Top 10 US Cities by Treatment Facility Count (SAMHSA)
US cities ranked by how many SAMHSA-registered treatment facilities operate within their municipal boundaries.
Research period:
What this ranking is (and isn't)
This ranks cities by raw facility count reported to SAMHSA, not by treatment quality, safety, capacity, or clinical outcomes, none of which SAMHSA's survey collects. A city ranking high here simply has more listed facilities, often because it has more people. This is not a personalized recommendation about where to seek treatment. Talk to a doctor or licensed counselor about your situation, or call the SAMHSA National Helpline at 1-800-662-4357 (free, confidential, 24/7).
Research question
Among the US cities recorded in the SAMHSA treatment facility directory, which carry the highest concentration of treatment facilities, and how does the distribution reflect urban-rural divides in behavioral health infrastructure?
Methodology
This ranking is generated fresh from the current SAMHSA dataset every time the page loads, not a fixed figure we typed in once and forgot about. When SAMHSA publishes an updated Behavioral Health Treatment Services Locator, our next data refresh picks up the change automatically and this page's numbers update with it.
Cities with no data reported are left out of the ranking rather than shown as a false zero, since SAMHSA occasionally withholds a figure for confidentiality or data-quality reasons. If a later SAMHSA release revises a number, that revision shows up here the next time we refresh, no manual edits needed on our end.
Every number on this page traces back to a specific SAMHSA record, so you can verify it yourself against the original source rather than taking our word for it. See the methodology page for the full data pipeline and how often we refresh.
Top 10 US Cities by Treatment Facility Count (SAMHSA)
Live data, current as of the most recent SAMHSA refresh
The ranked top 10
Every row below reflects the current SAMHSA dataset and updates automatically the next time we refresh it.
| # | City | State | Treatment facilities |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Chicago | IL | 171 |
| 2 | Baltimore | MD | 147 |
| 3 | New York | NY | 131 |
| 4 | Los Angeles | CA | 111 |
| 5 | Phoenix | AZ | 110 |
| 6 | Brooklyn | NY | 106 |
| 7 | Salt Lake City | UT | 102 |
| 8 | Minneapolis | MN | 98 |
| 9 | Bronx | NY | 87 |
| 10 | Las Vegas | NV | 83 |
Source: Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (SAMHSA) - SAMHSA Behavioral Health Treatment Services Locator (public records). Values are current as of our most recent SAMHSA data refresh.
Findings
Top entity in the ranking
The top-ranked record in this dataset is Chicago, with a value of 171 on the Treatment facilities column. The full top-10 set is rendered in the table above. Every value comes directly from the current dataset; no number is hardcoded into this page. When the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (SAMHSA) publishes a revision, the ranking and the prose around it update automatically.
Distribution shape
The gap between the top-ranked record (171) and the 10th-ranked record (83) characterizes how concentrated the top of the distribution is. Where the top value is many multiples of the median value of the visible set, the population is highly concentrated, a small number of entities accumulate the bulk of the measured quantity. Where the top and bottom of the visible set are close together, the distribution is relatively flat across the top end. The full distribution beyond this top-10 cut is summarized in the aggregate context section below and explored in the linked entity profiles.
Aggregate context
Across the full population behind this ranking, here are the summary statistics: how many records exist in total, the sum of the ranking metric across all qualifying records, and the mean per-record value. The methodology page documents the exact filter applied (records with null or zero values on the ranking metric are excluded). This aggregate row is computed from the same dataset that powers the ranking above.
Source provenance
The records in this ranking originate from Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (SAMHSA), specifically the SAMHSA Behavioral Health Treatment Services Locator (public records). PlainRecovery ingests each new release from the agency and republishes the figures here automatically, so this page always reflects the current dataset rather than a fixed snapshot. See the methodology page for the source URL, the vintage date, and how the data is processed.
Why this ranking matters
Rankings like this one let a reader scan a population quickly and identify outliers, concentrations, and patterns that warrant deeper investigation. The detail pages linked from each entity in the table above give the full per-entity context: time-series history where available, related metrics from adjacent tables, and links onward to the underlying source records. The methodology page explains how an entity earns inclusion in the dataset and how the ranking column is computed at the source.
What this analysis cannot tell us
City-level facility counts reflect the address each facility listed in its SAMHSA registration. Some facilities operate multiple locations under a single registration, and some metropolitan areas span multiple municipalities, the count is per-city as recorded, not per-metro-area. Address records are maintained by the facility and updated when changes are reported to SAMHSA; current operating locations may differ slightly from registration addresses. Cities are not adjusted for population, large urban cores naturally accumulate more facilities than smaller cities. This ranking measures registered facility count, not treatment capacity, bed count, or appointment availability.
Secondary cut from the same source
Top 10 states by facilities offering a sliding-fee scale or payment assistance
Sources
- SAMHSA Behavioral Health Treatment Services Locator - https://findtreatment.gov/