A performance audit of the Oregon Health Division drinking water program, conducted in 2000 by the Oregon Secretary of State, found that the effectiveness of the program's oversight of public water systems needed improvement. The audit found that public water systems did not always report their test results to the Division. The audit also discovered several test results in laboratory files that indicated the presence of contamination that had not been reported to the Division. The audit report recommended that the Oregon legislature amend the Oregon drinking water statute to require that public water system water quality test results be submitted by drinking water laboratories to both the Division and the water supplier. The authors investigated whether direct reporting to the state agency could yield other beneficial outcomes, such as improved responsiveness to positive sample results and improved compliance monitoring and reporting. The authors used public water system coliform bacteria compliance data to compare these outcomes in Oregon, where direct reporting by labs is not required, to Idaho, where direct reporting by labs is required. It was found that responsiveness to water quality problems at public water systems was comparable in Oregon and Idaho. The level of compliance with monitoring and reporting standards was higher in Idaho. The authors concluded that factors other than direct lab reporting may play large roles in improving responsiveness by water suppliers to occurrences of positive coliform sample results. Knowledge of the operators at smaller water systems and their availability for communication may be the key factors. Includes 2 references, table, figures.