The PREDICT Act requires the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention to award grants, contracts, or cooperative agreements to eligible state, tribal, and local health departments (or partnerships) to build or improve wastewater-based infectious disease surveillance capacity for public health emergency preparedness and response. Applicants must describe sampling-site selection, response plans aligned with existing public health plans, and a strategy to sustain surveillance after the award period.
The Secretary is instructed to issue guidance within 180 days that recommends assays for multiplex testing, sets standards for testing methods and metrics, and establishes reporting requirements for a publicly accessible wastewater database and dashboard.
Why this matters: the bill operationalizes federal funding and technical direction for wastewater monitoring as a routine surveillance tool. It ties money to interoperability and public data access, which will shape how local jurisdictions prioritize sampling, partner with labs and utilities, and plan for sustaining systems once federal support ends.
The legislation also directs continued federal research on assay performance and population-level inference, while asking agencies to avoid duplicating existing work.
At a Glance
What It Does
Directs CDC to fund eligible state, tribal, and local health departments (or partnerships) to create or expand wastewater surveillance programs for infectious disease detection, and to produce guidance within 180 days on assays, testing standards, and reporting. It requires applicants to include site-selection criteria, response plans, and sustainability strategies, and authorizes public publication of recipient data via a CDC database and dashboard.
Who It Affects
State, Tribal, and local health departments (and their public–private partners), public health and commercial laboratories, wastewater utilities and operators, academic research partners, and congregate institutions or rural sites where wastewater is not connected to a municipal system.
Why It Matters
The bill channels federal funding and technical standards into wastewater surveillance, encouraging comparable methods and public data sharing across jurisdictions—shifting wastewater monitoring from ad hoc projects toward a standardized public‑health surveillance component that informs emergency response and disease burden estimation.
More articles like this one.
A weekly email with all the latest developments on this topic.
What This Bill Actually Does
The bill creates a CDC‑administered grant, contract, and cooperative agreement program limited to state, tribal, and local health departments or partnerships that include such departments. Recipients must submit applications describing planned surveillance activities, how they will pick sampling sites, how findings will feed into response actions consistent with existing emergency response plans, and how the jurisdiction will sustain the activity when federal support ends.
The purpose is explicitly tied to public health emergency preparedness and response, not purely academic research.
Funding may be used to build or enhance laboratory and field capacity, to sample and test wastewater at institutions or locations—especially in rural areas or places not served by centralized sewage treatment—and to implement projects that use evidence‑based or promising approaches. The statute encourages recipients to form public–private partnerships to leverage local laboratory, utility, and academic capabilities, and requires that the CDC provide technical assistance to grantees to support planning and implementation.The Secretary must issue draft guidance within 180 days recommending assay strategies (including multiplex approaches) and establishing standards for testing methods, metrics, and reporting formats.
The bill directs reporting of sample data to the CDC for publication in a public wastewater surveillance database and dashboard and allows the Secretary to prioritize applicants that commit to public data access and that assess community surveillance needs. Finally, the law authorizes unspecified appropriations for fiscal years 2026–2030 and separately directs continued HHS research on improving collection, assay sensitivity/specificity, and methods for estimating population‑level signals while avoiding unnecessary duplication across agencies.
The Five Things You Need to Know
Eligibility is limited to state, Tribal, or local health departments or partnerships that include such a department; private organizations alone are not eligible recipients.
Applications must include site‑selection factors, a response plan tied to section 319C–1 emergency plans, and a sustainability plan describing continuation after the award period.
The Secretary must issue draft guidance within 180 days recommending assays (including for multiplex testing) and set standards for testing methods, metrics, and reporting to a public CDC database and dashboard.
The Secretary may prioritize awards to applicants that commit to public access of wastewater data in comparable formats and submit a community needs assessment describing disease burden and other surveillance availability.
The bill authorizes 'such sums as may be necessary' for fiscal years 2026 through 2030 and separately directs continued federal research on assay performance and population‑level inference, with instruction to avoid duplicating existing agency efforts.
Section-by-Section Breakdown
Every bill we cover gets an analysis of its key sections.
Short title
Names the statute the 'Public health Response and Emergency Detection through Integrated wastewater Community Testing Act' (PREDICT Act). This is a procedural provision with no operational effect beyond identifying the legislation.
Establishes CDC‑administered wastewater surveillance awards
Directs the CDC Director to award grants, contracts, or cooperative agreements to eligible entities to establish, maintain, or improve wastewater surveillance activities focused on infectious disease detection for preparedness and response. Practically, this creates a federal financing mechanism under the Public Health Service Act that can be used to scale local sampling networks, laboratory testing, and related surveillance infrastructure.
Who can apply and what applications must show
Defines eligible recipients as state, tribal, or local health departments or partnerships that include such a department. The application must describe proposed activities, factors for choosing sampling sites, a response plan consistent with section 319C–1 emergency plans, and a sustainability plan. For compliance officers, the key operational obligations are the required content of applications and the explicit link between findings and existing public health response frameworks.
Award priorities and approved uses of funds
Authorizes the Secretary to prioritize applicants that promise public data access and demonstrate community need. Permitted uses include establishing or improving sampling and lab capacity, targeted surveillance at facilities or rural locations not served by municipal utilities, and projects using evidence‑based or promising practices. This frames both who will be competitive for funding and what grant budgets can legitimately cover.
Partnership requirements, federal technical support, and standards
Requires recipients to seek partnerships with public and private entities to leverage local capabilities, obliges the CDC to provide technical assistance, and mandates draft guidance within 180 days. Guidance must recommend assays (including multiplex uses), set standards for testing methods and metrics, and establish reporting requirements for a publicly available database and dashboard. These provisions convert programmatic intent into enforceable deliverables and create a timeline for federal standard‑setting.
Funding authorization and continued research with non‑duplication
Authorizes 'such sums as may be necessary' for FY2026–2030 for the grant program and separately tasks HHS with continuing or supporting wastewater surveillance research to improve collection, assay performance, and population estimates while avoiding needless duplication across HHS entities. The non‑duplication language places an administrative obligation on HHS to coordinate internal programs and clarify where new research fits relative to existing CDC work.
This bill is one of many.
Codify tracks hundreds of bills on Healthcare across all five countries.
Explore Healthcare in Codify Search →Who Benefits and Who Bears the Cost
Every bill creates winners and losers. Here's who stands to gain and who bears the cost.
Who Benefits
- State, Tribal, and local health departments — receive federal funding and CDC technical assistance to build or scale wastewater surveillance programs, and gain standardized reporting pathways to inform public health response.
- Public health and academic laboratories — obtain new testing contracts and collaborative opportunities to validate assays, expand capacity for multiplex testing, and participate in population‑level inference research.
- Rural communities and congregate settings not served by municipal sewage systems — the statute explicitly authorizes targeted surveillance in these areas, creating access to monitoring where municipal programs do not reach.
- Research community — additional federal research support is directed toward improving assay sensitivity/specificity and methods to translate wastewater signals into population estimates.
- General public and local decision‑makers — stand to gain earlier detection of outbreaks and a publicly available dataset and dashboard to inform interventions and community awareness.
Who Bears the Cost
- State, Tribal, and local health departments — must prepare detailed applications, implement sustainability plans, and may need to absorb ongoing operational costs after federal awards expire.
- Wastewater utilities and small onsite system operators — may face operational burdens allowing access for sampling, coordinating logistics, and sharing data with public health partners without dedicated compensation.
- CDC/HHS — must allocate staff and resources to administer awards, provide technical assistance, issue guidance within a short timeframe, run the public dashboard, and coordinate intra‑departmental research efforts.
- Public and commercial laboratories — will need to scale capabilities to meet standardized assay and reporting requirements, which may require capital investment and quality‑assurance upgrades.
- Communities and institutions under surveillance — while not financially liable under the bill, they face potential reputational and operational impacts from public reporting of localized wastewater signals, and may need to participate in response activities.
Key Issues
The Core Tension
The central tension is between creating a standardized, publicly accessible national wastewater surveillance network that enables early detection and cross‑jurisdictional comparison, and preserving local control, privacy protections, and sustainable funding; standardization and transparency increase public‑health utility but also magnify implementation, legal, and equity challenges that the bill leaves largely unresolved.
The bill mandates a national push for comparable wastewater surveillance but leaves key implementation choices unspecified. It requires public reporting and assay standards, yet it does not define technical thresholds for limits of detection, normalization metrics (e.g., flow, fecal markers), or metadata requirements that affect comparability.
Those technical definitions will determine whether data from different recipients are truly interoperable or only superficially comparable. The 180‑day timeline for draft guidance creates pressure to resolve complex lab and sampling questions quickly, potentially privileging interim approaches that later require revision.
Privacy and legal issues are not addressed in the statute. The requirement to publish recipient data on a public dashboard raises unanswered questions about geographic granularity, metadata disclosure, and protections against re‑identification of small populations or specific facilities.
The bill encourages partnerships and targeted sampling of non‑municipal sites, which can be epidemiologically valuable but heightens the risk that wastewater signals could be tied to discrete institutions or small communities without explicit safeguards. Finally, the authorization of 'such sums as may be necessary' provides flexibility but leaves recipients uncertain about long‑term funding, complicating the sustainability commitments applicants must make and risking service gaps once federal support ends.
Try it yourself.
Ask a question in plain English, or pick a topic below. Results in seconds.