Sistemas de agua de Illinois que atienden a las poblaciones más desfavorecidas — 2026

Empresas de agua comunitarias de Illinois que atienden a poblaciones con el porcentaje combinado más alto de residentes no blancos y hogares por debajo del 200% del nivel federal de pobreza (Censo ACS 2019-2023, agregado a través de los límites del área de servicio del sistema de agua comunitario v3 de la EPA).

50 Sistemas
clasificados
22,183 PWSID
con datos demográficos
2019-23 Versión del
Censo ACS
EPA v3 Límites del área de servicio
de CWS (marzo de 2026)
Cómo leer esta lista Sistemas que atienden al mayor porcentaje combinado de residentes no blancos y hogares por debajo del 200 % del nivel federal de pobreza. Se usan percentiles dentro de cada clase de tamaño para neutralizar el sesgo del tamaño del sistema. Se aplica un tope de cinco sistemas por estado para producir una lista representativa a nivel nacional. Véase la página de metodología para conocer los detalles del cálculo.

These 50 Illinois water utilities serve populations with the highest combined percent of non-white residents and households below 200% of the Federal Poverty Level. Within-size-class percentile rankings neutralize the confound of system size; no geographic cap is applied at the state level because all utilities are within a single state.

RankWater SystemStatePop servedEquity score% PoC served% Below 200% FPLUnresolved violations
1 Riverdale Illinois 4,934 99.4 98% 59%
2 Harvey Illinois 17,401 96.4 95% 47%
3 Robbins Illinois 3,946 94.7 86% 47%
4 Calumet City Illinois 18,296 94.5 92% 45% 1
5 North Chicago Illinois 24,913 93.5 76% 47%
6 Markham Illinois 11,441 93 88% 43%
7 Dolton Illinois 16,216 91.7 95% 41%
8 Blue Island Illinois 10,034 91.4 83% 42%
9 Chicago Heights Illinois 27,018 91.4 80% 43%
10 Cicero Illinois 67,879 90 92% 40%
11 Maywood Illinois 16,729 87.4 94% 37% 1
12 Melrose Park Illinois 18,505 86 83% 37%
13 Rantoul Illinois 8,222 85.8 52% 44%
14 Park Forest Illinois 20,368 84.9 81% 37%
15 Waukegan Illinois 91,335 83 80% 35%
16 Dekalb Illinois 36,787 81.6 41% 45%
17 Carbondale Illinois 19,751 81.2 36% 51% 1
18 Beardstown Illinois 4,981 80.2 45% 41%
19 Glenwood Illinois 6,175 79.4 78% 33%
20 South Holland Illinois 23,606 78.2 90% 31%
21 Hazel Crest Illinois 12,343 77.6 86% 31%
22 Lansing Illinois 19,102 77.5 75% 32%
23 Aqua Illinois-University Park Illinois 6,660 77.5 80% 31%
24 Bellwood Illinois 18,619 77.4 96% 30%
25 Broadview Illinois 3,872 77.4 81% 31%
26 Zion Illinois 19,518 76.7 70% 32%
27 Chicago Illinois 2,499,694 75.2 69% 35%
28 Berwyn Illinois 31,486 75 74% 30%
29 Rock Island Illinois 33,349 73.9 36% 40%
30 Leyden Twsp Water District Illinois 9,055 73.8 72% 30%
31 Aqua Illinois-Vermilion County Illinois 30,764 73.8 33% 42%
32 Country Club Hills Illinois 17,589 73.5 86% 28%
33 Posen Illinois 5,619 73.4 86% 28%
34 Steger Illinois 7,588 73.3 49% 34%
35 East Moline Illinois 18,472 71 44% 34%
36 Richton Park Illinois 11,839 70.8 87% 26% 1
37 Franklin Park Illinois 13,504 70 62% 29%
38 Harvard Illinois 4,896 69.4 43% 33%
39 Bensenville Illinois 16,742 68.6 57% 29%
40 Caseyville Illinois 5,012 68.5 40% 34%
41 Moline Illinois 41,580 67.2 36% 35%
42 Justice-Willow Springs Water Commission Illinois 10,539 65.9 39% 32%
43 Rockford Illinois 160,283 65.6 45% 42%
44 Galesburg Illinois 28,463 65.1 23% 41%
45 Decatur Illinois 67,593 65 31% 36%
46 Il American-Granite City Illinois 35,279 64.5 29% 37%
47 Glendale Heights Illinois 28,813 64 62% 24%
48 Hanover Park Illinois 37,937 63.8 62% 24%
49 Aqua Illinois-Kankakee Illinois 66,527 63.6 34% 33%
50 Chicago Ridge Illinois 9,607 63.4 41% 30%

How to read this ranking

Each row links to a full utility profile with violation history, lead testing results, and service-area ZIPs. The demographic context columns are from independent data sources (ACS, not EJScreen) and are provided for readers who want to examine equity patterns alongside the operational data.

See the full methodology for calculation details, data vintages, and known limitations.

Frequently asked questions

What does the "equity score" mean?

A 0-100 composite that combines two within-size-class percentile ranks: (1) percent of population served that is non-white (Census ACS B03002), and (2) percent below 200 percent of the Federal Poverty Level (Census ACS C17002). Within-size-class comparison (small, medium, large) is used because small rural systems and large urban systems have structurally different demographic profiles; mixing them in a single ranking produces a methodologically weak list dominated by size rather than disparity.

Why is the list capped at 5 systems per state?

Without a cap, the list concentrates in states with large numbers of historically disadvantaged small-to-medium systems (Texas, California). A geographic diversity cap produces a more nationally-representative snapshot. Per-state rankings, if available, show the full within-state comparison without a cap.

Does this claim discrimination?

No. It reports a demographic fact: these water utilities serve populations that are more non-white and lower-income than the national median, after controlling for system size. Causation — why that pattern exists — is a separate research question requiring different data and methods.

ZipCheckup es una herramienta independiente de datos públicos. Somos un servicio de referencia, no un proveedor de pruebas de agua, remediación ni servicios públicos. Las clasificaciones reflejan datos federales de acceso público y se ofrecen con fines informativos. Para problemas con su sistema de agua específico, el proveedor local de agua o el programa estatal de agua potable son los puntos de contacto adecuados.

Reciba alertas de seguridad para Illinois

Actualizaciones gratuitas cuando la EPA publique nuevos datos para esta zona. Sin spam.

Puede cancelar la suscripción en cualquier momento. Política de privacidad.

Compartir esta página

X Facebook
Ver opciones de filtros de agua Herramienta gratuita — sin llamada telefónica requerida.