Physical, compliance, and capital-execution pressure reflected in the blended headline composite.
States / Colorado
Colorado
Explore Colorado drinking-water system scores, stress signals, infrastructure risk, and statewide market context across 174 scored service markets serving approximately 7.0 million people. This state profile highlights what is happening and why it matters using water-system, fiscal, capital, and signal context.
Colorado has an average MISI infrastructure stress score of 25.2/100 in the Watch band as of 2026-05-19. Public records summarize recent drinking-water violations, PFAS monitoring records, lead and copper context, and source-water mix across 174 covered systems. Updated May 2026.
National context
States sized by scored-market count. Color reflects average stress band.
State headline composite
Component of current headline composite
Affordability, demand-base, and parent-government fiscal pressure reflected in the blended headline composite.
Staleness, disclosure freshness, and reporting-visibility effects reflected in the blended headline composite.
State interpretation guide
How to read Colorado headline composite
Plain-language summary
Colorado currently shows an average MISI headline composite of 25.2 versus a national average of 25.0. In v0.1.2, the headline composite remains a blended structural stress measure rather than a pure physical-condition index. A frozen national reference and a 50 percent single-factor cap reduce the dominance of near-universal and very rare factors, while the component bars continue to separate infrastructure, socioeconomic, and observability readings.
Why this page stands out
- 174 scored systems are included in this state view, with explicit confidence and source-backed context.
- State posture is benchmarked against national averages, not evaluated in isolation.
- Top system links below connect state-level findings directly to profile-level diagnostics.
What to do next
- Review the executive context to understand the state-level pressure pattern.
- Open top system profiles to inspect what is actually driving stress at market level.
- Use Track to monitor changes in high-stress systems over time.
Public record layer
Statewide Water Quality Context
Stored public-record context for recent drinking-water violations, contaminant monitoring, and source-water mix across covered systems. This is not a tap-water safety determination and does not change the MISI score.
- Surface water151
- Groundwater23
- Purchased water0
- Mixed source0
- Not stored0
Latest identity snapshot: Dec 31, 2025
- Violation, enforcement, and compliance-burden counts use the recent 3 years window for dated stored records.
- Drinking-water identity snapshots are stored for 161 of 174 included scored systems.
- PFAS monitoring summary records are stored for 136 of 174 included systems; missing records are not treated as non-detections.
- Lead and copper summary records are stored for 157 of 174 included systems; missing records are not treated as absence of lead/copper context.
- How many covered systems in Colorado have recent recorded drinking-water violations?
- Stored public records show 81 covered systems with recent drinking-water violations, with 1,137 recorded violations across 174 covered systems in the recent 3 years window.
- How does Munimetric summarize PFAS public-record context in Colorado?
- Stored contaminant-monitoring summaries are present for 136 covered systems; 82 systems have PFAS detection context in this state summary.
- How does Munimetric summarize lead & copper context in Colorado?
- Stored lead & copper summaries are present for 157 covered systems; 80 systems have violation or action-level context in this state summary.
- What source-water types are represented across covered Colorado systems?
- Stored identity records group covered Colorado systems by source-water type: Surface water: 151, Groundwater: 23.
- Where can I find official drinking-water records for Colorado?
- The Official records drawer lists Public drinking-water profile, Contaminant monitoring records links where currently available for Colorado.
- Is this a real-time statewide tap-water condition rating?
- No. This is not a real-time tap-water condition determination. Munimetric summarizes stored public-record context for research and navigation, and this layer does not change MISI.
Official records
- Public drinking-water profileEPA ECHO: Federal drinking-water dashboard and public-record search entry point.
- Contaminant monitoring recordsEPA UCMR: Federal contaminant-monitoring program reference and public data entry point.
- Methodology/source notesDisplayed from stored public drinking-water records and official program references. This layer does not change MISI.
- Enforcement historyEPA ECHO / SDWIS: Violation and enforcement counts are aggregated from stored public compliance records across covered systems.
- Contaminant monitoring recordsEPA UCMR: PFAS context uses stored contaminant-monitoring summaries where available; missing records are not treated as non-detections.
- State drinking-water programOfficial link not currently stored for this state program mapping.
| System | Population | Source water | Recent violations | Recent enforcement | Public-record flags |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mountain Village Town OfCO0157400 | 9,700 | Groundwater | 201 | 72 | recent violations recorded, recent enforcement history, recent monitoring/reporting failures, PFAS detections in stored records, lead/copper context |
| Grand County Water No 1CO0125323 | 5,400 | Surface water | 92 | 84 | recent violations recorded, recent enforcement history, recent monitoring/reporting failures, PFAS detections in stored records, lead/copper context |
| Parkville WdCO0133700 | 7,500 | Surface water | 88 | 70 | recent violations recorded, recent enforcement history, recent monitoring/reporting failures, lead/copper context |
| Telluride Town OfCO0157800 | 7,900 | Surface water | 70 | 162 | recent violations recorded, recent enforcement history, recent monitoring/reporting failures, lead/copper context |
| Rifle City OfCO0123676 | 9,489 | Surface water | 45 | 70 | recent violations recorded, recent enforcement history, recent monitoring/reporting failures, PFAS detections in stored records, lead/copper context |
| Ymca Rockies Wind RiverCO0135883 | 3,730 | Surface water | 38 | 68 | recent violations recorded, recent enforcement history, recent monitoring/reporting failures, lead/copper context |
| Denver Water BoardCO0116001 | 1,287,000 | Surface water | 35 | 12 | recent violations recorded, recent enforcement history, recent monitoring/reporting failures, PFAS detections in stored records, lead/copper context |
| Montezuma WcCO0142900 | 13,797 | Surface water | 28 | 60 | recent violations recorded, recent enforcement history, recent monitoring/reporting failures, PFAS detections in stored records, lead/copper context |
This is not a real-time tap-water condition determination. For current advisories or health guidance, consult the utility or state drinking-water program.
Executive context
What This Page Shows
174 of the community drinking-water systems in Colorado are currently scored. Analytics below are calculated from this covered subset only. Covered systems serve approximately 7.0M people.
What the Data Suggests
Colorado has 174 scored service markets in the Munimetric coverage set, covering roughly 7.0 million residents in total. At the latest reading, the state-level average lands at 25.2 out of 100, indicating early but meaningful signs of structural stress in aggregate. A relatively small share — roughly 6% — currently sit in elevated-stress bands.
Across state markets, Operational Stress stands out as the dominant contributor to headline stress (12.8 points average), with Capex Pressure a distant second at 8.4. That pattern suggests a particular kind of pressure — concentrated rather than broadly distributed.
811 active signals are recorded across state markets. The most prevalent is Current Drought Severity, affecting 174 markets.
State-level average stress has been relatively steady between recent observation periods, suggesting the current picture reflects persistent conditions rather than a sudden shift.
This summary is based on structured, source-backed public data and is intended for research and monitoring only. It is not investment advice, a credit opinion, or municipal advisory guidance.
Recent Movement
Latest average MISI is 25.2 as of May 19, 2026. Movement since May 17, 2026 is flat.
Compact summary from 42 stored state observations.
State Family Contribution Summary
Signals
Signal Frequency
| Signal | Severity | Markets affected | % of scored |
|---|---|---|---|
| Current Drought Severity | high | 174 | 100% |
| Climate Hazard Exposure | high | 155 | 89% |
| Compliance Escalation | high | 101 | 58% |
| PFAS Contamination Risk | high | 82 | 47% |
| Lead & Copper Rule Risk | high | 80 | 46% |
| Infrastructure Capital Gap | high | 50 | 29% |
| Utility Data Staleness | high | 47 | 27% |
| High-AGI Out-Migration | high | 42 | 24% |
| Monitoring / Reporting Failures | medium | 27 | 16% |
| Housing Market Weakness | medium | 23 | 13% |
| Parent-Government Fiscal Stress | high | 22 | 13% |
| Population Served Decline | medium | 8 | 5% |
Markets
Top Markets
| # | Market | Score | Band | Population | Signals |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Denver Water Board | 50.2 | Fragile | 1.3M | 9 |
| 2 | Durango City of | 49.1 | Fragile | 34K | 7 |
| 3 | Inverness Wsd | 48.7 | Fragile | 8K | 8 |
| 4 | Snowmass Village Wsd | 45.7 | Fragile | 6K | 8 |
| 5 | Wellington Town of | 43.2 | Fragile | 12K | 7 |
| 6 | Northern Colorado Wa | 42.0 | Fragile | 5K | 6 |
| 7 | Fountain City of | 41.5 | Fragile | 25K | 7 |
| 8 | Ft Collins City of | 41.1 | Fragile | 180K | 7 |
| 9 | East Larimer County Wd | 40.8 | Fragile | 28K | 6 |
| 10 | Lochbuie Town of | 40.8 | Fragile | 7K | 7 |
| 11 | Parker Wsd | 40.0 | Watch | 76K | 6 |
| 12 | Brighton City of | 39.8 | Watch | 56K | 7 |
| 13 | Clifton Wd | 38.5 | Watch | 35K | 7 |
| 14 | Berthoud Town of | 37.3 | Watch | 14K | 6 |
| 15 | Mountain Village Town of | 37.1 | Watch | 10K | 6 |
| 16 | Little Thompson Wd | 37.0 | Watch | 26K | 6 |
| 17 | Englewood City of | 36.7 | Watch | 57K | 7 |
| 18 | Montezuma Wc | 36.0 | Watch | 14K | 6 |
| 19 | Perry Park Wsd | 35.8 | Watch | 4K | 6 |
| 20 | Ft Collins Loveland Wd | 35.7 | Watch | 64K | 6 |
Comparison
State Comparison
National average: 25.0
| Rank | State | Avg Score | Band | Markets | Delta vs State |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 23 | Rhode Island | 26.3 | Watch | 29 | +1.1 |
| 24 | Maryland | 25.9 | Watch | 78 | +0.7 |
| 25 | Colorado | 25.2 | Watch | 174 | +0.0 |
| 26 | North Carolina | 25.1 | Watch | 276 | -0.1 |
| 27 | Texas | 24.9 | Watch | 987 | -0.3 |
Analytical posture
State Stress Analytics
Score Distribution
Distribution of scored market scores with the state average overlay.
174 markets plotted.
Stress vs Population
Each point is a scored market; tooltip reveals market-level context.
173 markets plotted.
Population View
People served by community water systems in Colorado, colored by stress band.
~7.0M people served by 174 systems in Colorado
174 scored systems · colored by stress band
Peer Constellation
Select a market to see its nearest peers by score similarity.
24 nearest peers by score distance.
Score Trend
Latest
25.2
Trend
+19.8
Observations
42
Extended layers
Advanced State Context
Priority views, detailed registers, and methodology supporting the analytical core above.
Markets & signals
Priority Views
| # | Service Market | Score | Band | Pop. | Signals |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Denver Water Board | 50.2 | Fragile | 1.3M | 9 |
| 2 | Durango City of | 49.1 | Fragile | 34K | 7 |
| 3 | Inverness Wsd | 48.7 | Fragile | 8K | 8 |
| 4 | Snowmass Village Wsd | 45.7 | Fragile | 6K | 8 |
| 5 | Wellington Town of | 43.2 | Fragile | 12K | 7 |
| 6 | Northern Colorado Wa | 42.0 | Fragile | 5K | 6 |
| 7 | Fountain City of | 41.5 | Fragile | 25K | 7 |
| 8 | Ft Collins City of | 41.1 | Fragile | 180K | 7 |
| 9 | East Larimer County Wd | 40.8 | Fragile | 28K | 6 |
| 10 | Lochbuie Town of | 40.8 | Fragile | 7K | 7 |
| 11 | Parker Wsd | 40.0 | Watch | 76K | 6 |
| 12 | Brighton City of | 39.8 | Watch | 56K | 7 |
| 13 | Clifton Wd | 38.5 | Watch | 35K | 7 |
| 14 | Berthoud Town of | 37.3 | Watch | 14K | 6 |
| 15 | Mountain Village Town of | 37.1 | Watch | 10K | 6 |
| 16 | Little Thompson Wd | 37.0 | Watch | 26K | 6 |
| 17 | Englewood City of | 36.7 | Watch | 57K | 7 |
| 18 | Montezuma Wc | 36.0 | Watch | 14K | 6 |
| 19 | Perry Park Wsd | 35.8 | Watch | 4K | 6 |
| 20 | Ft Collins Loveland Wd | 35.7 | Watch | 64K | 6 |
Detailed records
Registers
| # | Market | Score | Band | Population | Signals |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Denver Water Board | 50.2 | Fragile | 1.3M | 9 |
| 2 | Durango City of | 49.1 | Fragile | 34K | 7 |
| 3 | Inverness Wsd | 48.7 | Fragile | 8K | 8 |
| 4 | Snowmass Village Wsd | 45.7 | Fragile | 6K | 8 |
| 5 | Wellington Town of | 43.2 | Fragile | 12K | 7 |
| 6 | Northern Colorado Wa | 42.0 | Fragile | 5K | 6 |
| 7 | Fountain City of | 41.5 | Fragile | 25K | 7 |
| 8 | Ft Collins City of | 41.1 | Fragile | 180K | 7 |
| 9 | East Larimer County Wd | 40.8 | Fragile | 28K | 6 |
| 10 | Lochbuie Town of | 40.8 | Fragile | 7K | 7 |
| 11 | Parker Wsd | 40.0 | Watch | 76K | 6 |
| 12 | Brighton City of | 39.8 | Watch | 56K | 7 |
| 13 | Clifton Wd | 38.5 | Watch | 35K | 7 |
| 14 | Berthoud Town of | 37.3 | Watch | 14K | 6 |
| 15 | Mountain Village Town of | 37.1 | Watch | 10K | 6 |
| 16 | Little Thompson Wd | 37.0 | Watch | 26K | 6 |
| 17 | Englewood City of | 36.7 | Watch | 57K | 7 |
| 18 | Montezuma Wc | 36.0 | Watch | 14K | 6 |
| 19 | Perry Park Wsd | 35.8 | Watch | 4K | 6 |
| 20 | Ft Collins Loveland Wd | 35.7 | Watch | 64K | 6 |
State intelligence is assembled from EPA SDWA compliance records, American Community Survey demographic and economic indicators, FEMA NRI hazard exposure profiles, and state-reported financial disclosures. Each service market receives a MISI score (0–100) based on five families: Operational Stress, Capex Pressure, Revenue Fragility, Rate Constraint, and Governance Risk. Scores are deterministic and threshold-based. In v0.1.2, the headline composite remains a blended structural stress measure rather than a pure physical-condition index. A frozen national reference and a 50 percent single-factor cap reduce the dominance of near-universal and very rare factors, while the component bars continue to separate infrastructure, socioeconomic, and observability readings. Peer context is provided by percentile ranking within population-based cohorts.
Munimetric tracks infrastructure stress across 174 community drinking-water systems in Colorado, covering compliance conditions, capital needs, revenue and rate pressure, and governance risk. Use this page to research which systems face the highest structural stress and how Colorado compares nationally.
- Which water systems in Colorado face the most infrastructure stress?
- The highest-stress systems in Colorado are ranked by MISI score above. Stress reflects operational burden, capital gaps, revenue fragility, rate affordability constraints, and governance risk—not a single compliance event. In v0.1.2, the headline composite remains a blended structural stress measure rather than a pure physical-condition index. A frozen national reference and a 50 percent single-factor cap reduce the dominance of near-universal and very rare factors, while the component bars continue to separate infrastructure, socioeconomic, and observability readings.
- How does Colorado compare to other states for drinking water infrastructure risk?
- Colorado is compared against all 50 states and territories using average MISI score, market count, and band distribution. The state comparison table above shows where Colorado ranks nationally and how its average score compares.
- Are there lead pipe or corrosion-related concerns in Colorado water systems?
- Where lead and copper rule compliance data is available from EPA SDWA records, Munimetric factors it into the Operational Stress family. Specific lead service line inventories vary by system. Individual system profiles contain the most detailed compliance context available.
- What compliance signals are active in Colorado?
- Munimetric tracks signals such as compliance escalation, monitoring and reporting failures, data staleness, and financial stress indicators across Colorado systems. The signal frequency table above summarizes which signals are most prevalent statewide.
- Does Munimetric track boil water advisories in Colorado?
- Munimetric does not track real-time boil water advisories. For current advisories, contact your local water utility or state drinking water program. Munimetric monitors structural conditions—compliance posture, infrastructure stress, and governance risk—that provide broader context around system reliability.
- Denver Water Board water system profile
- Durango City of drinking water infrastructure profile
- Inverness Wsd MISI score & system data
- Snowmass Village Wsd water system profile
- Wellington Town of drinking water infrastructure profile
- Northern Colorado Wa MISI score & system data
- Fountain City of water system profile
- Ft Collins City of drinking water infrastructure profile
- East Larimer County Wd MISI score & system data
- Lochbuie Town of water system profile
- Parker Wsd drinking water infrastructure profile
- Brighton City of MISI score & system data
- Clifton Wd water system profile
- Berthoud Town of drinking water infrastructure profile
- Mountain Village Town of MISI score & system data
Keep monitoring this state
Workflow access covers exports, Track, Munex, alerts, and repeat monitoring tools.
Water Infrastructure in Colorado
Munimetric tracks infrastructure stress across 174 community drinking-water systems in Colorado. Each system receives a Munimetric Infrastructure Stress Index (MISI) score from 0 to 100, calculated across five risk families: Operational Stress, Capex Pressure, Revenue Fragility, Rate Constraint, and Governance Risk. Higher scores indicate more structural stress. Scores are source-backed and deterministic, drawing from EPA SDWA compliance records, American Community Survey demographic and economic data, FEMA National Risk Index hazard profiles, and state financial disclosures.
State-level monitoring shows which systems face the highest structural stress, how Colorado compares against other states nationally, and which monitoring signals are most active across the state. Each individual system profile includes compliance history, score family drivers, peer rankings within population-based cohorts where safeguards pass, and public source context. Full provenance cards and source workbench views remain workflow-gated. Munimetric covers community water systems across all 50 states and territories. This is structural risk research—not a water quality rating, advisory feed, or credit rating. Updated May 2026.
The statewide public-record layer adds drinking-water violation categories, PFAS monitoring summaries where stored, lead and copper context, source-water mix, and official record links across covered systems. These records help explain water-system context alongside infrastructure stress without turning Munimetric into a tap-water safety determination.
- What is the Munimetric score for Colorado?
- Munimetric assigns a state-level average MISI score based on the individual scores of all covered community water systems in Colorado. The state average, band distribution, and market-level rankings are shown on this page. Higher MISI values indicate greater structural stress.
- Which water systems in Colorado face the most infrastructure stress?
- The state page ranks the highest-stress systems in Colorado by MISI score. Stress reflects operational burden, capital gaps, revenue fragility, rate affordability constraints, and governance risk, not a single compliance event. The headline remains a blended structural stress composite rather than a pure physical-condition index. Workflow actions remain reserved for account access.
- How does Colorado compare to other states for drinking water infrastructure risk?
- Colorado is compared against all 50 states and territories using average MISI score, market count, and band distribution. Munimetric tracks nationwide coverage across 9,000+ scored service markets.
- Are there lead pipe or corrosion-related concerns in Colorado water systems?
- Where lead and copper rule compliance data is available from EPA SDWA records, Munimetric factors it into the Operational Stress family score. Specific lead service line inventories vary by system. Individual system profiles contain the most detailed compliance context available.
- Does Munimetric include PFAS monitoring context for Colorado water systems?
- Munimetric summarizes stored PFAS monitoring context where public contaminant-monitoring records are available. Missing PFAS summaries remain missing records, not non-detections, and this public-record layer does not change the MISI score by itself.
- What compliance signals are active in Colorado?
- Munimetric tracks signals such as compliance escalation, monitoring and reporting failures, population decline, income erosion, data staleness, and parent-government fiscal stress across Colorado water systems.
- Does Munimetric track boil water advisories in Colorado?
- Munimetric does not track real-time boil water advisories. For current advisories, contact your local water utility or state drinking water program. Munimetric monitors structural conditions that provide context around system reliability over time.
- U.S. water infrastructure stress monitoring homepage
- How Munimetric scores drinking water systems
- Browse all water system profiles in the Screener
- Compare water infrastructure risk across all U.S. states
- Browse Colorado water systems by MISI stress band
- Browse Colorado water systems by population served
- Browse Colorado water systems by source-water type
- Water infrastructure research & guides
- Munimetric analytical rankings
- Compare states by average MISI
- Compare states by High Stress share
- National High-Stress water-system ranking
- Denver Water Board water system profile