This chart summarizes performance at regional and statewide levels. The average clinic score (percentage of "yes" responses) for each region is compared to the average clinic score across the entire state. The default view displays data for viral load suppression, a key outcome measure, but other indicators may be selected under the Filter tab. Additional information about each data point can be obtained by moving your cursor over it.

This overview may be useful for public health officers and researchers. It also enables individual providers and consumers to compare care in their region to that at a particular facility. It should be noted, however, that these are only relative comparisons for the purpose of continuous quality improvement; the statewide average is not intended to define a standard of acceptable performance. Also, the statistical significance of regional performance variation depends on the number of submissions per region, which varies considerably across the state. The "About" tab contains additional details concerning this dataset.

This dataset represents self‐reported performance data by HIV ambulatory care programs. All HIV ambulatory programs throughout New York State with a significant HIV caseload (a total caseload of at least 30 HIV‐infected patients receiving ambulatory HIV care at one or more sites) are expected to self‐report their annual quality of care performance data using standardized submission tools and methodologies. With the assistance of the online eHIVQUAL application, performance data results are instantly available to HIV programs, allowing them to immediately utilize their data findings to prioritize upcoming quality activities, and are available for generating benchmarking reports across New York State. See Limitations regarding redaction of small‐population data.

This dataset represents self‐reported performance data by HIV ambulatory care programs. All HIV ambulatory programs throughout New York State with a significant HIV caseload (a total caseload of at least 30 HIV‐infected patients receiving ambulatory HIV care at one or more sites) are expected to self‐report their annual quality of care performance data using standardized submission tools and methodologies. With the assistance of the online eHIVQUAL application, performance data results are instantly available to HIV programs, allowing them to immediately utilize their data findings to prioritize upcoming quality activities, and are available for generating benchmarking reports across New York State. See Limitations regarding redaction of small‐population data.

This dataset represents self‐reported performance data by HIV ambulatory care programs. All HIV ambulatory programs throughout New York State with a significant HIV caseload (a total caseload of at least 30 HIV‐infected patients receiving ambulatory HIV care at one or more sites) are expected to self‐report their annual quality of care performance data using standardized submission tools and methodologies. With the assistance of the online eHIVQUAL application, performance data results are instantly available to HIV programs, allowing them to immediately utilize their data findings to prioritize upcoming quality activities, and are available for generating benchmarking reports across New York State. See Limitations regarding redaction of small‐population data.

This dataset represents self‐reported performance data by HIV ambulatory care programs. All HIV ambulatory programs throughout New York State with a significant HIV caseload (a total caseload of at least 30 HIV‐infected patients receiving ambulatory HIV care at one or more sites) are expected to self‐report their annual quality of care performance data using standardized submission tools and methodologies. With the assistance of the online eHIVQUAL application, performance data results are instantly available to HIV programs, allowing them to immediately utilize their data findings to prioritize upcoming quality activities, and are available for generating benchmarking reports across New York State. See Limitations regarding redaction of small‐population data.