Original aggregate analysis
What the current evidence layers contain
Aggregate counts across FindTreatment.gov listings and California DHCS SUD and NTP records. Exact crosswalks merge some identities; counts do not describe openings, quality, enforcement history, or clinical fit.
Calculated from 14,184 merged records · Build date 2026-08-31
Geographic distribution
Largest record counts by state
This ranks records in the current dataset, not market size, quality, or availability. Differences can reflect source scope and reporting practices.
| # | State | Relative count | Records | Share |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | CA | 2,931 | 20.7% | |
| 2 | NY | 643 | 4.5% | |
| 3 | IL | 533 | 3.8% | |
| 4 | FL | 486 | 3.4% | |
| 5 | PA | 478 | 3.4% | |
| 6 | OH | 477 | 3.4% | |
| 7 | MD | 431 | 3.0% | |
| 8 | NC | 430 | 3.0% | |
| 9 | KY | 420 | 3.0% | |
| 10 | TX | 415 | 2.9% | |
| 11 | AZ | 407 | 2.9% | |
| 12 | IN | 385 | 2.7% |
Interpretation
What these aggregates mean
They describe the public records included in this release. They are useful for seeing coverage, missingness, concentration, and reported patterns. They do not establish causation or individual quality.
Counts are computed during the same build that creates the map and record pages. A source update changes the analysis automatically.
Review sources and methodologyGo from aggregate to record