Santa Clara County public water systems

Failing or At-Risk

12systems

1,362people served (0% of total)

Not At-Risk or Not Assessed

61systems

2,048,950people served (100% of total)

includes Not Assessed systems, which are outside the SAFER assessment

Status classification

Share of listed systems, followed by the count, reported population, and funding in each status.

Failing10%

Not At-Risk69%

Not Assessed9%

Failing

At-Risk

Potentially At-Risk

Not At-Risk

Not Assessed

Systems

8

4

5

54

7

Population

1,054

308

1,361

504,460

1,544,490

Funding since 2017

$2M

$0

$1M

$0

Key figures

78

public water systems

2,051,673

reported population

74%

serve 500 people or fewer

$3M

reported funding since 2017

System locations

Points show reported system locations. They do not represent service-area boundaries.

Each point represents one system record.

Summary

Santa Clara County has 78 public water systems in the SAFER dataset. Of these, 12 (15%) are classified as Failing or At-Risk.

Those systems report serving 1,362 people. The county profile is also shaped by small systems: 58 systems serve 500 people or fewer.

7 systems are Not Assessed. These fall outside the SAFER risk assessment, so they carry no classification either way.

Reported funding since 2017 totals $3M across 2 systems. Technical assistance funding totals $406K.

System counts and reported population

Not Assessed systems make up 9% of listed systems and 75% of reported population. A few large systems account for most of that population, so a small number of systems can shift the population picture entirely. Counts and population are worth reading together.

Risk profile

Risk in Santa Clara County is distributed across four dimensions. Accessibility contributes the largest share of the combined weighted risk score at 49%. Across all individual indicators, No intertie appears most often, affecting 42 of 71 assessed systems.

Water Quality

of combined weighted risk

State 33% · ▼ 7 pts

Most common flagWater quality trends toward MCL

Accessibility

of combined weighted risk

State 36% · ▲ 14 pts

Most common flagNo intertie

Affordability

of combined weighted risk

State 17% · ▼ 7 pts

Most common flagExtreme water bill

TMF Capacity

of combined weighted risk

State 14% · ▲ 1 pts

Most common flagTotal net annual income

Water Quality

Water Quality accounts for 25% of the county’s combined weighted risk score. Water quality trends toward MCL appears in 14 of 71 assessed systems. Past presence on Failing list is next, appearing in 13 of 71 assessed systems.

Each indicator was assessed for 71 systems.

Accessibility

Accessibility accounts for 49% of the county’s combined weighted risk score. No intertie appears in 42 of 71 assessed systems. Limited water sources is next, appearing in 36 of 71 assessed systems.

Indicator denominators range from 56 to 71 assessed systems.

Affordability

Affordability accounts for 10% of the county’s combined weighted risk score. Extreme water bill appears in 20 of 61 assessed systems. Household socioeconomic burden is next, appearing in 6 of 71 assessed systems.

Indicator denominators range from 61 to 71 assessed systems.

TMF Capacity

TMF Capacity accounts for 15% of the county’s combined weighted risk score. Total net annual income appears in 22 of 65 assessed systems. Operating ratio is next, appearing in 15 of 65 assessed systems.

Indicator denominators range from 60 to 71 assessed systems.

Patterns and context

The countywide totals hide important differences among systems. The panels below show how SAFER status varies by system size and service-area economic status, what conditions appear among Failing systems, and how reported funding is distributed across the 78 systems in Santa Clara County.

Status by system size

SAFER status within each population group

Among systems serving 500 people or fewer, 12 of 58 are Failing or At-Risk. This size group has the county’s highest concentration of high-concern classifications.

Economic context

Orange shows Failing or At-Risk systems within each service-area group

DAC and SDAC service areas contain 2 of 78 listed systems. Within those two groups, 1 systems are Failing or At-Risk.

Conditions among Failing systems

A system can appear under more than one condition

Frequently listed primary analytes

Nitrate4
Total Haloacetic Acids (Haa5)1
Tthm1

Among 8 Failing systems, 5 report primary MCL violation. The most frequently listed primary analytes are Nitrate, Total Haloacetic Acids (Haa5), and Tthm.

Reported funding

Totals since 2017 and number of systems reporting funding

Funding since 2017 totals $3M across 2 systems. Failing systems account for 63% of that total. Reported technical assistance funding adds $406K.

Key takeaways

15%

of systems are Failing or At-Risk

That represents 12 systems reporting service to 1,362 people. That is below the statewide average of 33%.

49%

of weighted risk comes from Accessibility

The most widespread individual flag is no intertie, found in 42 of 71 assessed systems. Statewide, Accessibility accounts for 36% of weighted risk.

74%

of systems serve 500 people or fewer

Small systems account for 58 of the county’s 78 listed systems. That is above the statewide average of 63%.