Abstract
States and the federal government invest in water, wastewater, and stormwater infrastructure
by providing subsidized loans and other financial assistance through State Revolving
Fund (SRF) programs. The funds are capitalized with federal grants, state contributions,
leveraged bonds, and loan repayments. Because the programs largely provide loans rather
than grants, the repayment of principal and interest replenishes the pool of capital
to finance infrastructure over time. Loan repayments are now the largest source of
capital for SRFs. The amount of assistance available through the SRFs will increase
substantially as state programs receive $55 billion in new funds through the bipartisan
infrastructure law over the next five years.
The increase in available funding—from both federal appropriations and loan repayments—makes
it more important than ever for states to efficiently commit funds to finance projects.
Uncommitted funds represent missed opportunities to improve public health and water
quality, spur economic development, and create jobs through infrastructure investment.
As federal funds flow to states faster, it is imperative to understand how states
can efficiently allocate funds to reach their full potential. The authors of this
report analyzed data from the EPA, interviewed stakeholders, and conducted a survey
of over 200 water system decision makers and 30 state SRF administrators to better
understand what is driving uncommitted SRF funds.
The report offers three main recommendations to help states allocate funds, described
fully in the report:
- Set and track goals for the allocation of funds.
- Stimulate demand for funds.
- Enhance effective administrative practices.
Material is made available in this collection at the direction of authors according
to their understanding of their rights in that material. You may download and use
these materials in any manner not prohibited by copyright or other applicable law.
Rights for Collection: Research and Writings
Works are deposited here by their authors, and
represent their research and opinions, not that of Duke University. Some materials
and descriptions may include offensive content.
More info