State veterinary facility license registry availability

If you need a bulk list of licensed veterinary facilities in the US, the honest starting point is that most states don't publish one. Vettica checked all 51 jurisdictions (50 states and DC) on 28 September 2026: nine have a no-cost public roster covering general facility licensing, one more (South Carolina) has a no-cost roster limited to some facility types, and ten in total have any no-cost roster. The other 41 have none, though most still publish something you can search one license at a time. This page breaks down what each jurisdiction publishes, what the three states with usable extracts contain, and what that means if you're verifying practices at scale.

Correction, 4 October 2026: an earlier version classed Arizona, Maryland and West Virginia as having no no-cost roster. Each publishes one: Arizona a CSV export of its premises registry sheet, Maryland an open-data layer of licensed veterinary hospitals (rows last updated 22 July 2025), and West Virginia a facility roster CSV, whose link had returned an error at our 28 September check. We retrieved all three on 30 September 2026 for our state veterinary board facility rosters report. The general-roster count rises from 6 to 9 and the any-roster count from 7 to 10. Kansas's count is now 677: the extract lists one license number (PRF001675) twice, which the earlier 678 counted twice.

Our data

Contribution: first-party data, derived analysis, downloadable dataset

• Collected: Checked each state veterinary board's website on 28 September 2026 for a facility license and a public bulk roster; evidence URL per state. Downloaded the public facility-license extracts or rosters of five state boards (FL DBPR, MO, KS, NC, OH) on 24-25 September 2026; one row per licensed facility record (aggregated 1 October 2026).
• Published: 40 aggregate figures; each group meets its dataset's minimum size (1 or 5 source records) and smaller groups are withheld.
• Method: the exact queries, row counts and thresholds are in the methodology.
• Computed: 40 derived figures (remaining counts) from the published figures. Each is a dataset row with its formula, inputs and expression, so it can be recomputed.
• Roster partition: 10 of 51 jurisdictions (50 states and DC), 19.6% — Any no-cost roster (9 general + 1 limited); 9 of 51 general facility coverage (AZ, CA, FL, KS, KY, MD, MO, OH, WV); 1 of 51 limited facility types (SC).
• Tracked: in our source-fact ledger since 1 October 2026; one correction, 4 October 2026 (see the correction note).
• Sources: the source manifest (JSON) lists the 56 sources behind the figures (state veterinary boards, state registry extracts), each with its public URL, retrieval date, status and the reason any is left out. A card's or table's Source link goes to that source's own page.
• Reproduce it: download the data as CSV or JSON (80 rows; variables: state registry availability, facility-license availability by licensing, roster access and format, no-cost public roster by licensing scope, licensed facility records by state, derived figure; license CC BY 4.0).

Most jurisdictions license no facilities and publish no roster

The headline split is stark. Of the 51 jurisdictions, 32 do not license veterinary facilities at all and have no no-cost bulk roster; 7 license facilities but publish no no-cost bulk roster; 9 license facilities and do publish one; and the remaining 3 sit in edge cases (one licenses only some facility types with a roster, one licenses only some types without one, and one has a search-only roster with no public bulk file). All figures are from Vettica's review of each state veterinary board's website, checked 28 September 2026, with Arizona, Maryland and West Virginia corrected on 4 October 2026 ([methodology](methodology.md)).

That means the majority of the country regulates veterinary facilities through individual practitioner licensing alone. For verification work that requires a publicly downloadable general facility roster, nine jurisdictions provide a direct source. South Carolina's limited PDF may help only when the target facility type is covered; elsewhere, use the state-specific routes below.

What the 19 jurisdictions that do license facilities actually publish

Nineteen of 51 jurisdictions license veterinary facilities (the 7 with no roster, the 9 with one, and the 3 edge cases above, per the same Vettica review). Their publication formats vary widely, and the format matters as much as the existence of a license.

Among the 7 jurisdictions that license facilities but have no no-cost public roster, each publishes in its own format: a searchable roster, a JavaScript report download, a JavaScript searchable/download portal, a facility license portal, a searchable credential portal, or just application forms and rules. One state offers a searchable roster behind a paid bulk subscription. None of these gives you a file you can pull without per-record work or payment.

The nine general-roster states each publish differently too: a bulk public-license download, a public facility roster, a public premises roster, a searchable roster with Excel export, searchable/downloadable eLicense permits, a tab-delimited XLS bulk download, a premises registry sheet with a CSV export (Arizona), an open-data map layer (Maryland) and a facility roster CSV (West Virginia). South Carolina, the limited-scope case, publishes a PDF roster. One jurisdiction with a search-only roster holds an export internally and publishes a county-search roster. So even the "good" states require format-specific handling; there's no single standard file.

Ten jurisdictions with any no-cost roster, and what "any" covers

Counting both scopes: 10 of 51 jurisdictions (19.6%) have a no-cost public roster of any kind, made up of 9 with general licensing scope and 1 (South Carolina) with limited scope covering only some facility types (Vettica review, 28 September 2026, corrected 4 October 2026). The remaining 41 of 51 jurisdictions have no no-cost roster at all.

Keep the two counts separate. The nine general rosters are the ones that cover facility licensing broadly; the ten-any-roster figure includes South Carolina's PDF, which covers only some facility types. If your task is verifying general practice facilities, nine states give you a direct source, and treating the ten figure as the general-practice count would overstate coverage.

What the three published extracts contain

Three states' public extracts were downloaded on 24–25 September 2026 (Florida DBPR, Missouri, and Kansas boards, per the public extracts record). Florida's extract holds 3,127 licensed facility records, Missouri's 1,001, and Kansas's 677. Florida's extract is roughly three times Missouri's and nearly five times Kansas's. The remaining 48 of 51 jurisdictions are not included in this comparison of licensed facility records by state; Florida, Missouri, and Kansas are the three that are.

Licensed facility records in each state's public extract

FL

3,127 licensed facility records

As of 1 October 2026

Source: Florida DBPR, Missouri and Kansas veterinary boards (public extracts, 24-25 September 2026), checked 1 October 2026

MO

1,001 licensed facility records

As of 1 October 2026

Source: Florida DBPR, Missouri and Kansas veterinary boards (public extracts, 24-25 September 2026), checked 1 October 2026

KS

677 licensed facility records

As of 1 October 2026

Source: Florida DBPR, Missouri and Kansas veterinary boards (public extracts, 24-25 September 2026), checked 1 October 2026

Licensed facility records in each state's public extract

Attribute	FL	MO	KS
Licensed facility records	3,127 licensed facility records, as of 1 October 2026	1,001 licensed facility records, as of 1 October 2026	677 licensed facility records, as of 1 October 2026

What this supports for verification work

For teams verifying US veterinary practices, the data points to a state-by-state sourcing strategy rather than a single national file:

• In the nine general-roster states, pull the board's own roster and match its format (XLS, Excel-exportable search, premises list, CSV, open-data layer, or bulk license download). This is the only route that gets facility-level records without per-license lookups.
• In South Carolina, the PDF roster covers only some facility types, so check whether your target facilities fall in the covered types before relying on it.
• In the 7 facility-licensing states with no no-cost roster, plan on per-record searches through whatever portal the board runs, or a paid subscription in the one state that offers one. Budget accordingly; a JavaScript-only portal may need manual or browser-based collection.
• In the 32 non-licensing jurisdictions, facility verification has no state registry to lean on. Verification there has to rest on practitioner license lookup (individual lookup, search, or roster formats, per the same review) plus non-registry evidence such as the clinic's own filings.

One practical check: the three states with published extracts let you validate counts against the boards' own files (Florida DBPR, Missouri, Kansas, 24–25 September 2026), so any downstream list you build for those states can be reconciled to a public source.

Limits of this data

Three limits shape what these figures can tell you.

Coverage is in registry terms, not market terms. The counts describe what each state veterinary board publishes on its own website, observed on 28 September 2026 (roster availability) and 24–25 September 2026 (extracts). A share of jurisdictions with a roster says nothing about market share, practice ownership, or how many practices operate in a state.

Definitions vary. "Licenses veterinary facilities" and "licenses only some facility types" reflect each board's own scope; a premises registration in one state isn't equivalent to a facility license in another. The publication-format labels (lookup, search, roster, portal) describe the board's website as checked, and one state's "search-only roster with a held copy" means the board holds an export that isn't publicly downloadable.

The snapshot is a single date. Roster availability changes when boards redesign sites or add downloads; these figures describe 28 September 2026, and no trend can be read from one observation. The extract counts are one row per licensed facility record in each board's public file as downloaded; they measure what the board publishes, not the total number of operating facilities.

How to use the dataset

The CSV and JSON files hold 80 rows: one row per aggregate group (each published figure), plus one row per derived figure with its formula and inputs (40 observed, 40 derived). The rows behind each group (the collected source rows) are not published.

Columns: id (row id (observed rows r01..., derived figures d01...)), kind (observed or derived), entity, attribute, scenario, value, number (the figure as a plain number), unit, scope (the scope, or a derived figure's input row ids), input_price_scope, scenario_scope, formula (a derived figure's formula in words), expression (its arithmetic over the input figures), source_owner, source_url, observed_at, fixture.

Variables: State registry availability; Facility-license availability by licensing, roster access and format; No-cost public roster by licensing scope; Licensed facility records by state; Derived figure. Data as of 1 October 2026. License: CC BY 4.0.

Each observed row's source_url is its public source (the page the data came from) or, for a figure built from several sources, the section of the source manifest that lists them; derived rows list their input rows in scope.

To use it, filter attribute to the figure you need, sort by number, and cite the row's source_owner and observed_at. Recompute any derived row from its expression and the input rows its scope lists.