Data-Sharing Strategies to Support Access to Care Interventions

September 22, 2025 | Anna Bartels, Chikamso Chukwu

Every state public health agency houses a Primary Care Office (PCO), which monitors the effectiveness of that jurisdiction’s health system. HRSA funds PCOs to identify communities with health professional shortages, and PCOs may also administer workforce programs to place providers in those communities. To identify which communities are experiencing shortages, PCOs collect state-level data on where health care providers work, what services they offer, and how many hours they spend on patient care. PCOs also track data on community needs, such as household income levels and community transportation options, to create a holistic picture of whether health care is truly accessible.

PCOs across the country have explored different policy pathways to access reliable, accurate data, including laws that support PCO access to certain data sets, cross-sectoral relationships, and data-sharing agreements. According to ASTHO’s national PCO workforce assessment, over 85% of PCOs are part of a formal data-sharing arrangement, with licensing boards and Medicaid agencies serving as two of the most common data sources. This health policy update describes several types of actions jurisdictions have taken to support PCO data access.

New Hampshire Law Allows the PCO to Survey Providers During License Renewals

The New Hampshire PCO’s Health Professions Data Center administers a survey tied to health care providers’ medical license renewals that gathers self-reported provider and practice data, such as where providers work, how many hours per week are spent delivering direct patient care, and anticipated changes in capacity over the next five years. New Hampshire law outlines the scope of the survey and authorizes the PCO to collect, store, analyze, and report on health care workforce supply and capacity through surveying during license renewal. Although survey responses are the primary source of data on the health care workforce, data from the state’s all payer claims database housed within the Medicaid division provides supplemental information. Given the type of data involved, legal agreements are required between the PCO, licensing agencies, and relevant parties to maintain privacy for providers. These data are critical for the PCO to evaluate current and future capacity — especially in regions with limited providers — and proactively focus recruitment efforts on those communities.

Colorado Braids Data Collection Strategies Across Multiple Sources

While the Colorado PCO has relied on a similar law that authorizes collecting licensure data for more than 10 years, its data collection efforts have since expanded. The state now collects and integrates data across 16 different sources, each requiring a different procurement strategy. While some data sources are simple to access because they are public use files (e.g., Medicare provider data), other sources — namely state agencies — require the PCO to submit an application or enter into a memorandum of understanding or contract for access. Pursuing multiple data sources in this way takes significant effort and staff time, necessitating the health department to supplement HRSA’s PCO cooperative agreement funding with other sources, including state appropriations and private funding. A commitment to collaboration and investment and a willingness to build new relationships and processes from scratch support the Colorado PCO’s wide-ranging data collection strategy.

Iowa Builds on Existing Relationships to Access Provider Data

Iowa’s PCO has a long-standing relationship with the University of Iowa and a joint interest in health care workforce data. Currently, the PCO purchases provider phone survey information from the University of Iowa’s existing program and receives data on a biannual basis. The university’s data collection is part of its own research efforts and not collected on behalf of the PCO, so while the data are broader than what the PCO needs, it is still a valuable source of provider information. Because of this existing arrangement, the PCO could pursue a more expansive agreement (that would likely require additional funding) and expand the scope of the data, such as by adding data collection on provider residence or sliding fee scales. Other PCOs may consider approaching partners that have pieces of the data they need so there is an established relationship in place that may be expanded as new resources become available.

PCOs Secure Access to Medicaid Claims Data

State Medicaid agencies are another frequent data partner for PCOs, with at least 16 receiving provider data from their state Medicaid agency in various formats. In some states the Medicaid agency shares a point-in-time file with the PCO, who may manually recode the data before submission to HRSA. In other states, the PCO has direct access to the Medicaid claims processing system to independently extract the necessary data points.

The nature of the partnership between the PCO and Medicaid agency may vary based on the state’s organizational structure (e.g., whether the PCO and Medicaid agency sit within the same department). However, a PCO seeking access to Medicaid claims data should be prepared to justify the need for the data, articulate how it can support the Medicaid agency, and develop the necessary relationships to support a workable solution for both parties.

Conclusion

Each PCO and state health agency has its own unique structure, and there is no “right” way to collect health care provider practice or access data. However, exploring how different jurisdictions approach these processes can help PCOs think strategically about new initiatives and relationships. ASTHO will continue tracking PCO success stories and remains available to facilitate connections among health agency staff.