Retrospective Evaluation of Capital Improvement Program Planning Effectiveness

Key Takeaways US water utilities spend billions annually on capital improvement programs (CIP). Few utilities examine whether their prioritization method improves long‐term system reliability or aligns with real‐world failure outcomes. In a study of City of Sugar Land, Texas, that examined the 2018–2025 era, five planning methods yielded meaningfully different results when tested against 321 unique main breaks. These methods included Weibull failure‐probability‐based, conditional‐survival‐based, and traditional risk‐scoring models; and two machine learning models. The choice of planning method has measurable consequences for system reliability and ratepayer value.