Is a priority-list listing ever more than a name on a spreadsheet? Measured, not asserted.
Every rate on this page is directional right now. Our snapshot history is still short — as little as one or two cycles for some lists — so these are early reads, not stable long-run rates. They will sharpen automatically as more years of data accumulate; we are not going to round a thin sample into a clean-looking percentage.
We tracked every project across every snapshot we have captured and measured how many actually reached the fundable range or funding list — the closest thing to imminent procurement these documents let us see. We never assert a project was funded, awarded, went to bid, or began construction. Leaving a list is reported as ambiguous — funded, withdrawn, or deferred, the documents do not say which — never as a positive outcome.
Clean Water SRF
Progression
Within 1 cycle24% (CI 20–29%, n=314) (directional)
Cohorts SFY2025–2025, first listed on the PPL. Entered the fundable range — the closest signal to imminent procurement.
Persistence & attrition
After 1 cyclen=314
70% remained listed without yet reaching that point (directional); 5% were no longer listed — funded, withdrawn, or deferred, not distinguished (directional).
Velocity
Among 85 projects that entered the fundable range, the typical time from first listing was 10.3 months (interquartile range 10.3–10.3 months) (directional).
Drinking Water SRF
Progression
Within 1 cycle21% (CI 19–24%, n=981) (directional)
Cohorts SFY2025–2025, first listed on the PPL. Entered the fundable range — the closest signal to imminent procurement.
Persistence & attrition
After 1 cyclen=981
69% remained listed without yet reaching that point (directional); 10% were no longer listed — funded, withdrawn, or deferred, not distinguished (directional).
Velocity
Among 393 projects that entered the fundable range, the typical time from first listing was 10.3 months (interquartile range 0.0–10.3 months) (directional).