Other Outpatient Care Centers (U.S.) — NAICS 62149

A rollup primer for a general investing audience — relevant to both public-market and private investors. Figures are U.S. unless noted. Reported data are historical facts; statements about future rates, demand, growth, or margins are forward-looking judgments. Tickers, prices, and valuation language are confined to the investable-universe and how-to-invest sections.

1. Overview

The North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) code 62149 — "Other Outpatient Care Centers" — is not one business. It is a federal filing drawer that holds four very different outpatient industries under a single five-digit label: health maintenance organization (HMO) medical centers (621491), kidney dialysis centers (621492), freestanding ambulatory surgical and emergency centers (621493), and a catch-all bucket called all other outpatient care centers (621498). What they share is a physical form — care delivered in a clinic, without an overnight hospital stay — and a common tailwind: the decades-long site-of-care shift, in which payers and patients keep moving treatment out of expensive hospital beds into cheaper outpatient settings.[1][8][12]

What they do not share is market structure, and that is the whole point of reading them together. Inside this one code sit some of the most concentrated industries in the entire U.S. economy alongside some of the most fragmented. One child is a nonprofit-dominated near-monopoly (HMO centers, led by Kaiser Permanente). One is a for-profit corporate duopoly (dialysis, DaVita and Fresenius). Two are scattered across thousands of doctor-owned clinics and nonprofit health centers (surgery/emergency centers and the "all other" bucket). The economics, ownership, growth direction, and the way an investor can actually own each are almost unrelated — which is why the aggregate statistics for 62149 are, on their own, misleading. This primer's job is the contrast across the four children, then the level as a whole.

The dual-audience takeaway up front: public-market investors find only a few near-pure plays here (they cluster in dialysis and surgery), while private investors — private equity, physicians, nonprofits, insurers, and real-estate owners — hold most of the assets and drive most of the deal activity. There is no single security that "is" NAICS 62149, and treating it as one industry is the classic mistake.

2. What's inside — the four children, and how they differ

The four child industries look alike on a map and behave nothing alike as businesses. The contrast below is the distinctive value of this rollup: same code, opposite market structures.

Shares of level receipts are computed from each child's 2022 Economic Census receipts against the level total; establishment shares use 2023 County Business Patterns. Because receipts (2022) and establishments (2023) come from different vintages, the ratios are directional, not precise.

Three contrasts matter most for an investor:

• Revenue is spread evenly; establishments are not. The four children each contribute roughly a sixth to a third of revenue, but HMO centers earn ~23% of the money from just ~5% of the sites. That is because an HMO "center" is a large integrated clinic, while a dialysis or urgent-care site is small. Per establishment, HMO centers gross on the order of ten times what a dialysis or "all-other" clinic does — a scale gap that shapes who can own each.
• Concentration runs the full spectrum. HMO centers (56 firms) and dialysis (a two-company market) are near the top of the concentration scale; surgical centers and the "all-other" bucket are near the bottom, made of thousands of independent, mostly physician-owned or nonprofit operators. This is why "who you can buy" differs so sharply by child (Section 4).
• Growth direction diverges. Surgical centers are the clearest growth story (the hospital-to-outpatient migration, still widening). HMO-style integrated care is structurally expanding but a graveyard for weak for-profit operators. Dialysis is a resilient annuity with flat unit demand and a genuine long-run drug headwind. The "all-other" bucket is growing and consolidating but too mixed to generalize.

3. How big it is — the level as a whole

Ground-truth federal figures for NAICS 62149 (our ingested data). County Business Patterns (CBP) covers 2023; the Economic Census (EC) covers 2022 — do not read them as one synchronized year.

Taken as one industry, 62149 is a roughly $187 billion revenue base employing about 990,000 people across 41,552 establishments — a large slice of U.S. outpatient care.[1][2]

The aggregation trap — the single most important caveat here. Read literally, the level looks like a competitive, unconcentrated industry: an HHI (Herfindahl-Hirschman Index, the sum of squared market shares used by antitrust regulators, where anything under 1,500 is "unconcentrated") of just 230.5, with the top four firms holding only 27% of revenue.[2] That number is real but structurally deceptive. It is low only because the aggregation blends two highly concentrated children with two highly fragmented ones — and because the dominant firm in one child (Kaiser in HMO centers) is not the dominant firm in another (DaVita and Fresenius in dialysis), which is different again from the thousands of independents in surgical and "all-other" centers. No single company owns much of the combined $187 billion, so the blended index reads "competitive" even though half the money sits in near-monopoly or duopoly sub-markets. A rollup HHI can hide the market structure of its parts; here it does exactly that. Judge concentration child by child, not at the level.

A second data note: the four children's firm counts sum to about 15,606, slightly above the level's 15,373, because a company that operates in more than one of the four industries is counted in each child but only once at the level. The overlap is small (~230 firms), which itself tells you these are mostly distinct businesses with distinct owners.[2]

Undercount caveats — the level understates the true footprint. CBP counts only establishments with paid employees; it excludes non-employers, the self-employed, and most government workers.[3] Three structural undercounts matter at this level, all inherited from the children:

• Government and public-agency care is largely invisible. County public-health clinics, tribal health programs, and Department of Veterans Affairs/military outpatient sites — concentrated in the 621498 bucket — mostly fall outside the business statistics.[3]
• Grant-funded nonprofit activity spills the receipts line. The federally supported community-health-center sector alone reported roughly $49.8 billion of total revenue in 2024, much of it federal grants and enhanced Medicaid rather than the fee-for-service "receipts" the Economic Census measures.[14] A large part of that activity lives inside 621498 but is only partly captured by the $187 billion figure.
• The HMO code is a fraction of the model it names. HMO-style integrated care is coded across at least three NAICS buckets: the insurance/premium side is classified as insurance, HMO-owned hospitals as hospitals, and the staffing physician groups often as physician offices. Kaiser Permanente alone reported roughly $100.8 billion of operating revenue in 2023 — more than half of this entire level — precisely because most of Kaiser sits in other codes.[6] Read 621491's ~$44 billion as one accounting bucket for a far larger care model.

Bottom line: treat the level's $187 billion and 41,552 establishments as a solid floor for employer-based outpatient care, not a full measure of the activity these four industries represent — and never as evidence that the field is competitively structured.

4. The investable universe — where value concentrates across the children

Public-market exposure is not spread evenly across the four children. It concentrates in the two where a few big corporations dominate (dialysis and, indirectly, HMO-style integrated care), thins out in surgical centers, and is scarce-and-diluted in the "all-other" bucket. Ticker presence signals market exposure, not that a company's operations fall cleanly inside 62149 — every listed name below mixes these clinics with hospitals, insurance, pharmacy, devices, or physician practices, and none reports a clean NAICS-62149 revenue line.

621492 — dialysis is the only child with true near-pure listed plays.

• DaVita Inc. (NYSE: DVA) — U.S.-focused dialysis is the core business; ~$13.6B revenue (2025), ~2,657 U.S. centers, ~200,500 patients, an estimated ~36% U.S. patient share; Berkshire Hathaway is the largest holder (~45%).[9]
• Fresenius Medical Care (NYSE: FMS) — global #1; 2,800+ U.S. centers and ~205,000 U.S. patients within ~3,600 clinics worldwide, and it also makes the machines, dialyzers, and fluids.[10]
• Suppliers ring both: Outset Medical (Nasdaq: OM) in home-dialysis devices, Baxter (NYSE: BAX) and Amgen (Nasdaq: AMGN) in renal products and drugs.

621493 — surgical/emergency centers offer one listed pure-play and one big platform.

• Surgery Partners (Nasdaq: SGRY) — the largest listed pure-play ambulatory-surgery operator; 157 surgery centers and 19 surgical hospitals across 30 states (2025). Private-equity firm Bain Capital owns ~39% and made — then walked away from — a take-private bid, showing how tightly public and private valuations are linked here.[19]
• Tenet Healthcare (NYSE: THC) — through United Surgical Partners International (USPI), the largest surgery-center platform (533 centers, 2025); ambulatory is Tenet's growth engine.[20] HCA (NYSE: HCA) and UnitedHealth's SCA Health (NYSE: UNH) give diluted exposure inside far larger companies.[16][20]

621491 — HMO centers have no pure listed equity. The category leader, Kaiser Permanente, is a nonprofit that issues bonds, not stock.[6] Equity investors reach the model only indirectly through diversified insurers that own or manage clinics — UnitedHealth/Optum (UNH), Humana/CenterWell (HUM), CVS/Oak Street (CVS) — and through small, volatile risk-bearing providers (agilon, Astrana, Privia, P3). Several for-profit versions (Cano Health, CareMax) went bankrupt in 2024, a warning that runs through the whole capitated model.[16][17][18]

621498 — the "all-other" bucket is the largest by revenue but the hardest to own. Its biggest single component — nonprofit, grant-funded community health centers serving ~32.4 million patients — is un-investable.[13][15] The closest listed pure-play is Concentra (NYSE: CON), an occupational-health operator spun out of Select Medical in 2024 (~$1.9B revenue, 600+ centers).[21] Beyond that, exposure runs through the same value-based names and the same diversified giants (Optum, CenterWell, CVS) whose clinic footprints are one piece of a much larger enterprise.

The cross-cutting pattern: the more concentrated the child, the cleaner the public exposure. Dialysis (a duopoly) gives you DVA and FMS; surgery (fragmenting) gives you one pure-play and a platform; HMO and "all-other" (either nonprofit-led or scattered) give you only diluted or private routes. Most of the assets in this level — physician-owned surgery centers, nonprofit health centers, PE-owned clinic chains, and the real estate under all of them — are private, and a complete private cap table does not exist.

5. How the money works

The four children run on four different revenue engines. An investor who understands only one will misread the others.

• Dialysis (621492): payer mix on a government-set price. Medicare pays a fixed bundled rate per treatment — the End-Stage Renal Disease (ESRD) Prospective Payment System, set at $281.71 for 2026 — that roughly covers cost.[11] Commercial (employer) insurance pays several times more; one study found ~$1,041 commercial versus ~$248 government per treatment.[7] Because commercial insurance covers only about a tenth of patients, that small slice generates a disproportionate share of profit and subsidizes the Medicare book. The business is a utilization game: pack more treatments through the same stations and staff.[9]
• Surgical centers (621493): facility fee × case volume × payer mix. An ambulatory surgical center (ASC) earns a "facility fee" for the room, staff, and supplies, billed separately from the surgeon. Revenue is cases × net revenue per case, and the profit engine is payer mix and case acuity — commercial insurers pay multiples of Medicare, and higher-acuity work (orthopedics, spine) carries far larger fees.[8][19] The entire value proposition is the site-of-service differential: Medicare pays an ASC roughly 46% less than a hospital outpatient department for the identical procedure, which is why insurers steer patients there.[8] Physician owners take distributions strictly pro rata to equity (not to referrals), which aligns them to keep rooms full.
• HMO centers (621491) and value-based clinics: capitation and the medical loss ratio. A full-risk provider receives a fixed per-member-per-month (PMPM) payment and profits on the spread between that premium and the cost of care. The master gauge is the medical loss ratio (MLR) — the share of premium spent on medical care; keep it low through prevention and coordination and there is margin, let it run high and you lose on every member.[16] Integrated systems run on razor-thin operating margins (Kaiser earned ~$329M of operating income on ~$100.8B of revenue in 2023) cushioned by investment income.[6]
• The "all-other" bucket (621498): three models at once. Fee-for-service clinics (urgent care, occupational health) earn visits × net reimbursement per visit. Community health centers stitch together a cost-based per-visit rate, federal Section 330 grants, 340B drug-pricing savings, and sliding-scale fees — economics driven by policy, not commercial pricing power.[14] Value-based operators run the same capitation/MLR model as the HMO child.

What they share operationally: all four are labor-heavy with a large fixed cost base, so utilization (chairs, rooms, or panels kept full) is the common profit lever, and same-center (organic) volume and revenue growth, payer mix, and cost per treatment/case/visit are the metrics that matter across every child. Clinic count alone is a weak measure everywhere — a new center can take years to mature. And across three of the four children, a fast-growing new lever is value-based care: taking risk on the total cost of a patient's care and keeping a share of the savings.[9][16]

6. What drives demand

Demand for this level is durable and mostly non-discretionary, but the drivers split by child:

• The site-of-care shift (all four, especially 621493 and 621498). Better minimally invasive techniques, anesthesia, and payer steering keep moving care out of hospitals into cheaper outpatient settings — the single biggest structural tailwind.[8][12] For surgery, regulators keep widening it: for 2026, Medicare added 289 procedures to the ASC list and began phasing out its "inpatient-only" list.[8]
• Aging and chronic disease (all four). More seniors and more diabetes and heart disease mean more dialysis, more cataract and joint procedures, and more chronic-care management. The 65-and-older population reached 61.2 million (18.0%) in 2024.[8]
• Medicare Advantage (MA, the private capitated alternative to traditional Medicare) — the growth engine for the capitated children. MA covered about 54% of Medicare beneficiaries in 2025, and value-based clinics are purpose-built for that population.[16] MA rate notices from the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) directly move the economics.
• Government coverage and grant cycles (621492, 621498). A disease-specific Medicare entitlement underwrites near-universal dialysis demand; Medicaid enrollment and periodic congressional reauthorization of community-health-center funding swing safety-net volumes.[14]
• A genuine drug-driven headwind (621492). New GLP-1 (glucagon-like peptide-1) and SGLT2 (sodium-glucose co-transporter-2) drugs slow kidney disease; in the FLOW trial semaglutide cut major kidney events by 24%. Over time this is a slow, real drag on how many people reach dialysis — a demand risk unique to that child.[24]

Judgment: demand across the level is resilient but not uniformly growing in unit terms. Surgical volume and value-based senior care are the clearest growth stories; dialysis is a flat-unit annuity; the "all-other" bucket grows with the site-of-care shift but unevenly.

7. Regulation

Every child is Medicare- and Medicaid-shaped, so CMS is the common regulator — it sets the prices (the dialysis bundle, the ASC and hospital-outpatient rates, MA and community-health-center payments) and the quality rules that gate them.[8][11][14] Shared federal regimes apply across all four:

• Fraud-and-abuse law. The Anti-Kickback Statute, the False Claims Act, and the physician self-referral Stark Law govern financial relationships with referring physicians throughout the level. Note one structural difference: physician-owned surgery centers rely on a dedicated ASC safe harbor that protects ownership so long as distributions track equity, not referrals — a carve-out that does not extend to most other outpatient settings.[8]
• Corporate practice of medicine (CPOM) and management services organizations (MSOs). Many states bar corporations from "practicing medicine," pushing private-equity and insurer owners into "friendly PC" / MSO structures across the HMO, surgical, and "all-other" children; several states are tightening CPOM rules and adding transaction-notification requirements.[18][19]
• HIPAA (the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act) governs patient data everywhere.
• Certificate of Need (CON) laws in roughly three dozen states can gate new dialysis and surgical facilities, protecting incumbents.[7][8]

Child-specific pressure points investors track: for dialysis, the annual ESRD bundle update, the Marietta v. DaVita Supreme Court ruling that lets employer plans cap dialysis pay, and escalating kickback enforcement;[7][25] for HMO/value-based care, MA rate notices, the CMS-HCC v28 risk model, and an aggressive expansion of Risk Adjustment Data Validation (RADV) audits that is a live financial risk;[16] for surgery, the annual ASC payment rule and the No Surprises Act's ban on balance-billing at freestanding ERs;[8] and for the safety net, HRSA (Health Resources and Services Administration) grant "cliffs" and Medicaid policy.[14]

8. Competitive dynamics and consolidation

The level's low blended HHI hides four different competitive states, but one theme cuts across all of them: competition is local even when ownership is national. Patients dialyze near home, choose a surgery center their doctor uses, and walk into the nearest clinic — so a firm with a small national share can still dominate a county, and the level's "unconcentrated" statistics coexist with real local pricing power.

The consolidation stories differ by child:

• HMO/integrated care (621491): vertical integration — insurers buying the primary-care relationship (Optum, CVS/Oak Street, Humana/CenterWell) — while Kaiser consolidates the nonprofit side via its new Risant Health platform. A late-2010s private-equity roll-up of senior value-based care largely unwound in painful bankruptcies.[16][23]
• Dialysis (621492): consolidation is decades old and largely complete at the top; DaVita and Fresenius run ~74% of facilities.[7] The remaining moves are regional roll-ups and vertical integration into value-based kidney care, now under active antitrust constraint (the FTC forced DaVita to divest Utah clinics and imposed 10-year prior-approval).[26]
• Surgical centers (621493): a long fragmented tail plus a consolidating head — the five largest corporate holders reached only ~21.5% of Medicare-certified ASCs in 2024.[8] Three buyers drive deals: hospitals defending outpatient volume, insurers (Optum's SCA Health), and PE specialty roll-ups (gastroenterology, orthopedics, ophthalmology). Research found prices rose ~11% per procedure within two quarters of an Optum acquisition — the kind of finding that draws antitrust attention, as the FTC's Ascension/AMSURG review shows.[22][26]
• All-other (621498): extraordinarily fragmented but consolidating fast — by 2024 roughly 78% of physicians were employed by hospitals, insurers, or corporate/PE-backed entities rather than independent. The nonprofit health-center sector grows on a parallel track, through federal funding rather than acquisition.[27]

Judgment: fragmentation plus a durable site-of-care tailwind is exactly the setup that attracts consolidators, so concentration is likely to keep rising in the two fragmented children even as antitrust scrutiny of insurer and PE ownership intensifies across all four.

9. Key risks

• Reimbursement dependence (all four). Most revenue is a government-set or government-anchored price. A skinny annual update to the dialysis bundle, the ASC rate, MA payments, or community-health-center funding hits margins directly, and this level has little pricing power against government payers.[8][11][14]
• Commercial-mix erosion (621492, 621493). The profit engine in dialysis and surgery is the commercially insured minority; insurer repricing, network narrowing, denials, anti-steering enforcement, and site-neutral payment reform all threaten it.[7][25]
• Value-based execution risk (621491, 621498). Full-risk operators eat cost overruns; the 2023–2024 surge in senior utilization helped push several capitated providers into bankruptcy, and clawbacks from expanded RADV audits can erase a year's margin.[16][23]
• Demand disruption (621492). GLP-1/SGLT2 drugs and transplant growth could gradually shrink the dialysis pipeline.[24]
• Labor (all four). Nurses, technicians, and physicians are the core input and the largest controllable cost; wage inflation or turnover caps capacity and margins.
• Compliance, cybersecurity, and privacy (all four). Coding, referral, and quality failures trigger repayments and litigation, and these operators hold vast protected health information — a 2025 ransomware attack on DaVita exposed data on ~2.7 million people.[9]
• Consolidation, antitrust, and political scrutiny (all four). Further insurer-provider and PE consolidation faces divestiture demands and reputational risk, and prior authorization and care denials are under intense public pressure.[26][27]
• Data risk. The federal statistics exclude government and non-employer operators and are not a facility or procedure census — do not infer utilization, payer mix, or margins from them (Section 3).

10. How to invest, and the outlook

There is no single ticker for NAICS 62149, and the level's headline "unconcentrated" statistics should never be the basis for a thesis. Invest child by child, and match the route to how each child is actually owned.

Public routes.

• Dialysis is the cleanest listed exposure: DaVita (DVA) for a concentrated U.S. pure-play and Fresenius (FMS) for a global, more diversified owner; plus device/drug suppliers (OM, BAX, AMGN) and a GLP-1 hedge (NVO, LLY).[9][10][24]
• Surgery offers Surgery Partners (SGRY) as the listed pure-play and Tenet (THC) via USPI, with HCA, UNH, and UHS as diluted exposure.[19][20]
• HMO/integrated care has no pure equity — reach it through diversified insurers (UNH, HUM, CVS), risk-bearing providers (agilon, Astrana, Privia, P3), or Kaiser bonds.[6][16]
• All-other is thinnest: Concentra (CON) in occupational health, the same value-based names, and the same diversified giants.[21]

For every listed name, isolate the outpatient earnings actually owned from the surrounding hospital, insurance, pharmacy, device, or physician-practice businesses before comparing valuation multiples, EBITDA (earnings before interest, taxes, depreciation, and amortization), or dividend yield — enterprise-value-to-EBITDA and free-cash-flow yield judged against the medical-cost cycle and government-payment risk, not against clinic-count growth.

Private routes — where most of the level actually sits. Physician-ownership stakes and PE specialty roll-ups (surgery, GI, orthopedics, ophthalmology); the private #3–#5 dialysis chains; value-based-care platforms; occupational and employer-clinic networks; and the net-lease real estate under all of them — a bond-like income play divorced from clinical risk, accessible through medical-office landlords and healthcare REITs (real estate investment trusts). Underwrite the individual center, not the national trend: licenses, CON status, accreditation, the full payer-contract set, station/room/panel utilization and ramp, physician ownership and referral compliance, staffing depth, quality history, leverage, and a realistic exit valued on durable cash flow rather than raw center count. The large nonprofit community-health-center sector is not investable — it is grant- and Medicaid-funded and community-governed; the only adjacent security is tax-exempt financing.[13][14]

Outlook (forward-looking judgment). The structural direction — cheaper, more convenient, more coordinated care moving out of hospitals — is durable and favorable across the level. But the four children will not move together. Surgical centers have the clearest runway (regulators keep widening what can leave the hospital). Value-based and integrated senior care has a strong demographic tailwind but a proven ability to bankrupt weak operators. Dialysis is a resilient, cash-generative annuity defended by a duopoly moat, with flat unit demand and a slow drug headwind. The "all-other" bucket is growing and consolidating but too heterogeneous for one forecast. The near-term items to watch are almost all in Washington: the annual CMS rate notices (dialysis bundle, ASC rate, MA payments), the pace of the inpatient-only-list phase-out, expanded RADV audits, site-neutral payment reform, and the antitrust response to insurer and PE consolidation. The recurring investment mistake is treating this code as one industry, or treating physical expansion as economic scale; the durable edge in every child is local density, favorable payer mix, operational discipline, and clean compliance.

---

Sources

1. U.S. Census Bureau, County Business Patterns 2023, NAICS 62149 and children 621491/621492/621493/621498 (establishments, employment, annual and first-quarter payroll). Histometrics ingested federal statistics.
2. U.S. Census Bureau, 2022 Economic Census — Concentration of Largest Firms, NAICS 62149 (receipts, firms, CR4/CR8/CR20/CR50, HHI). Histometrics ingested federal statistics. https://data.census.gov/table/ECNSIZE2022.EC2200SIZECONCEN
3. U.S. Census Bureau, County Business Patterns Methodology (coverage and exclusions). https://www.census.gov/programs-surveys/cbp/technical-documentation/methodology.html
4. U.S. Census Bureau, 2022 Economic Census — Concentration of Largest Firms, NAICS 621498 (CR4 7.2%, HHI 27.7). https://data.census.gov/table/ECNSIZE2022.EC2200SIZECONCEN?codeset=naics~621498
5. U.S. Census Bureau, 2022 Economic Census — Concentration of Largest Firms, NAICS 621491 (56 firms, CR4 88.8%, HHI 2,449.2). https://data.census.gov/table/ECNSIZE2022
6. Kaiser Permanente, Fast Facts and 2023 financial results (Fierce Healthcare, "Kaiser Permanente reports $4.1B profit, exceeds $100B operating revenues in 2023"), 2024–2026. https://about.kaiserpermanente.org/who-we-are/fast-facts
7. Medicare Payment Advisory Commission (MedPAC), March 2026 Report to the Congress — outpatient dialysis chapter (DaVita/Fresenius facility and station share; for-profit mix; payment). https://www.medpac.gov/wp-content/uploads/2026/03/Mar26_MedPAC_Report_To_Congress_SEC.pdf
8. Medicare Payment Advisory Commission (MedPAC), March 2026 Report to the Congress, Ch. 11 — Ambulatory Surgical Center Services (certified-ASC count, for-profit and physician-ownership mix, ~46% site-of-service difference, top-5 corporate share, CON count); with CMS CY2026 OPPS/ASC Final Rule (2.6% update; 289 procedures added; inpatient-only-list phase-out). https://www.medpac.gov/wp-content/uploads/2026/03/Mar26_Ch11_MedPAC_Report_To_Congress_SEC.pdf
9. DaVita Inc., Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2025, SEC EDGAR. https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/927066/000092706626000012/dva-20251231.htm
10. Fresenius Medical Care AG, Annual Report 2025 and Equity Story. https://freseniusmedicalcare.com/en/investors/equity-story/equity-story/
11. Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS), Calendar Year 2026 ESRD PPS Final Rule (bundled base rate $281.71). https://www.cms.gov/newsroom/fact-sheets/calendar-year-cy-2026-end-stage-renal-disease-esrd-prospective-payment-system-final-rule
12. U.S. Census Bureau and Office of Management and Budget, 2022 NAICS Manual, NAICS 62149 and child codes (definitions and exclusions). https://www.census.gov/naics/reference_files_tools/2022_NAICS_Manual.pdf
13. Health Resources and Services Administration (HRSA), Impact of the Health Center Program (~1,400 organizations, 15,000+ sites, 32.4 million patients, 2024). https://bphc.hrsa.gov/about-health-center-program/impact-health-center-program
14. KFF, Community Health Center Patients, Financing, and Services ($49.8B revenue; Medicaid ~45%), 2024; with NACHC and CMS FQHC payment guidance. https://www.kff.org/medicaid/community-health-center-patients-financing-and-services/
15. National Association of Community Health Centers (NACHC), America's Health Centers: By the Numbers, 2024. https://www.nachc.org/resource/americas-health-centers-by-the-numbers/
16. UnitedHealth Group (2025 Form 10-K, Optum Health), Humana (2025 Form 10-K, CenterWell), and CVS Health (2025 Form 10-K, Oak Street Health), SEC EDGAR; with KFF Medicare Advantage enrollment and CMS 2026 MA rate materials. https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/731766/000073176626000062/unh-20251231.htm
17. Humana Inc., 2025 Form 10-K (CenterWell / Conviva senior primary care), SEC EDGAR. https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/49071/000004907126000009/hum-20251231.htm
18. CVS Health, 2025 Form 10-K (Oak Street Health, MinuteClinic), SEC EDGAR; with American Medical Association corporate-practice-of-medicine materials. https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/64803/000006480326000010/cvs-20251231.htm
19. Surgery Partners, Inc., Form 10-K FY2025 and 2024 results (157 ASCs, 19 surgical hospitals; Bain Capital ~39% and take-private discussions), SEC EDGAR. https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1638833/000163883326000008/sgry-20251231.htm
20. Tenet Healthcare Corporation, Form 10-K FY2025 (USPI: 533 ASCs, 26 surgical hospitals); HCA Healthcare Form 10-K FY2025; SCA Health (UnitedHealth/Optum) About Us. https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/70318/000007031826000012/thc-20251231.htm
21. Concentra Group Holdings, Form 10-Q and investor materials (~$1.9B revenue; 600+ occupational-health centers plus ~400 onsite clinics), 2024–2026. https://ir.concentra.com/
22. Becker's ASC Review, Top ASC operators by market share, 2025 (USPI, SCA, AMSURG counts and shares); with Massachusetts Health Policy Commission notice on Ascension/AMSURG. https://www.beckersasc.com/asc-transactions-and-valuation-issues/top-5-asc-operators-by-market-share-2025/
23. Private Equity Stakeholder Project, Private Equity's Failed Bet on Value-Based Care (2025) and Private Equity's Role in Ambulatory Surgical Centers (2025). https://pestakeholder.org/wp-content/uploads/2025/05/PESP_Report_Healthcare_May2025.pdf
24. American Diabetes Association / Diabetes Care, FLOW trial — semaglutide reduces major kidney events by 24%; FDA kidney-risk label expansion (2024–2025). https://diabetes.org/newsroom/press-releases/semaglutide-reduced-risk-major-kidney-disease-events-24-patients-type-2
25. Marietta Memorial Hospital Employee Health Benefit Plan v. DaVita Inc., 596 U.S. ___ (2022), U.S. Supreme Court; with U.S. Department of Justice, "DaVita to Pay Over $34 Million to Resolve Allegations of Illegal Kickbacks" (2024). https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/21pdf/20-1641_3314.pdf
26. Federal Trade Commission, DaVita Utah divestiture and 10-year prior-approval order (2022) and Ascension/AMSURG, In the Matter of (divestitures; pending); with Becker's/Healthcare Brew post-acquisition price study on Optum ASC purchases (+11%/~$239 per procedure). https://www.ftc.gov/legal-library/browse/cases-proceedings/251-0093-ascensionamsurg-matter
27. Physicians Advocacy Institute / Avalere, physician-practice employment and consolidation data (78% employed by 2024; ~47% hospital-consolidated); with U.S. GAO, Health Care Consolidation (2024) and FTC/DOJ physician-merger study. https://www.techtarget.com/revcyclemanagement/news/366643177/The-corporate-takeover-of-physician-practices-accelerates-study