Medical Staff of Santa Barbara Cottage Hospital

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
770242461
IRS 990 coverage
2013–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
Santa Barbara, CA, USA
Phone
8052876903
Rating
70
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate

Reported finances

Revenue
$253,438
Expenses
$250,489
Assets
$381,796
Liabilities
$0

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

39 people listed

Highest reported compensation

  • DR ANNE RODRIGUEZ MD (CHIEF OF STAFF-SANTA BARBARA): $147,375 total reported compensation
  • DR MICHAEL SHENODA MD (VICE CHIEF OF STAFF-SANTA BARBARA): $54,225 total reported compensation
  • DR ERIC REY AMADOR MD (SECRETARY TREASURER-SANTA BARBARA): $33,375 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

The purpose of the medical staff of santa barbara is to assure that all patients admitted to or treated at cottage health facilities (hospitals) receive a uniform standard of quality care, treatment and efficiency consistent with generally accepted standards attainable within the hospitals' means and circumstances. It also organizes and supports professional education and community health education and medical staff support services. It provides a means for the medical staff, board of directors of cottage health (board) and administration of cottage health to discuss issues of mutual concern and to implement education and changes intended to continuously improve the quality of patient care. It provides for accountability of the medical staff to the board through the mec. It exercises its rights and responsibilities in a manner that does not jeopardize the hospitals' licenses, medicare and medi-cal provider status, accreditation, or tax exempt status.

What it reported doing in 2025

In accordance with the medical staff bylaws, the medical staff oversees the review and approval process for granting clinical privileges and membership, and performs ongoing professional practice performance and peer review through established mechanisms as described in the bylaws. Medical staff departments and medical staff committees hold monthly meetings to review quality and patient outcomes in order to establish patient care standards, including full participation in the development of hospital-wide policy involving the oversight of care, treatment and services provided by members and others in the hospital.

Operating model

Revenue model
Membership-supported. 83% of the money available for current operations came from membership dues.
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. Some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered and program spending has declined or grown slowly.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 76
  • Transparency & Controls: 74
  • Accountability: 72
  • Sustainability: 42
  • Growth: 20

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 84.7%; rating input score 85
  • Program expense ratio: 85.1%; rating input score 85
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 1 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 17
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 87.2%; rating input score 87; 26th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 4 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 50
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: Limited
    • Other executive compensation review process: Pass
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 1.2%; rating input score 38; 38th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.52; rating input score 52; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 77; 77th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 150.2%; rating input score 0; 0th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -0.5% per year; rating input score 0; 27th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -1.6% per year; rating input score 0; 15th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 11.5% per year; rating input score 100; 67th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 84.7% of revenue deployed · 85.1% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 34 of 39 board members independent · 4 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $213K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $147K · 39 people listed · 1 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 14 of 14 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
  • Filing history: 13 filing years from 2013 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 36 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: Filed and resolved organization relationships.
  • 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.

Key Signals

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

  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 7 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 38/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 52/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 0/100.