Skip to content
FonteumThe Graph

By use case

Exclusion & monitoring (self-serve)Free roster screen — no accountExclusion & sanctions screeningCredentialing & provider-data enrichmentAudit evidence & defensible programsProvider data for AI / RAGM&A & network diligence

By buyer

Compliance & riskJournalists & newsroomsDevelopers & AI teams

By industry

HealthcareProviders & facilitiesSanctionsOFAC / EU / UK / UN / OIG / SAMFederal contractingSAM · USASpending · FAPIIS

The capability layer

APIREST + bulk accessFor AI agentsModel Context Protocol serverFHIR R4 APIBulk exportAudit packSigned report artifacts; source facts remain separately citedReconciliationSource-vs-source diffsAI answers with sourcesHow records link upHistoryRetained versions for named sources

The differentiator

Coverage & sourcesThe catalogFreshnessMethodologyCare CompareFacility qualityAI answers, comparedBrowse all datasets →
Research

The dev on-ramp

DocsAPI referenceConnect your AI agent (MCP)One-paste installFHIR sandboxLive API surfaceQuickstartStatusChangelogSDKs & integrations
Pricing
Sign inFree roster screen →Get a signed certificate →

Solutions

Exclusion & monitoring (self-serve)Exclusion & sanctions screeningCredentialing & provider-data enrichmentAudit evidence & defensible programsProvider data for AI / RAGM&A & network diligenceCompliance & riskJournalists & newsroomsDevelopers & AI teamsHealthcareSanctionsFederal contracting

Platform

APIFor AI agentsFHIR R4 APIBulk exportAudit packReconciliationAI answers with sourcesHow records link upHistory

Data

Coverage & sourcesFreshnessMethodologyCare CompareAI answers, comparedBrowse all datasets →
Research

Developers

DocsAPI referenceConnect your AI agent (MCP)FHIR sandboxQuickstartStatusChangelogSDKs & integrations
Pricing
Sign inFree roster screen →Get a signed certificate →

Desk

Care quality

Provider performance, patient outcomes, and accreditation — how care is delivered and where it slips.

9 studies on this desk

  • Who runs the clinical trials: academia, not pharma, 2026

    Of the 589,453 studies registered on ClinicalTrials.gov, 71.4% are run by academic and hospital sponsors and only 22.1% by industry — the registry of medical research is led by universities, not pharma. Yet industry runs 41.2% of phased drug-development trials, and 53.8% of all sponsors registered just one study.

    2026-06-17 · 9 min
  • The 1% penalty: which hospitals lose Medicare pay for hospital-acquired conditions, FY2026

    In CMS's FY2026 Hospital-Acquired Condition Reduction Program, 719 of 3,055 hospitals — the worst-performing quartile by total HAC score — lose 1% of every Medicare payment for the year. The cut is graded on a curve: most hospitals beat the national infection baseline, yet a fixed quartile is penalized regardless.

    2026-06-17 · 9 min
  • Where clinical trials stop: the Phase 2 valley, 2026

    Of the 373,998 clinical trials on ClinicalTrials.gov that have reached a final outcome, 51,959 — about 1 in 7 — ended in discontinuation rather than completion. Attrition is uneven: 23.0% of settled Phase 2 trials stop early, against 14.7% at Phase 1, the signature of the efficacy-stage valley where a candidate must first prove it works.

    2026-06-16 · 9 min
  • The FDA Drug Recall List, Analyzed: 2026 Trends by Severity

    Of 56,777 FDA drug and device recalls on file, 5,237 — 9.2%, about one in eleven — carry Class I, the agency's most serious tier, signaling a reasonable probability of serious injury or death. Devices drive 68.9% of recalls; 99.4% are voluntary, company-initiated withdrawals, not FDA-ordered.

    2026-06-14 · 11 min
  • GLP-1 drugs now cost Medicare Part D $24.57 billion a year

    GLP-1 drugs cost Medicare Part D $24.57 billion in 2024 — 10.8% of the entire program's drug spending on just 1.3% of its prescriptions. Ozempic alone, at $12.38 billion, is the second-costliest drug in Part D; Mounjaro and Trulicity push the class past $24 billion.

    2026-06-12 · 11 min
  • HAC Reduction Program: 719 Hospitals Penalized in FY2026

    719 hospitals — 23.9% of 3,012 eligible — were penalized under the CMS Hospital-Acquired Condition (HAC) Reduction Program in FY2026, losing 1% of every Medicare payment for a full fiscal year. Every penalized hospital is named from official CMS data with reproducible methodology and a state-by-state breakdown.

    2026-06-06 · 10 min
  • Nursing Home Survey Results: How Fast Deficiencies Get Fixed

    Across 410,723 corrected CMS nursing home health deficiencies, the mean time from survey to documented correction is 32.4 days — but the harm-level citations, Severity G and above, close faster, in 28.5 days. The more severe the finding, the quicker the fix. Texas and Illinois correct in about two weeks; Washington, D.C. takes nine.

    2026-06-04 · 14 min
  • DaVita vs Fresenius: The Two Chains Running 74% of US Dialysis

    DaVita and Fresenius Medical Care together operate 73.7% of the 7,557 Medicare-certified dialysis facilities in the United States. Chain-owned centers average 2.92 CMS stars versus 2.27 for independents — independents are 3.7× more likely to receive a 1-star rating. State-level market concentration, chain rankings, and reproducible SQL from CMS Care Compare.

    2026-06-04 · 12 min
  • Why 14% of skilled nursing facilities had a quality drop in Q1

    Across 5,148 SNFs in Q1 2026, the composite quality score declined by an average of 0.06 points — but the decline was not evenly distributed. Facilities that changed ownership in the prior twelve months accounted for a disproportionate share of the slide.

    2026-05-12 · 8 min

Other desks

  • Financial distress
  • Access
  • Workforce
All research →

What’s on file, by the numbers

Platform snapshot · 2026-07-15

13.4Mproviders & companiesProviders, organizations, owners, and facilities on file
26.2Msource-linked factsSource-linked field facts in the dated platform snapshot
—sources liveCrosswalk-resolved sources with a proved content transition in 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

Built on the authoritative federal record

The primary sources, named on every page.

These are the federal agencies whose public datasets Fonteum ingests and attributes — the issuing authorities, not customers or partners. Every figure on the site links back to one of them.

  • CMS
  • HHS-OIG
  • HRSA
  • FDA
  • NLM
  • NUCC
  • Census
  • BLS
  • BEA

See the full source registry, with license and refresh cadence for each →

Reproducible by design

Published figures name their source and date.

Source and date

Published research identifies its government file and observation date. Source-file SHA-256 coverage is disclosed separately; facts do not currently link deterministically to signatures.

Reproducible SQL

Each study ships the exact query behind its figures, run against the same dated copy of the federal file we used. Re-run it yourself.

Daily observations

The platform records table row counts daily. Those observations 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 →

Fonteum
Platform
Platform overviewAPIFor AI agents (MCP)FHIR R4 APIBulk exportAudit packReconciliationAI answers with sourcesHow records link upHistory
Solutions
All solutionsExclusion & sanctions screeningCredentialing & enrichmentAudit evidenceProvider data for AI / RAGUse casesM&A & network diligenceCompliance & riskJournalists & newsroomsDevelopers & AI teams
Data & sources
Coverage & sourcesBrowse all datasetsState Medicaid exclusionsFreshnessMethodologyCare CompareNursing homesRecall recordsSanctions screeningOIG LEIE listOwnershipStaffingDeficienciesSpecial Focus Facilities
Federal contracting
OverviewAwards during active exclusionFederal debarment scorecardProcurement questionsContractor lookup8(a) certification guide
Developers
Developer hubDocsAPI referenceQuickstartStatusChangelogSDKs & integrationsWebhooks
Research & guides
Research hubLearnHow it worksGuidesHealthcare provider dataExclusion & sanctions screeningProvider credentialing dataHealthcare data for AIHospital margin gapProvider access gapsGlossaryComparisonsSourced data vs plain LLM answersCitationsManifestoWhy Fonteum
Company
AboutPressCustomersPricingContactEditorial policyCorrections
Trust & legal
TrustTrust markQualitySecurityPrivacy policyTerms of serviceAPI termsMedical disclaimer

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

© 2026 Fonteum LLC. All rights reserved.

·hello@fonteum.com

A public-records graph that exposes source and observation metadata where supplied.

Fonteum's provenance ledger contained 26.2M source-linked facts on July 12, 2026. All but 14 carried a source-file SHA-256; 0 linked deterministically to a signature. Inspect a supplied snapshot id at fonteum.com/verify · source-mark coverage and limitations.
Request access→