document_title: Water in California

question_text: where does la get most of its water

question_tokens: where does la get most of its water

text: Water in California

text: Sources of water[edit]

text: California's limited water supply comes from two main sources: surface water, or water that travels or gathers on the ground, like rivers, streams, and lakes; and groundwater, which is water that is pumped out from the ground. California has also begun producing a small amount of desalinated water, water that was once sea water, but has been purified.

text: Groundwater[edit]

text: This section's factual accuracy may be compromised due to out-of-date information. Please update this article to reflect recent events or newly available information. (August 2017)

text: Groundwater is a critical element of the California water supply. During a normal year, 30% of the state's water supply comes from groundwater (underground water). In times of intense drought, groundwater consumption can rise to 60% or more.[4] Over 850,000,000 acre feet (1,050 km3) of water is stored in California's 450 known groundwater reservoirs.[4] However, not all the water is usable. Over half of the groundwater is unavailable due to poor quality and the high cost of pumping the water from the ground. While surface water is concentrated mostly in the northern part of the state, groundwater is more evenly distributed.[4]

text: The largest groundwater reservoirs are found in the Central Valley.[4] The majority of the supply there is in the form of runoff that seeps into the aquifer. The freshwater is usually found in deposits of gravel, silt, and sand. Below these deposits lies a layer of deep sediment, a relic of the era when the Pacific Ocean covered the area.

text: Though California has laws governing surface water usage and quality, there exist no statewide groundwater management laws. Each groundwater basin is individually adjudicated to determine water rights.[5] Otherwise, for all practical purposes, land ownership implicitly carries the right to virtually unlimited groundwater pumping.

text: The large quantity of water beneath the surface has given rise to the misconception that groundwater is a sort of renewable resource that can be limitlessly tapped. Calculations assuming that groundwater usage is sustainable if the rate of removal equals the rate of recharge are often incorrect as a result of ignoring changes in water consumption and water renewal.[6]

text: While the volume of groundwater in California is very large, aquifers can be over drafted when groundwater is removed more rapidly than it is replenished. In 1999, it was estimated that the average, annual overdrafting was around 2,200,000 acre feet (2.7 km3) across the state, with 800,000 acre feet (0.99 km3) in the Central Valley.[7][page needed] Since then, overdrafting had significantly increased. Satellite measurements found that in just the combined Sacramento and San Joaquin River basins, including the Central Valley, overdrafting between 2011 and 2014 was 12,000,000 acre feet (15 km3) of water per year.[8]

text: Surface water[edit]

text: California has ten major drainage basins defined for convenience of water management. These basins are divided from one another by the crests of mountains. From north to south the basins are: North Coast, Sacramento River, North Lahontan, San Francisco Bay, San Joaquin River, Central Coast, Tulare Lake, South Lahontan, South Coast, and Colorado River regions. Each region incorporates watersheds from many rivers of similar clime.

text: The Central Valley watershed, which incorporates the Sacramento River, San Joaquin River and Tulare Lake regions, is the largest in California, draining over a third of the state – 60,000 square miles (160,000 km2) – and producing nearly half the total runoff.[9][10] The Sierra Nevada snowpack feeds Central Valley river systems and is a critical source of water in the state's long dry season when little if any precipitation falls. Up to 30 percent of California's water supply is from snowpack.[11] Much of California's extensive reservoir and aqueduct system is designed to store and capture runoff from the Central Valley watershed. The Sacramento and San Joaquin Rivers converge at the Sacramento–San Joaquin River Delta, a large fresh-water estuary where much of the state's water supply is withdrawn. The Central Valley watershed provides most of the water for Northern and Central California, as well as a significant chunk of Southern California's usage.[10]

text: The North Coast watershed receives the highest annual precipitation of any California watershed. It incorporates many large river systems such as the Klamath, Smith and Eel, and produces over a third of the runoff in the state. With a few exceptions, the North Coast watersheds are relatively undeveloped and provides water only to local communities. The vast majority of water flows uncontrolled into the Pacific Ocean. There have been many proposals to divert water from North Coast rivers to increase water supplies in the rest of California, but these projects were never realized, both due to cost and potential environmental harm.[12]

text: The Colorado River originates more than 1,000 miles (1,600 km) from California in the Rocky Mountains of Colorado and Wyoming and forms the state's southeastern border in the Mojave Desert. Unlike the other California watersheds, essentially all of the water flowing in the Colorado originates outside the state. The Colorado is a critical source of irrigation and urban water for southern California, providing between 55 and 65 percent of the total supply.[13]

text: The Central and South Coast watersheds include the most populous regions of California – the San Francisco Bay Area, Los Angeles and San Diego – but have relatively little natural runoff, requiring the importation of water from other parts of the state.

text: Rivers of the Lahontan watersheds in eastern California are part of the high desert Great Basin and do not drain to the Pacific. Most of the water is used locally in eastern California and western Nevada for irrigation. The Owens River of the South Lahontan region, however, is a principal source of water for Los Angeles.

text:
Main California watersheds[14]

Hydrologic region
Annual precipitation
Annual runoff

North Coast
55,900,000 acre feet (69.0 km3)
28,900,000 acre feet (35.6 km3)

Sacramento River
52,400,000 acre feet (64.6 km3)
22,400,000 acre feet (27.6 km3)

North Lahontan
6,000,000 acre feet (7.4 km3)
1,900,000 acre feet (2.3 km3)

San Francisco Bay
5,500,000 acre feet (6.8 km3)
1,200,000 acre feet (1.5 km3)

San Joaquin River
21,800,000 acre feet (26.9 km3)
7,900,000 acre feet (9.7 km3)

Central Coast
12,300,000 acre feet (15.2 km3)
2,500,000 acre feet (3.1 km3)

Tulare Lake
13,900,000 acre feet (17.1 km3)
3,300,000 acre feet (4.1 km3)

South Lahontan
9,300,000 acre feet (11.5 km3)
1,300,000 acre feet (1.6 km3)

South Coast
10,800,000 acre feet (13.3 km3)
1,200,000 acre feet (1.5 km3)

Colorado River
4,300,000 acre feet (5.3 km3)
200,000 acre feet (0.25 km3)

text: Rain and snowfall[edit]

text: Rain typically falls in California only during the winter and spring months, from October through May, with more rain falling on the northern half of the state than the southern. Approximately 75 percent of the total precipitation volume occurs north of Sacramento, while 75 percent of the total water demand is in the south. With very rare exceptions, summers are dry throughout the state. Precipitation falling as snow in the Sierra and other mountain ranges feeds the network of reservoirs and surface water sources that supply the state; a low rainfall or light snowfall year can result in drought.

text: Rivers in northern and coastal California are mainly rain fed, peaking from January to April and falling to very low levels between June and November. Snowmelt has a significant influence on the Sierra Nevada rivers from east of Sacramento to east of Bakersfield, which typically peak between April and July. Snowmelt is also the primary water source for the Colorado River which supplies southern California.

text: California precipitation and snowpack is measured by the state of California by "water year", which runs from October 1 to September 30.[15]

text: Desalination[edit]

text: In response to water shortages in the state, some water districts are looking to desalination as a way to provide water for residents. Supporters view seawater desalination as a safer water source, since it draws its water from the ocean and thus, is not affected by periods of drought like other sources of water are. Another incentive for desalination is the ability for localities to be more self-sufficient with their water supply, thus improving their drought resilience. However, desalination has been the subject of scrutiny by opponents, who believe that the costs and possible environmental effects of desalination are indicators that California should continue to pursue other alternatives.[16]

text: Although the response to desalination has been mixed, some areas of California are moving forward with seawater desalination. In December 2015, Poseidon Water completed the construction of the Claude "Bud" Lewis Carlsbad Desalination Plant.[17] This facility, which was approved by the San Diego Water Authority, is responsible for providing water for about 8% of San Diego County's water by the year 2020.[18] As of December 2015, there are 6 additional seawater desalination plants currently in operation in the state of California. As of May 2016, there are also 9 more proposed desalination plants.[19]

text: Reuse[edit]

text: Water always gets recycled, via rivers, aquifers, and the atmosphere, but we can also do this directly and intentionally. Water reuse in California is increasingly important, with reclaimed water being used preferably for agricultural irrigation, toilet flushing, and industry (e.g., making concrete, cooling), although some apply direct and indirect potable reuse, risking environmental persistent pharmaceutical pollutants and other constituents of emerging concern. Treatment should be in accordance with the use and, in many cases, water can be safely and productively recycled back to the same non-potable use.[20]

text: Uses of water[edit]

text: This section needs additional citations for verification. Please help improve this article by adding citations to reliable sources. Unsourced material may be challenged and removed. (October 2014) (Learn how and when to remove this template message)

text: Water use in California is divided into approximately 51% for environmental uses, 39% agricultural use and 11% urban uses, though that varies considerably between regions and between wet and dry years.[21] Solely relying on these statewide volumes is controversial because they don't consider the fact that most of the volume of water used for environmental purposes includes flows down Wild and Scenic Rivers in the North Coast where there is no practical way to recover it for either agricultural or urban use because it lacks many connections to the statewide water supply system.[22] It also doesn't factor in the amount of water required to keep salty water from the Pacific Ocean from intruding into the Delta beyond a certain small concentration.[22] Otherwise, "reduced water quality resulting from large amounts of salt water drawn into the Delta could shut down the export pumps that supply fresh water to agriculture and cities."[23][24]

text: Around 75% of California's water supply comes from north of Sacramento, while 80% of the water demand occurs in the southern two-thirds of the state.[25] The Sacramento-San Joaquin River Delta Estuary located between San Francisco Bay and Sacramento receives about 40% of California's total precipitation and 50% of its total streamflow. It is a critical hub used by the federal Central Valley Project and California State Water Project to connect water collected and stored in the north regions of the state with aqueducts and canals that transport it to users in the North Bay, South Bay, East Bay, and Greater Southern California. In a typical year, about 10.8 million acre feet (13.3 km3) are exported from the Delta: 67% is delivered by the Central Valley Project, 26% by the State Water Project and the remainder to other federal water project users.[26] Those flows are greatly reduced in drought years. About 16.5 million acre feet (20.4 km3) of water entering the Delta in a typical year flows through the Delta into San Francisco Bay, including 6.3 million acre feet (7.8 km3) in governmentally mandated environmental flows; 22.4 million acre feet (27.6 km3) is used for other environmental purposes, and 1.6 million acre feet (2.0 km3) supplies water to managed wetlands and wildlife preserves.[27]

text: Agricultural[edit]

text: In an average year, about 39% of California's water consumption, or 34.1 million acre feet (42.1 km3), is used for agricultural purposes. Of that total, 11%, or 8.9 million acre feet (11.0 km3) is not consumed by the farms for crop production but is instead recycled and reused by other water users, including environmental use, urban use, and agricultural use, yielding net water consumption for food and fiber production equal to 28% of California's water consumption, or 25.2 million acre feet (31.1 km3).[27] This water irrigates almost 29 million acres (120,000 km2), which grows 350 different crops. Agricultural water usage varies depending on the amount of rainfall each year.

text: Alfalfa uses about 18% of California irrigation water and produces 4% of California's farm-gate revenue, most of which is used as livestock feed.[28] In 2015, California exported one-fourth of its total alfalfa production of roughly 2 million tons. About one-third of that, around 700,000 tons, went to China, Japan took about the same amount and Saudi Arabia bought 5,000 tons. Alfalfa farmers pay about $70 an acre-foot, in Los Angeles that same amount of water is worth $1000 per acre-foot.[29] In 2012, California exported 575,000 tons of alfalfa to China, for $586 million.[28] Other common crop water use, if using all irrigated water: fruits and nuts with 34% of water use and 45% of revenue, field crops with 14% of water and 4% of revenue, pasture forage with 11% of water use and 1% of revenue, rice with 8% of water use and 2% of revenue (despite its lack of water, California grows nearly 5 billion pounds (2.3×10^9 kg) of rice per year, and is the second largest rice-growing state[30][31]), and truck farming of vegetables and nursery crops with 4% of water use and 42% of revenue; head of broccoli: 5.4 gallons; one walnut: 4.9 gallons; head of lettuce: 3.5 gallons; one tomato: 3.3 gallons; one almond 1.1 gallon; one pistachio: 0.75 gallon; one strawberry 0.4 gallon; one grape: 0.3 gallon.[32][33]

text: Horses, based on the amount of alfalfa they eat, use about 1.9 million acre feet (2.3 km3) of water – about 7% of irrigated water in the state. There are 698,000 horses in California.[34]

text: Cheap agricultural water paired with a mild climate has allowed farmers to produce widely in California. Jane Dye Gussow discusses California's agricultural water in her book This Organic Life. She argues the farms that use precious water in California produces food in an area that "was never intended to be a garden."[35] The Central Valley, where the majority of this agricultural water is used, is the most threatened agricultural land in the nation.[citation needed]

text: California is one of the top five states in water use for livestock. Water withdrawals for livestock use in California were 101-250 million gallons per day in 2010.[36]

text: Urban/residential[edit]

text: Urban and industrial use of water consumes about 11%, or 8.9 million acre feet (11.0 km3), of total water consumption in an average year.[27] A 2011 study of a sampling of 735 California homes across ten water districts found that the weighted average annual total water use of these homes was 132,000 US gallons (0.41 acre⋅ft) per year or 362 US gallons (0.00111 acre⋅ft) per household per day.[37] The study found that about 53% of total average household water use, or more than 192 US gallons (0.00059 acre⋅ft) per household per day, was used for landscaping and other outdoor uses. Meanwhile, indoor use accounted for more than 170 US gallons (0.00052 acre⋅ft) per household per day. The most in-home water consumption is toilet flushes, using 20% of the water. After toilets, 20% is used for showers and 18% goes to leaks inside homes.[38]

text: In Sacramento, in 2012 before the severe drought started, residents were using 217 US gallons (0.00067 acre⋅ft) a day per-capita.[39] Many homes in Sacramento didn't have water meters until recently. They now are gradually being installed after former Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger signed a 2004 law mandating meters statewide by 2025.[40]

text: After Folsom, a city of 72,000 east of Sacramento, installed meters in 2011 and adopted tiered rates that charge more for people who consume the most water, per-capita use started falling steadily.[40]

text: In response to the severe California drought, in April 2015, Governor Jerry Brown issued an executive order mandating statewide reductions in water use. The mandate aimed to reduce the amount of water consumed statewide in urban areas by 25% from 2013 levels. The State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) proposed regulatory instructions that grouped urban water utilities into nine tiers, with conservation standards ranging from 8% to 36%.[41]

text: Water distribution[edit]

text: There are six main systems of aqueducts and infrastructure that redistribute and transport water in California: the State Water Project, the Central Valley Project, several Colorado River delivery systems, the Los Angeles Aqueduct, the Tuolumne River/Hetch Hetchy system, and the Mokelumne Aqueduct.

text: The State Water Project[edit]

text: The California State Water Project is the largest multipurpose, state-built water project in the United States.[42] The SWP transports water from the Feather River watershed to agriculture, and some of the water goes to industrial and urban users. More than two-thirds of Californians receive some water from the SWP. The system was designed and contracted to deliver 4.2 million acre feet (5.2 km3), but in an average year delivers only 2.3 million acre feet (2.8 km3) because many of the original planned features were never built.[14] Twenty-nine agencies hold contracts for SWP water. The contractors pay for SWP's major operating costs and have gradually reduced the $1.75 billion bond debt that supplied funds for initial construction. In the years since 1960, SWP has built 29 dams, 18 pumping plants, five hydroelectric power plants, and around 600 miles (970 km) of canals and pipelines.[43]

text: The SWP system begins with reservoirs on upper tributaries of the Feather River. Oroville Dam creates the largest SWP reservoir. At 770 feet (230 m) above the riverbed, the dam is the tallest in the United States. The reservoir covers 15,000 acres (61 km2) and holds 3.5 million acre feet (4.3 km3).[44] Water travels from Lake Oroville to the Sacramento River. At Harvey O. Banks Delta Pumping Plant, which pulls SWP water into the Bethany Reservoir, around 2.2 million acre feet (2.7 km3) are extracted from the Delta each year.[45] Water that flows to the south end of the San Joaquin Valley must be pumped over the Tehachapi Mountains. Because of this, the SWP is California's largest energy consumer, and even though the hydroelectric plants of the SWP generate 5,900 GWh per year, that is only a fraction of the energy needed to lift water over the Tehachapis.[46] Below the Tehachapis the California Aqueduct splits, with the west branch storing water in Castaic and Pyramid Lake, and the east branch storing water in the Silverwood Lake reservoir.

text: The Central Valley Project[edit]

text: The CVP's original purpose was to tame seasonal flooding and to direct water to the south to irrigate 3 million acres (12,000 km2) of farmland. The CVP is operated by the United States Bureau of Reclamation. As one of the largest water systems in the world it stores over 7 million acre feet (8.6 km3) of water, or 17 percent of the state's developed water.[47] The CVP dams and diverts five major rivers: the Trinity, the Sacramento, the American, the Stanislaus, and the San Joaquin. Friant Dam, on the San Joaquin, was completed in 1944, forming Millerton Lake. This was one of 20 reservoirs in the CVP. Shasta Dam, the largest CVP storage facility, was completed in 1945. At Sacramento, American River water stored by Folsom Dam is added. 2.5 million acre feet (3.1 km3) are annually pumped from the Delta into the Delta-Mendota Canal. New Melones Dam on the Stanislaus River was finished in 1979, and the reservoir was filled in 1982.

text: The CVP has generated some controversy about environmental damage, prices charged to farmers, and lax enforcement of farm size limitations. Bureau of Reclamation water was supposed to be used for farms limited to 160 acres (65 ha) (see Homestead Act). Under Spanish and Mexican land grants, however, there were only a few land owners, all of whom owned large tracts of land. A 1982 reform increased CVP area limits to 960 acres (3.9 km2).[48] In 1992, the Central Valley Project Improvement Act made fish and wildlife protection and restoration an authorized purpose of the CVP on an equal footing with other authorized purposes. 0.8 million acre feet (0.99 km3) of annual runoff were dedicated to environmental usage, which generated intense controversy.[49]

text: Colorado River Systems[edit]

text: The Colorado River is the source of 4.4 million acre feet (5.4 km3) per year for California.[50] Six other states along the river's watershed (Wyoming, Nevada, Utah, Colorado, New Mexico, and Arizona) and Mexico, share allocated portions of river water. The Metropolitan Water District of Southern California, or MWD, holds priority water rights on the Colorado. It sells water to 95 percent of the South Coast region. Lake Mead, formed by Hoover Dam, is the primary reservoir in the Colorado River basin. The Colorado River Aqueduct begins 155 miles (249 km) downstream from Hoover Dam, and can carry 1.2 million acre feet (1.5 km3) annually.

text: An additional system diverts water from the Colorado River at the Imperial Diversion Dam provides waters to the Imperial and Coachella valleys as well as Yuma, Arizona, via the Alamo Canal, the Coachella Canal and the All-American Canal, which runs alongside the Mexican border. This system was also responsible for the accidental re-creation of the Salton Sea in 1905.

text: The Colorado is considered over-allocated, because apportionments were made on inaccurate measurements of annual runoff. Marc Reisner in Cadillac Desert noted that the Colorado is "unable to satisfy all the demands on it, so it is referred to as a 'deficit' river, as if the river were somehow at fault for its overuse".[51] For years California took more than its share of the apportionment, because other states were not prepared to use their entire allotments. MWD became used to 0.8 million acre feet (0.99 km3) excess of water. Pressure from other Colorado river states caused the Secretary of the Interior to order California to show progress towards decreasing its dependency on the excess 0.8 million acre feet (0.99 km3), or face cuts.[52] The Colorado River Water Use Plan called for Imperial and Coachella Valley agriculture to give up water in order to reallocate 0.8 million acre feet (0.99 km3) within the state. The plan's proposals generated much controversy, and the deadline arrived with no agreement reached. The Department of the Interior reduced MWD's access by 0.415 million acre feet (0.512 km3).

text: The Los Angeles Aqueduct[edit]

text: The Los Angeles Aqueduct carries water from the Eastern Sierra Nevada to Los Angeles. The construction of the aqueduct marked the first major water delivery project in California. The city purchased 300,000 acres (1,200 km2) of land in the Owens Valley in order to gain access to water rights. The Los Angeles Department of Water and Power transports 0.4 million acre feet (0.49 km3) of Eastern Sierra Nevada water to the city each year. This growth clearly shows William Mulholland's observation that "Whoever brings the water, brings the people."[53]

text: After four decades of diversion from the Mono Lake area, environmental damage created an environmental battle in the 1980s, with a victory for the Mono Lake proponents in 1994.[54] Other problems arose when dust from the bed of Owens Lake (completely dried up by diversions) became a major source of air pollution in the southern Owens Valley. To restore Mono Lake, correct air-quality law violations, and rewater portions of the Owens River, Los Angeles has begun to reduce its dependence on Eastern Sierra Nevada water. This has mostly been achieved through water conservation. The city enacted a program offering free low-flow toilets to its customers.[55]

text: Hetch Hetchy Aqueduct[edit]

text: The Hetch Hetchy Aqueduct carries water from the Tuolumne River to San Francisco and other Bay Area regions. The system starts in Hetch Hetchy Valley, inside Yosemite National Park. The system also generates up to 400MW of electrical power, depending on rainfall, most of which is sent to San Francisco via city-owned power lines.[56] After water leaves Hetch Hetchy, it passes through tunnels towards powerhouses. Three pipes then bring the water across the Central Valley. Concerns about the Hetch Hetchy Aqueduct's ability to withstand earthquakes led to a $1.7 billion bond, approved by voters in November 2002.[57]

text: Mokelumne Aqueduct[edit]

text: The East Bay Municipal Utility District (EBMUD) serves 35 communities in Alameda and Contra Costa Counties, including Berkeley and Oakland. The Mokelumne River in the central Sierra Nevada is the source for almost all of EBMUD's water. EBMUD built the Pardee Dam across the Mokelumne in the foothills northeast of Stockton. South of Pardee is Camanche Reservoir, which regulates releases to serve downstream water rights holders. EBMUD holds almost 30,000 acres (120 km2) in the Mokulumne River watershed and 25,000 acres (100 km2) in other watersheds. EBMUD also has an American River water right that could be sent to the Mokelumne Aqueduct through the Folsom South Canal. The only time this has been done was during the drought years of 1977–78, when the water was actually pumped from the Delta.[14] This generated controversy, as EBMUD preferred the cleaner water from the American River, but environmentalists and Sacramento had concerns about the impacts such a diversion would have on the river. The legal battle led to affirmation of EBMUD's water right, but modifications were also negotiated. The intake point was moved downstream, to maintain minimum flows in the American River before it merges with the Sacramento.

text: North Bay[edit]

text: The North Bay Aqueduct of the California State Water Project delivers an annual average of 39,309 acre feet (0.048487 km3) of water to urban communities and agricultural users in Napa, Solano, Sonoma and Marin counties. That water is diverted from the Sacramento-San Joaquin River Delta Estuary, a water hub that serves as the junction of south-, west, and north-flowing rivers draining the Cascade and Sierra Nevada mountain ranges.

text: Certain municipalities north of San Francisco Bay, including Santa Rosa and Petaluma, are served by the Sonoma County Water Agency. Their primary water source is the Russian River. However, it must be noted that the Russian River owes its summer flow in large part to the Eel, which is bled off via a tunnel into Potter Valley (via the Potter Valley Project) and flows to a reservoir near Ukiah, Lake Mendocino. PG&E now owns the rights to this delivery system, as well as the long controversial history. There are many[who?] along the Eel who would like their water back.

text: The cities of Vallejo, Fairfield, and Vacaville are served by the Solano County Water Agency, which transports water from Lake Berryessa and moves it south along the Putah South Canal. Marin County has the Marin Municipal Water District and the North Marin Water District.

text: Planning and management[edit]

text: The planning and management of water in California is subject to a vast number of laws, regulations, management plans, and historic water rights. The state agency responsible for water planning is the California Department of Water Resources.

text: Safety concerns[edit]

text: Water purity has been an emerging issue in California, especially in communities with low-income residents. Aging infrastructure, coupled with a lack of research on the topic, has exacerbated this issue, with water health violations occurring in 7-8% of water systems a year.[58] The San Joaquin Valley, a largely rural and agricultural area with 65% residents being people of color, is registered with the most water quality violations. Tulare, a city within San Joaquin Valley, has 99% of its residents relying on compromised groundwater, contrasted with Los Angeles County, with 11% of residents relying only on a contaminated water supply. [59] These water violations often lead to purchased water sources and private ownership of water distribution, as private utilities appear to have larger bandwidth to serve a large population. Trade-offs often include greater inequity in water access, as private utilities face higher repercussions for delivering unsafe water and often decide to opt-out from serving under-resourced populations.[60] In many cases, bottled water is tested less frequently than public water for pollutants, and in 1999, approximately 33% of bottled water tested by the FDA exceeded allowable limits.[citation needed]

text: The U.S. Geological Survey analyzed the results of a 2002 study of 10 streams in California and discovered that the Sacramento River had the highest traces of acetaminophen, cholesterol and birth control hormones of any water source in the nation.[citation needed] Pharmaceutical discharge polluted by drug companies are relatively common in California water, with Southern California water tables especially susceptible to contamination.[61]

text: California water plans[edit]

text: There have been several documents known as the "California Water Plan", with the most recent being published in 2013.[62] Before the state of California started drafting comprehensive plans for the management of water in the state, the earliest plan for water distribution in California was an 1873 report. This was followed by a 1919 report called "Irrigation of Twelve Million Acres in the Valley of California". The 1919 report is the first comprehensive plan, and is often called the "Marshall Plan", after its author Col. Robert Bradford Marshall. There have been many subsequent water plans and water plan updates, which were often issued as California Department of Water Resources bulletins.[63] California Water Code provides guidance or the plan updates.[64] Beginning in 1957, early Water Plan Updates were largely technical and focused on water supply development. Plans gradually became more comprehensive to address the state's growing conflicts over limited resources. Updates now present the status and trends of California's water-dependent natural resources; water supplies; and agricultural, urban, and environmental water demands for a range of plausible future scenarios. They also evaluate different combinations of regional and statewide resource management strategies to reduce water demand, increase water supply, reduce flood risk, improve water quality, and enhance environmental and resource stewardship. The evaluations and assessments performed for the updates help identify effective actions and policies for meeting California's resource management objectives in the near term and for several decades to come.

text: Since 2000, another major goal for each update has been to receive broad input and support from Californians. Preparation of these new millennial Water Plan updates has been widely viewed as exceptionally transparent and collaborative as the consensus seeking process is routinely cited by other agencies and states as a model for policy planning efforts.[65] The approach involves: interest based dialog and exchange among teams, committees and the public to develop work products; multiple opportunities for review by different audiences; and integration and reconciliation of feedback from a variety of perspectives.

text: Update 2013 leverages the clear guidance Governor Edmund G. Brown Jr. (Jerry Brown) forged with his California Water Action Plan.[66] That five-year plan, released in January 2014, outlines a succinct set of actions that together bring reliability, restoration, and resilience to California water resources, even as the state's population is expected to grow from 38 million to 50 million by 2049.

text: Three related themes distinguish Update 2013 from Update 2009. The five year time span reinforced the value of integrated water management, and Update 2013 closely examines the practices and policies that allow water managers to combine flood management, environmental stewardship, and surface water and groundwater supply actions to deliver multiple benefits across a region. Fundamental to that integrated approach is better alignment in the management of data, planning, policy-making, and regulation across local, State, tribal, and federal governments.

text: Water rights[edit]

text: On more than one occasion, the California Supreme Court has noted that "the scope and technical complexity of issues concerning water resource management are unequalled by virtually any other type of activity presented to the courts."[67][68] An example of this complexity is demonstrated in the case of National Audubon Society v. Superior Court.

text: Water rights are divided in multiple ways. Water rights to surface water and underground sources are separate. Also, California recognizes four distinct types of water rights to surface water in its statutory and common law: pueblo, riparian, prior appropriation, and water reserved by the US. A fifth statutory right also provides area of origin watershed rights.[citation needed]

text: Pueblo water rights[edit]

text: California recognizes water rights granted to pueblos (settlements) under the Spanish and Mexican governments, prior to the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo.[69][70] Under the doctrine, pueblos organized under the laws of Mexico or Spain have a water right to the yield of all streams and rivers flowing through the city and the groundwater aquifers lying below.[71] Pueblo water rights are superior to all riparian and appropriative rights and cannot be lost by a failure to assert an interest or use the water.[72] In addition, the pueblo's claim expands with the needs of the city and may be used to supply the needs of areas that are later annexed to the city.[72] Los Angeles and San Diego are the only original pueblos to exercise their pueblo water rights in the courts.

text: Pueblo water rights are controversial. Some modern scholars and courts argue that the pueblo water rights doctrine lacks a historical basis in Spanish or Mexican water law.[73]

text: Riparian water rights[edit]

text: A landowner who has their property border a river has a right to use that land.Under the riparian doctrine, "the owner of land has the right to divert the water flowing by his land for use upon his land, without regard to the extent of such use or priority in time".[74] "Riparians on a stream system are vested with a common ownership such that in times of water shortage all riparians must reduce their usage proportionately."[75]

text: Riparian water rights were inherited from the common law of England.[76] Under the doctrine, property owners have correlative rights to the reasonable use of the water passing through their land adjacent to the watercourse. The right is part and parcel with the land itself and, in California, only accompanies those tracts that have always directly touched the water.[77]

text: Riparian rights received legal recognition after California gained statehood. It then became law that owners that have property touching a water source have a right to that water and it cannot be appropriated by another party. [1]

text: The English focus on landownership differs sharply from the "first in time, first in right" approach 49ers, who were generally trespassing on federal land, developed to wash hills into rivers.[78] In Lux v. Haggin (1886) the California Supreme Court resolved the conflict by finding that riparian water rights are superior even to older prior appropriations. When in 1926 the Court went so far as to find that riparian owners did not need to put their water to beneficial use, the People amended the California Constitution to reverse the decision, establishing that no water in the state may be wasted.[79]

text: While riparian rights are superior to appropriative rights and may survive dormant and unused, in 1979 the California Supreme Court found that the California State Water Resources Control Board has the power to assign unused riparian rights lower priority than existing prior appropriations.[80]

text: Water rights by prior appropriation[edit]

text: "The appropriation doctrine confers upon one who actually diverts and uses water the right to do so provided that the water is used for reasonable and beneficial uses," regardless of whether that person owns land contiguous to the watercourse.[75] In addition, all appropriative rights are subordinate to riparians or earlier appropriators.[75] In times of shortage riparians are entitled to fulfill their needs before appropriators are entitled to any use of the water.[81] "And, as between appropriators, the rule of priority is 'first in time, first in right.'"[82] Beginning in 1914, a statutory scheme has provided the exclusive method of acquiring appropriation rights through the California State Water Resources Control Board.[83] The modern system of prior appropriation water rights followed by California is characterized by five principles:

text:
Exclusive right is given to the original appropriator, and all following rights are conditional upon precedent rights.
All rights are conditional upon beneficial use.
Water may be used on riparian lands or non-riparian lands (i.e. water may be used on the land next to the water source, or on land removed from the water source)
Diversion is permitted, regardless of the shrinkage of the river or stream.
The right may be lost through non-use.[84]

text: Beneficial use is defined as agricultural, industrial, or urban use. Environmental uses, such as maintaining body of water and the wildlife that use it, were not initially regarded as beneficial uses in some states but have been accepted in some areas.[85] Every water right is parameterized by an annual yield and an appropriation date. When a water right is sold, it maintains its original appropriation date.

text: Water reserved by the United States[edit]

text: Lands reserved by the United States government are accompanied by a corresponding reservation of water rights for as much water is needed to fulfill the purpose for which the reservation was made. Such reservations were made on behalf of Native American tribes, national parks, monuments and forests.[86][86][87][88] Water rights reserved by the United States are defined by and controlled by federal law. And because reserved water rights are not riparian nor appropriative, they may conflict with state law.[86]

text: Area of origin watershed rights[edit]

text: California provides communities and other water users within watersheds senior status over appropriative water rights in limited circumstances.[89] California area of origin laws include The County of Origin Law (1931), The Water Protection Statute (1933), and The Delta Protection Act (1959).[90]

text: Area of origin water rights parallel pueblo water rights. In both cases, water is reserved for future growth of the local community. In other words, appropriations may be subject to a water rights claim from people/government in the area of origin. That later claim would be senior despite its temporal disconnect. As a result of its pueblo rights, Los Angeles has rights to all or almost all water from the Los Angeles River.[which?] In the same way, communities along major water sources such as the Sacramento River theoretically have senior water rights to support growth despite a downstream user holding otherwise senior appropriative water rights.[citation needed]

text: Area of origin laws were passed in reaction to the controversies related to Los Angeles diverting water from the Owens Valley.[citation needed] Despite being on the books for generations, the area of origin statutes were not used until 2000. In addition, there currently are no court opinions regarding area of origin watershed rights.[citation needed][when?]

text: Adjudication[edit]

text: Since under the law, landowners can extract as much groundwater from their property as they can put to beneficial use, adjudication was used to determine who had the right to pump how much and to audit such usage.[91] The courts appoint water masters to audit usage and otherwise enforce water rights, who are often management boards, the United States Department of the Interior, the California Department of Water Resources, or an individual.[91][92][93]

text: Disputes and controversies[edit]

text: The California Water Wars, a struggle between Los Angeles and certain parties within the Owens Valley, for water rights is but one example of the alleged wrongdoings of municipalities and people in securing adequate water supplies. The city of Los Angeles bought 300,000 acres (1,200 km2) of land from residents of the Owens Valley and the water rights attached with them, for a fair price. The diverting of this water from the valley, transformed it from an agricultural valley into a dust bowl.[51]

text: The electricity produced by the hydroelectric plants drawing their water from the Hetch Hetchy reservoir became the subject of controversy when it was reported by the San Francisco Bay Guardian that the city of San Francisco sold roughly 500 megawatts of power to PG&E,[94] supposedly in violation of the Raker Act, which specifies that because the source of water and power was on public land, no private profit could be gained from such sales. Whether or not the Raker Act is indeed being violated is still a matter of controversy.[citation needed]

text: The creation of so many dams in California in order to enact a pragmatic water supply program has been met with criticism from some environmentalists,[which?] who have decried the negative effects of dams on ecosystems, particularly on migratory fish populations.[95]

text: Predicted need for increased water supplies[edit]

text: This section's factual accuracy may be compromised due to out-of-date information. Please update this article to reflect recent events or newly available information. (May 2013)

text: It is projected that California's population will grow to almost 50 million by 2050.[96] If the prediction comes true and there is no action to increase the water supply, the difference between water demand and supply would be between 2.0–6.0 million acre feet (2.5–7.4 km3) in the year 2020.[97] Over the past five years California voters have approved $3 billion in bonds for water development and management.[when?] Many of these projects are incorporated in the CALFED Bay-Delta program, a federal-state program designed to reduce water supply conflicts. In August 2000 the state and federal governments approved the CALFED plan for water quality, water conservation and recycling, watershed administration, ecosystem re-establishment, delta levees, surface and groundwater storage, water transportation, and science. The plan has a thirty-year implementation period and was designed to incorporate changes in conditions and knowledge about the effects of specific projects. Stage 1 was initiated in 2000 and was designed as a seven-year program. The cost is estimated to be $8.7 billion.[98] Stage 1 water yield within the next seven to ten years is estimated to be 2.9 million acre feet (3.6 km3) per year.[97] As part of Stage 1, an Environmental Water Account was established through the purchase of 0.35 million acre feet (0.43 km3) of water. The EWA is used to protect fish and other wildlife without reducing water allocations to farms and municipalities.

text: A $7.5 billion water bond was approved in November 2014 with a 2 to 1 ratio.[99] The bond-financing, which has been contentiously debated by the legislature and Governor Jerry Brown for the past few years, was said to improve the water quality, supply and infrastructure, if passed by voters.[100]

text: Natural disasters and California water[edit]

text: Major droughts in California history since 1900[edit]

text:
1917–21
1922–26
1928–37
1943–51
1959–62
1976–77
1987–92
2007–09
2012–15[101][102]

text: Archives relating to California water[edit]

text: The California Water Documents collection in the Claremont Colleges Digital Library is a valuable online resource of archived materials related to California's water history. Additionally, the collection has digitized materials relating to the creation and operation of both the Central Valley Project and the California State Water Project as well as their component units.[103] The items represented in the Claremont Colleges Digital Library are part of a larger collection entitled the Water Resources Collection in Special Collections at Claremont Colleges' Honnold/Mudd Library. The Water Resources Collection was started in the 1930s by Librarian Willis Holmes Kerr and Librarian and Claremont Colleges' Trustee John Treanor.[104] These librarians' interest in California's water problem led them to start collecting a variety of documents related to water history and usage from around the state. It includes reports of engineers, annual reports and minute books of boards of directors of water companies, documents of federal and state governments, promotional pamphlets, and newspaper clippings.[104] Most of the documents focus on the water history from the first half of the 20th century, but there are additional, more recent publications included, which have been donated by Claremont Graduate University Professor Merrill Goodall.[104] The California Water Documents collection is currently a work in progress at the Claremont Colleges Digital Library.

text: The Water Resources Collections and Archives is located at the University of California, Riverside and features a comprehensive collection of water-resource related documents.


document_title: VistA

question_text: what does cprs stand for in the va

question_tokens: what does cprs stand for in the va

root

text: VistA

text: Features[edit]

text: The Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) has had automated data processing systems, including extensive clinical and administrative capabilities, within its medical facilities since before 1985.[6] Initially called the Decentralized Hospital Computer Program (DHCP) information system, DHCP was enshrined as a recipient of the Computerworld Smithsonian Award for best use of Information Technology in Medicine in 1995.

tag: p

text: VistA supports both ambulatory and inpatient care, and includes several significant enhancements to the original DHCP system. The most significant is a graphical user interface for clinicians known as the Computerized Patient Record System (CPRS), which was released in 1997. In addition, VistA includes computerized order entry, bar code medication administration, electronic prescribing, and clinical guidelines.

text: CPRS provides a client–server interface that allows health care providers to review and update a patient's electronic medical record. This includes the ability to place orders, including those for medications, special procedures, X-rays, nursing interventions, diets, and laboratory tests. CPRS provides flexibility in a wide variety of settings so that a consistent, event-driven, Windows-style interface is presented to a broad spectrum of health care workers.

text: Clinical Functions[edit]

text:
Admission Discharge Transfer (ADT)
Ambulatory Care Reporting
Anticoagulation Management Tool (AMT)
Automated Service Connected Designation (ASCD)
Beneficiary Travel
Blind Rehabilitation
Care Management
Clinical Case Registries
Clinical Procedures
Clinical/Health Data Repository (CHDR)
Computerized Patient Record System (CPRS)
CPRS: Adverse Reaction Tracking (ART)
CPRS: Authorization Subscription Utility (ASU)
CPRS: Clinical Reminders
CPRS: Consult/Request Tracking
CPRS: Health Summary
CPRS: Problem List
CPRS: Text Integration Utility (TIU)
Dentistry
Electronic Wait List Pharm: National Drug File (NDF)
Emergency Department Integration Software (EDIS)
Functional Independence Measurement (FIM)
Group Notes Primary Care Management Module (PCMM)
HDR – Historical (HDR-Hx)
Home Based Primary Care (HBPC)
Home Telehealth
Immunology Case Registry (ICR)
Incomplete Records Tracking (IRT)
Intake and Output Scheduling
Laboratory Shift Handoff Tool
Laboratory: Anatomic Pathology
Laboratory: Blood Bank
Laboratory: Blood Bank Workarounds
Laboratory: Electronic Data Interchange (LEDI)
Laboratory: Emerging Pathogens Initiative (EPI)
Laboratory: Howdy Computerized Phlebotomy Login Process
Laboratory: National Laboratory Tests (NLT) Documents and LOINC Request Form
Laboratory: Point of Care (POC)
Laboratory: Universal Interface
Laboratory: VistA Blood Establishment Computer Software (VBECS)
Lexicon Utility
Medicine
Mental Health (YS)
Methicillin Resistant Staph Aurerus (MRSA)
Mobile Electronic Documentation (MED)
Nationwide Health Information Network Adapter (NHIN)
Nursing
Nutrition and Food Service (NFS)
Oncology
Patient Appointment Info. Transmission (PAIT)
Patient Assessment Documentation Package (PADP)
Patient Care Encounter (PCE)
Patient Record Flags
Pharm: Automatic Replenish / Ward Stock (AR/WS)
Pharm: Bar Code Medication Administration (BCMA)
Pharm: Benefits Management (PBM)
Pharm: Consolidated Mail Outpatient Pharmacy
Pharm: Consolidated Mail Outpatient Pharmacy
Pharm: Controlled Substances
Pharm: Data Management (PDM)
Pharm: Drug Accountability
Pharm: Inpatient Medications
Pharm: Outpatient Pharmacy
Pharm: Prescription Practices (PPP)
Prosthetics
Quality Audiology and Speech Analysis and Reporting (QUASAR)
Radiology / Nuclear Medicine
RAI/MDS
Remote Order Entry System (ROES)
Social Work
Spinal Cord Dysfunction
Standards & Terminology Services (STS)
Surgery
Traumatic Brain Injury (TBI)
Virtual Patient Record
VistA Imaging System
VistAWeb
Visual Impairment Service Team (VIST)
Vitals / Measurements
Women's Health

tag: ul

text: Financial-Administrative Functions[edit]

text:
Accounts Receivable (AR)
Auto Safety Incident Surv Track System (ASISTS)
Automated Information Collection System (AICS)
Automated Medical Information Exchange (AMIE)
Clinical Monitoring System Integrated Billing (IB)
Compensation Pension Record Interchange (CAPRI)
Current Procedural Terminology (CPT) Library
Decision Support System (DSS) Extracts
Diagnostic Related Group (DRG) Grouper
Electronic Claims Management Engine (ECME)
Engineering (AEMS / MERS) Police and Security
Enrollment Application System Quality Management Integration Module
Equipment / Turn-In Request
Event Capture Release of Information (ROI) Manager
Fee Basis
Fugitive Felon Program (FFP)
Generic Code Sheet (GCS)
Health Eligibility Center (HEC)
Hospital Inquiry (HINQ)
ICD-9-CM
Incident Reporting
Income Verification Match (IVM)
Integrated Patient Funds
Occurrence Screen
Patient Representative
Personnel and Accounting Integrated Data (PAID)
Record Tracking
Veterans Identification Card (VIC/PICS)
Voluntary Service System (VSS)
WebHR
Wounded Injured and Ill Warriors

text: Infrastructure Functions[edit]

text:
Capacity Management Tools
Duplicate Record Merge: Patient Merge Name Standardization
Electronic Error and Enhancement Reporting (E3R)
Enterprise Exception Log Service (EELS)
FatKAAT
FileMan
FileMan Delphi Components (FMDC)
Health Data Informatics
Health Level 7 (HL7) (VistA Messaging)
Institution File Redesign (IFR)
KAAJEE
Kernel
Kernel Delphi Components (KDC)
Kernel Toolkit
Kernel Unwinder
List Manager
M-to-M Broker
MailMan
Master Patient Index (MPI)
Medical Domain Web Services (MDWS) (MWVS*2)
National Online Information Sharing (NOIS)
National Patch Module
Network Health Exchange (NHE)
Patient Data Exchange (PDX)
Remote Procedure Call (RPC) Broker
Resource Usage Monitor
Single Signon/User Context (SSO/UC)
SlotMaster (Kernel ZSLOT)
SQL Interface (SQLI)
Standard Files and Tables
Statistical Analysis of Global Growth (SAGG)
Survey Generator
System Toolkit (STK)
VistA Data Extraction Framework (VDEF)
VistALink
XML Parser (VistA)

text: Patient Web Portal Functions[edit]

text:
Clinical Information Support System (CISS)
Electronic Signature (ESig) Person Services
HealtheVet Web Services Client (HWSC) Registries
My HealtheVet Spinal Cord Injury and Disorders Outcomes (SCIDO)
National Utilization Management Integration (NUMI)
Occupational Health Record-keeping System (OHRS)
Patient Advocate Tracking System (PATS)
VA Enrollment System (VES)
Veterans Personal Finance System (VPFS)

text: Achievements[edit]

text: For its development of VistA, the United States Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) / Veterans Health Administration (VHA) was named the recipient of the prestigious Innovations in American Government Award presented by the Ash Institute of the John F. Kennedy School of Government at Harvard University in July, 2006. The VistA electronic medical records system is estimated to improve efficiency by 6% per year, and the monthly cost of the EHR is offset by eliminating the cost of even a few unnecessary tests or admissions.[7][8]

text: The adoption of VistA has allowed the VA to achieve a pharmacy prescription accuracy rate of 99.997%, and the VA outperforms most public sector hospitals on a variety of criteria, enabled by the implementation of VistA.[9]

text: VA hospitals using VistA are one of only thirteen hospital systems that have achieved the qualifications for HIMSS stage 7, the highest level of electronic health record integration,[10][11] while a non-VA hospital using VistA is one of only 42 US hospitals that has achieved HIMSS stage 6.[12][13]

text: Licensing and dissemination[edit]

text: The VistA system is public domain software, available through the Freedom Of Information Act directly from the VA website[14] or through a growing network of distributors, such as the OSEHRA VistA-M.git tree.

text: VistA modules and projects[edit]

text: Database backend[edit]

text: VistA was developed using the M or MUMPS language/database. The VA currently runs a majority of VistA systems on the proprietary InterSystems Caché version of MUMPS, but an open source MUMPS database engine, called GT.M, for Linux and Unix computers has also been developed. Although initially separate releases, publicly available VistA distributions are now often bundled with the GT.M database in an integrated package. This has considerably eased installation. The free, open source nature of GT.M allows redundant and cost-effective failsafe database implementations, increasing reliability for complex installations of VistA.

text: Database projections[edit]

text: An open source project called EsiObjects has also allowed the (ANSI- Standard) MUMPS language and database technology to evolve into a modern object-oriented language (and persistent-object store) that can be integrated into mainstream, state-of-the-art technologies. For the Caché MUMPS database, a similar object-oriented extension to MUMPS called Caché ObjectScript has been developed. Both of these have allowed development of the MUMPS database environment (by programmers) using modern object-oriented tools.

text: M2Web is an open source web gateway to MUMPS for use with VistA.

text: A free open source module from M/Gateway called MGWSI has been developed to act as a gateway between GT.M, Cache, or M21 MUMPS databases and programming tools such as PHP, ASP.NET, or Java, in order to create a web-based interface.

text: Patient Web Portal[edit]

text: MyHealtheVet is a web portal that allows veterans to access and update their personal health record, refill prescriptions, and schedule appointments. This also allows veterans to port their health records to institutions outside the VA health system or keep a personal copy of their health records, a Personal Health Record (PHR).

text: VistA Imaging[edit]

text: The Veterans Administration has also developed VistA Imaging, a coordinated system for communicating with PACS (radiology imaging) systems and for integrating others types of image-based information, such as EKGs, pathology slides, and scanned documents, into the VistA electronic medical records system. This type of integration of information into a medical record is critical to efficient utilization.[15]

text: It can be used independently or integrated into the VistA electronic health record system (as is done in VA health facilities).

text: Deployments and uses[edit]

text: Role in development of a national healthcare network[edit]

text: The VistA electronic healthcare record has been widely credited for reforming the VA healthcare system, improving safety and efficiency substantially. The results have spurred a national impetus to adopt electronic medical records similar to VistA nationwide.

text: VistA Web collectively describes a set of protocols that in 2007 was being developed and used by the VHA to transfer data (from VistA) between hospitals and clinics within the pilot project. This is the first effort to view a single patient record so that VistA becomes truly interoperable among the more than 128 sites running VistA today.

text: BHIE enables real-time sharing of electronic health information between DoD and VA for shared patients of allergy, outpatient pharmacy, demographic, laboratory, and radiology data. This became a priority during the Second Iraq War, when a concern for the transition of healthcare for soldiers as they transferred from active military status to veteran status became a national focus of attention.[16]

text: A Clinical Data Repository/Health Data Repository (CHDR) allows interoperability between the DoD's Clinical Data Repository (CDR) & the VA's Health Data Repository (HDR). Bidirectional real time exchange of computable pharmacy, allergy, demographic and laboratory data occurred in phase 1. Phase 2 involved additional drug–drug interaction and allergy checking. Initial deployment of the system was completed in March 2007 at the El Paso, Augusta, Pensacola, Puget Sound, Chicago, San Diego, and Las Vegas facilities.

text: The combination of VistA and the interoperable projects listed above in the VA/DoD systems will continue to expand to meet the objectives that all citizens will have an electronic record by 2014.

text: Because of the success of these programs, a national move to standardize healthcare data transmission across the country was started. Text-based information exchange is standardized using a protocol called HL7 (Health Level 7), which is approved by the American National Standards Institute. DICOM is an international image communications protocol standard. VistA is compliant with both.

text: VistA has been interfaced with commercial off-the-shelf products, as well. Standards and protocols used by VA are consistent with current industry standards and include HL7, DICOM, and other protocols.

text: Tools for CCR/CCD support have been developed for VistA, allowing VistA to communicate with other EHRs using these standardized information exchange protocols.[17] This includes the Mirth open source cross platform HL7 interface and NHIN Connect, the open source health information exchange adaptor.

text: In 2009, a project was undertaken to facilitate EHR communication between the VA (using VistA) and Kaiser Permanente (using Epic) using NHIN Connect.[18] When completed, two of the largest medical record systems in the US will be able to exchange health data. Public-domain VistA derivatives are also expected to be able to use NHIN Connect.

text: The VistA EHR has been used by the VA in combination with Telemedicine to provide surgical care to rural areas in Nebraska and Western Iowa over a 400,000-square-mile (1,000,000 km2) area.[19]

text: Usage in non-governmental hospitals[edit]

text: Under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA), the VistA system, the CPRS graphical interface, and unlimited ongoing updates (500–600 per year) are provided as public domain software.[20]

text: This was done by the US government in an effort to make VistA available as a low cost Electronic Health Record (EHR) for non-governmental hospitals and other healthcare entities.

text: With funding from The Pacific Telehealth & Technology Hui, the Hui 7 produced a version of VistA that ran on GT.M in a Linux operating system, and that was suitable for use in private settings. VistA has since been adapted by companies such as Blue Cliff, DSS, Inc., Medsphere, and Sequence Managers Software to a variety of environments, from individual practices to clinics to hospitals, to regional healthcare co-ordination between far-flung islands. In addition, VistA has been adopted within similar provider environments worldwide. Universities, such as UC Davis and Texas Tech implemented these systems. A non-profit organization, WorldVistA, has also been established to extend and collaboratively improve the VistA electronic health record and health information system for use outside of its original setting.

text: VistA (and other derivative EMR/EHR systems) can be interfaced with healthcare databases not initially used by the VA system, including billing software, lab databases, and image databases (radiology, for example).

text: VistA implementations have been deployed (or are currently being deployed) in non-VA healthcare facilities in Texas,[21] Arizona,[22] Florida, Hawaii,[23] New Jersey,[24] Oklahoma,[23] West Virginia,[25][26] California,[27][28] New York,[29] and Washington, D.C.[23][30]

text: In one state, the cost of a multiple hospital VistA-based EHR network was implemented for one tenth the price of a commercial EHR network in another hospital network in the same state ($9 million versus $90 million for 7–8 hospitals each). (Both VistA and the commercial system used the MUMPS database).[31]

text: VistA has even been adapted into a Health Information System (VMACS) at the veterinary medical teaching hospital at UC Davis.[32]

text: International deployments[edit]

text: VistA software modules have been installed around the world, or are being considered for installation, in healthcare institutions such as the World Health Organization,[25] and in countries such as Mexico,[23][25][33] American Samoa,[23] Kurdistan, Iraq, Finland, Jordan,[34] Germany,[35] Kenya,[25] Nigeria,[36] Egypt,[23] Malaysia, India,[37] Brazil, Pakistan,[30] and Denmark.[38]

text: In September 2009, Dell Computer bought Perot Systems, the company installing VistA in Jordan (the Hakeem project).[39]

text: History[edit]

text: The concept that eventually became VistA was initiated and planned at the beginning of the 1970s by the National Center for Health Services Research and Development of the U.S. Public Health Service (NCHSR&D/PHS). (The NCHSR&D is now known as the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ).)

text: As a proof of concept, the U.S. Navy's clinic at the Brunswick Naval Air Station had used an early version of the system software to develop an operational, automated, clinic-management and medical-record system that was "paperless".

text: The National Center for Health Sciences Research and Development then turned to an agency of the U.S. Department of Commerce, the National Bureau of Standards (NBS, reorganized in 1988 as the National Institute of Standards and Technology), to turn the systems-technology strategy into a systems-architecture design.

text: Under the farsighted leadership of the VA's Chief Medical Director, Dr. John Chase, the VA's Department of Medicine and Surgery (now known as the Veterans Health Administration (VHA)), then agreed to deploy the system at the largest medical system of that time, the VA hospitals.

text: Both Dr. Robert Kolodner (National Health Information Technology Coordinator)[40] and George Timson (an architect of VistA who has been involved with it since the early years) date VistA's actual architecture genesis, then, to 1977.[41][42] The program was launched in 1978 with the deployment of the initial modules in about twenty VA Medical Centers. The program was named the Decentralized Hospital Computer Program (DHCP) in 1981.

text: The physicians in VA Medical Centers, with leadership from the National Association of VA Physicians (NAVAP, renamed NAVAPD in 1989 when Dentists were added) and its Executive Director, Dr. Paul Shafer, made sure that the VA understood the importance of clinician-directed development and refinement of this new clinical-information system.

text: In December 1981, Congressman Sonny Montgomery of Mississippi arranged for the Decentralized Hospital Computer Program (DHCP) to be written into law as the medical-information systems development program of the VA. VA Administrator Robert P. Nimmo signed an Executive Order in February 1982 describing how the DHCP was to be organized and managed within the VA's Department of Medicine and Surgery.

text: In consultation with F. Whitten Peters and Vincent Fuller of the Williams and Connolly law firm, it was established at the beginning of the 1980s that the software existing in the VA (derived from the PHS projects) was legally in the public domain and must be made available without proprietary or other restrictions to other government and private-sector organizations for their use.

text: In conjunction with the VA's DHCP development, the (IHS) Indian Health Service deployed a system built on and augmenting DHCP throughout its Federal and Tribal facilities as the Resource and Patient Management System (RPMS). This implementation emphasized the integration of outpatient clinics into the system, and many of its elements were soon re-incorporated into the VA system (through a system of technology sharing). Subsequent VistA systems therefore included elements from both RPMS and DHCP. Health IT sharing between VA and IHS continues to the present day.

text: The U.S. Department of Defense (DoD) then contracted with Science Applications International Corporation (SAIC) for a heavily modified and extended form of the DHCP system for use in DoD healthcare facilities, naming it the Composite Health Care System (CHCS).

text: Meanwhile, in the early 1980s, major hospitals in Finland[43] were the first institutions outside of the United States to adopt and adapt the VistA system to their language and institutional processes, creating a suite of applications called MUSTI and Multilab. (Since then, institutions in Germany, Egypt,[23] Nigeria,[36] and other nations abroad have adopted and adapted this system for their use, as well.)

text: The name "VistA" (Veterans Health Information System and Technology Architecture) was adopted by the VA in 1994, when the Under Secretary for Health of the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs (VA), Dr. Ken Kizer, renamed what had previously been known as the Decentralized Hospital Computer Program (DHCP).

text: The four major adopters of VistA – VA (VistA), DoD (CHCS), IHS (RPMS), and the Finnish Musti consortium – each took VistA in a different direction, creating related but distinct "dialects" of VistA. VA VistA and RPMS exchanged ideas and software repeatedly over the years, and RPMS periodically folded back into its code base new versions of the VA VistA packages. These two dialects are therefore the most closely related. The Musti software drifted further away from these two but retained compatibility with the infrastructure of RPMS and VA VistA (while adding additional GUI and web capabilities to improve function). Meanwhile, the CHCS code base diverged from that of the VA's VistA in the mid-eighties and has never been reintegrated. The VA and the DoD had been instructed for years to improve the sharing of medical information between the two systems, but for political reasons made little progress toward bringing the two dialects back together. More recently, CHCS's development was brought to a complete stop by continued political opposition within the DoD, and it has now been supplanted by a related, but different, system called AHLTA. While AHLTA is the new system for DoD, the core systems beneath AHLTA (for Computerized Physician Order Entry, appointing, referral management, and creation of new patient registrations) remain those of the underlying CHCS system. (While some ongoing development has occurred for CHCS, the majority of funds are consumed by the AHLTA project.) Thus, the VistA code base was split four ways.

text: Many VistA professionals then informally banded together as the "Hardhats" (a name the original VistA programmers used for themselves) to promote that the FOIA (Freedom of Information Act) release of VA VistA (that allows it to be in the public domain) be standardized for universal usage.

text: WorldVistA was formed from this group and was incorporated in March 2003 as a non-profit corporation. This allowed the WorldVistA board of directors to pursue certain activities (obtaining grants, creating contracts, and making formal alliances) that they otherwise could not pursue as an informal organization. It is, however, an organization independent of the VA system and its version of VistA therefore differs from that of the VA's. Nevertheless, it maintains as an objective that its public version be compatible (interoperable) with the VA's official version. It has developed packages of WorldVistA for multiple operating systems, including Linux (Debian/Ubuntu and Red Hat) -based and Microsoft Windows-based operating systems. Co-operation with the maintainers and vendors of OpenVistA, another widely deployed open source public version of VistA, helps maintain interoperability and a standardized framework.

text: In 2011 the Open Source Electronic Health Record Agent (OSEHRA) project was started (in cooperation with the Department of Veterans Affairs) to provide a common code repository for VistA (and other EHR and health IT) software.[44]

text: Therefore, it is through the joint achievement of thousands of clinicians and professional systems experts from the United States and other nations, many of them volunteers, that the VistA system has developed.

text: Supporters of VistA[edit]

text: There have been many champions of VistA as the electronic healthcare record system for a universal healthcare plan. VistA can act as a standalone system, allowing self-contained management and retention of healthcare data within an institution. Combined with BHIE (or other data exchange protocol) it can be part of a peer-to-peer model of universal healthcare. It is also scalable to be used as a centralized system (allowing regional or even national centralization of healthcare records). It is, therefore, the electronic records system most adaptable to a variety of healthcare models.

text: In addition to the unwavering support of congressional representatives such as Congressman Sonny Montgomery of Mississippi, numerous IT specialists, physicians, and other healthcare professionals have donated significant amounts of time in adapting the VistA system for use in non-governmental healthcare settings.

text: The ranking member of the House Veterans Affairs Committee's Oversight and Investigation Subcommittee, Rep. Ginny Brown-Waite of Florida, recommended that the Department of Defense (DOD) adopt VA's VistA system following accusations of inefficiencies in the DOD healthcare system. The DOD hospitals use Armed Forces Health Longitudinal Technology Application (AHLTA) which has not been as successful as VistA and has not been adapted to non-military environments (as has been done with VistA).[16]

text: In November 2005, the U.S. Senate passed the Wired for Health Care Quality Act, introduced by Sen. Enzi of Wyoming with 38 co-sponsors, that would require the government to use the VA's technology standards as a basis for national standards allowing all health care providers to communicate with each other as part of a nationwide health information exchange. The legislation would also authorize $280 million in grants, which would help persuade reluctant providers to invest in the new technology.[45] There has been no action on the bill since December 2005. Two similar House bills were introduced in late 2005 and early 2006; no action has been taken on either of them, either.[46]

text: In late 2008, House Ways and Means Health Subcommittee Chair Congressman Pete Stark (D-CA) introduced the Health-e Information Technology Act of 2008 (H.R. 6898) that calls for the creation of a low-cost public IT system for those providers who do not want to invest in a proprietary one.[47]

text: In April 2009, Sen. John D. Rockefeller of West Virginia introduced the Health Information Technology Public Utility Act of 2009 calling for the government to create an open source electronic health records solution and offer it at little or no cost to safety-net hospitals and small rural providers.[48][49]

text: VistA Derivatives[edit]

text:
Astronaut VistA – an installer suite for different versions of VistA, with multiple enhancements and bug fixes.
WorldVistA or WorldVistA EHR
OpenVistA (Medsphere)
Osehra-Vista (OSEHRA)
vxVistA (Document Storage Systems, Inc.)

text: An effort has been made by the Astronaut team, WorldVistA team, members of the VistA Software Alliance, and the OSEHRA to standardize structure between the platform derivatives to allow for future interoperability, as part of the vision for a national healthcare network record system.[citation needed]


document_title: Premier League records and statistics

question_text: who has scored the most goals in a premiership season

text: Premier League records and statistics

text: League records[edit]

text: Titles[edit]

text:
Most titles: 13, Manchester United[1]
Most consecutive title wins: 3
Manchester United (1998–99, 1999–2000, 2000–01)[1]
Manchester United (2006–07, 2007–08, 2008–09)[1]
Biggest title-winning margin: 19 points, 2017–18; Manchester City (100 points) over Manchester United (81 points)[2]
Smallest title-winning margin: 0 points and 8 goal difference – 2011–12; Manchester City (+64) over Manchester United (+56). Both finished on 89 points, but Manchester City won the title with a superior goal difference – the only time that goal difference has determined the Premier League.[3]

text: Points[edit]

text:
Most points in a season: 100, Manchester City (2017–18)[2]
Fewest points in a season: 11, Derby County (2007–08)[4]
Most home points in a season: 55, joint record:[5]
Chelsea (2005–06)
Manchester United (2010–11)
Manchester City (2011–12)[6]
Fewest home points in a season: 7, Sunderland (2005–06)[7]
Most away points in a season: 50, Manchester City (2017–18)[2]
Fewest away points in a season: 3, Derby County (2007–08)[7]
Most points in a season without winning the league: 89, Manchester United (2011–12)[8]
Fewest points in a season while winning the league: 75, Manchester United (1996–97)[9]
Most points in a season while being relegated:
42 games: 49, Crystal Palace (1992–93)[10]
38 games: 42, West Ham United (2002–03)[10]
Fewest points in a season while surviving relegation: 34, West Bromwich Albion (2004–05)[11]

text: Wins[edit]

text:
Most wins in total: 629, Manchester United[12]
Most wins in a season (38 games): 32, Manchester City (2017–18)[2]
Fewest wins in a season (38 games): 1, Derby County (2007–08)[7]
Most home wins in a season (19 games): 18, joint record:[13]
Chelsea (2005–06)
Manchester United (2010–11)
Manchester City (2011–12)[6]
Fewest home wins in a season (19 games): 1, joint record:[7]
Sunderland (2005–06)
Derby County (2007–08)
Most away wins in a season (19 games): 16, Manchester City (2017–18)[2]
Fewest away wins in a season (19/21 games): 0, joint record:[7][14][15]
Leeds United (1992–93)
Coventry City (1999–2000)
Wolverhampton Wanderers (2003–04)
Norwich City (2004–05)
Derby County (2007–08)
Hull City (2009–10)
Most consecutive wins: 18, Manchester City (between 26 August 2017 and 27 December 2017)[16][2]
Most consecutive home wins: 20, Manchester City (between 5 March 2011 and 21 March 2012)[17]
Most consecutive away wins: 11, joint record:[18][16]
Chelsea (between 6 April 2008 and 7 December 2008)
Manchester City (between 21 May 2017 and 27 December 2017)
Most consecutive games without a win: 32, Derby County (2007–08)[7]
Most consecutive games without a win from beginning of season: 16, Queens Park Rangers (between 18 August 2012 and 8 December 2012)[19]

text: Defeats[edit]

text:
Most defeats in total: 351, Everton[20]
Longest unbeaten run: 49 games, Arsenal (7 May 2003 – 24 October 2004)[21]
Fewest defeats in a season (38 games): 0, Arsenal (2003–04)[22]
Fewest home defeats in a season (19 games): 0, joint record:
Manchester United (1995–96, 1999–2000, 2010–11)[23][24][25]
Arsenal (1998–99, 2003–04, 2007–08)[26][27][28]
Chelsea (2004–05, 2005–06, 2006–07, 2007–08, 2014–15)[28][29][30][31][32]
Liverpool (2008–09, 2017–18)[33]
Manchester City (2011–12)[6]
Tottenham Hotspur (2016–17)
Fewest away defeats in a season (19 games): 0, Arsenal (2001–02, 2003–04)[27][34]
Most consecutive home games undefeated: 86, Chelsea (20 March 2004 – 5 October 2008)[35]
Most consecutive away games undefeated: 27, Arsenal (5 April 2003 – 25 September 2004)[36]
Most defeats in a season (42 games or 38 games): 29, joint record:
Ipswich Town (1994–95)
Sunderland (2005–06)
Derby County (2007–08)[37]
Most home defeats in a season (19 games): 14, Sunderland (2002–03, 2005–06)[38]
Most away defeats in a season (19 games): 17, Burnley (2009–10)[39]
Most consecutive defeats over more than one season (38 games): 20, Sunderland (2002–03, 2005–06)[40]

text: Draws[edit]

text:
Most draws in total: 287, Everton[20]
Most draws in a season (42 games): 18 – joint record:
Manchester City (1993–94)[41]
Sheffield United (1993–94)[41]
Southampton (1994–95)[41]
Most draws in a season (38 games): 17 – joint record:
Newcastle United (2003–04)[41]
Aston Villa (2006–07, 2011–12)[41]
Sunderland (2014–15)[41]
Most home draws in a season: 10 – joint record:
Sheffield Wednesday (1996–97)[41]
Leicester City (1997–98, 2003–04)[41]
Manchester United (2016–17)[41]
Most away draws in a season: 10, Newcastle United (2003–04)[41]
Fewest draws in a season: 3, Chelsea (1997–98, 2016–17)[41]
Fewest home draws in a season: 0 – joint record:
Manchester City (2008–09)[41]
Manchester United (2012–13)[41]
Chelsea (2016–17)[41]
Fewest away draws in a season: 1 – joint record:
Bolton Wanderers (1995–96)[41]
Queens Park Rangers (1995–96, 2014–15)[41]
Barnsley (1997–98)[41]
Chelsea (1997–98)[41]
Bradford City (1999–2000)[41]
Everton (2000–01)[41]
Ipswich Town (2000–01)[41]
Portsmouth (2005–06, 2007–08)[41]
Burnley (2009–10)[41]
Liverpool (2011–12)[41]
Newcastle United (2013–14)[41]
Queens Park Rangers (2014–15)[41]
Most consecutive draws: 7 – joint record:
Norwich City (1993–94)[41]
Southampton (1994–95)[41]
Manchester City (2009–10)[41]

text: Goals[edit]

text:
Most goals scored in a season: 106, Manchester City (2017–18)[2]
Fewest goals scored in a season: 20, Derby County (2007–08)[42]
Most goals conceded in a season (42 games): 100, Swindon Town (1993–94)[43]
Most goals conceded in a season (38 games): 89, Derby County (2007–08)[44]
Fewest goals conceded in a season: 15, Chelsea (2004–05)[45]
Best goal difference in a season: 79, Manchester City (2017–18)[2]
Worst goal difference in a season: –69, Derby County (2007–08)[46]
Most goals scored in a season by a relegated team: 55, Blackpool (2010–11)[47]
Most goals scored at home in a season: 68, Chelsea (2009–10)[45]
Fewest goals scored at home in a season: 10, Manchester City (2006–07)[48]
Most goals conceded at home in a season (21 games): 45, Swindon Town (1993–94)[49]
Most goals conceded at home in a season (19 games): 43
Derby County (2007–08)[49]
Wolverhampton Wanderers (2011–12)[49]
Fewest goals conceded at home in a season (21 games or 19 games): 4, Manchester United (1994–95)[49]
Most goals scored away in a season: 48, Liverpool (2013–14)[49]
Fewest goals scored away in a season: 8
Middlesbrough (1995–96)[49]
Southampton (1998–99)[49]
Sheffield United (2006–07)[49]
Derby County (2007–08)[49]
Most goals conceded away in a season (21 games): 59, Ipswich Town (1994–95)[49]
Most goals conceded away in a season (19 games): 55, Wigan Athletic (2009–10)[49]
Fewest goals conceded away in a season: 9, Chelsea (2004–05)[49]
Fewest failures to score in a match in a season: 0 (scored in every game), Arsenal (2001–02)[50]
Most goals scored in total: 1,924, Manchester United[20]
Most goals conceded in total: 1,267, Tottenham Hotspur[20]

text: Attendances[edit]

text:
Highest attendance, single game: 83,222, Tottenham Hotspur 1–0 Arsenal (at Wembley Stadium, 10 February 2018)[51]
Lowest attendance, single game: 3,039, Wimbledon 1–3 Everton (at Selhurst Park, 26 January 1993)[52][53]
Highest season average attendance: 75,821 – Old Trafford, Manchester United (2006–07)[54]
Lowest season average attendance: 8,353 – Selhurst Park, Wimbledon (1992–93)[54]

text: Player records[edit]

text: Appearances[edit]

text:
Most Premier League appearances: 653, Gareth Barry (2 May 1998 to 24 February 2018)[55]
Oldest player: John Burridge, 43 years and 162 days (for Manchester City v. Queens Park Rangers, 14 May 1995)[56]
Youngest player: Matthew Briggs, 16 years and 65 days (for Fulham v. Middlesbrough, 13 May 2007)[57]
Most consecutive Premier League appearances: 310, Brad Friedel (14 August 2004 until 7 October 2012)[58]
Most seasons appeared in: 22, Ryan Giggs (every season from 1992–93 to 2013–14)[59]

text: Goals[edit]

text:
First Premier League goal: Brian Deane (for Sheffield United v. Manchester United, 15 August 1992)[60]
Most Premier League goals: 260, Alan Shearer[61]
Most Premier League goals at one club: 183, Wayne Rooney (Manchester United)[62]
Oldest goalscorer: 40 years and 268 days, Teddy Sheringham (for West Ham United v. Portsmouth, 26 December 2006)[63]
Youngest goalscorer: 16 years and 271 days, James Vaughan (for Everton v. Crystal Palace, 10 April 2005)[64]
Most consecutive Premier League matches scored in: 11, Jamie Vardy (for Leicester City, 29 August to 28 November 2015)[65]
Most seasons scored in: 21, Ryan Giggs (every season from 1992–93 to 2012–13)[66]

text:
Rank

Name

Goals

Games

Goals per game

Playing position

First goal

Last goal

1

 Alan Shearer
260
441
0.59
Forward
1992–93
2005–06

2

 Wayne Rooney
208
491
0.42
Forward
2002–03
2017–18

3

 Andy Cole
187
414
0.45
Forward
1993–94
2006–07

4

 Frank Lampard
177
609
0.29
Midfield
1997–98
2014–15

5

 Thierry Henry
175
258
0.68
Forward
1999–2000
2011–12

6

 Robbie Fowler
163
379
0.43
Forward
1993–94
2006–07

7

 Jermain Defoe
162
492
0.33
Forward
2001–02
2017–18

8

 Michael Owen
150
326
0.46
Forward
1996–97
2012–13

9

 Les Ferdinand
149
351
0.42
Forward
1992–93
2004–05

10

 Teddy Sheringham
146
418
0.35
Forward
1992–93
2006–07

tag: table

text:
Most goals in a season (42 games): 34, joint record:[68]
Andy Cole (Newcastle United, 1993–94)
Alan Shearer (Blackburn Rovers, 1994–95)

text:
Most goals in a season (38 games): 32, Mohamed Salah (Liverpool, 2017–18)[69]
Most games scored in during a Premier League season: 24, Mohamed Salah (Liverpool, 2017–18)[70]
Most Premier League goals in a calendar year: 39, Harry Kane (Tottenham Hotspur, 2017)[71]
Number of teams scored against in a season: 17, joint record:
20-team league:[69]
Ian Wright (Arsenal, 1996–97)
Robin van Persie (Arsenal, 2011–12)
Mohamed Salah (Liverpool, 2017–18)
22-team league:[citation needed]
Andy Cole (Newcastle United, 1993–94)
Alan Shearer (Blackburn Rovers, 1994–95)
Most goals in a debut season: 30, Kevin Phillips (Sunderland, 1999–2000)[72]
Most Premier League hat-tricks in a season: 5, Alan Shearer (38 games) (Blackburn Rovers, 1995–96)[73]
Most Premier League hat-tricks: 11, Alan Shearer[74]
Most goals in a game: 5, joint record:[75]
Andy Cole (for Manchester United v. Ipswich Town, 4 March 1995) W 9–0
Alan Shearer (for Newcastle United v. Sheffield Wednesday, 19 September 1999) W 8–0
Jermain Defoe (for Tottenham Hotspur v. Wigan Athletic, 22 November 2009) W 9–1
Dimitar Berbatov (for Manchester United v. Blackburn Rovers, 27 November 2010) W 7–1
Sergio Agüero (for Manchester City v. Newcastle United, 3 October 2015) W 6–1

text:
Most goals in one half: 5, Jermain Defoe (for Tottenham Hotspur v. Wigan Athletic, 22 November 2009) W 9–1[76]
Fastest goal: 10 seconds, Ledley King (for Tottenham Hotspur v. Bradford City, 9 December 2000)[77]
Most goals scored by a substitute in a game: 4, Ole Gunnar Solskjær (for Manchester United v. Nottingham Forest, 6 February 1999)[78]
Most consecutive away league matches scored in: 9, Robin van Persie (for Arsenal, 1 January 2011 to 22 May 2011)[79]
Most consecutive seasons to score at least 30 goals: 3 (1993–1996), Alan Shearer (all for Blackburn Rovers)[80]
Most consecutive seasons to score at least 25 goals: 4 (1993–1997), Alan Shearer (1993–1996 for Blackburn Rovers, 1996–1997 for Newcastle United)[81]
Most consecutive seasons to score at least 20 goals: 5 (2001–2006), Thierry Henry (all for Arsenal)[81]
Most consecutive seasons to score at least 10 goals: 11 (2004–2015), Wayne Rooney (all for Manchester United)[82]
Most consecutive seasons to score at least 1 goal: 21 (1992–2013), Ryan Giggs (all for Manchester United)[66]
Fastest Premier League hat-trick: 2 minutes 56 seconds, Sadio Mané (for Southampton v. Aston Villa, 16 May 2015)[83]
Most different clubs to score for: 7, Craig Bellamy (for Coventry City, Newcastle United, Blackburn Rovers, Liverpool, West Ham United, Manchester City, Cardiff City)[84]
Most own goals: 10, Richard Dunne[85]
Most own goals in a season: 4, joint record:
Martin Škrtel (2013–14)[86]
Lewis Dunk (2017–18)[87]
Most hat-tricks against a single club: 3, Luis Suárez (for Liverpool v. Norwich City)[88]
Most goals in a calendar month: 10 (December 2013), Luis Suárez (Liverpool)[89]

text: Assists[edit]

text:
Most assists (career)

Rank
Player
Assists

1
 Ryan Giggs
162

2
 Cesc Fàbregas
111

3
 Wayne Rooney
103

4
 Frank Lampard
102

5
 Dennis Bergkamp
94

6
 Steven Gerrard
92

7
 David Beckham
80

8
 James Milner
78

9
 Teddy Sheringham
76

10
 David Silva
75

text:
Most Premier League assists in a season: 20, Thierry Henry (Arsenal, 2002–03)[91]
Most consecutive Premier League matches with an assist: 7, Mesut Özil (for Arsenal, 26 September to 21 November 2015)[92]
Most assists in a single Premier League match: 4, joint record:[93]
Dennis Bergkamp (for Arsenal v. Leicester City, 20 February 1999)
José Antonio Reyes (for Arsenal v. Middlesbrough, 14 January 2006)
Cesc Fàbregas (for Arsenal v. Blackburn Rovers, 4 October 2009)
Emmanuel Adebayor (for Tottenham Hotspur v. Newcastle United, 11 February 2012)
Santi Cazorla (for Arsenal v. Wigan Athletic, 14 May 2013)
Dušan Tadić (for Southampton  v. Sunderland, 18 October 2014)[94]

text: Goalkeepers[edit]

text:
Most clean sheets (career)

Rank
Player
Clean  sheets

1
 Petr Čech
201

2
 David James
169

3
 Mark Schwarzer
151

4
 David Seaman
140

5
 Nigel Martyn
137

6
 Pepe Reina
134

7
 Edwin van der Sar
132

 Tim Howard

 Brad Friedel

10
 Peter Schmeichel
128

text:
Most clean sheets in one season: 24, Petr Čech (for Chelsea, 2004–05)[95]
Longest consecutive run without conceding a goal: 14 games (1,311 minutes), Edwin van der Sar (for Manchester United, 2008–09)[96]
Goalscoring goalkeepers (excluding own goals):
Peter Schmeichel (Everton 3–2 Aston Villa, 20 October 2001)[97]
Brad Friedel (Charlton Athletic 3–2 Blackburn Rovers, 21 February 2004)[98]
Paul Robinson (Tottenham Hotspur 3–1 Watford, 17 March 2007)[99]
Tim Howard (Everton 1–2 Bolton Wanderers, 4 January 2012)[100]
Asmir Begović (Stoke City 1–1 Southampton, 2 November 2013)[101]

text: Disciplinary[edit]

text:
Most red cards: 8, joint record:[55]
Duncan Ferguson
Patrick Vieira
Richard Dunne
Most yellow cards for a player: 103, Gareth Barry[67]
Most yellow cards for a single team in one game: 9 (Tottenham Hotspur v. Chelsea, 2 May 2016)[102]
Fouling record: 782, Kevin Davies (since 2000–01, the first season for which reliable records are available)[103]
Longest ban: 12 matches, Joey Barton. After being dismissed for violent conduct, Barton was found guilty of two further separate counts of violent conduct after his dismissal against Manchester City, 23 May 2012[104]

text: Youngest goalscorers[edit]

text: This is a list of the top 10 youngest players to score a goal in the Premier League.[105]

text:
Player

Date

Team

Age

Opposition

1

James Vaughan

10 April 2005

Everton

16 years, 270 days

Crystal Palace

2

James Milner

26 December 2002

Leeds United

16 years, 346 days

Sunderland

3

Wayne Rooney

19 October 2002

Everton

16 years, 351 days

Arsenal

4

Cesc Fàbregas

25 August 2004

Arsenal

17 years, 114 days

Blackburn Rovers

5

Michael Owen

6 May 1997

Liverpool

17 years, 144 days

Wimbledon

6

Andy Turner

5 September 1992

Tottenham

17 years, 166 days

Everton

7

Federico Macheda

5 April 2009

Manchester United

17 years, 226 days

Aston Villa

8

Raheem Sterling

20 October 2012

Liverpool

17 years, 317 days

Reading

9

Mikael Forssell

20 February 1999

Chelsea

17 years, 342 days

Nottingham Forest

10

Danny Cadamarteri

20 September 1997

Everton

17 years, 344 days

Barnsley

text: Match records[edit]

text: Scorelines[edit]

text:
Biggest home win: 9–0, Manchester United v. Ipswich Town (4 March 1995)[106]
Biggest away win: 1–8, Nottingham Forest v. Manchester United (6 February 1999)[106]
Biggest aggregate win: 12–1, joint record:
Blackburn Rovers 7–0 Nottingham Forest (18 November 1995) & Nottingham Forest 1–5 Blackburn Rovers (13 April 1996)
Tottenham Hotspur 9–1 Wigan Athletic (22 November 2009) & Wigan Athletic 0–3 Tottenham Hotspur (21 February 2010)
Biggest loss by reigning champions: 1–6, joint record:[107]
Manchester United 1–6 Manchester City (23 October 2011), after Manchester United won the 2010–11 season
Leicester City 1–6 Tottenham Hotspur (18 May 2017), after Leicester City won the 2015–16 season
Largest goal deficit overcome to win: 3
Leeds United 4–3 Derby County (8 November 1997)[108]
West Ham United 3–4 Wimbledon (9 September 1998)[109]
Tottenham Hotspur 3–5 Manchester United (29 September 2001)[110]
Wolverhampton Wanderers 4–3 Leicester City (25 October 2003)[111]
Largest goal deficit overcome to draw: 4, Newcastle United 4–4 Arsenal (5 February 2011)[112]
Highest scoring: 7–4, Portsmouth v. Reading (29 September 2007)[113]
Highest scoring draw: 5–5, West Bromwich Albion v. Manchester United (19 May 2013)[114]
Highest scoring in the first half: 7 goals, joint record:
Blackburn Rovers 3–4 Leeds United (14 September 1997 – final score; 3–4)[115]
Bradford City 4–3 Derby County (21 April 2000 – final score; 4–4)[116]
Reading 3–4 Manchester United (1 December 2012 – final score; 3–4)[117]
Most individual goal scorers in one game: 9, joint record:
Tottenham Hotspur 4–5 Arsenal (13 November 2004)[118]
Portsmouth 7–4 Reading (29 September 2007)[119]
Most individual goal scorers in one game for the same team: 7, joint record:
Chelsea 8–0 Aston Villa (23 December 2012)[120]
Manchester City 7–0 Norwich City (2 November 2013)[121]
Southampton 8–0 Sunderland (18 October 2014)[122]

text: All-time Premier League table[edit]

text: The all-time Premier League table is a cumulative record of all match results, points and goals of every team that has played in the Premier League since its inception in 1992. The table that follows is accurate as of the end of the 2017–18 season. Teams in bold are part of the 2018–19 Premier League. Numbers in bold are the record (highest either positive or negative) numbers in each column.[123]

text:
Pos.

Club

Seasons

Pld

Win

Draw

Loss

GF

GA

GD

Pts

1st

2nd

3rd

4th

Relegated

AvgPts

BestPos.

1
Manchester United

26
1000
629
215
156
1924
875
1049
2102
13
6
3
1

80.85
1

2
Arsenal

26
1000
544
253
203
1772
962
810
1885
3
6
5
7

72.50
1

3
Chelsea

26
1000
537
248
215
1707
963
744
1859
5
4
4
2

71.50
1

4
Liverpool

26
1000
499
255
246
1685
1024
661
1752

3
5
7

67.38
2

5
Tottenham Hotspur

26
1000
423
255
322
1480
1267
213
1524

1
2
2

58.62
2

6
Everton

26
1000
362
287
351
1303
1265
38
1373

1

52.81
4

7
Manchester City

21
810
359
194
257
1279
952
327
1271
3
2
2
1
2
60.52
1

8
Newcastle United

23
882
334
225
323
1207
1187
20
1227

2
2
1
2
53.35
2

9
Aston Villa

24
924
316
275
333
1117
1186
−69
1223

1

1
1
50.96
2

10
West Ham United

22
844
275
221
348
1012
1214
−202
1046

2
47.55
5

11
Blackburn Rovers

18
696
262
184
250
927
907
20
970
1
1

1
2
53.89
1

12
Southampton

19
734
229
202
303
892
1022
−130
889

1
46.79
6

13
Leeds United

12
468
189
125
154
641
573
68
692

1
2
1
57.67
3

14
Middlesbrough

15
574
165
169
240
648
794
−146
661[124]

4
44.01
7

15
Sunderland

16
608
153
159
296
612
904
−292
618

4
38.63
7

16
Fulham

13
494
150
136
208
570
697
−127
586

1
45.08
7

17
Bolton Wanderers

13
494
149
128
217
575
745
−170
575

3
44.23
6

18
Leicester City

12
460
142
129
189
572
670
−98
555
1

3
46.25
1

19
West Bromwich Albion

12
456
112
128
216
475
696
−221
464

4
38.67
8

20
Stoke City

10
380
116
109
155
398
525
−127
457

1
45.70
9

21
Coventry City

9
354
99
112
143
387
490
−103
409

1
45.40
11

22
Sheffield Wednesday

8
316
101
89
126
409
453
−44
392

1
49.00
7

23
Wimbledon

8
316
99
94
123
384
472
−88
391

1
48.88
6

24
Crystal Palace

9
350
97
89
164
374
511
−137
380

4
42.22
10

25
Charlton Athletic

8
304
93
82
129
342
442
−100
361

2
45.13
7

26
Norwich City

8
316
89
92
135
365
510
−145
359

1

4
44.88
3

27
Wigan Athletic

8
304
85
76
143
316
482
−166
331

1
41.38
10

28
Swansea City

7
266
82
66
118
306
383
−77
312

1
44.57
8

29
Queens Park Rangers

7
278
81
65
132
339
431
−92
308

3
44.00
5

30
Birmingham City

7
266
73
82
111
273
360
−87
301

3
43.00
9

31
Portsmouth

7
266
79
65
122
292
380
−88
293[125]

1
41.86
8

32
Derby County

7
266
68
70
128
271
420
−149
274

2
39.14
8

33
Nottingham Forest

5
198
60
59
79
229
287
−58
239

1

3
47.80
3

34
Ipswich Town

5
202
57
53
92
219
312
−93
224

2
44.80
5

35
Watford

5
190
45
43
102
188
318
−130
178

2
35.60
13

36
Hull City

5
190
41
48
101
181
323
−142
171

3
34.20
16

37
Burnley

4
152
40
37
75
145
229
−84
157

2
39.25
7

38
Wolverhampton Wanderers

4
152
32
40
80
156
281
−125
136

2
34.00
15

39
Sheffield United

3
122
32
36
54
128
168
−40
132

2
44.00
14

40
Bournemouth

3
114
34
30
50
145
195
−50
132

44.00
9

41
Reading

3
114
32
23
59
136
186
−50
119

2
39.67
8

42
Oldham Athletic

2
84
22
23
39
105
142
−37
89

1
44.50
19

43
Bradford City

2
76
14
20
42
68
138
−70
62

1
31.00
17

44
Brighton & Hove Albion

1
38
9
13
16
34
54
–20
40

40.00
15

45
Blackpool

1
38
10
9
19
55
78
−23
39

1
39.00
19

46
Huddersfield Town

1
38
9
10
19
28
58
–30
37

37.00
16

47
Barnsley

1
38
10
5
23
37
82
−45
35

1
35.00
19

48
Cardiff City

1
38
7
9
22
32
74
−42
30

1
30.00
20

49
Swindon Town

1
42
5
15
22
47
100
−53
30

1
30.00
22

text: League or status at 2018–19:

text:
2018–19 Premier League teams

2018–19 EFL Championship teams

2018–19 EFL League One teams

2018–19 EFL League Two teams

Defunct teams

text: By a 2007 agreement, neither Milton Keynes Dons nor AFC Wimbledon regards itself as custodian of Wimbledon F.C.'s statistics.[126][127]

text: Managers[edit]

text:
Most Premier League titles: 13, Sir Alex Ferguson (Manchester United) – 1993, 1994, 1996, 1997, 1999, 2000, 2001, 2003, 2007, 2008, 2009, 2011, 2013
Most Premier League Manager of the Month awards: 27, Sir Alex Ferguson
Most consecutive Premier League Manager of the Month awards: 4, Pep Guardiola[128]
Most promotions to the Premier League: 4, Steve Bruce (Birmingham City in 2001–02 and 2006–07 and Hull City in 2012–13 and 2015–16)
Most relegations from the Premier League: 3, Dave Bassett (Sheffield United in 1993–94, Nottingham Forest in 1996–97, and Leicester City in 2001–02)[129]
Longest spell as manager: 21 years, 224 days, Arsène Wenger (Arsenal, 1 October 1996 to 13 May 2018)[130]
Shortest spell as manager (excluding caretakers): 41 days, Les Reed (Charlton Athletic, 14 November 2006 to 24 December 2006) (8 games)[131]