Prevention Gap Map: colorectal cancer screening at Michigan health centers, 2025.
Screening rates for health center patients aged 46 to 75 at Michigan's 39 federally funded health centers (35 with a rate published by HRSA), from HRSA's Uniform Data System, shown against the Healthy People 2030 target of 72.8%.
| File | What is in it |
|---|---|
| gapmap-2025-michigan-centers.csv | One row per health center (39 rows): HRSA's ID and name for the center, the name as shown on the map, city, rural or urban setting, whether HRSA published a rate, patients screened, patients eligible, screening rate, points below the 72.8% target, and permanent clinic sites. |
| gapmap-2025.json | The file the interactive map is built from, including the 383 permanent clinic sites placed on the map. |
Column definitions
| Column | Meaning |
|---|---|
| bhcmis_id | HRSA's identifier for the health center (BHCMIS ID), for matching to HRSA's own files. |
| hrsa_name | The center's name exactly as HRSA's file writes it. |
| health_center, city | The name and city as shown on the Gap Map. |
| setting | Rural or Urban, as HRSA classifies the center. |
| rate_published | "no" for the four centers where HRSA's file shows "--" in place of a rate. Their figure columns are left empty in this file. |
| adults_46_75_screened | Health center patients aged 46 to 75 with appropriate colorectal cancer screening on record (the measure's numerator, as HRSA reports it). |
| adults_46_75_eligible | Health center patients aged 46 to 75 counted in the measure after its exclusions (the denominator, as HRSA reports it). |
| screening_rate_pct | HRSA's published rate, in percent. |
| points_below_target_72_8 | Percentage points below the Healthy People 2030 target of 72.8%, to one decimal; 0.0 where a center meets or beats it. |
| permanent_clinic_sites | Sites HRSA lists as active and permanent for the center. Seasonal sites and mobile vans are not counted. |
Read it correctly
- Source: HRSA Uniform Data System awardee file for reporting year 2025 (H80-2025.xlsx, refreshed 7 May 2026), colorectal cancer screening measure, patients aged 46 to 75.
- HRSA's file shows "--" in place of the rate for four centers. It does list their patient counts, and those counts are part of the Michigan total. HSREP does not calculate a rate that HRSA did not publish, and this file leaves those four centers' figures blank, so the 35 published rows do not add up to the state total. The counts are in HRSA's own file.
- The 72.8% target is Healthy People 2030 objective C-07: a national target for adults aged 45 to 75, tracked through the National Health Interview Survey. HRSA's measure covers health center patients aged 46 to 75, from clinical records. The target is a benchmark, not a like-for-like comparison.
- A screening rate does not show whether a positive stool test led to a colonoscopy. This is not a ranking.
Cite this dataset
HSREP. (2026). Prevention Gap Map: Colorectal cancer screening at Michigan health centers, 2025 [Data set]. Based on HRSA Uniform Data System awardee data, reporting year 2025. https://hsraep.org/data.html#gap-map
See it as a map: the Prevention Gap Map.
Season 1 campaign performance, February to April 2026.
Post-level results for HSREP's two-country advocacy campaign: about 40 posts per platform across nine published pieces, on Facebook, LinkedIn and Instagram, at $0 ad spend.
| File | What is in it |
|---|---|
| season1-platform-totals.csv | The three dashboard totals and how they add to 57,274. |
| season1-posts-facebook.csv | 40 Facebook posts: date, views, viewers, engagement, reactions, clicks, comments and shares. |
| season1-posts-linkedin.csv | 40 LinkedIn posts: impressions, members reached, video views and social engagement. Some Chapter 1 posts were captured only as a chapter total; the notes column says which. |
| season1-posts-instagram.csv | 39 Instagram posts: total views, the views HSREP's method treats as cross-post referrals (primarily from Facebook), and the native views that remain after removing them. |
| HSR_Season1_Master_Dataset.xlsx | The source for the four files above. The full 12-tab workbook: chapters, country distribution, LinkedIn audience quality, reconciliation, findings, methodology and references. |
Column definitions
| Column | Meaning |
|---|---|
| unit, cascade_position, date | The chapter or event a post belongs to, its place in that chapter's sequence of posts, and the date it was published. |
| fb_views | Facebook: the number of times the post was played (video or reel) or appeared on a screen (photo or text), repeat views included. |
| viewers | Facebook: unique accounts that viewed the post. Meta treats unique-account figures as approximate. |
| impressions | LinkedIn: the number of times the post was displayed on screen. LinkedIn describes this number as an estimate. |
| members_reached | LinkedIn: members who saw the post, counted once each. Never added across posts. |
| ig_total_views, from_other, ig_native_calc | Instagram: all views; views that Instagram's insights attribute to "Other" sources, which HSREP's method treats as cross-post referral views, primarily from Facebook (for Reels, where Instagram shows no source breakdown, Facebook's own count of Instagram views is used); and total views minus those, which is the figure HSREP counts. |
| notes | Capture notes from the master workbook, in plain text. |
Read it correctly
- Views and impressions count plays and appearances on a screen, not people. One person can be counted many times.
- These are the platforms' own counts, read from their dashboards and not audited by a third party. LinkedIn describes its impression count as an estimate, and Meta treats unique-account figures as approximate.
- The post rows add to 36,304 Facebook views and 12,199 LinkedIn impressions, a little below the dashboard totals used for the headline (36,997 and 13,054). Some views are captured only at chapter or campaign level, such as later views, reshares and hashtag discovery, and some Chapter 1 LinkedIn posts exist only as a chapter total. The methodology page sets out how the platform totals are reconciled.
- Instagram native views subtract the views HSREP's method treats as cross-post referrals, primarily from Facebook, so the same view is not counted twice. This is HSREP's reading of Instagram's source breakdown, not a figure Instagram reports.
Cite this dataset
Choyon, M. S. A. (2026). HSR Season 1: Social media campaign performance master dataset [Data set]. HSREP. https://hsraep.org/data.html#season-1
Reuse it. Tell us if something is wrong.
HSREP's compilation, added columns and documentation are licensed under Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 (CC BY 4.0): free to reuse, including commercially, with credit to HSREP. The Gap Map figures are HRSA's, which HRSA makes available to the public free of charge; please cite HRSA as the original source as well. HRSA is not responsible for data that has been reprocessed, so check anything important against HRSA's own file. The CSV files are built by a script from HRSA's rows and the master workbook, and an automatic check stops any version that differs from those sources from being published. Errors go in the corrections log, with the date and what changed. For questions about the data, write to contact@hsraep.org.