941,692
+/-18,807
0.3%
+/-0.1
Swiss
Ukrainian
968,769
+/-20,640
0.3%
+/-0.1
Welsh
1,780,002
+/-30,844
0.6%
+/-0.1
West Indian (excluding
Hispanic origin groups)
2,758,050
+/-40,768
0.9%
+/-0.1
***** Indicates that the margin of error estimate is
controlled. A statistical test for sampling variability
is not appropriate.
(X) Not applicable or not available
Data are based on a sample and are subject to sampling variability. The degree of uncertainty for an
estimate arising from sampling variability is represented through the use of a margin of error. The
value shown here is the 90 percent margin of error.
The margin of error can be interpreted roughly as
providing a 90 percent probability that the interval
28
defined by the estimate minus the margin of error
and the estimate plus the margin of error (the lower
and upper confidence bounds) contains the true
value. In addition to sampling variability, the ACS
estimates are subject to nonsampling error (for a
discussion of nonsampling variability, see Accuracy
of the Data). The effect of nonsampling error is not
represented in these tables.
Ancestry listed in this table refers to the total number
of people who responded with a particular ancestry; for example, the estimate given for Russian
© 2014 American Water Works Association
represents the number of people who listed Russian
as either their first or second ancestry. This table lists
only the largest ancestry groups; see the Detailed
Tables for more categories. Race and Hispanic origin
groups are not included in this table because official
data for those groups come from the Race and
Hispanic origin questions rather than the ancestry
question (see Demographic Table).
Data for year of entry of the native population reflect
the year of entry into the U.S. by people who were
born in Puerto Rico, U.S. Island Areas or born
outside the U.S. to a U.S. citizen parent and who
subsequently moved to the U.S.
Fertility data are not available for certain geographic
areas due to problems with data collection.
The Census Bureau introduced a new set of
disability questions in the 2008 ACS questionnaire.
Accordingly, comparisons of disability data from
2008 or later with data from prior years are not
recommended. For more information on these
© 2014 American Water Works Association questions and their evaluation in the 2006 ACS
Content Test, see the Evaluation Report Covering
Disability.
While the 2012 American Community Survey (ACS)
data generally reflect the December 2009 Office
of Management and Budget (OMB) definitions of
metropolitan and micropolitan statistical areas; in
certain instances the names, codes, and boundaries
of the principal cities shown in ACS tables may differ
from the OMB definitions due to differences in the
effective dates of the geographic entities.
Estimates of urban and rural population, housing
units, and characteristics reflect boundaries of urban
areas defined based on Census 2000 data. Boundaries
for urban areas have not been updated since Census
2000. As a result, data for urban and rural areas from
the ACS do not necessarily reflect the results of
ongoing urbanization.
Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2012 American
Community Survey
29
DP03—Selected Economic Characteristics
2012 American Community Survey—1-Year Estimates
Supporting documentation on code lists, subject definitions, data accuracy, and statistical testing
can be found on the American Community Survey website in the Data and Documentation section.
Sample size and data quality measures (including coverage rates, allocation rates, and response rates)
can be found on the American Community Survey website in the Methodology section.
Although the American Community Survey (ACS) produces population, demographic and housing
unit estimates, it is the Census Bureau’s Population Estimates Program that produces and disseminates
the official estimates of the population for the nation, states, counties, cities and towns and estimates
of housing units for states and counties.
Note: Data are as presented by U.S. Census Bureau and may not adhere to column headers in all cases.
Subject
Estimate
United States
Margin of
Percent
Error
Percent Margin
of Error
Employment Status
Population 16 years
and over
248,601,283
+/-46,427
248,601,283
(X)
In labor force
158,729,043
+/-97,259
63.8%
+/-0.1
Civilian labor force
157,703,368
+/-97,765
63.4%
+/-0.1
Employed
142,921,687
+/-110,732
57.5%
+/-0.1
Unemployed
14,781,681
+/-57,265
5.9%
+/-0.1
Armed Forces
1,025,675
+/-14,087
0.4%
+/-0.1
Not in labor force
89,872,240
+/-92,931
36.2%
+/-0.1
Civilian labor force
157,703,368
+/-97,765
157,703,368
(X)
Percent unemployed
(X)
(X)
9.4%
+/-0.1
Females 16 years
and over
127,549,401
+/-29,848
127,549,401
(X)
In labor force
74,952,713
+/-73,382
58.8%
+/-0.1
Civilian labor
force
74,822,864
+/-73,414
58.7%
+/-0.1
Employed
67,988,534
+/-70,221
53.3%
+/-0.1
23,202,782
+/-37,060
23,202,782
(X)
15,060,788
+/-47,952
64.9%
+/-0.2
46,949,993
+/-48,586
46,949,993
(X)
33,138,547
+/-80,481
70.6%
+/-0.2
Own children under
6 years
All parents in family
in labor force
Own children 6 to 17
years
All parents in family
in labor force
30
© 2014 American Water Works Association
Subject
Estimate
United States
Margin of
Percent
Error
Percent Margin
of Error
Commuting to Work
Workers 16 years
and over
140,862,960
+/-122,752
140,862,960
(X)
Car, truck, or van
-- drove alone
107,460,210
+/-120,264
76.3%
+/-0.1
Car, truck, or van
-- carpooled
13,675,867
+/-62,942
9.7%
+/-0.1
Public transportation
(excluding taxicab)
7,053,456
+/-38,366
5.0%
+/-0.1
Walked
3,969,058
+/-30,555
2.8%
+/-0.1
Other means
2,560,426
+/-32,137
1.8%
+/-0.1
Worked at home
6,143,943
+/-37,377
4.4%
+/-0.1
25.7
+/-0.1
(X)
(X)
Civilian employed
population 16 years
and over
142,921,687
+/-110,732
142,921,687
(X)
Management,
business,
science, and arts
occupations
51,543,472
+/-132,318
36.1%
+/-0.1
Service occupations
26,183,178
+/-81,583
18.3%
+/-0.1
Sales and office
occupations
34,949,741
+/-79,770
24.5%
+/-0.1
Natural resources,
construction,
and maintenance
occupations
12,851,881
+/-54,192
9.0%
+/-0.1
Production,
transportation, and
material moving
occupations
17,393,415
+/-77,668
12.2%
+/-0.1
142,921,687
+/-110,732
142,921,687
(X)
Agriculture,
forestry, fishing
and hunting,
and mining
2,830,729
+/-29,008
2.0%
+/-0.1
Construction
8,802,312
+/-51,690
6.2%
+/-0.1
Manufacturing
14,988,864
+/-62,761
10.5%
+/-0.1
Mean travel time to
work (minutes)
Occupation
Industry
Civilian employed
population 16 years
and over
Wholesale trade
3,785,841
+/-30,786
2.6%
+/-0.1
Retail trade
16,639,780
+/-65,872
11.6%
+/-0.1
© 2014 American Water Works Association 31
Subject
Estimate
United States
Margin of
Percent
Error
Percent Margin
of Error
Industry (continued)
Transportation and
warehousing, and
utilities
7,020,960
+/-52,939
4.9%
+/-0.1
Information
2,975,482
+/-29,955
2.1%
+/-0.1
Finance and insurance, and real estate
and rental and leasing
9,414,894
+/-46,008
6.6%
+/-0.1
Professional, scientific,
and management,
and administrative
and waste management services
15,591,744
+/-67,318
10.9%
+/-0.1
Educational services,
and health care and
social assistance
33,113,097
+/-106,595
23.2%
+/-0.1
Arts, entertainment,
and recreation, and
accommodation and
food services
13,697,912
+/-71,169
9.6%
+/-0.1
Other services, except
public administration
7,118,937
+/-45,319
5.0%
+/-0.1
Public administration
6,941,135
+/-45,397
4.9%
+/-0.1
Civilian employed
population 16 years
and over
142,921,687
+/-110,732
142,921,687
(X)
Private wage and
salary workers
113,197,324
+/-108,242
79.2%
+/-0.1
Government
workers
20,742,455
+/-76,283
14.5%
+/-0.1
Self-employed in
own not incorporated business
workers
8,760,153
+/-49,622
6.1%
+/-0.1
221,755
+/-7,394
0.2%
+/-0.1
Class of Worker
Unpaid family
workers
Income and Benefits (in 2012 inflation-adjusted dollars)
Total households
32
115,969,540
+/-150,555
115,969,540
(X)
Less than $10,000
8,885,815
+/-45,748
7.7%
+/-0.1
$10,000 to $14,999
6,550,068
+/-42,389
5.6%
+/-0.1
$15,000 to $24,999
12,889,311
+/-56,170
11.1%
+/-0.1
$25,000 to $34,999
12,033,359
+/-48,052
10.4%
+/-0.1
© 2014 American Water Works Association
Subject
Estimate
United States
Margin of
Percent
Error
Percent Margin
of Error
Income and Benefits (in 2012 inflation-adjusted dollars) (continued)
$35,000 to $49,999
15,971,542
+/-55,844
13.8%
+/-0.1
$50,000 to $74,999
20,866,034
+/-73,232
18.0%
+/-0.1
$75,000 to $99,999
13,779,990
+/-61,225
11.9%
+/-0.1
$100,000 to $149,999
14,366,700
+/-54,419
12.4%
+/-0.1
$150,000 to $199,999
5,345,408
+/-30,185
4.6%
+/-0.1
$200,000 or more
5,281,313
+/-30,281
4.6%
+/-0.1
Median household
income (dollars)
51,371
+/-53
(X)
(X)
Mean household
income (dollars)
71,317
+/-101
(X)
(X)
Households with earnings
90,088,460
+/-124,296
77.7%
+/-0.1
Mean earnings
(dollars)
73,069
+/-120
(X)
(X)
With Social Security
33,980,061
+/-71,707
29.3%
+/-0.1
16,977
+/-24
(X)
(X)
20,818,837
+/-73,764
18.0%
+/-0.1
23,335
+/-80
(X)
(X)
6,215,750
+/-36,843
5.4%
+/-0.1
9,058
+/-33
(X)
(X)
3,341,535
+/-29,968
2.9%
+/-0.1
3,670
+/-37
(X)
(X)
With Food Stamp/
SNAP benefits in the
past 12 months
15,814,499
+/-58,089
13.6%
+/-0.1
Families
76,509,262
+/-122,329
76,509,262
(X)
Less than $10,000
3,846,375
+/-31,943
5.0%
+/-0.1
$10,000 to $14,999
2,592,664
+/-30,737
3.4%
+/-0.1
$15,000 to $24,999
6,531,659
+/-36,066
8.5%
+/-0.1
Mean Social Security
income (dollars)
With retirement
income
Mean retirement
income (dollars)
With Supplemental
Security Income
Mean Supplemental
Security Income
(dollars)
With cash public
assistance income
Mean cash public
assistance income
(dollars)
$25,000 to $34,999
7,044,637
+/-35,945
9.2%
+/-0.1
$35,000 to $49,999
10,192,989
+/-39,701
13.3%
+/-0.1
$50,000 to $74,999
14,666,522
+/-61,902
19.2%
+/-0.1
$75,000 to $99,999
10,698,861
+/-52,861
14.0%
+/-0.1
$100,000 to $149,999
11,837,094
+/-53,798
15.5%
+/-0.1
$150,000 to $199,999
4,557,339
+/-28,709
6.0%
+/-0.1
$200,000 or more
4,541,122
+/-26,116
5.9%
+/-0.1
© 2014 American Water Works Association 33
Subject
Estimate
United States
Margin of
Percent
Error
Percent Margin
of Error
Income and Benefits (in 2012 inflation-adjusted dollars) (continued)
Median family
income (dollars)
62,527
+/-123
(X)
(X)
Mean family income
(dollars)
83,124
+/-147
(X)
(X)
Per capita income
(dollars)
27,319
+/-46
(X)
(X)
Nonfamily households
39,460,278
+/-82,851
39,460,278
(X)
Median nonfamily
income (dollars)
31,231
+/-73
(X)
(X)
Mean nonfamily
income (dollars)
45,468
+/-142
(X)
(X)
Median earnings for
workers (dollars)
30,155
+/-33
(X)
(X)
Median earnings
for male full-time,
year-round workers
(dollars)
47,473
+/-90
(X)
(X)
Median earnings
for female full-time,
year-round workers
(dollars)
37,412
+/-57
(X)
(X)
Civilian noninstitutionalized population
308,896,460
+/-13,901
308,896,460
(X)
With health insurance
coverage
263,281,913
+/-193,879
85.2%
+/-0.1
With private health
insurance
201,212,706
+/-311,250
65.1%
+/-0.1
With public
coverage
96,135,771
+/-134,387
31.1%
+/-0.1
No health insurance
coverage
45,614,547
+/-194,601
14.8%
+/-0.1
Civilian noninstitutionalized population under
18 years
73,577,504
+/-31,899
73,577,504
(X)
No health insurance
coverage
5,263,807
+/-56,117
7.2%
+/-0.1
193,478,987
+/-25,377
193,478,987
(X)
Health Insurance Coverage
Civilian noninstitutionalized population 18 to
64 years
34
In labor force
148,442,883
+/-87,903
148,442,883
(X)
Employed
134,769,382
+/-104,387
134,769,382
(X)
With health
insurance coverage
110,806,227
+/-158,202
82.2%
+/-0.1
© 2014 American Water Works Association
Subject
Estimate
United States
Margin of
Percent
Error
Percent Margin
of Error
Health Insurance Coverage (continued)
With public coverage
9,150,460
+/-44,169
6.8%
+/-0.1
No health insurance
coverage
23,963,155
+/-113,439
17.8%
+/-0.1
Unemployed
13,673,501
+/-55,758
13,673,501
(X)
With health
insurance coverage
7,493,425
+/-39,458
54.8%
+/-0.3
With private health
insurance
4,692,307
+/-32,224
34.3%
+/-0.2
With public coverage
3,110,221
+/-28,491
22.7%
+/-0.2
No health insurance
coverage
6,180,076
+/-47,950
45.2%
+/-0.3
Not in labor force
45,036,104
+/-85,189
45,036,104
(X)
With health
insurance coverage
35,230,912
+/-73,036
78.2%
+/-0.1
With private health
insurance
22,711,475
+/-66,574
50.4%
+/-0.1
With public coverage
15,492,836
+/-63,060
34.4%
+/-0.1
No health insurance
coverage
9,805,192
+/-62,844
21.8%
+/-0.1
Percentage of families and people whose income in the past 12 months is below
the poverty level
All families
(X)
(X)
11.8%
+/-0.1
With related children
under 18 years
(X)
(X)
18.8%
+/-0.1
With related children
under 5 years only
(X)
(X)
19.3%
+/-0.2
(X)
(X)
5.8%
+/-0.1
With related children
under 18 years
(X)
(X)
8.7%
+/-0.1
With related children
under 5 years only
(X)
(X)
7.1%
+/-0.2
(X)
(X)
31.8%
+/-0.2
With related children
under 18 years
(X)
(X)
41.5%
+/-0.2
With related children
under 5 years only
(X)
(X)
48.0%
+/-0.6
All people
(X)
(X)
15.9%
+/-0.1
Under 18 years
(X)
(X)
22.6%
+/-0.2
(X)
(X)
22.3%
+/-0.2
Married couple
families
Families with female
householder, no
husband present
Related children
under 18 years
© 2014 American Water Works Association 35
Subject
Estimate
United States
Margin of
Percent
Error
Percent Margin
of Error
Percentage of families and people whose income in the past 12 months is below
the poverty level (continued)
Related children
5 to 17 years
(X)
(X)
21.0%
+/-0.2
18 years and over
(X)
(X)
13.9%
+/-0.1
18 to 64 years
(X)
(X)
14.8%
+/-0.1
65 years and over
(X)
(X)
9.5%
+/-0.1
People in families
(X)
(X)
13.4%
+/-0.1
Unrelated individuals
15 years and over
(X)
(X)
26.7%
+/-0.1
An (X) means that the estimate is not applicable or
not available.
Data are based on a sample and are subject to
sampling variability. The degree of uncertainty for an
estimate arising from sampling variability is represented through the use of a margin of error.
The value shown here is the 90 percent margin of
error. The margin of error can be interpreted roughly
as providing a 90 percent probability that the interval
defined by the estimate minus the margin of error
and the estimate plus the margin of error (the lower
and upper confidence bounds) contains the true
value. In addition to sampling variability, the ACS
estimates are subject to nonsampling error (for a
discussion of nonsampling variability, see Accuracy
of the Data). The effect of nonsampling error is not
represented in these tables.
Employment and unemployment estimates may
vary from the official labor force data released by
the Bureau of Labor Statistics because of differences
in survey design and data collection. For guidance
on differences in employment and unemployment
estimates from different sources go to Labor Force
Guidance.
The Census Bureau introduced an improved
sequence of labor force questions in the 2008 ACS
questionnaire. Accordingly, we recommend using
caution when making labor force data comparisons
from 2008 or later with data from prior years. For
more information on these questions and their
evaluation in the 2006 ACS Content Test, see the
“Evaluation Report Covering Employment Status”
at http://www.census.gov/acs/www/Downloads/
methodology/content_test/P6a_Employment_Status.
pdf, and the “Evaluation Report Covering Weeks
Worked” at http://www.census.gov/acs/www/
36
Downloads/methodology/content_test/P6b_Weeks_
Worked_Final_Report.pdf. Additional information
can also be found at http://www.census.gov/people/
laborforce/.
Workers include members of the Armed Forces and
civilians who were at work last week.
Industry codes are 4-digit codes and are based on the
North American Industry Classification System 2
007. The Industry categories adhere to the guidelines
issued in Clarification Memorandum No. 2, “NAICS
Alternate Aggregation Structure for Use By U.S.
Statistical Agencies,” issued by the Office of
Management and Budget.
Occupation codes are 4-digit codes and are based
on Standard Occupational Classification 2010.
The health insurance coverage category names
were modified in 2010. See ACS Health Insurance Definitions for a list of the insurance type
definitions.
While the 2012 American Community Survey (ACS)
data generally reflect the December 2009 Office
of Management and Budget (OMB) definitions of
metropolitan and micropolitan statistical areas; in
certain instances the names, codes, and boundaries
of the principal cities shown in ACS tables may differ
from the OMB definitions due to differences in the
effective dates of the geographic entities.
Estimates of urban and rural population, housing
units, and characteristics reflect boundaries of urban
areas defined based on Census 2000 data. Boundaries
for urban areas have not been updated since Census
2000. As a result, data for urban and rural areas from
the ACS do not necessarily reflect the results of
ongoing urbanization.
© 2014 American Water Works Association
DP04—Selected Housing Characteristics
2012 American Community Survey 1-Year Estimates
Supporting documentation on code lists, subject definitions, data accuracy, and statistical testing
can be found on the American Community Survey website in the Data and Documentation section.
Sample size and data quality measures (including coverage rates, allocation rates, and response rates)
can be found on the American Community Survey website in the Methodology section.
Although the American Community Survey (ACS) produces population, demographic and housing unit estimates,
it is the Census Bureau’s Population Estimates Program that produces and disseminates the official estimates of the
population for the nation, states, counties, cities and towns and estimates of housing units for states and counties.
Note: Data are as presented by U.S. Census Bureau and may not adhere to column headers in all cases.
Subject
Estimate
United States
Margin of
Percent
Error
Percent Margin
of Error
Housing Occupancy
Total housing units
132,452,249
+/-3,899
132,452,249
(X)
Occupied
housing units
115,969,540
+/-150,555
87.6%
+/-0.1
Vacant housing units
16,482,709
+/-151,760
12.4%
+/-0.1
Homeowner vacancy rate
2.0
+/-0.1
(X)
(X)
Rental vacancy rate
6.8
+/-0.1
(X)
(X)
Total housing units
132,452,249
+/-3,899
132,452,249
(X)
Units in Structure
1-unit, detached
81,554,643
+/-96,447
61.6%
+/-0.1
1-unit, attached
7,695,788
+/-39,654
5.8%
+/-0.1
2 units
5,006,114
+/-32,000
3.8%
+/-0.1
3 or 4 units
5,880,296
+/-36,686
4.4%
+/-0.1
5 to 9 units
6,311,130
+/-48,988
4.8%
+/-0.1
10 to 19 units
5,927,271
+/-42,333
4.5%
+/-0.1
20 or more units
11,465,984
+/-45,014
8.7%
+/-0.1
Mobile home
8,510,590
+/-47,407
6.4%
+/-0.1
100,433
+/-5,010
0.1%
+/-0.1
132,452,249
+/-3,899
132,452,249
(X)
Boat, RV, van, etc.
Year Structure Built
Total housing units
Built 2010 or later
1,199,560
+/-17,579
0.9%
+/-0.1
Built 2000 to 2009
19,799,406
+/-58,762
14.9%
+/-0.1
Built 1990 to 1999
18,348,209
+/-63,370
13.9%
+/-0.1
Built 1980 to 1989
18,326,856
+/-54,882
13.8%
+/-0.1
Built 1970 to 1979
20,944,138
+/-55,241
15.8%
+/-0.1
Built 1960 to 1969
14,577,453
+/-53,238
11.0%
+/-0.1
Built 1950 to 1959
14,397,367
+/-56,476
10.9%
+/-0.1
Built 1940 to 1949
7,072,019
+/-33,988
5.3%
+/-0.1
Built 1939 or earlier
17,787,241
+/-52,804
13.4%
+/-0.1
© 2014 American Water Works Association 37
Subject
Estimate
United States
Margin of
Percent
Error
Percent Margin
of Error
Rooms
Total housing units
1 room
132,452,249
+/-3,899
132,452,249
(X)
2,571,344
+/-31,732
1.9%
+/-0.1
2 rooms
3,324,834
+/-28,221
2.5%
+/-0.1
3 rooms
12,165,887
+/-51,392
9.2%
+/-0.1
4 rooms
22,119,418
+/-82,252
16.7%
+/-0.1
5 rooms
27,132,313
+/-72,875
20.5%
+/-0.1
6 rooms
23,967,579
+/-67,507
18.1%
+/-0.1
7 rooms
16,219,785
+/-55,494
12.2%
+/-0.1
8 rooms
11,187,180
+/-51,806
8.4%
+/-0.1
9 rooms or more
13,763,909
+/-69,957
10.4%
+/-0.1
5.5
+/-0.1
(X)
(X)
Median rooms
Bedrooms
Total housing units
132,452,249
+/-3,899
132,452,249
(X)
No bedroom
2,852,924
+/-31,268
2.2%
+/-0.1
1 bedroom
14,848,713
+/-56,098
11.2%
+/-0.1
2 bedrooms
35,456,731
+/-77,090
26.8%
+/-0.1
3 bedrooms
52,539,071
+/-77,063
39.7%
+/-0.1
4 bedrooms
21,182,430
+/-63,016
16.0%
+/-0.1
5 or more bedrooms
5,572,380
+/-36,811
4.2%
+/-0.1
Housing Tenure
Occupied housing units
115,969,540
+/-150,555
115,969,540
(X)
Owner-occupied
74,119,256
+/-204,618
63.9%
+/-0.1
Renter-occupied
41,850,284
+/-99,327
36.1%
+/-0.1
Average household size of
owner-occupied unit
2.70
+/-0.01
(X)
(X)
Average household size of
renter-occupied unit
2.53
+/-0.01
(X)
(X)
115,969,540
+/-150,555
115,969,540
(X)
31,507,002
+/-86,334
27.2%
+/-0.1
Year Householder Moved into Unit
Occupied housing units
Moved in 2010 or later
38
Moved in 2000 to 2009
45,461,532
+/-103,598
39.2%
+/-0.1
Moved in 1990 to 1999
18,996,653
+/-73,683
16.4%
+/-0.1
Moved in 1980 to 1989
9,200,406
+/-45,714
7.9%
+/-0.1
Moved in 1970 to 1979
6,071,721
+/-31,287
5.2%
+/-0.1
Moved in 1969 or
earlier
4,732,226
+/-32,031
4.1%
+/-0.1
© 2014 American Water Works Association
Subject
Estimate
United States
Margin of
Percent
Error
Percent Margin
of Error
Vehicles Available
Occupied housing units
115,969,540
+/-150,555
115,969,540
(X)
No vehicles available
10,689,431
+/-37,853
9.2%
+/-0.1
1 vehicle available
39,574,983
+/-87,684
34.1%
+/-0.1
2 vehicles available
43,295,903
+/-103,206
37.3%
+/-0.1
3 or more vehicles
available
22,409,223
+/-72,075
19.3%
+/-0.1
House Heating Fuel
Occupied housing units
115,969,540
+/-150,555
115,969,540
(X)
Utility gas
56,539,016
+/-94,783
48.8%
+/-0.1
Bottled, tank, or LP gas
5,542,387
+/-45,108
4.8%
+/-0.1
Electricity
42,846,023
+/-74,703
36.9%
+/-0.1
6,809,676
+/-34,762
5.9%
+/-0.1
132,151
+/-5,038
0.1%
+/-0.1
2,487,241
+/-24,120
2.1%
+/-0.1
47,976
+/-2,991
0.0%
+/-0.1
520,565
+/-9,789
0.4%
+/-0.1
1,044,505
+/-14,735
0.9%
+/-0.1
Occupied housing units
115,969,540
+/-150,555
115,969,540
(X)
Lacking complete
plumbing facilities
435,710
+/-11,167
0.4%
+/-0.1
Lacking complete
kitchen facilities
924,522
+/-14,767
0.8%
+/-0.1
No telephone service
available
2,988,112
+/-28,912
2.6%
+/-0.1
Fuel oil, kerosene, etc.
Coal or coke
Wood
Solar energy
Other fuel
No fuel used
Selected Characteristics
Occupants per Room
Occupied housing units
115,969,540
+/-150,555
115,969,540
(X)
1.00 or less
112,132,529
+/-158,286
96.7%
+/-0.1
1.01 to 1.50
2,710,941
+/-25,715
2.3%
+/-0.1
1.51 or more
1,126,070
+/-18,969
1.0%
+/-0.1
Owner-occupied units
74,119,256
+/-204,618
74,119,256
(X)
Less than $50,000
6,784,356
+/-45,203
9.2%
+/-0.1
$50,000 to $99,999
12,100,148
+/-64,404
16.3%
+/-0.1
Value
$100,000 to $149,999
12,245,474
+/-54,740
16.5%
+/-0.1
$150,000 to $199,999
11,370,120
+/-58,404
15.3%
+/-0.1
$200,000 to $299,999
13,393,416
+/-53,010
18.1%
+/-0.1
$300,000 to $499,999
11,068,593
+/-44,464
14.9%
+/-0.1
© 2014 American Water Works Association 39
Subject
Estimate
United States
Margin of
Percent
Error
Percent Margin
of Error
Value (continued)
$500,000 to $999,999
5,696,677
+/-32,349
7.7%
+/-0.1
$1,000,000 or more
1,460,472
+/-15,379
2.0%
+/-0.1
171,900
+/-257
(X)
(X)
Median (dollars)
Mortgage Status
Owner-occupied units
74,119,256
+/-204,618
74,119,256
(X)
Housing units with a
mortgage
48,726,257
+/-132,898
65.7%
+/-0.1
Housing units without
a mortgage
25,392,999
+/-101,183
34.3%
+/-0.1
+/-132,898
48,726,257
(X)
Selected Monthly Owner Costs (SMOC)
Housing units with a
mortgage
48,726,257
Less than $300
100,603
+/-4,352
0.2%
+/-0.1
$300 to $499
907,617
+/-14,798
1.9%
+/-0.1
$500 to $699
2,791,709
+/-26,912
5.7%
+/-0.1
$700 to $999
7,617,103
+/-47,072
15.6%
+/-0.1
14,002,995
+/-57,754
28.7%
+/-0.1
$1,500 to $1,999
9,658,799
+/-44,122
19.8%
+/-0.1
$2,000 or more
13,647,431
+/-47,437
28.0%
+/-0.1
1,460
+/-2
(X)
(X)
25,392,999
+/-101,183
25,392,999
(X)
Less than $100
318,875
+/-7,172
1.3%
+/-0.1
$100 to $199
1,927,740
+/-21,067
7.6%
+/-0.1
$200 to $299
4,165,055
+/-34,123
16.4%
+/-0.1
$300 to $399
4,897,726
+/-36,364
19.3%
+/-0.1
$400 or more
14,083,603
+/-56,662
55.5%
+/-0.1
434
+/-1
(X)
(X)
$1,000 to $1,499
Median (dollars)
Housing units without
a mortgage
Median (dollars)
Selected Monthly Owner Costs as a Percentage of Household Income (SMOCAPI)
Housing units with a
mortgage (excluding units
where SMOCAPI cannot
be computed)
Less than 20.0 percent
48,475,878
+/-133,811
48,475,878
(X)
18,511,789
+/-78,965
38.2%
+/-0.1
20.0 to 24.9 percent
7,834,722
+/-43,020
16.2%
+/-0.1
25.0 to 29.9 percent
5,693,837
+/-35,669
11.7%
+/-0.1
30.0 to 34.9 percent
3,950,995
+/-31,306
8.2%
+/-0.1
12,484,535
+/-54,996
25.8%
+/-0.1
250,379
+/-6,977
(X)
(X)
35.0 percent or more
Not computed
40
© 2014 American Water Works Association
Subject
Estimate
United States
Margin of
Percent
Error
Percent Margin
of Error
Selected Monthly Owner Costs as a Percentage of Household Income (SMOCAPI) (continued)
Housing unit without a
mortgage (excluding units
where SMOCAPI cannot
be computed)
25,063,787
+/-99,099
25,063,787
(X)
Less than 10.0 percent
10,245,634
+/-53,652
40.9%
+/-0.1
10.0 to 14.9 percent
4,988,873
+/-33,780
19.9%
+/-0.1
15.0 to 19.9 percent
3,004,519
+/-24,949
12.0%
+/-0.1
20.0 to 24.9 percent
1,863,562
+/-19,886
7.4%
+/-0.1
25.0 to 29.9 percent
1,236,236
+/-14,258
4.9%
+/-0.1
30.0 to 34.9 percent
838,838
+/-14,153
3.3%
+/-0.1
2,886,125
+/-22,253
11.5%
+/-0.1
329,212
+/-8,219
(X)
(X)
39,629,329
+/-100,083
39,629,329
(X)
721,831
+/-13,855
1.8%
+/-0.1
35.0 percent or more
Not computed
Gross Rent
Occupied units paying
rent
Less than $200
$200 to $299
1,276,784
+/-15,018
3.2%
+/-0.1
$300 to $499
3,266,904
+/-24,886
8.2%
+/-0.1
$500 to $749
9,127,518
+/-43,009
23.0%
+/-0.1
$750 to $999
9,634,214
+/-51,875
24.3%
+/-0.1
$1,000 to $1,499
10,001,083
+/-44,209
25.2%
+/-0.1
$1,500 or more
5,600,995
+/-38,324
14.1%
+/-0.1
884
+/-2
(X)
(X)
2,220,955
+/-24,856
(X)
(X)
38,681,971
(X)
Median (dollars)
No rent paid
Gross Rent as a Percentage of Household Income (GRAPI)
Occupied units paying
rent (excluding units
where GRAPI cannot be
computed)
38,681,971
+/-98,311
Less than 15.0 percent
4,574,966
+/-38,358
11.8%
+/-0.1
15.0 to 19.9 percent
4,708,840
+/-38,335
12.2%
+/-0.1
20.0 to 24.9 percent
4,820,400
+/-33,703
12.5%
+/-0.1
25.0 to 29.9 percent
4,458,671
+/-28,851
11.5%
+/-0.1
30.0 to 34.9 percent
3,455,267
+/-30,821
8.9%
+/-0.1
35.0 percent or more
16,663,827
+/-63,611
43.1%
+/-0.1
Not computed
3,168,313
+/-24,874
(X)
(X)
© 2014 American Water Works Association 41
(X) Not applicable or not available
Data are based on a sample and are subject to
sampling variability. The degree of uncertainty
for an estimate arising from sampling variability is
represented through the use of a margin of error.
The value shown here is the 90 percent margin of
error. The margin of error can be interpreted roughly
as providing a 90 percent probability that the interval
defined by the estimate minus the margin of error
and the estimate plus the margin of error (the lower
and upper confidence bounds) contains the true
value. In addition to sampling variability, the ACS
estimates are subject to nonsampling error (for a
discussion of nonsampling variability, see Accuracy
of the Data). The effect of nonsampling error is not
represented in these tables.
The median gross rent excludes no cash renters.
In prior years, the universe included all owneroccupied units with a mortgage. It is now restricted
to include only those units where SMOCAPI is
computed, that is, SMOC and household income
are valid values.
In prior years, the universe included all owneroccupied units without a mortgage. It is now
restricted to include only those units where
SMOCAPI is computed, that is, SMOC and
household income are valid values.
In prior years, the universe included all renteroccupied units. It is now restricted to include only
those units where GRAPI is computed, that is, gross
rent and household Income are valid values.
42
The 2009, 2010, 2011, and 2012 plumbing data for
Puerto Rico will not be shown. Research indicates
that the questions on plumbing facilities that
were introduced in 2008 in the stateside American
Community Survey and the 2008 Puerto Rico
Community Survey may not have been appropriate
for Puerto Rico.
Telephone service data are not available for
certain geographic areas due to problems with
data collection.
While the 2012 American Community Survey (ACS)
data generally reflect the December 2009 Office
of Management and Budget (OMB) definitions of
metropolitan and micropolitan statistical areas; in
certain instances the names, codes, and boundaries
of the principal cities shown in ACS tables may differ
from the OMB definitions due to differences in the
effective dates of the geographic entities.
Estimates of urban and rural population, housing
units, and characteristics reflect boundaries of urban
areas defined based on Census 2000 data. Boundaries
for urban areas have not been updated since Census
2000. As a result, data for urban and rural areas from
the ACS do not necessarily reflect the results of
ongoing urbanization.
Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2012 American
Community Survey
© 2014 American Water Works Association
marks
AWWA is the authoritative resource for knowledge, information, and advocacy to
improve the quality and supply of water in North America and beyond. AWWA is
the largest organization of water professionals in the world. AWWA advances public
health, safety and welfare by uniting the efforts of the full spectrum of the entire water
community. Through our collective strength we become better stewards of water for
the greatest good of the people and the environment.
20594-2E (8/14)