Access Gap · America's Future

Rank #8 of 10 by shortfall

Fort SageAZ

Low gap

Treatment slots

Funded or available treatment capacity in this region right now. This is the "supply" side of the gap.

Estimated need

Estimated people needing treatment, derived by the open method shown below. A region total — never a list of individuals.

People short

Unmet need: max(0, need − slots). The number of added slots that would fully close this region's gap.

Access gap
?
Access-gap score
The share of estimated need that current capacity does not cover: `round(max(0, need − slots) ÷ need × 100)`. 0% means need is fully met; higher means worse access. It never divides by zero — a region with no estimated need shows a 0% gap.

16%

of estimated need is currently unmet.

84% covered16% gap

Adding 15 slots would fully close this region's gap. Model it on the plan page →

Open methodology

Tribal + county health screenings, 12-mo positive screens.

Need estimates are region totals only. No individual is represented, queried, or stored. Gap = max(0, need − slots) ÷ need.

Computation audit

access-gap.audit

$ gap --region "Fort Sage"
slots        = 80
est_need     = 95
shortfall    = max(0, 95 - 80) = 15
gap_score    = round(15/95 * 100) = 16%
coverage     = 84%
severity     = low
sha256(inputs) = 35548bda72287c10…  (aggregate-only)
individual_records_touched = 0

Ask AI

AI can be wrong. Not medical, legal, or financial advice.

Fort SageAZ

Access gap?Access-gap scoreThe share of estimated need that current capacity does not cover: round(max(0, need − slots) ÷ need × 100). 0% means need is fully met; higher means worse access. It never divides by zero — a region with no estimated need shows a 0% gap.

Open methodology

Computation audit

Ask AI

Access gap
?
Access-gap score
The share of estimated need that current capacity does not cover: `round(max(0, need − slots) ÷ need × 100)`. 0% means need is fully met; higher means worse access. It never divides by zero — a region with no estimated need shows a 0% gap.