St. Rose Hospital

Legal name: Hayward Sisters Hospital

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
941668344
IRS 990 coverage
2009–2024
Official website data refreshed
Sep 2026
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Hayward, CA, US
Phone
(510) 264-4000
Rating
60
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Hospitals and Related Primary Medical Care Facilities

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$142,998,054
Expenses
$145,269,568
Assets
$65,496,502
Liabilities
$73,839,819

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

18 people listed

Highest reported compensation

  • MARK FRATZE (CHAIR (AS OF 11/24)): $894,673 total reported compensation
  • KIMBERLY MIRANDA (TREASURER (AS OF 11/24)): $851,009 total reported compensation
  • ROMOANETIA LOFTON (SECRETARY (AS OF 11/24)): $642,514 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

To provide high quality, yet cost-effective health care to the community, regardless of ability to pay.

What it reported doing in 2024

Hayward sisters hospital (dba st. Rose hospital) is a general acute care hospital located in hayward, California, and is the sole corporate member of st. Rose foundation and saint rose medical building, inc. Founded in 1968, the hospital is currently licensed for 155 beds and has an active medical staff of over 302. The hospital's primary service area is in the southern sub-region of alameda county, with a population of nearly 800,000, which includes the cities of fremont, hayward, newark, san leandro, san lorenzo, and union city. The hospital is situated in a predominantly working-class section of hayward, and its primary service area encompasses the cities of hayward and union city.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 72% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 100% of reported program-service expenses outside its grant, affiliate-payment, and member-benefit lines. This expense classification does not rule out separately announced grant awards.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. A relatively small share of voting board members are independent and few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 68
  • Transparency & Controls: 66
  • Accountability: 48
  • Sustainability: 21
  • Growth: 40

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 76.7%; rating input score 77
  • Program expense ratio: 75.4%; rating input score 75
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 92.3%; rating input score 92; 12th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 0 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 0
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Missing
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Yes; rating input score 100

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 20%; rating input score 20; 9th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 7 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 88
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Limited
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -1.6%; rating input score 20; 20th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.45; rating input score 16; 16th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 1.13; rating input score 4; 4th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 2.1%; rating input score 53; 53rd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 0.2% per year; rating input score 100; 8th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -0.8% per year; rating input score 0; 4th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -1.8% per year; rating input score 0; 4th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • What they do: 3 programs and campaigns described on the official site · 2 operating locations identified
  • Where the money goes: 76.7% of revenue deployed · 75.4% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 1 of 5 board members independent · 7 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $109.6M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $895K · 18 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 5 contractors listed · $9.9M reported
  • Consistency: 34 of 34 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 9 filed schedules · includes major donors, executive pay, and related organizations
  • Filing history: 16 filing years from 2009 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 7 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 3 filed related-organization links
  • Grant readiness: Federal tax and exclusion status, award history, and grant-maker relationships.
  • People: Everyone the filings name, and which of them the filings identify by more than a name.
  • Staff and benefit plans: Retirement and health plans the organization files with the Department of Labor, and the people in them.

Key Signals

Signals prioritize questions for review. They are not findings of misconduct.

  • High — Accountability: Independent voting board scored 20/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 20/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 16/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Other executive compensation review process not reported.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 4/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 53/100.