The Leapfrog Group is a national nonprofit that grades the safety and quality of American hospitals and surgery centers and publishes the results for anyone to read. It was founded in 2000 by a group of large employers and other organizations that purchase health care for their workers, who were frustrated that they were paying enormous sums without any reliable way to tell which hospitals actually kept patients safe. That purchaser-driven origin still shapes the organization, and its independence from the hospitals it rates is part of why this business directory includes it among the patient-safety references in the medical malpractice category.

The reason an employer coalition cared about hospital safety connects directly to the subject of medical malpractice. Preventable harm in hospitals, the wrong medication, a surgery on the wrong site, an avoidable infection, a fall, a pressure ulcer, drives both human suffering and enormous cost. The employers funding Leapfrog were paying for those complications through their health plans. Their bet was that if hospital safety performance were measured and made public, hospitals would compete to improve and patients would gain a tool to choose more carefully. Two decades on, that bet produced two well-known programs: the Leapfrog Hospital Survey and the Hospital Safety Grade.

The Leapfrog Hospital Survey is a voluntary annual questionnaire that hospitals complete about their own practices and outcomes. It asks detailed questions across areas such as medication safety, including whether the hospital uses computerized order entry with decision support to catch dangerous prescriptions, intensive care staffing, infection rates, maternity care practices like early elective deliveries and cesarean rates, and the volume and outcomes of high-risk surgeries. Hospitals that participate get a detailed report on how they compare with national standards and with their peers. Because participation is voluntary and self-reported, Leapfrog builds in verification steps and is transparent that a hospital choosing not to submit is a data point in itself.

The Hospital Safety Grade is the program most familiar to the public. Twice a year, Leapfrog assigns letter grades from A to F to general hospitals across the country, based on a set of measures focused specifically on errors, accidents, injuries, and infections. The grading methodology draws on the hospital survey where available, along with publicly reported data from federal sources such as the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services. An expert panel reviews and updates the methodology, and the scoring formula is published so that researchers and hospitals can see how each grade is calculated rather than treating it as a black box.

For patients, the appeal is obvious. Someone facing a planned surgery or choosing where to deliver a baby can look up a hospital and see a single letter grade, then drill into the underlying measures to understand why a hospital scored as it did. The grades are free to look up, searchable by location, and updated on a predictable schedule. That accessibility is deliberate, since the founding purchasers wanted information that an ordinary person, not just a benefits manager, could act on. The lookup also lets a visitor compare several nearby hospitals side by side, so the choice is framed as a comparison rather than a single up-or-down judgment on one facility. Employers and health plans, for their part, use Leapfrog data to design networks, steer employees toward safer facilities, and sometimes tie payment to performance.

What sets Leapfrog apart from a government rating is its independence and its single-minded focus on safety. It is not a regulator and has no power to fine or close a hospital. It does not accredit. Its influence is entirely informational and reputational: a public letter grade that a hospital's competitors, patients, and local newspaper can all see. Hospitals pay close attention to these grades, and the organization has been candid that some hospitals dislike the methodology, particularly when a grade slips. That friction is a sign the program has teeth rather than a flaw, though it does mean the grades are sometimes contested.

The organization has expanded its work over time. It rates ambulatory surgery centers and hospital outpatient departments, reflecting how much surgery has moved out of traditional inpatient settings. It has put particular emphasis on maternity care, publishing data on cesarean rates and episiotomies and on hospitals' performance in reducing harm to mothers and newborns, an area where outcomes in the United States have drawn serious concern. It also reports on hospitals' efforts to prevent the kinds of never events, errors so serious they should essentially never happen, that frequently underlie malpractice claims.

It is fair to weigh the caveats. The Hospital Safety Grade rests in part on self-reported survey data, and although Leapfrog verifies submissions and supplements them with federal data, no measurement system of this kind is perfect. Hospitals and some researchers have argued over particular measures and over how missing data is handled, and different rating systems sometimes disagree about the same hospital, which can confuse patients who check more than one. Leapfrog publishes its methodology openly, which makes these debates possible to have on the merits, but a reader should treat a grade as a strong informed signal rather than a final verdict, and should look at the specific measures behind it.

The reach of the grading program is substantial. Each release covers roughly 3,000 general hospitals nationwide, which means most Americans can find a graded hospital near them, and the spring and fall cycles have become a recurring news event in many local markets. Leapfrog also publishes a Top Hospitals list each year, a more selective recognition that draws on full survey participation and strong performance, which hospitals compete hard to make. Over the years the organization has tightened its measures as practices it once pushed, such as computerized prescribing, became standard, so the bar for a high grade has moved upward rather than staying fixed. That willingness to raise expectations as the field improves is one reason the grades have kept their meaning instead of inflating toward a wall of A's.

The audience is wide and practical. Patients and families use the grades to choose hospitals. Employers and purchasers, the organization's founding base, use the data to manage benefits and contract for care. Hospitals use their reports to find and fix weaknesses, and many publicize an A grade in their own marketing. Journalists draw on the twice-yearly grade releases to report on local hospital safety. Researchers and policy groups cite Leapfrog data in studies of hospital quality. Patient-safety advocates point to it as a model of public reporting. The breadth of that audience is one reason the organization has stayed relevant well beyond its original employer coalition.

The Leapfrog Group is based in Washington, and its website is the gateway to both its programs, with the public Hospital Safety Grade lookup hosted on a companion site and the survey, methodology, and research materials on its main domain. The material aimed at patients is plain and easy to use, while the methodology and survey documentation go deep enough to satisfy researchers and hospital quality staff.

For this business directory, Leapfrog fills a clear niche: an independent, non-commercial source that measures and publishes hospital safety in a form the public can actually use. It does not handle malpractice claims or take sides in disputes, but the harms it tracks are precisely the failures that give rise to those claims, which makes it relevant background for anyone thinking about a hospital's safety record. It earns its place here on the strength of its independence, the transparency of its methods, and a mission, holding hospitals publicly accountable for patient safety, that lines up squarely with the purpose of this category.

---