Medically Underserved Area Designated · below priority line

UT · Healthcare shortage profile

Juab County, UT

Peak severity leads this reading: Juab County's highest active HPSA score is 12.0, still below HRSA's 17-point high-priority line. Population 11,786.

Active HPSAs
2
Population
11,786
Peak shortage score
12.0
MUA Index
52.6

Light-burden verdict

According to current HRSA Data Warehouse records, Juab County carries a comparatively light shortage burden - 2 active HPSA designations, more than 10% of the 3,289 real US counties, with mental health the deepest gap.

2
Active HPSA designations
1
Mental-health shortages
12
Peak severity score (of 26)
Top 90%
US counties by volume

Few Census ZCTAs touch Juab County

The Census ZCTA-county crosswalk lists only 6 ZIP Code Tabulation Areas intersecting Juab County, a sparse footprint relative to most US counties in this mirror (at or below the 9-ZIP tercile cut).

Intersecting ZCTA

1 additional ZCTA intersect this county in the crosswalk (ordered by land share).

Source: Census ZCTA–county relationship file joined to this portal's county FIPS set. As of 2026-08-15.

Key findings

What the HRSA Data Warehouse does not surface for Juab County, UT on its own pages , computed from the retained designation mirror as of 2026-08-15. Each line carries its own denominator so it can be quoted as it stands.

  1. Closing Juab County's active designations would take about 2.6 additional clinician FTEs, with mental health the largest gap.

    HRSA providers_needed summed once per HPSA id (no double-count across status rows): 1.9 mental health, 0.7 dental. This is the federal gap estimate, not a headcount of practising clinicians.

  2. 50% of Juab County's 2 active designations are mental health.

    Discipline mix from designated HPSA records only: 0 primary care, 1 mental health, 1 dental (denominator 2).

  3. Peak HPSA score 12.0 sits below HRSA's 17-point high-priority line.

    Below-17 designations still count as shortages for program geography, but they do not clear the high-priority NHSC placement threshold on this release.

Corpus placement

Designated volume without a high-priority score

According to current HRSA Data Warehouse records, Juab County carries 2 active designations, above 10% of real US counties. None of those scores clear HRSA's high-priority line of 17 on this release, so the page leads with severity reading rather than a national distribution chart.

State peer position. Juab County falls in the lower half of UT counties by active-designation volume, at rank 25 of 29. Ties share a rank.

Computed from current designated HPSA rows for every five-digit county FIPS. See the placement methodology.

Healthcare shortage designations from HRSA. FIPS: 49023. Population: 11,786.

Medically Underserved Area

MUA Designated
MUA Index: 52.6

Active HPSA scores

Mental Health 12.0
Dental 12.0

Current designated records only. Scores range 0–25 (primary/mental health), 0–26 (dental). Higher = greater need. What counts as a high score?

Highest-severity HPSA designations

All 2 active (designated) HPSAs in Juab County, ranked by HRSA shortage score.

Name Type Score
Six County Mental Health Catchment Area mental_health 12.0
Juab County dental 12.0

Light-burden reading for Juab County

Peak severity leads this reading: Juab County's highest active HPSA score is 12.0, still below HRSA's 17-point high-priority line. Juab County's shortage runs equally deep in mental health and dental care: both scored 12.0 by HRSA, still short of the 17-point priority line, though the designation itself is formal. The county also sits inside a Medically Underserved Area, indexed at 52.6, and the lower the index, the greater the measured need.

Juab County carries 2 active designations and sits below the national mid-pack (above 10% of counties). A light footprint still matters: a single high-score dental or mental-health record can open program geography even when the county total looks small next to heavy peers.

Juab County falls in the lower half of UT counties by active-designation volume, at rank 25 of 29. Read the active scores and the deepest-care guide link below before collapsing this county into a "no shortage" story.

Light-volume FTE gap for Juab County

HRSA providers_needed summed once per HPSA id for Juab County's active designations: about 2.6 FTE, a federal gap estimate, not a headcount of practising clinicians.

Counties near Juab County's mental score of 12.0

One peer set for this severity-led county: nearest active mental HPSA score to 12.0 (severity lead on this page is “Six County Mental Health Catchment Area”).

Frequently Asked Questions

Does Juab County's MUA standing sit beside its HPSA records?
Yes - Juab County carries an MUA designation (index 52.6; lower = greater measured need) in addition to its HPSA rows. MUA and HPSA are separate HRSA tracks; both can open different federal pathways.
Which record sets Juab County's peak score of 12.0?
"Six County Mental Health Catchment Area" leads the active set (score 12.0; mental health; 60,000 people in the service area; ~1.9 FTE still needed on the record; designated 05/08/1998). Below 17 the shortage is formal but outside HRSA's high-priority NHSC tier. Discipline mix across 2 active rows: 0 primary care, 1 mental health, 1 dental.
Which other active designations sit under Juab County's severity reading?
After "Six County Mental Health Catchment Area", the next active names on this release are "Six County Mental Health Catchment Area" and "Juab County". Provider need (id-de-duped) totals ~2.6 FTE across disciplines that still carry a gap.

Source: HRSA Data Warehouse. FIPS: 49023. This county’s designations come from BCD_HPSA_FCT_DET_MH.csv (mental health) and BCD_HPSA_FCT_DET_DH.csv (dental) — download the normalized export on our open data page. PlainHealthAccess is not affiliated with HRSA or any government agency.

HRSA Data Warehouse HPSA + MUA/P records for FIPS 49023 (Juab County, UT), vintage 2026-08-15. Active designation count 2; peak score 12.0; signature peak score 12.0. This profile is reference material, not professional advice; see methodology.