What is the Munimetric score for Indiana?

Munimetric assigns a state-level average MISI score based on the individual scores of all covered community water systems in Indiana. 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 Indiana face the most infrastructure stress?

The state page ranks the highest-stress systems in Indiana 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 Indiana compare to other states for drinking water infrastructure risk?

Indiana 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 Indiana 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 Indiana 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 Indiana?

Munimetric tracks signals such as compliance escalation, monitoring and reporting failures, population decline, income erosion, data staleness, and parent-government fiscal stress across Indiana water systems.

Does Munimetric track boil water advisories in Indiana?

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.

How many covered systems in Indiana have recent recorded drinking-water violations?

Stored public records show 121 covered systems with recent drinking-water violations, with 585 recorded violations across 211 covered systems in the recent 3 years window.

How does Munimetric summarize PFAS public-record context in Indiana?

Stored contaminant-monitoring summaries are present for 199 covered systems; 79 systems have PFAS detection context in this state summary.

How does Munimetric summarize lead & copper context in Indiana?

Stored lead & copper summaries are present for 209 covered systems; 103 systems have violation or action-level context in this state summary.

What source-water types are represented across covered Indiana systems?

Stored identity records group covered Indiana systems by source-water type: Surface water: 62, Groundwater: 149.

Where can I find official drinking-water records for Indiana?

The Official records drawer lists Public drinking-water profile, Contaminant monitoring records links where currently available for Indiana.

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.

States / Indiana

Indiana

Name: Indiana Drinking Water Infrastructure Stress Data
Creator: Munimetric
License: https://munimetric.com/terms

Indiana municipal water system monitoring across 211 scored service markets serving approximately 4.8 million people, with Munimetric scores, stress signals, market rankings, and infrastructure risk context. This state profile highlights what is happening and why it matters using water-system, fiscal, capital, and signal context.

Indiana has an average MISI infrastructure stress score of 21.3/100 in the Watch band as of 2026-08-22. Public records summarize recent drinking-water violations, PFAS monitoring records, lead and copper context, and source-water mix across 211 covered systems. Updated May 2026.

National context

States sized by scored-market count. Color reflects average stress band.

211Markets scored

21.3Headline composite

~4.8MPop. served

832Active signals

Band distribution (MISI)

State headline composite

Component of current headline composite

Infrastructure Stress16.7 / 100

Physical, compliance, and capital-execution pressure reflected in the blended headline composite.

Socioeconomic Stress3.8 / 100

Affordability, demand-base, and parent-government fiscal pressure reflected in the blended headline composite.

Observability Stress0.8 / 100

Staleness, disclosure freshness, and reporting-visibility effects reflected in the blended headline composite.

21.3 headline compositeIndiana state composite211 markets~4.8M people served

State interpretation guide

How to read Indiana headline composite

Plain-language summary

Indiana currently shows an average MISI headline composite of 21.3 versus a national average of 24.4. 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

211 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 saved monitoring after research access is enabled to follow high-stress systems over time.

Priority Indiana paths

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.

Systems with recent violations

121 of 211Systems with recent public violation rows.

Source-water mix211 systems

Surface water62
Groundwater149
Purchased water0
Mixed source0
Not stored0

Latest identity snapshot: Jun 30, 2026

Coverage

Violation, enforcement, and compliance-burden counts use the recent 3 years window for dated stored records.
Drinking-water identity snapshots are stored for 210 of 211 included scored systems.
PFAS monitoring summary records are stored for 199 of 211 included systems; missing records are not treated as non-detections.
Lead and copper summary records are stored for 209 of 211 included systems; missing records are not treated as absence of lead/copper context.

Water quality questionsDefinitions and public-record context

How many covered systems in Indiana have recent recorded drinking-water violations?: Stored public records show 121 covered systems with recent drinking-water violations, with 585 recorded violations across 211 covered systems in the recent 3 years window.
How does Munimetric summarize PFAS public-record context in Indiana?: Stored contaminant-monitoring summaries are present for 199 covered systems; 79 systems have PFAS detection context in this state summary.
How does Munimetric summarize lead & copper context in Indiana?: Stored lead & copper summaries are present for 209 covered systems; 103 systems have violation or action-level context in this state summary.
What source-water types are represented across covered Indiana systems?: Stored identity records group covered Indiana systems by source-water type: Surface water: 62, Groundwater: 149.
Where can I find official drinking-water records for Indiana?: The Official records drawer lists Public drinking-water profile, Contaminant monitoring records links where currently available for Indiana.
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 notes

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.

Top recent compliance-burden systemsRecent 3 years

System	Population	Source water	Recent violations	Recent enforcement	Public-record flags
Washington Township WaterIN5210015	4,315	Groundwater	46	13	recent violations recorded, recent enforcement history, recent monitoring/reporting failures
Tell City Water DepartmentIN5262004	9,315	Groundwater	42	10	recent violations recorded, recent enforcement history, recent monitoring/reporting failures, PFAS detections in stored records
Seelyville Water WorksIN5284011	6,393	Groundwater	28	3	recent violations recorded, recent enforcement history, recent monitoring/reporting failures, lead/copper context
Bicknell Municipal UtilitiesIN5242001	4,064	Groundwater	24	39	recent violations recorded, recent enforcement history, recent monitoring/reporting failures, lead/copper context
North Vernon Water DepartmentIN5240008	6,500	Surface water	17	45	recent violations recorded, recent enforcement history, recent monitoring/reporting failures, PFAS detections in stored records, lead/copper context
Cordry Sweetwater Conservancy DistrictIN5207004	3,425	Groundwater	16	35	recent violations recorded, recent enforcement history, recent monitoring/reporting failures
Princeton Water DepartmentIN5226008	10,875	Groundwater	16	26	recent violations recorded, recent enforcement history, recent monitoring/reporting failures, lead/copper context
Mitchell Water DepartmentIN5247003	5,000	Groundwater	13	19	recent violations recorded, recent enforcement history, recent monitoring/reporting failures, 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

211 of the community drinking-water systems in Indiana are currently scored. Analytics below are calculated from this covered subset only. Covered systems serve approximately 4.8M people.

What the Data Suggests

Indiana has 211 scored service markets in the Munimetric coverage set, covering roughly 4.8 million residents in total. At the latest reading, the state-level average lands at 21.3 out of 100, indicating early but meaningful signs of structural stress in aggregate. A relatively small share — roughly 3% — currently sit in elevated-stress bands.

Across state markets, Operational Stress (8.7 points average) and Capex Pressure (8.1) are the leading contributors to headline stress. The relatively close spacing suggests pressure is spread across more than one dimension.

832 active signals are recorded across state markets. The most prevalent is Climate Hazard Exposure, affecting 148 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 21.3 as of Aug 22, 2026. Movement since Aug 20, 2026 is flat.

Compact summary from 98 stored state observations.

State Family Contribution Summary

Operational Stress8.7 / 20.0

Capex Pressure8.1 / 20.0

Governance Risk2.4 / 20.0

Revenue Fragility2.1 / 20.0

Rate Constraint0.0 / 20.0

Signals

Signal Frequency

Signal	Severity	Markets affected	% of scored
Climate Hazard Exposure	high	148	70%
Compliance Escalation	high	135	64%
Lead & Copper Rule Risk	high	103	49%
High-AGI Out-Migration	high	94	45%
PFAS Contamination Risk	high	79	37%
Parent-Government Fiscal Stress	high	78	37%
Infrastructure Capital Gap	high	72	34%
Monitoring / Reporting Failures	medium	59	28%
Utility Data Staleness	high	33	16%
Population Served Decline	medium	23	11%
Housing Market Weakness	medium	7	3%
Income Erosion	low	1	0%

Markets

Top Markets

#	Market	Score	Band	Population	Signals
1	Mishawaka Utilities	44.9	Fragile	50K	7
2	Lafayette Water Works	44.5	Fragile	71K	8
3	Gas City Water Department	43.4	Fragile	6K	7
4	Fort Wayne - 3 Rivers Filtration Plant	42.5	Fragile	270K	8
5	Jasper Municipal Water Utility	40.4	Fragile	17K	8
6	Princeton Water Department	40.1	Fragile	11K	6
7	Mount Vernon Water Works	39.2	Watch	6K	7
8	City of Bloomington Utilities	38.7	Watch	83K	7
9	New Haven Water Department	38.4	Watch	16K	7
10	Princes Lake Water Department	38.3	Watch	4K	5
11	Jasonville Water Department	37.4	Watch	4K	5
12	South Bend Water Works	37.4	Watch	115K	7
13	Hammond Water Works Department	36.3	Watch	78K	6
14	Southwestern Bartholomew Water Corp.	36.1	Watch	9K	7
15	Danville Water Works	36.0	Watch	11K	6
16	Whiting Water Department	35.7	Watch	5K	6
17	Hebron Water Department	35.2	Watch	4K	6
18	Angola Water Department	34.9	Watch	9K	5
19	Aberdeen Pate Water Company, Inc.	34.7	Watch	5K	6
20	New Chicago Water Works	34.7	Watch	6K	5

Comparison

State Comparison

National average: 24.4

Rank	State	Avg Score	Band	Markets	Delta vs State
36	California	21.7	Watch	711	+0.4
37	New York	21.6	Watch	347	+0.3
38	Indiana	21.3	Watch	211	+0.0
39	Wyoming	21.0	Watch	25	-0.2
40	Hawaii	20.9	Watch	40	-0.4

Analytical posture

State Stress Analytics

Score Distribution

Distribution of scored market scores with the state average overlay.

211 markets plotted.

Stress vs Population

Each point is a scored market; tooltip reveals market-level context.

211 markets plotted.

Population View

People served by community water systems in Indiana, colored by stress band.

~4.8M people served by 211 systems in Indiana

Stable

Watch

Fragile

High Stress

Critical

211 scored systems · colored by stress band

Peer Constellation

Select a market to see its nearest peers by score similarity.

Center market:

24 nearest peers by score distance.

Score Trend

Latest

21.3

Trend

+20.5

Observations

Extended layers

Advanced State Context

Priority views, detailed registers, and methodology supporting the analytical core above.

Markets & signals

Priority Views

#	Market	Score	Band	Population	Signals
1	Mishawaka Utilities	44.9	Fragile	50K	7
2	Lafayette Water Works	44.5	Fragile	71K	8
3	Gas City Water Department	43.4	Fragile	6K	7
4	Fort Wayne - 3 Rivers Filtration Plant	42.5	Fragile	270K	8
5	Jasper Municipal Water Utility	40.4	Fragile	17K	8
6	Princeton Water Department	40.1	Fragile	11K	6
7	Mount Vernon Water Works	39.2	Watch	6K	7
8	City of Bloomington Utilities	38.7	Watch	83K	7
9	New Haven Water Department	38.4	Watch	16K	7
10	Princes Lake Water Department	38.3	Watch	4K	5
11	Jasonville Water Department	37.4	Watch	4K	5
12	South Bend Water Works	37.4	Watch	115K	7
13	Hammond Water Works Department	36.3	Watch	78K	6
14	Southwestern Bartholomew Water Corp.	36.1	Watch	9K	7
15	Danville Water Works	36.0	Watch	11K	6
16	Whiting Water Department	35.7	Watch	5K	6
17	Hebron Water Department	35.2	Watch	4K	6
18	Angola Water Department	34.9	Watch	9K	5
19	Aberdeen Pate Water Company, Inc.	34.7	Watch	5K	6
20	New Chicago Water Works	34.7	Watch	6K	5

Detailed records

Registers

#	Market	Score	Band	Population	Signals
1	Mishawaka Utilities	44.9	Fragile	50K	7
2	Lafayette Water Works	44.5	Fragile	71K	8
3	Gas City Water Department	43.4	Fragile	6K	7
4	Fort Wayne - 3 Rivers Filtration Plant	42.5	Fragile	270K	8
5	Jasper Municipal Water Utility	40.4	Fragile	17K	8
6	Princeton Water Department	40.1	Fragile	11K	6
7	Mount Vernon Water Works	39.2	Watch	6K	7
8	City of Bloomington Utilities	38.7	Watch	83K	7
9	New Haven Water Department	38.4	Watch	16K	7
10	Princes Lake Water Department	38.3	Watch	4K	5
11	Jasonville Water Department	37.4	Watch	4K	5
12	South Bend Water Works	37.4	Watch	115K	7
13	Hammond Water Works Department	36.3	Watch	78K	6
14	Southwestern Bartholomew Water Corp.	36.1	Watch	9K	7
15	Danville Water Works	36.0	Watch	11K	6
16	Whiting Water Department	35.7	Watch	5K	6
17	Hebron Water Department	35.2	Watch	4K	6
18	Angola Water Department	34.9	Watch	9K	5
19	Aberdeen Pate Water Company, Inc.	34.7	Watch	5K	6
20	New Chicago Water Works	34.7	Watch	6K	5

Munimetric tracks infrastructure stress across 211 community drinking-water systems in Indiana, 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 Indiana compares nationally.

Which water systems in Indiana face the most infrastructure stress?: The highest-stress systems in Indiana 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 Indiana compare to other states for drinking water infrastructure risk?: Indiana is compared against all 50 states and territories using average MISI score, market count, and band distribution. The state comparison table above shows where Indiana ranks nationally and how its average score compares.
Are there lead pipe or corrosion-related concerns in Indiana 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 Indiana?: Munimetric tracks signals such as compliance escalation, monitoring and reporting failures, data staleness, and financial stress indicators across Indiana systems. The signal frequency table above summarizes which signals are most prevalent statewide.
Does Munimetric track boil water advisories in Indiana?: 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.

Keep monitoring this state

Research access covers saved monitoring, alerts, recurring briefs, and team review.

Get the Water Stress Brief Request research access

Water Infrastructure in Indiana

Munimetric tracks infrastructure stress across 211 community drinking-water systems in Indiana. 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 Indiana 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 Indiana?: Munimetric assigns a state-level average MISI score based on the individual scores of all covered community water systems in Indiana. 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 Indiana face the most infrastructure stress?: The state page ranks the highest-stress systems in Indiana 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 Indiana compare to other states for drinking water infrastructure risk?: Indiana 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 Indiana 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 Indiana 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 Indiana?: Munimetric tracks signals such as compliance escalation, monitoring and reporting failures, population decline, income erosion, data staleness, and parent-government fiscal stress across Indiana water systems.
Does Munimetric track boil water advisories in Indiana?: 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.