Skip to content
FonteumPublic-records evidence
Fonteum Care Compare · Ambulatory Surgical Centers

5,611 Medicare-certified ambulatory surgical centers — per-facility ASC-1 through ASC-12 measures, with NPI on every row.

ASCs are the one Care Compare facility type that publishes NPI directly on the agency-level identity table — a deterministic cross-source bridge for sanctions, claims, and provider-graph joins. ASC-12 (7-day risk-standardized hospital visit rate) is the headline quality measure; SDOH measures newly required from the 2025 reporting period have limited baseline trend data through 2024.

See the Audit Pack →
Headline figure

Every ASC in the 2024 CMS Care Compare snapshot publishes its NPI directly — a deterministic provider-graph bridge that the rest of the Care Compare set lacks. 5,611 facilities reported ASC-1 through ASC-12 quality measures across 54 states + territories. The newly-required SDOH measure (added 2025 reporting period) has only limited baseline trend data through 2024 — Fonteum flags this rather than letting consumers infer trends from sparse data.

Source: CMS Care Compare · ASC Quality Measures - Facility · Reporting Year 2024 · Source-modified 2025-12-16 · Snapshot 2026-05-07.

National coverage

Medicare-Certified ASCs

Every ASC in the CMS ASC Quality Reporting Program — identity, NPI, state, ASC-1 through ASC-12 measures.

5,611
Procedure scope

NPI Deterministic Bridge

Unique among Care Compare datasets: NPI is published on every facility row, enabling deterministic joins to NPPES Type 2, sanctions, and claims without fuzzy matching.

100%
Payment lever

Documented Suppression

ASC measures suppress when fewer than 25 cases are recorded. Fonteum flags this with explicit DataAvailabilityState rather than implying low quality.

<25 cases
State coverage — top 10 by ASC count

54 states + territories with Medicare-certified ASCs

Every state with enough Medicare-certified ASCs to report has its own quality page; the data is also in the snapshot and audit-pack export.

StateASCs
CA645
FL478
TX424
GA341
MD284
PA233
NJ216
AZ204
OH187
NY167

Methodology · Sources · Corrections log · Editorial policy

What’s on file, by the numbers

Platform snapshot · 2026-08-24

13.4Mproviders & companiesProviders, organizations, owners, and facilities on file
26.2Msource-linked factsSource-linked field facts in the dated platform snapshot
90sources with dataDistinct snapshot source IDs with at least one positive record count
70fresh sourcesDistinct source IDs whose latest positive-data snapshot falls within the preceding 45 days
111sources integratedActive registry rows; integration does not establish a load
13state Medicaid jurisdictionsDistinct states represented in the state-exclusions serving table

Integrated, with-data, and fresh-observation counts are separate. No platform-wide source-completeness count is published. Completeness is source-specific and must be evaluated against the named source's expected scope. State coverage is a separate jurisdiction measure.

Source authority is record-specific

Use the issuer named on the record.

Fonteum spans federal, state, and global public publishers. A source page or returned record identifies its issuer and dataset where that metadata is available. A platform registry count does not assign every page to one authority or establish loaded, fresh, or complete coverage.

Browse source records and their stated limitations →

Reproducible by design

Inspect the evidence each published figure actually supplies.

Source and date

Research pages expose the named public file and observation date where those fields are available. Source-file SHA-256 coverage is separate; facts do not currently link deterministically to signatures.

Available derivation

Studies with a retained release and committed derivation link the SQL or method used. Other studies state the evidence and reproduction limits they actually have.

Daily observations

Dated table row-count observations can detect local drift. They do not imply that an upstream publisher released or Fonteum ingested new data that day.

Named medical review

Reviewed by Jennifer Montecillo, MD, medical reviewer. Non-practicing medical reviewer.

Read the full provenance and attestation methodology →

Request access