Date: 7 April 2026 10:00-11:30 BST

Location: Online

Co-Chairs: Lucy Chambers (IB1); Dan Slidel (Southern Water)

Secretariat: Icebreaker One 

Meeting Aims

1. Create clarity on the framework, infrastructure and processes needed for sharing data.
2. Review use case process and confirm whether there is room for improvement.

Summary:

• It was noted that:
  • NESO is conducting similar work on templated Data Sharing Agreements, for interoperability purposes, Stream should endeavour to collaborate at some point.
  • The Working Group has developed early outputs to support data sharing, including a decision tree and an initial view of required templates and modules.
  • The work has been informed by a legal and risk‑based perspective, recognising varying sensitivity and risk across data sharing scenarios.
  • A revised use case process map was presented, intended to provide clearer expectations, support varied use case entry points, and remain adaptable as understanding matures.
• It was discussed that:
  • Widening participation in the Data Sharing Working Group is essential to diversify inputs.
  • A one‑size‑fits-all approach to data sharing agreements is not appropriate, and that a modular, templated approach may better accommodate different use cases.
  • Decision‑making tools should be usable by non‑legal stakeholders, while enabling appropriate escalation to legal, governance and compliance functions.
  • Reducing friction in data sharing requires attention beyond legal agreements, including identity management, audit and enforcement, data quality, infrastructure security, and organisational buy‑in.
  • Data ownership should sit with business leads, supported by legal oversight rather than led by legal teams alone.
  • There is a need to clarify what should be handled centrally versus individually by member organisations.
  • There’s a need for clearer decision rights and escalation, more effective prioritisation, and explicit consideration of funding, resourcing and capacity constraints within an agile use case process.
  • Members need better visibility of the pipeline and roadmap to understand what is coming, what is committed, and when.
  • The process should include a post‑delivery review to assess whether use cases delivered value and what was learned.

Next meeting: Tuesday 19 May 2026 10:00-11:30 BST

Formal records, including attendees, are maintained by the secretariat. 

These are confidential to the Advisory Group Members.

Date: 2 April 2026 10:00-11:30 BST

Location: Online

Co-Chairs: Charlotte Hillenbrand (IB1), Katy Woodward (United Utilities) and Josh Evans (Pennon Group) 

Secretariat: Icebreaker One 

Meeting Aims

1. Reviewing the use case template plus endorsement 
2. Review and discuss the ecosystem map 
3. Update members on use case status

Summary

• It was agreed that:
  • The WEC use case needed formal approval from members to take to the Steering Group.
• It was noted that:
  • All outcomes are now published on the Stream website. 
  • The stakeholder map is intended to be a live tool, reviewed and refined over time rather than fixed. 
  • Welsh, Scottish (and potentially Northern Ireland) regulators were identified as missing and should be added to the stakeholder map. 
  • Both Stream team capacity and member capacity were recognised as constraints when sequencing activity (particularly use cases). 
  • It is important that we measure the impact of what we’re doing, looking at outcomes and quantitative targets for the activity level. 
  • Each stakeholder will be assigned to a desired outcome: high levels of advocacy, integration of Stream into their ways of working (such as with DEFRA), facilitate access to sources of funding, and recognise and adopt Stream as the de facto data sharing infrastructure.
  • Independent innovators should be considered in the wider ecosystem map.
• It was discussed that:
  • The priorities of the group might be skewed towards the government/regulatory group, rather than the representative of the wider water industry but this may be influenced by the Water Sector reform over the next two years. 
  • Stream could look to the EU for research and data sharing opportunities.
  • Stream’s role may increasingly be one of coordination, rather than delivery alone.

Next meeting: Thursday 14 May 2026 10:00-11:30 BST

Formal records, including attendees, are maintained by the secretariat. 

These are confidential to the Advisory Group Members.

Date: Tuesday 10 March 2026 10:00-12:00 GMT

Location: online

Co-Chairs: Melissa Tallack (NWL); Gavin Starks (IB1)

Secretariat: IB1

Meeting Aims 

1. Sign off Q2 outcomes and priority use case
2. Align on bids process criteria for incoming bids

Summary:

• It was agreed that:
  • Q2 strategic business priorities include: (endorsed by members after this meeting)
    • defining Stream’s 12‑month ambition and roadmap
    • continuing development of the Change Champion network
    • establishing a clearer process for supporting funding bids
    • progressing the Open Data maturity assessment plan.
  • The first prioritised Water Efficiency use case for this year will be Water Situation Reports.
• It was noted that:
  • Co-ordination will be required with the Environment Agency for the water situation report (as the report is owned by the EA)
  • Growing demand for Stream support on shared data use cases highlights the need for a clearer triage and prioritisation approach.
  • Members and observers felt there were certain items that should be taken into consideration, such as scope clarification (open vs shared data), the importance of FOI/EIR alignment, and maintaining opt‑in/opt‑out flexibility.
  • Energy sector learnings highlight the importance of common pattern libraries and Trust Frameworks to minimise cost and legal complexity.
  • Cross‑sector use cases may present future opportunities and should be considered in long‑term design thinking.
• It was discussed that:
  • The bids process requires refinement, including criteria such as value, repeatability, resource impact, technology implications, and avoiding parallel infrastructures.
  • A scoring matrix for shared data use cases could include economic, social and environmental value, friction reduction, legal complexity, and organisational readiness.
  • A Trust Framework model separating identity assurance from Scheme rules could lower future cost and improve cross‑sector interoperability.
  • Sector legal engagement will be challenging but early use case examples could build confidence and reduce friction.
  • Further knowledge‑sharing and workshops are needed to deepen understanding of Trust Frameworks and scheme governance.

Next meeting: Tuesday 21 April 2026 10:00-12:00 BST

Formal records, including attendees, are maintained by the secretariat. 

These are confidential to the Steering Group Members.

Date: 24 February 2026 10:00-11:30 GMT

Location: Online

Co-Chairs: Lucy Chambers (IB1); Darren Anderson (NWL)

Secretariat: Icebreaker One 

Meeting Aims

1. Endorse the Q2 outcomes
2. Endorsement for CReDO data standardisation
3. Accelerating the decision towards sharing agreement templates

Summary:

• It was agreed that:
  • There were no significant concerns with the overall approach; however, the primary delivery risk identified was engagement with internal legal teams.
  • There’s value in the development of reusable artefacts and templates to avoid repeated drafting and to help colleagues engage legal teams more effectively.
• It was noted that:
  • A decision was made to continue with Esri on a reduced basis, with the cost totalling £27,000, down from £45,000 in year 1 and 2 of the project.
  • Q2 outcomes were presented for endorsement, including:
    • progressing data sharing agreements (created and signed) and sharing progress on shared data; 
    • technology / data sharing infrastructure best practice to CaSTco extension funding project
  • The next CReDO workshops are on hold, pending a further funding decision.
  • A case study on the Perseus data sharing scheme was presented as an example of how multilateral data-sharing arrangements and governance structures have been implemented elsewhere.
  • The working group outlined its approach to data-sharing agreements, including developing a decision framework and questionnaire to guide organisations on appropriate sharing mechanisms, categorising data by risk level, and creating a modular template agreement that could be adapted by participating organisations.
• It was discussed that:
  • There are risks associated with combining datasets and the need for legal and security considerations to be embedded within the framework.
  • It might be worth convening legal stakeholders together, potentially at the Innovation Festival, to help develop draft agreements and accelerate buy-in across water companies.

Next meeting: Tuesday 7 April 2026 10:00-11:30 BST

Formal records, including attendees, are maintained by the secretariat. 

These are confidential to the Advisory Group Members.

Date: 19 February 2026 10:00-11:30 GMT

Location: Online

Co-Chairs: Charlotte Hillenbrand (IB1), Alex Hughes (Portsmouth Water), Andy Johnston (Scottish Water) 

Secretariat: Icebreaker One 

Meeting Aims

1. Review the feasibility of the Q2 outcomes 
2. Prioritise Q2 use cases

Summary

• It was agreed that:
  • Breakout group outputs indicate that initial focus is expected to fall on Water Situation Reports and Smart Metering use cases.
  • Recruitment for the next Change Champion cohort will begin in Q2, adopting the new six month model.
• It was noted that:
  • Alignment on Stream’s long‑term ambition to 2030 will require a clearer narrative and a shared understanding of data‑maturity expectations.
  • There is a need for earlier visibility of future expectations, including DEFRA’s emerging monitoring direction, and Stream could provide a coordinated route for this.
  • Q2 planning includes further development of CReDO, water‑efficiency workshops, and refreshed ecosystem communications
    • Use case and dataset activities will require higher member engagement than ecosystem‑level work.
• It was discussed that:
  • Water Situation Reports present a clear opportunity to move from PDF‑based reporting to consistent, reusable datasets aligned with EA‑sourced information.
  • Smart Metering requires alignment on core data items and consideration of processing‑scale challenges, reflecting varied rollout maturity across companies.
  • DWMP, WRMP and WINEP remain important but carry higher complexity due to predefined reporting formats and the need to reconcile published plans with underlying datasets.
  • Members emphasised ensuring new datasets are interoperable and sensitive to internal organisational capacity and timelines.

Next meeting: Thursday 2 April 2026 10:00-11:30 GMT

Formal records, including attendees, are maintained by the secretariat. 

These are confidential to the Advisory Group Members.

Co-chaired by Icebreaker One and NWL, the group’s primary function is to help provide leadership and market signalling. Oversight of, and endorsement from, this group will establish a lasting set of robust governance measures to ensure data is shared safely and with the correct regulations.

Date: 27 January 2026 10:00-12:00 GMT

Location: online

Co-Chairs: Melissa Tallack (NWL); Gavin Starks (IB1)

Meeting Aims: 

• Members provide direction to Stream on priorities emerging from company 1-1s
• Clear ambition and alignment on the vision for Stream

Summary:

Minutes:

• It was noted that:
  • Operational updates for 2026 are progressing, including intranet launch and minor operating model refinements
  • Ofwat completed meetings with all water companies, noting that strong progress has been enabled by Stream and identifying sector‑wide themes including internal data portals, maturity assessment use, value measurement, and transparency of roadmaps.
  • Upcoming regulatory changes from DEFRA’s white paper and wider government initiatives (Smart Data Council, National Data Library, NESO/RECO developments) will have material impact on future data flows and interoperability requirements.
  • There was broad support for the ODI maturity model as a shared baseline. Members felt it provides practical benchmarking, comparability and a lighter process than previous audits.

• It was agreed that:
  • Stream will prioritise work on the four sector themes presented by Ofwat (in order of priority):
    • Standardised maturity assessment (e.g. using the ODI Open Data Maturity Assessment for Open Data).
    • Alignment on company data portals and approaches to internal/external data publishing.
    • Value measurement framework for open/shared data.
    • Greater transparency of company roadmaps.
  • Members will reflect on the long‑term direction of Stream as a Data Institution, to inform future governance and strategic decisions.

• It was discussed that:
  • The transition from Stream today to a Data Institution requires a clearer narrative for members, ensuring a clear understanding of the different layers of governance, operational maturity, and interoperability with the wider ecosystem.
  • Stream must be capable of connecting with wider UK data sharing initiatives, both within the water sector and cross-sector.
  • Its socio‑technical approach was seen as a strength versus more tech‑heavy models elsewhere.
  • Strong consensus that use cases should continue driving design decisions.
    • Use cases like continuous water quality monitoring will test how far Stream should move beyond raw data to provide analytics/visualisation and a guided interpretation.
  • There is a need for early visibility of future expectations (e.g., open monitoring) to avoid inefficiencies seen in recent reporting requirements. Stream could act as a coordinated route into regulators.

Date: 13 January 2026 10:00-11:30 GMT

Location: online

Co-Chairs: Lucy Chambers (IB1); Darren Anderson (NWL)

Secretariat: IB1

Meeting Aims

1. Refresher on the Data Institution to surface any key questions that members have
2. Aligning on new steps/actions for the Data Institution (potentially questions to take away for the next session)
3. Aligning on governance/onboarding best practice for 2026

• It was noted that:
  • The meeting focused on advancing Stream’s transition toward becoming a data institution, a key strategic goal for 2026. 
  • Funding from the Water Breakthrough Challenge will end by 2028, requiring Stream to develop a sustainable business model beyond member subscriptions, otherwise membership fees are likely to triple. 
  • A centralised hub for governance documents will be developed to improve integration and transparency. 
• It was agreed that:
  • Next steps include refining the business and operating model, creating clear messaging and an FAQ for executive buy-in, addressing financial sustainability, and engaging data champions within member organisations. 
• It was discussed that:
  • Becoming a recognised data institution by 2028 requires clarity on recognition criteria and positioning Stream as the industry go-to for water data. 
  • There are some key concerns, which include: 
    • Balancing commercialisation with maintaining open data principles. 
    • Aligning Stream’s governance with existing company processes and managing liability shifts. 
    • Our current technical capability for items such as automated data pipelines and broader data formats (e.g., audio/video) was identified as a potential limitation. 
  • There are some opportunities, which include: 
    • Leveraging Stream’s role to influence governance standards and become proactive rather than reactive. 
    • Positioning Stream as the trusted industry hub/advisory body during regulatory changes. 
  • Some risks were identified: 
    • Loss of regulatory pressure could reduce industry cooperation. 
    • There are long timelines to realise true value (e.g., Transport for London example took 10 years). 

Date: 8 January 2026 10:00-11:30 GMT

Location: Online

Co-Chairs: Charlotte Hillenbrand (IB1), Alex Hughes (Portsmouth Water), Andy Johnston (Scottish Water) 

Secretariat: Icebreaker One 

Meeting Aims 

• Refresh the prioritisation process to ensure focus and alignment for 2026 
• Refine the backlog ahead of prioritisation process for one big use case on 2026’s theme of water effectiveness using water company insights 
• What do you want to see from a water company perspective moving forward? 

Summary

• It was noted that:
  • All outcomes were achieved in Q4 2025. 
  • The overarching theme for 2026 is water efficiency, covering leakage, per capita consumption, metering, water quality, and resilience. 
  • Engagement from members is critical to success; lack of participation is a key risk. 
  • Several changes for 2026 include introducing a strategic business pillar and renaming ‘operations’ to ‘governance’. 
  • Open Data Day will run in March as part of the global Open Knowledge Foundation event, focused on water efficiency, with hackathons hosted by member organisations, who are able to define their own challenge within the remit of water efficiency. 
• It was agreed that:
  • Five priority use cases will move forward for refinement 
  • Some use cases (e.g., APR data and common performance commitments) are valuable but deferred due to timing and regulatory uncertainty. 
• It was discussed that:
  • Additional use cases need further exploration before prioritisation 
  • Risks include dependency on third-party data and regulatory changes. 
  • CReDO funding update: the initial bid was unsuccessful but a new bid will be submitted for Catalyst funding. 
  • Engagement campaigns and reusable tools, such as the bitesize messaging, will be developed to strengthen ecosystem participation. 

Co-chaired by Icebreaker One and NWL, the group’s primary function is to help provide leadership and market signalling. Oversight of, and endorsement from, this group will establish a lasting set of robust governance measures to ensure data is shared safely and with the correct regulations.

Date: 1 December 2025 10:00-12:00 BST

Location: online

Co-Chairs: Melissa Tallack (NWL); Gea Winterson-Mikic on behalf of Gavin Starks (IB1)

Secretariat: IB1

Meeting Aims 

1. Endorsing the 2026 achievement states and outcomes for Q1 2026
2. Endorsing the Tech WG recommendations
3. Engaging members in the shift from project to business through the Data Institution
4. To gather a baseline to understand where companies’ engagement with Stream is right now and how we can best support companies moving forward. What are the next steps?
5. Action from members on Water Efficiency Lab Fund and Section 82 work

Summary:

Minutes:

• It was agreed that:
  • The tech working group’s recommendations will proceed, subject to quorum confirmation, with emphasis on publisher support, metadata enhancements, and Esri contract engagement.
  • Q1 priorities will include roadmap development for the data institution and delivery of secure data sharing capabilities.

• It was noted that:
  • Stream is working towards a ‘data institution’ status, supported by ODI workshops scheduled for early 2026.
  • Water Efficiency will be the 2026 theme, following the delivery of the 2025 “Clean up UK Rivers and Seas” theme.
  • Usability testing showed high satisfaction for external users (score: 77.5) regarding the Stream platform, but only average ease of use for publishers (score: 68.6).
  • The Esri contract renewal is a fixed 3-year term starting early 2026, limiting near-term replatforming options due to budget constraints.
  • A retrospective was conducted and a summary will be shared back in the next meeting

• It was discussed that:
  • Financial sustainability remains a core challenge as Stream transitions to a Data Institution
  • There is a need to distinguish bugs from enhancement requests in platform feedback to better inform contract negotiations.
  • Manual account setup on the Esri platform poses a barrier to scaling shared data access but it can be done.
  • Risks include uncertain technical readiness for secure research environments and potential misalignment between future use cases and existing tooling.

Date: 17 November 2025 10:00-11:30 GMT

Location: online

Co-Chairs: Lucy Chambers (IB1); Jackie Yemm

Secretariat: IB1

Meeting Aims:

• It was noted that:
  • A series of more detailed workshops will be held to understand how Stream can move forward to becoming a Data Institution (legal & governance, technical, and commercial) and what the challenges may be.
    • Multiple people are welcome
    • Please invite anyone with IP experience to join the legal & governance workshop.
  • The Cunliffe review called out a need for a data sharing platform, the Data Institution work is in response to that call, alongside the need to be a sustainable venture.
  • A renewal for ESRI is occurring earlier, with a longer contract than anticipated and therefore tradeoffs have had to be made and the recommendations have been adapted accordingly.
  • Stream’s theme for 2026 is water efficiency, which came out of strategic priorities and AMP8 work.
  • The Achievement States have been set for the year and members have been asked to endorse them.
    • Sharing agreements are essential to move Stream beyond open data and the needs of these agreements are a key part of the work in Q1.
    • Water company risk appetite is low and therefore moving forward with data sharing without impacting the work on Open Data needs to be considered
  • A retrospective took place and members shared their feedback for the state of governance for 2026
• It was discussed that:
  • One of the key challenges facing the Data Institution will be the shift in mindset from project to business, alongside the financial implications of this shift for water companies
  • The Data Institution is a big shift for Stream to communicate to stakeholders when the value creation work is still ongoing
  • Work needs to be done to show that this is relevant and the right thing to do
  • The biggest risk is that it is unknown whether the platform meets the requirements for the Phase 3 goals as we do not know what the requirements are.

Date: 13 November 2025 10:00-11:30 GMT

Location: Online

Co-Chairs: Charlotte Hillenbrand (IB1), Alex Hughes (Portsmouth Water), Andy Johnston (Scottish Water) 

Secretariat: Icebreaker One 

Meeting Aims 

• To sign off the achievement states 
• To recap on the Data Institution aims and its impact for Stream 
• To have a retrospective on AG1’s 2025 experience 

Summary:

• It was noted that:
  • A key goal is to position Stream as a responsible data steward in the sector
  • The ODI have invited all members along to three respective workshops to help shape the data stewardship of the model.
    • The workshops include: legal and governance, commercial, and technical infrastructure
  • Independence and financial stability are key elements of a secure Data Institution
  • ‘Global’ could be interpreted as ‘one’ other country but this needs to be more clearly defined, potentially to ‘international’ or ‘globally relevant’.
  • Our big theme for the year will be water efficiency but further work is needed to define what success looks like.
  • this should be called out in the achievement slide so that it’s clear
• It was agreed that the achievement states feel like the right level of ambition
• It was noted that the confidence for the CReDO use case being finished is high
• It was discussed that:
  • Tools for tracking engagement are important to help bring in non-water company members and their engagement
  • Open Data day planning needs to be brought forward so that awareness is raised within companies.
• It was agreed that in order to improve external awareness, we first need to be recognised internally within water companies
• It was noted that taking the time to provide context to the discussion and vote is helpful for members.

Co-chaired by Icebreaker One and NWL, the group’s primary function is to help provide leadership and market signalling. Oversight of, and endorsement from, this group will establish a lasting set of robust governance measures to ensure data is shared safely and with the correct regulations.

Date: 13 October 2025 10:00-12:00 BST

Location: online

Co-Chairs: Melissa Tallack (NWL); Gavin Starks (IB1)

Secretariat: IB1

Meeting Aims 

1. Improved understanding & support regarding the Discovery work (in the context of the use case water efficiency fund for pan utility interoperability) 

2. Vote on Q4 outcomes 

3. Collaborate on the Independent Water Commission Review items 

Summary:

Outcomes:

• It was noted that Q4 activities are focused on data quality improvements, CReDO refinement, platform analytics, and preparing Stream’s infrastructure and processes for 2026 readiness.
• It was discussed that the ecosystem pillar, particularly around leadership, strategic clarity, and publisher-consumer coordination, is central to Stream’s long-term value and will require active support and championing through Phase 3.

Project collaboration opportunities:

• It was noted that:
  • Stream is supporting two aligned bids to the Water Breakthrough Challenge Fund: CaSTCo (led by United Utilities) and Riverdeep Mountain AI (RDMAI), both of which seek to use Stream for data provision and verification, citizen science infrastructure, and model enhancement.
  • Mobilisation on Stream’s side would follow confirmation of bid success (expected April at the earliest), though early engagement on Section 82 and member discussions may be beneficial.

Marketing strategy:

• It was noted that:
  • Audience segmentation is structured into Tier 1 (regulators, policymakers, etc.) and Tier 2 (civic tech, students, etc.).
  • The strategy will be delivered through four content pillars, with the current focus on trust and storytelling via Open October.

A strategic response to the Cunliffe review:

• It was agreed that:
  • The Cunliffe review presents a key opportunity for Stream to represent the best collective industry response to its proposals.
  • The 32 relevant recommendations presented on the Miro board require senior-level socialisation to assess their strategic importance, particularly given the varying stages of progress and resource constraints across member companies.
• It was discussed that:
  • Key opportunities include monitoring under Section 82, harmonising smart meter standards, and improving infrastructure data reporting
  • It would be worth running a workshop to divide items into short, medium and long-term aims.

Water Efficiency Fund

• It was noted that the programme will consist of two parts: a national Water Efficiency Campaign and a Water Efficiency Lab for innovation testing.
• It was agreed that robust data access plans must be in place by mid-2026, including anonymised smart meter and water consumption data with national coverage.

Date: 9 October 2025 10:00-11:30 BST

Location: online

Co-Chairs: Lucy Chambers (IB1); Dilani Pararajasingam (Pennon Group)

Secretariat: IB1

Meeting Aims 

1. Endorsement for Q4 outcomes 

2. Capturing views on proposed principles from the Technology Working Group 

3. Seeking advice on the simplest approach to bring value through CReDO 

Summary:

Q3 Outcomes

It was noted that:

• There was strong performance across operational areas:
  • engagement scores showed a significant increase (107%), though this may not accurately reflect true engagement levels.
  • There were mixed results with technology 50/50 success rate.
• A successful workshop was held to align industry needs with member objectives.
• Efforts to expand the secretariat support role are underway.

Q4 Outcomes: Endorsement

It was noted that

• Endorsement was delayed due to timing constraints but quorum was reached in the meeting and the Q4 outcomes were endorsed.
• The Technology pillar will focus on a single priority: platform renewal preparation.

It was discussed that Stream aims to streamline operations based on Q1–Q3 learnings – preparing for potential paid project work, and establishing plans and processes to enable quick onboarding and delivery.

Working Group Updates

Technology WG: 

It was noted that 

• the Technology Working Group developed a framework to assess tools for collaboration and future adoption.
• a vote is planned on the proposed principles and standards

It was discussed that documents have been shared for review; feedback and suggestions are encouraged. It was requested that members read documents thoroughly before providing input.

CReDO – First Shared Use Case

It was noted that:

• CReDO is the first cross-sector use case under Outcome 2: discovery and refinement of shared data sets.
  • Initial discussions with CReDO have taken place; discovery and refinement will begin in Q4.
• if funded, data availability is expected by January 2027.

It was discussed that a use case refinement session will take place with data publishers and members to identify gaps and questions.

Group Discussion

It was discussed that 

• legal agreements are not yet in place and will only start once funding is confirmed.
• getting internal data might take time. There could be resistance, especially around asset data.
• there is value in moving from reactive to proactive maintenance which will be a focus this quarter. Anglian will join the refinement session to share their experience.
• standardising data across companies would really help. We will be at the clarification call next week with our Climate SME.

It was noted that 

• Stream can learn from NUAR’s approach to flexible data sharing.

Date: 25 September 2025 10:00-11:30 BST

Location: Online

Co-Chairs: Melissa Tallack (NWL); Charlotte Hillenbrand (IB1) 

Secretariat: Icebreaker One 

Meeting Aims 

1. Understanding how we shape and deliver future use cases 

2. Endorsement for Q4 outcomes 

Summary:

• It was noted that:
  • The only outcome at risk was “Improved data quality and consistency across priority datasets​”, with improvements needed by 29th September to reach the 50% target.
  • On the 29th September, the target had not been reached (45%).
• It was agreed that the new outcomes are suitable for the next quarter, with the vote being recorded as quorate in the meeting.

Open October

• It was noted that:
  • The pillar champions asked members to share who they thought should be at Open October.
  • One key area that Stream should be mindful of is how to use the government’s growth strategy as an opportunity to platform the project’s work.
  • As a result, it may be worth inviting individuals from DSIT and DBT.

The Cunliffe Review

• It was noted that there are 32 potential recommendations that may be relevant to the Stream consortium.
• It was agreed that some of these recommendations could form the basis of future use cases.
• It was noted that:
  • Members were concerned about how these use cases may be funded
  • Section 81-82 is a priority
  • The next step would be to theme the recommendations to help further align on which recommendations to prioritise.

CReDO

• It was noted that:
  • The Product Team is ready to go into the discovery and refinement phase for this cross-sector use case, with the aim to finish the work by the end of Q4.
  • The goal for this use case is to bring the work that CReDO has done with Anglian Water to the wider Stream members, whilst also building out a more comprehensive model.

Co-chaired by Icebreaker One and NWL, the group’s primary function is to help provide leadership and market signalling. Oversight of, and endorsement from, this group will establish a lasting set of robust governance measures to ensure data is shared safely and with the correct regulations.

Date: 1 September 2025 10:00-12:00 BST

Location: online

Co-Chairs: Melissa Tallack (NWL); Gavin Starks (IB1)

Secretariat: IB1

Meeting Aims:

1. Introduction to the Cunliffe Review in preparation for aligning on responses in the next meeting 
2. Conduct vote to endorse setting up Data Standards Water Quality Monitoring 
3. Conduct vote to confirm endorsement by members of the Innovate UK bid 

Summary:

Q3 outcomes update and engagement overview

• It was noted that:
  • Work is progressing as planned, with only one item in the technology pillar at risk of not being completed.
  • An engagement sheet has been created to track all activities in Stream and to identify gaps, especially around voting.
  • Improvements are being made to address barriers to engagement, such as adding links to chaser emails and increasing visibility of upcoming work.

Cunliffe review framing

• It was noted that:
  • Ofwat will be replaced by a new regulator following the Cunliffe Review
  • Individual meetings will be arranged during October between Ofwat and water companies to discuss open data progress and future plans.
  • 37 review recommendations relevant to Stream will be reviewed at the next SG meeting.
  • Members were asked to review recommendations and prepare for discussion on Stream’s future role.

Data standards for continuous water quality monitoring (CWQM)

• It was noted that:
  • Section 82 of the Environment Act mandates continuous monitoring of discharges with near real-time data publication in a common format.
  • Alignment with regulatory obligations, transparency, and open publication are key drivers.
  • Implementation timelines vary across companies.
  • Stream’s role may require coordination with Water UK or other bodies for broader sector inclusion.
• It was discussed that no definition has yet been given for the “common format,” creating both a challenge and an opportunity to define standards early, to ensure that fragmented approaches seen previously (e.g., NSOH) are avoided.
• The English WaSCs agreed that:
  • There is a need for a CWQM data standard.
  • They supported  Stream convening WaSCs to define this standard.
  • They supported Stream leading consistent near real-time publication.
  • They are willing to participate in a follow-up session.
• It was noted that additional companies want to take advantage of being involved in the data standardisation discussion.
• It was noted that the next step would be to gain consensus on the plan to create and publish a standard and co-ordinate the open publication of the data.

Costing Working Group update

• It was noted that:
  • The Costing Working Group (WG) has met several times and proposed a draft set of commercial principles to guide work beyond core running costs.
  • The principles aim to safeguard Stream’s open data mission while enabling aligned commercial work; members were asked to consider their appropriateness.
  • The model supports Stream’s independence from NWL, working towards a not-for-profit structure post-project phase.
• It was discussed that:
  • A freemium model is being considered, with open use cases remaining free and optional commercial services layered above.
  • Lessons from NSOH show the importance of securing parallel resourcing to avoid diverting core teams.
• It was noted that early feedback supported the approach, including a desire to avoid increased subscription fees while leveraging co-funding opportunities such as the Ofwat Innovation Fund.

Breakout group 1 feedback:

• It was agreed that Stream must maintain a foundational, business-as-usual programme focused on publishing, updating, and maintaining core open data services.
• It was discussed that:
  • There are outstanding governance questions, including whether thresholds could be introduced to streamline approval for smaller projects.
  • The distinction between commercial and non-commercial activities may challenge existing principles, and a sub-committee or working group could be established to manage these complexities.
  • Publishing third-party data raises considerations around data security, SLAs, and service expectations, particularly under commercial agreements.
  • Clear value demonstration is essential for stakeholder support, including defining impact metrics and understanding Stream’s addressable market within public-good versus private sector boundaries.
• It was noted that financial thresholds could be introduced to distinguish between minor and major projects requiring SG oversight.

Breakout group 2 feedback

• It was noted that:
  • The group broadly supported the proposed commercial principles, recognising the viability of an open and premium model.
  • Public bodies may face constraints in engaging with commercialised data models.
  • The group supported further refinement and wordsmithing of the draft commercial principles.
• It was discussed that maintaining alignment with Stream’s vision and avoiding dilution of its public-good mission is essential.
• It was suggested that a governance committee could be established to manage commercial decision-making and mitigate against mission drift.

Innovate UK Bid – Water ontology and AI workshop

• It was noted that:
  • A visioning workshop is planned for 10 September to explore the use of AI in accelerating development of a water sector ontology, supported by UCL, the Future Water Association and Visioning Lab.
  • The initiative aims to address the lack of a common ontology across the water sector and determine how AI might assist in resolving that gap.
  • No costs are associated with the initial workshop, and at least two water companies are required to support the Innovate UK bid.
  • Stream’s involvement was seen as positive for ensuring sector-wide alignment and engagement, including access to shared datasets and structured workshops.
  • The scope will likely need to narrow over time due to the complexity of the challenge.
  • Stream members were asked to vote to indicate their willingness to participate in the Innovate UK bid, which they passed in favour
• It was discussed that data protection and vendor lock-in were key concerns; participants requested assurances about non-functional requirements, such as secure environments and ring-fenced data

Date: 18 August 2025 10:00-11:30 BST

Location: online

Co-Chairs: Lucy Chambers (IB1); Dilani Pararajasingam (Pennon Group)

Secretariat: IB1

Meeting Aims 

1. What’s the next best step to take within the analytics space? 
2. Understanding the challenges and pain points within the Stream platform 

Summary:

• Outcomes:
  • It was noted that:
    • The session focused on analytics, with the aim of identifying next steps and user needs.
    • Operations and technology workstreams are progressing, though minor blockers remain (e.g., Teams accounts for IB1).
    • No immediate support is required, but risks were raised for awareness.
• Definition of analytics
  • It was discussed that:
    • Analytics should support understanding of user engagement, platform usability, and dataset value.
    • Analytics requirements differ by user group (e.g., Product Team vs water company members and their Boards), necessitating tailored approaches.
    • Developing analytics as a product backlog using user stories would aid iteration.
  • It was noted that:
    • Two core categories exist: platform experience analytics and data consumption analytics.
• Sector examples:
  • It was noted that:
    • Members seek better tools to assess data usage trends and engagement over time.
    • User account systems could improve attribution but may conflict with open access principles.
    • Reservoir dataset engagement provided a strong narrative, aligning with public search trends.
    • A member company’s NSOH API received over 5 million queries, with estimates suggesting polling activity by 50–100 organisations at 5–15 minute intervals. While precise use cases are unknown, this indicates sustained external interest and engagement with the data.
    • Tracking the impact of social media activity, such as LinkedIn posts promoting datasets, could help assess whether such communications drive greater user engagement with data.
  • It was discussed that:
    • Current analytics are insufficiently granular and fragmented across sources.
    • Tools like Google Analytics provide partial solutions without requiring logins.
    • Incorporating prompts during the user journey, asking users to indicate the purpose of their data download or map use, could improve understanding of dataset value and inform analytics.
    • Real usage insight helps validate our platform’s impact and guide future dataset priorities.

Date: 14 August 2025 10:00-11:30 BST

Location: online

Co-Chairs: Elysia Moore covering for Melissa Tallack (NWL); Charlotte Hillenbrand (IB1)

Secretariat: IB1

Meeting aims:

1. To prepare members for the next use case prioritisation conversation (next AG) 

2. Co-create the Open October event 

Summary:

• Outcomes review:
  • It was noted that:
    • that outcomes for Q3 are progressing as planned. The APR dataset was published on 1 August, with work underway on data quality and the DWQ dataset.
    • that ecosystem pillar items are also in progress, with no concerns raised.
• Use case prioritisation:
  • It was noted that:
    • Six AMP8 priorities were confirmed: water efficiencies, protecting the environment, health and safety, customer experience, net zero, and infrastructure/resilience.
    • CReDO will be prioritised for discovery in Q4, while other use cases remain in the backlog or blocked due to external constraints.
    • Tagging each use case with AMP8 priorities would strengthen future prioritisation discussions.
• It was discussed that overlaps between priorities mean a single use case could address multiple areas.
• It was agreed that members should provide additional input and new use case ideas ahead of the next Advisory Group at the end of September.
• Cross-sector use case: CReDO
  • It was noted that:
    • CReDO 2, focused on climate adaptation and cross-sector resilience, will begin discovery in September, with Connected Places Catapult, Edinburgh University, and Northumberland among the partners.
    • CReDO is considered a high-profile use case and a significant opportunity for Stream to demonstrate impact.
  • It was discussed that:
    • Questions remain on the granularity of probabilistic asset failure analysis, which will be clarified in future sessions.
• Open October planning
  • It was noted that Open October will run 13–16 October with a hybrid hackathon and in-person event, themed around systems thinking.
  • It was discussed that Leeds, Wales, and Yorkshire have offered to host, while an East region location is still being explored, however, the event may be condensed to one location depending on availability.
• Group 1: Hackathon challenge focus
  • It was discussed that potential hackathon themes include Cleaning Up the UK’s Rivers, Lakes and Seas, storm overflows, lead in drinking water, water scarcity, per capita consumption, leakage ratios, and energy-water resilience.
  • It was noted that:
    • Some data gaps may limit feasibility (e.g. reservoir levels).
    • Aligning this hackathon with learnings from the year’s previous hackathons may provide continuity, with water scarcity and drinking water quality framed as possible themes for the following year.
• Group 2 – In-person event design
  • It was noted that engagement and communication remain a challenge, and members endorsed using the event to demonstrate Stream’s alignment with AMP8 priorities and to showcase successes.
  • It was discussed that:
    • Tangible open data examples (APR, NSOH) would help secure internal support for attendance.
    • Togetherness and cross-company engagement were key benefits of one in-person meetup.
    • A session on data sharing models/infrastructure should be considered to support progress toward shared data.
    • Water companies wish to see a clear three-year roadmap with defined expectations of involvement.
    • A presentation on digital twins and discussion of Section 82 delivery would be valuable.

Co-chaired by Icebreaker One and NWL, the group’s primary function is to help provide leadership and market signalling. Oversight of, and endorsement from, this group will establish a lasting set of robust governance measures to ensure data is shared safely and with the correct regulations.

Date: 21 July 2025 10:00-12:00 BST

Location: online

Co-Chairs: Andrew Myers (NWL) (stepping in for Melissa Tallack (NWL)); Gavin Starks (IB1)

Secretariat: IB1

Meeting Aims:

1. Sentiment and comments on end of phase report 

2. Decision around revisiting the use case 

3. Impact and outcomes

Summary:

• It was noted that members should be working towards a position where their votes are formal endorsements on behalf of their organisation.
  • In addition, it was noted that in any vote, there is an option to delegate responsibility.
• It was noted that there were a couple of OKRs that did not progress from last quarter, including one regarding the engagement of legal representatives from water companies. This OKR was put on hold due to not getting a full list of names nor a tangible use case for legal teams to dig in as a reference point.
• It was noted that public interest and search on the Stream platform for the reservoir dataset has increased.
  • It was discussed that it would be worth revisiting this dataset now that demand is there, particularly during a dry period, to help drive behavioural changes.
  • It was noted that in order to understand the true impact of the data, we need to engage with users to find out how they are using the data, which could be done via a short survey or blog post that notes Stream’s response to reservoir concern and how we are responding to it.
• It was noted that Stream’s LinkedIn lead magnet and  external newsletters have been well received, with a strong open rate and subscriber list.
• It was noted that internal newsletters are not performing as well currently, particularly click through rate, which is being addressed by trialling a few different features.
• It was noted that an end of phase report has been written and shared with members to incite feedback and to ensure there was a general consensus on the benefits articulated.
• It was noted that
  • Stream has elevated the importance of open data within organisations, enabling increased executive engagement and supporting internal project advancement.
  • the foundational infrastructure established through Stream enabled the delivery of projects such as the National Storm Overflow Hub.
  • the attraction of additional funding validates the credibility of Stream.
• It was discussed that
  • Stream facilitates sector-wide conversations that individual companies may not be well-positioned to initiate, particularly with external stakeholders who are critical of the water sector.
  • external testimonials from users and organisations that have benefited from Stream would strengthen the evidence of impact.
• It was noted that
  • the report was well received, with Stream’s role in improving transparency and APR data quality highlighted as key achievements.
  • there is good consensus amongst members that it’s hard to bring a complex set of organisations together and maintain activity.
  • the report should also acknowledge the challenges that have been faced, highlighting where the initiative has had to pivot during implementation.
  • outcome metrics and public benefit assessments are considered to support external communication and more effective stakeholder engagement.
• It was discussed that
  • the value of data should be recognised across its full lifecycle, not only when converted into insight or wisdom
  • third-party and indirect reuse of Stream data (e.g. sewage mapping tools) may extend its reach beyond what is currently measured.
• It was noted that two new working groups are in need of member support: Open October Planning and Technology Tool Stack Framework, and a registration form was provided for expressions of interest.

Date: 17 July 2025 10:00-11:30 BST

Location: online

Co-Chairs: Lucy Chambers (IB1); Melissa Tallack (NWL) filling in for Dilani Pararajasingam (Pennon Group)

Secretariat: IB1

Meeting Aims 

1. Members to review and refine the end of phase report findings 
2. Members to shape the impact and outcomes into playback for their senior stakeholders 

Summary:

• It was noted that this quarter is about prepping for the next phase of funding.
• It was noted that activities for this quarter include things like finalising team structure, tooling, as well as the analytics work that has been carried over.
  • It was discussed that the analytics work last quarter focused on what we need and this quarter is making decisions around those needs.
• It was noted that a final version of the Phase 2 report will be submitted on 25th July after review by the Steering Group. 

End of Phase Report – Group 1 feedback:

• It was noted that approximately £1.2 million in duplicated project costs have been avoided through shared efforts under Stream.
• It was noted that several companies avoided consultancy costs of £140–150k by discontinuing plans for separate open data portals and opting to publish via Stream.
• It was noted that the NSOH data standard was agreed efficiently in just three sessions, attributed to Stream’s facilitation and process maturity.
• It was discussed that the second year of APR reporting was significantly easier than the first, reducing resource burden and improving staff well-being.
• It was noted that APIs have enabled real-time regulatory compliance tracking, helping companies replicate Ofwat’s processes and address site-level issues.
• It was noted that Stream’s joint and individual risk assessments provide layered protection against data breaches, with learnings taken from the energy sector.

End of Phase Report – Group 2:

• It was noted that Stream provides governance benefits, particularly in making participation straightforward and cost-efficient.
• It was discussed that the programme has strengthened internal governance and encouraged better data-sharing practices across organisations.
• It was noted that the platform and support team enable water companies to engage with open data in a way that may not have been possible without Stream.
• It was suggested that stronger evidence of external impact, such as testimonials from third-party data users, would further demonstrate value.
• It was noted that Stream fosters a culture of trust and collaboration, supporting wider industry engagement and innovation.

Sharing the report within organisations:

• It was noted that Stream outcomes and benefits should be shared internally to raise awareness and reinforce the programme’s value.
• It was discussed that tailored materials are needed:
  • A concise one-slide summary of key benefits for executive engagement.
  • A fuller slide deck to support team discussions and address concerns around data sharing and risk.
• It was noted that modular, reusable content would help water companies present Stream’s work effectively at forums such as board or risk committees.
• It was noted that content should highlight Stream’s achievements, sector benefits, and risk management, e.g., the rivers/aquifers example resonated well.
• It was noted that having a clear route to access presentation materials would support internal communication efforts.

Date: 3 July 2025 10:00-11:30 BST

Location: online

Co-Chairs: Melissa Tallack (NWL); Charlotte Hillenbrand (IB1)

Secretariat: IB1

Meeting Aims

1. Members to review and refine the end of phase report findings
2. Members to shape the impact and outcomes into playback for their senior stakeholders

Summary:

• It was noted that as Stream transitions to an outcome based approach for Q3, it would be beneficial to have the lead for each task noted and responsibility represented 
• It was discussed that incomplete OKRs from the previous quarter may roll forward if still relevant, though some will be tracked separately in datasets and reports.
• It was discussed that while there are no current blockers requiring advisory group assistance, any that arise will be communicated via Monday updates or advisory group agendas.
• It was noted that a draft of the end-of-phase report has been submitted to Ofwat, and member feedback is invited before 18th July, specifically focusing on key findings and member outcomes. The following questions were asked of members:
  • Do you agree with the assumptions being made? 
  • Do you agree with the estimations that have been made?
  • Have we missed anything?
• It was noted that the report collates learnings, achievements, and outcomes from the implementation phase, to support internal messaging and strategic alignment.
• It was discussed that estimating financial benefits (e.g. cost avoidance from NSOH) requires review, with suggestions that some figures may be currently understated.
• Members discussed the end of phase report in two breakout groups 
  • Group 1 noted that:
    • There is a strong sense of collective action driving forward progress across the sector, enabled through Stream’s structure and approach.
    • Alignment on data ethics, particularly through the ODI’s frameworks, has been a significant and valuable contribution.
    • Working collaboratively within Stream has created the opportunity to share learning from other sectors, which would have been difficult to access individually.
    • Stream has raised the profile of open data both externally and internally, improving data literacy across members.
    • One member organisation implemented an end-to-end process for data triage and management as a direct result of their engagement with Stream.
  • Group 2:
    • It was noted that Stream has enabled confidence when undertaking open data initiatives for the first time and helped embed a sustained focus on improving internal processes.
    • It was noted that internal access to data has improved, with more data being published as a result of Stream participation.
    • It was discussed that APR reporting posed initial challenges, but future efficiencies are anticipated through standardisation.
    • It was noted that NSOH data has supported regulatory compliance, with one organisation reporting improvement from 32% to 86%.
    • It was agreed that the £100K estimated savings per company from NSOH work may be underestimated and should be revisited.
    • It was noted that reputational benefits have increased as a result of consistent and transparent data publication.
• It was discussed that members would benefit from streamlined internal communications material to support stakeholder engagement, which will be prioritised this quarter
  • It was agreed that in addition to the final report, short, punchy messaging (e.g. “Did you know?” statements) would help reinforce Stream’s value across senior and operational levels.
  • It was agreed that these materials should be flexible in format and adaptable to each organisation’s internal voice, while remaining aligned on core facts.
• It was noted that members requested early access to draft report content to support upcoming internal meetings.
• It was noted that Stream is supporting the WaterCommons concept note, submitted to the Microsoft and GovLab New Commons Challenge, in partnership with the ODI and the Rivers Trust.
  • It was noted that the concept, which builds on citizen science work, has progressed to the next round with final submission due by 14 July; two winning projects will receive $100K.
  • It was noted that the initiative aims to improve the accessibility and governance of citizen science data, delivering value to both communities and water companies.
  • It was noted that Stream’s role is to provide supporting infrastructure, with the Rivers Trust leading and the ODI guiding the governance approach.
  • It was discussed that members were invited to:
    • Review the concept note
    • Suggest relevant citizen science contacts
    • Identify internal stakeholders working in this space.