Which CMS-Reported Dialysis Chains Have the Most Listed Facilities in 2026?
DaVita has the most listed facilities in this analysis of the June 2026 CMS Dialysis Facility Listing: 2,799 distinct CMS Certification Numbers are associated with the exact reported Chain Organization value “DaVita.” Fresenius Medical Care follows with 2,667, and US Renal Care, Inc. follows with 453.
Those results describe CMS-reported chain associations. They do not establish ultimate corporate ownership, consolidate subsidiaries into a corporate family, or measure current day-to-day control.
The analysis retains 6,583 distinct chain-assigned facility CCNs in the 50 states and District of Columbia, grouped into 28 substantive reported Chain Organization values. The complete ranking preserves each reported value separately.
Table of contents
- The leading reported chain organizations
- Ten leading reported chain values at a glance
- Complete ranking of 28 reported organizations
- Facilities and dialysis stations answer different questions
- What a CMS chain assignment means
- How the ranking was calculated
- Why similar chain names remain separate
- How to interpret the results
- The conclusion supported by this snapshot
- Frequently asked questions
- Investigate the facilities behind a chain assignment in QOPE
- Sources
The leading reported chain organizations
DaVita accounts for 42.52% of the qualifying chain-assigned facilities in this analysis. Fresenius Medical Care accounts for 40.51%. Their counts are considerably larger than those of the remaining reported values, but those percentages have a specific denominator: the retained facilities assigned to substantive chain organizations.
They are not shares of all dialysis facilities, patients, treatments, or revenue. Independent facilities and excluded records are outside that denominator.
US Renal Care, Inc., Dialysis Clinic, Inc., and American Renal Associates complete the five leading exact reported values. The table also counts represented jurisdictions across the 50 states and DC. That provides a broad geographic starting point; local availability requires a closer look at individual facilities.
Ten leading reported chain values at a glance
| Rank | Chain Organization | Distinct CCNs | Share of qualifying CCNs |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | DaVita | 2799 | 42.52% |
| 2 | Fresenius Medical Care | 2667 | 40.51% |
| 3 | US Renal Care, Inc. | 453 | 6.88% |
| 4 | Dialysis Clinic, Inc. | 243 | 3.69% |
| 5 | American Renal Associates | 218 | 3.31% |
| 6 | Kaiser Permanente | 22 | 0.33% |
| 7 | Northwest Kidney Centers | 19 | 0.29% |
| 8 | Wake Forest University | 19 | 0.29% |
| 9 | Centers for Dialysis Care | 18 | 0.27% |
| 10 | Greenfield Health Systems | 15 | 0.23% |
The complete table below preserves identifiers and additional source fields for follow-up.
Complete ranking of 28 reported organizations
This table uses the June 2026 snapshot. Share means a percentage of the 6,583 qualifying chain-assigned CCNs. “States/DC represented” counts distinct state-or-DC values. Station sums include available positive integer values; the last column identifies records omitted from those sums.
| Rank | Chain Organization | Distinct CCNs | Share | States/DC represented | Available station sum | Missing/invalid station counts |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | DaVita | 2799 | 42.52% | 47 | 48930 | 50 |
| 2 | Fresenius Medical Care | 2667 | 40.51% | 49 | 50064 | 44 |
| 3 | US Renal Care, Inc. | 453 | 6.88% | 32 | 8007 | 7 |
| 4 | Dialysis Clinic, Inc. | 243 | 3.69% | 30 | 4551 | 1 |
| 5 | American Renal Associates | 218 | 3.31% | 27 | 4170 | 0 |
| 6 | Kaiser Permanente | 22 | 0.33% | 5 | 97 | 6 |
| 7 | Northwest Kidney Centers | 19 | 0.29% | 1 | 378 | 0 |
| 8 | Wake Forest University | 19 | 0.29% | 1 | 549 | 0 |
| 9 | Centers for Dialysis Care | 18 | 0.27% | 1 | 389 | 0 |
| 10 | Greenfield Health Systems | 15 | 0.23% | 1 | 321 | 0 |
| 11 | Atlantic Dialysis Management Services | 13 | 0.20% | 1 | 350 | 0 |
| 12 | Sanford Health | 13 | 0.20% | 3 | 131 | 1 |
| 13 | Mayo Clinic Dialysis | 12 | 0.18% | 2 | 204 | 0 |
| 14 | Puget Sound Kidney Centers | 11 | 0.17% | 1 | 197 | 0 |
| 15 | Diversified Specialty Institutes (DSI) | 8 | 0.12% | 4 | 147 | 0 |
| 16 | Central Florida Kidney Centers | 7 | 0.11% | 1 | 145 | 0 |
| 17 | Intermountain Healthcare | 7 | 0.11% | 1 | 95 | 0 |
| 18 | Independent Dialysis Foundation (IDF) | 6 | 0.09% | 2 | 124 | 0 |
| 19 | Satellite Healthcare | 6 | 0.09% | 4 | 102 | 0 |
| 20 | Gundersen Lutheran | 5 | 0.08% | 1 | 84 | 0 |
| 21 | North Central Pennsylvania Dialysis Clinics | 4 | 0.06% | 1 | 55 | 0 |
| 22 | Satellite Dialysis | 4 | 0.06% | 2 | 71 | 0 |
| 23 | Scott & White Memorial Hospital | 4 | 0.06% | 1 | 116 | 0 |
| 24 | Innovative Dialysis Systems | 3 | 0.05% | 2 | 31 | 0 |
| 25 | Veterans Administration | 3 | 0.05% | 3 | 30 | 0 |
| 26 | UPMC Health System | 2 | 0.03% | 1 | 24 | 0 |
| 27 | Dallas County Hospital District | 1 | 0.02% | 1 | 5 | 0 |
| 28 | Memorial Hermann Healthcare System | 1 | 0.02% | 1 | 7 | 0 |
Facilities and dialysis stations answer different questions
A facility count measures distinct CCNs. A station count measures reported dialysis stations within those facilities. The two can produce different ordering.
For example, DaVita has more qualifying facility CCNs than Fresenius Medical Care in this snapshot. However, the available station counts sum to 48,930 for DaVita and 50,064 for Fresenius Medical Care. The station values are incomplete: 50 qualifying DaVita records and 44 Fresenius records lack a positive integer station count under this calculation.
The station sums should therefore be read as totals of available valid values, with missingness disclosed. They are not a second fully complete capacity ranking. Neither facility counts nor station sums establish treatment volume or patient counts.
What a CMS chain assignment means
Chain Owned and Chain Organization are the source fields used to identify qualifying records. A reported chain association can reflect ownership or management. Reading it as proof of the ultimate legal parent would go beyond the file.
The ranking preserves exact reported names so readers can inspect the grouping. No fuzzy matching or corporate consolidation was applied; a corporate-family analysis would require an audited crosswalk of subsidiaries and reporting aliases.
How the ranking was calculated
The archived CSV contains 7,490 facility rows. Exclusions are applied sequentially: first geographic scope, then a nonblank CCN, then affirmative Chain Owned, then a substantive chain name. Each excluded row is counted once under the first failing condition, so the reported categories are mutually exclusive.
The calculation excludes 63 records outside the 50 states and District of Columbia, 730 remaining records without an affirmative Chain Owned value, and 114 remaining records with nonsubstantive chain labels such as “Other” or “State Owned.” No in-scope records were excluded for a blank CCN. CCN format validity was not separately audited.
Eligible records require a nonblank CCN and a substantive Chain Organization. Surrounding whitespace is removed from chain names, while case, punctuation, and wording are preserved. Each exact value is ranked by its distinct CCN count.
No duplicate eligible CCNs or inconsistent chain assignments were found. Equal counts share competition ranks, with organization names determining display order within ties.
The reported share is the organization's distinct CCN count divided by all 6,583 qualifying chain-assigned CCNs. Geography counts include DC wherever it appears among an organization's qualifying records.
Why similar chain names remain separate
The alias audit identified Satellite Dialysis and Satellite Healthcare as a pair needing consideration. They have four and six qualifying CCNs, respectively. They remain separate because the calculation has no documented crosswalk establishing how their reported assignments should be consolidated.
Combining those two values hypothetically would yield ten qualifying CCNs and leave the five leading organizations unchanged. The published ranking keeps them separate.
The automated punctuation-and-case normalization check found no collisions among the retained reported values. It checks label similarity, not organizational relationships.
How to interpret the results
For market analysts, the table offers an inspectable view of reported chain assignments in a dated Medicare facility listing. Start by deciding whether the question concerns reported assignments, corporate ownership, or service capacity. Each requires a different next step.
For reported assignments, retain the original chain labels and inspect the facilities behind each value. For corporate ownership, investigate name relationships with dated sources before combining groups. For capacity, examine station availability and missing values rather than carrying over the facility ordering.
For researchers, retaining CCNs makes it possible to investigate facility-level attributes with compatible source files. Before joining quality or utilization measures, check the reporting period and whether the other file has one row or several rows per facility.
For readers comparing service availability, the states column adds context, but it does not measure local access. A count of represented states cannot show travel distance, appointment availability, treatment options, or the distribution of locations within each state.
The conclusion supported by this snapshot
DaVita leads the June 2026 ranking by distinct qualifying facility CCNs associated with its exact reported name. Fresenius Medical Care follows closely and has a larger sum of available reported station counts.
The contrast between the two leaders is the central takeaway: the organization with more listed facility records need not have the larger available station sum. Choose the measure that fits the question and carry its missingness and denominator into any comparison.
Frequently asked questions
Are these percentages dialysis market shares?
They are shares of qualifying chain-assigned facility CCNs in this calculation. They do not measure shares of patients, treatments, revenue, or all dialysis facilities.
Does the geography column include DC?
Yes. It counts distinct retained jurisdictions across the 50 states and District of Columbia. It does not describe how evenly facilities are distributed within those jurisdictions.
Why are Satellite Healthcare and Satellite Dialysis separate?
They are separate source values with six and four qualifying CCNs, respectively. The alias audit explains why this ranking retains both.
Investigate the facilities behind a chain assignment in QOPE
Choose a reported organization and retain its exact name, facility CCNs, and June 2026 snapshot as your reference. Open QOPE's Facilities dataset to investigate facility records alongside this ranking. Confirm the dates and reported affiliations before drawing conclusions about an individual location.
Sources
- CMS Dialysis Facility Listing by Facility
- CMS Dialysis Facilities catalog
- CMS Dialysis Facility data dictionary
*Source note: June 2026 CMS Dialysis Facility Listing by Facility CSV, dataset 23ew-n7w9, retrieved September 30, 2026. Rankings use distinct CCNs by exact reported Chain Organization. Supporting cleaned records, ranking output, and audit are archived with this draft.