Data

Where FDA-registered 503B outsourcing facilities are, by jurisdiction

USPeptideRx EditorialLast reviewed: August 29, 2026

As of 2026-08-28, FDA's published list carried 97 registered outsourcing facilities, spread across the jurisdictions in the table below and concentrated heavily in a handful of them. The count is worth far less than it looks: registration is federal and location-independent, so the number that decides whether a facility may ship office stock to your practice is not how many sit in your state but whether the facility holds your state's licence to ship into it.

A 503B outsourcing facility is the route through which a clinic can lawfully hold most compounded stock without a patient-specific prescription, so the first question an operator asks is usually where these facilities are. The distribution is the answer, and it is more lopsided than most people expect: a small number of jurisdictions hold most of the registered facilities, and a majority of U.S. jurisdictions hold none at all.

The second question is the one that actually decides anything, and the count above does not answer it. Registration under section 503B is federal, and a registered facility is not confined to its own state. What governs whether it may ship into yours is your state’s law on receiving — usually a nonresident or out-of-state licence, and in several states a wholesale distributor licence on top of it.

Count of facilities registered with FDA as outsourcing facilities under section 503B, by jurisdiction, as published by FDA and retrieved on 2026-08-28. Jurisdictions with no registered facility on that date do not appear.
Jurisdiction	Code	Registered facilities
Texas	TX	17
Florida	FL	15
New Jersey	NJ	9
California	CA	8
Pennsylvania	PA	5
Colorado	CO	4
Arizona	AZ	3
Arkansas	AR	3
Missouri	MO	3
Ohio	OH	3
Tennessee	TN	3
Alabama	AL	2
Connecticut	CT	2
Nevada	NV	2
New York	NY	2
Oklahoma	OK	2
South Carolina	SC	2
Kansas	KS	1
Maryland	MD	1
Massachusetts	MA	1
Minnesota	MN	1
Mississippi	MS	1
Montana	MT	1
Nebraska	NE	1
North Carolina	NC	1
Puerto Rico	PR	1
Virginia	VA	1
Wisconsin	WI	1

Code: Two-letter postal abbreviation, as FDA’s table records it.
Registered facilities: A count of rows on FDA's list, not a measure of capacity, size or output. Accurate to 2026-08-28.

Why the count in your state is not the number you need

Registration with FDA is a federal election a facility makes, and it does not carve the country into territories. A facility registered in one state routinely supplies practices in many others, so an operator in a jurisdiction with no registered facility is not cut off, and an operator in the largest cluster is not automatically served.

The binding constraint sits on the receiving end. In every state whose receiving-side rules have been read from primary sources on this site, an outsourcing facility shipping in from elsewhere must also hold that destination state’s licence — and FDA registration on its own is never enough. Which is to say: the useful question is not how many facilities are near you, but which facilities hold your state’s permit. That is a question for your own board of pharmacy, and every board’s lookup portal is listed in the state boards of pharmacy directory.

What registration establishes, and what it does not

Registering under section 503B means a facility has elected to be regulated as an outsourcing facility: it compounds under current good manufacturing practice requirements, reports the products it compounds to FDA, and is subject to FDA inspection on a risk-based schedule. That is a genuinely different bargain from the one a 503A pharmacy makes, and it is the reason the 503B route exists for office stock at all. The two are compared in full in 503A vs 503B.

What registration is not is approval. FDA does not approve, endorse, or vouch for a registered facility or anything it compounds, and compounded preparations are not FDA-approved drugs. Nor does registration make a facility a pharmacy — an outsourcing facility is registered with FDA rather than licensed as a pharmacy at all, which is why attaching the word registered to the word pharmacy gets the regulator and the credential wrong in the same breath.

Why this page does not reproduce FDA’s facility list

FDA’s table carries, alongside each facility’s name, columns recording whether a Form 483 was issued, whether a recall was conducted, and what action followed the last inspection. Those columns are public. Reformatting them into a directory of named facilities and their inspection history would still be the wrong thing to publish: it converts a regulatory record into a compliance scoreboard about named businesses, on a site that sells access to compounders, and it goes stale the week after it is posted while continuing to read as current.

So this page carries the aggregate and stops. If you need to check a particular facility — its registration status, its inspection history, or the 483 itself where FDA links one — go to FDA’s own page, which is listed in the sources below and is updated continuously rather than quarterly. That is the more accurate answer as well as the appropriate one.

Method and retrieval

Data retrieved August 28, 2026.

FDA publishes its registered-outsourcing-facility list as a server-rendered HTML table. That page was fetched directly over HTTPS on the retrieval date and the table parsed in full, with no rows sampled or excluded. The per-jurisdiction counts below were then recomputed from the parsed facility records rather than copied from any summary, and they agree with the count FDA’s own page carries. No facility is named on this page, and no column of FDA’s table describing an inspection, a Form 483, a recall or a regulatory action is reproduced here in any form — see the note below on why.

FDA updates the list continuously as facilities register, re-register and withdraw, so a count is accurate to its retrieval date and to nothing after it. Refreshed quarterly here. For a current answer about any single facility, use FDA’s page rather than this one.

What this page does not establish

Counts are accurate to 2026-08-28 and to no later date. FDA's list changes continuously, so treat any figure here as a snapshot rather than a current fact.
1 facility on FDA's list is published without a city or state. It is included in the total above and appears in no jurisdiction row, because inferring its location would be inventing data.
A count of registered facilities says nothing about capacity, product range, quality, or whether any of them will take your practice as a customer. It is a count of rows.
This page names no facility and carries no assessment of any facility, including any this site works with. It reproduces no column of FDA’s table describing an inspection, a Form 483, a recall, or a regulatory action.
Jurisdictions absent from the table held no registered facility on the retrieval date. That is not a statement about whether a registered facility elsewhere may ship into them — in general one can, subject to that jurisdiction’s own licensing.
Whether a given facility holds your state’s licence to ship in is not answerable from this data and must be checked with your own board of pharmacy.

Sources

Primary sources, fetched directly from the issuing body. No secondary summaries.