SUTTER SANTA ROSA REGIONAL HOSPITAL
SANTA ROSA, CA
Ranks 52 of 70 scanned hospitals in CA. Ranks 732 of 998 scanned nationally.
This file has one or more blockers, issues that should be resolved before signing the attestation.
- Blockers
- 2
- Warnings
- 2
- Info
- 0
Source: https://edge.sitecorecloud.io/sutterhealt962c-sutterhealt8fce-production57cc-4860/media/Project/SutterHealth/SutterHealth/Files/billing-insurance/costs-and-charges/940562680-1740413798_sutter-santa-rosa-regional-hospital_standardcharges.csv
Format: csv-tall · Schema v3.0 · Engine v0.2.3 · 9/19/2026, 7:18:28 PM
Automated analysis of the public file, using the current MRF Preflight ruleset. Not legal advice. Hospitals may re-scan at any time.
Score history
L1: Schema conformance
Required fields present on every line item
Blocker · HPT-L1-001Every standard charge line item must include a description, at least one billing code and code type, a care setting, and at least one standard charge (gross charge, discounted cash price, or a payer-specific negotiated dollar amount, percentage, or algorithm). Rows missing any of these can't be matched to a real service or priced.
322 of 40421 rows are missing a required field.
Citation: 45 CFR 180.50(b); CMS v3.0.0 CSV/JSON data dictionary, required-field list
Remediation: Fill in the description, code, code|type, and setting for every row, and make sure every row carries at least one standard charge, before republishing.
Affects 322 row(s).
L2: Completeness and plausibility
No placeholder values in price or payer fields
Warning · HPT-L2-014Values like 999999999, 'N/A', or an empty payer name are common placeholders hospitals leave in when a real number wasn't ready. They pass schema validation but carry no real pricing information.
40421 rows contain a placeholder value instead of real data.
Citation: CMS Hospital Price Transparency FAQ, data completeness guidance
Remediation: Replace placeholder values with the real negotiated rate, or omit the row if the rate genuinely doesn't exist for that payer/plan.
Affects 40,421 row(s).
L3: Discoverability compliance
cms-hpt.txt is present at the domain root and points at a live MRF
Blocker · HPT-L3-001Every hospital must publish a cms-hpt.txt file at the root of its public domain listing the location(s) of its machine-readable file(s). Without it, the MRF is effectively undiscoverable to anyone who doesn't already have the direct URL.
cms-hpt.txt at https://www.sutterhealth.org/cms-hpt.txt exists but doesn't contain a recognizable MRF URL.
Citation: CMS Hospital Price Transparency txt-file FAQ; 45 CFR 180.50(e)
Remediation: Publish a cms-hpt.txt file at https://<your-domain>/cms-hpt.txt listing the full URL(s) of your MRF(s), one per line.
MRF filename follows the CMS naming convention
Warning · HPT-L3-002CMS expects the MRF filename to follow <ein>_<hospital-name>_standardcharges.<ext>. A non-conforming filename makes the file harder for automated tools (including CMS's own review process) to identify.
Filename "940562680-1740413798_sutter-santa-rosa-regional-hospital_standardcharges.csv" doesn't match <ein>_<hospital-name>_standardcharges.<ext>.
Citation: 45 CFR 180.50(b)(1)(i) — file naming convention
Remediation: Rename the file to <ein>_<hospital-name>_standardcharges.csv (or .json), using the hospital's EIN with no dashes.
2 blockers found in this file
The Attestation Evidence Packet documents every finding above with the exact file location, what was checked, and when — as a dated PDF with a SHA-256 hash, so what was true at generation time stays provable after the file changes. One hospital, one-time.