Search

Before the COVID-19 pandemic, for-profit nursing homes' revenue generally covered their costs, whereas not-for-profit nursing homes often needed donations and other nonpatient revenue to cover expenses. The unprecedented challenges presented by the pandemic caused the industry to report operating losses that were larger among not-for-profits and facilities relying on agency staff. COVID-19 public health emergency funding allowed nursing homes to remain profitable through 2021. By 2022, as these public health emergency funds were cut back, for-profit nursing homes had overall net incomes of $1.68 per resident day, whereas not-for-profit nursing homes lost $31.18 per resident day. Without public health emergency funds, for-profit and not-for-profit nursing homes would have had losses of $7.47 and $42.35 per resident day, respectively, in 2022. These results indicate that as public health emergency funds are entirely withdrawn, the long-term financial viability of nursing homes, especially not-for-profits, will be seriously challenged.

Introduction: Organizations in the "ecosystem of recovery"-most often non-profits led and staffed by individuals with lived substance use disorder (SUD) experience-offer peer services, group counseling, and a wide variety of programs to help those struggling with SUD. The efforts of such organizations are effective in transitioning those suffering from SUD into long-term recovery. Despite well-established evidence depicting inequitable access to SUD treatment between BIPOC and non-Hispanic White Americans, there has been no empirical undertaking of whether organizations in the ecosystem of recovery face barriers to fund their operations based on the racial and ethnic composition of their community members., Methods: In this 2022 needs assessment, "Optimizing Recovery Funding," we combined the results of quantitative and qualitative data for a mixed methods analytic approach. The study employs bivariate descriptive statistics and inferences along with thematic analyses. From an initial list of 537 organizations across U.S. states and territories, 145 leaders of these organizations comprise our survey analytic sample. A total of 85 leaders participated in one of 16 focus groups, with 10 based on geography and 6 based on population identity. This needs assessment produced comprehensive data on the operations of organizations in the ecosystem of recovery., Results: A lack of training and existing organizational funding, as well as non-inclusive language in funding requests for proposals contributed to some organizations' decisions not to pursue certain grants and funding mechanisms. There were no statistical differences in applying for, nor success in receiving, federal and state funding between organizations serving predominantly BIPOC community members and those serving mostly non-Hispanic White community members. However, there were key instances of-at times inexplicable-inequity in funding outcomes., Conclusions: All leaders of organizations in the ecosystem of recovery who participated in the needs assessment made it clear that there are fundamental issues to accessing peer recovery operational and programmatic funding. Innovative strategies for developing inclusive and culturally responsive funding approaches that prioritize organizations predominantly serving historically marginalized communities are needed., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest The authors do not have any conflicts of interest, or competing interests, to declare., (Copyright © 2024 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Hospital CEO salaries have grown quickly over the past two decades. We investigate correlates of rising nonprofit hospital CEO pay between 2012 and 2019 by merging compensation data from Candid's IRS 990 forms with hospital data from the National Academy for State Health Policy Hospital Cost Tool. Almost half of the measured increase in CEO compensation (44.5%) accrued to a "base case" CEO, who was leading a non-teaching hospital system or independent hospital with fewer than 100 beds that earned 0 profits and provided no charity care. Another 28.5% of the measured salary increase resulted from changes in the generosity with which observable metrics were rewarded, particularly the reward for heading a system with 500 or more beds. The remaining 27% resulted mostly from hospital systems or single hospitals that increased their profits or bed size over time. The increase in CEO compensation associated with leading larger healthcare systems and earning greater profits may explain the increase in healthcare system consolidation which has occurred over the last several years., Competing Interests: I have read the journal’s policy, and the authors of this manuscript have the following competing interests: the authors receive funding from Arnold Ventures. VH and MNS receive funding from the Health Care Service Corporation and the National Academy of State Health Policy. The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, publication decision, or manuscript preparation. VH is a member of the Blue Cross Blue Shield of Texas Community Advisory Board, Community Health Choice: Houston Business Coalition on Healthcare Advisory Board, Texas Employers for Affordable Health Care Advisory Board, and the Blue Cross Blue Shield Research Alliance. VH receives support for attending membership committee meetings from the National Academy of Medicine. VH owned stock in IBM. “However, this does not alter our adherence to PLOS ONE policies on sharing data and materials.”, (Copyright: © 2024 Jenkins et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.)

While philanthropic support for science has increased in the past decade, there is limited quantitative knowledge about the patterns that characterize it and the mechanisms that drive its distribution. Here, we map philanthropic funding to universities and research institutions based on IRS tax forms from 685,397 non-profit organizations. We identify nearly one million grants supporting institutions involved in science and higher education, finding that in volume and scope, philanthropy is a significant source of funds, reaching an amount that rivals some of the key federal agencies like the NSF and NIH. Our analysis also reveals that philanthropic funders tend to focus locally, indicating that criteria beyond research excellence play an important role in funding decisions, and that funding relationships are stable, i.e. once a grant-giving relationship begins, it tends to continue in time. Finally, we show that the bipartite funder-recipient network displays a highly overrepresented motif indicating that funders who share one recipient also share other recipients and we show that this motif contains predictive power for future funding relationships. We discuss the policy implications of our findings on inequality in science, scientific progress, and the role of quantitative approaches to philanthropy., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

Background: Philanthropy in plastic surgery supports research, clinical care, academic infrastructure, and education in the United States and internationally. Plastic surgeons have opportunities to innovatively address unmet needs in their local and global communities by forming philanthropic nonprofit organizations., Methods: The authors queried three national philanthropic databases (Charity Navigator, Guidestar, and ProPublica) for Internal Revenue Service 990 form tax return information related to philanthropic plastic surgery organizations. The authors analyzed the financial information publicly available about current plastic surgery philanthropic organizations and their funding sources., Results: Seventy-three federally tax-exempt groups identified plastic surgery as their primary area of work to the Internal Revenue Service in 2019, and 52 of those organizations said they engaged in clinical and/or educational philanthropy.3 In 2017, a total of $158.5 million was donated to these groups in cash and noncash donations including equipment and time. Analyses of 6 years (2013 to 2018) of tax records from groups that provide plastic surgery clinical, research, or educational philanthropy reveal that government grants provide very little funding for this work. Eighty-six percent of money raised for these groups in 2017 was collected by means of direct donations. Money obtained from fundraising events contributed 2 percent to their total monies raised in 2017 on average and 8 percent came from noncash gifts., Conclusions: A broad body of academic research is reviewed here that guides best practices and measuring a group's impact and outcomes. The details of a philanthropic group's organization and finances directly influence the impact of their work and, as such, are worthy of our sustained attention., (Copyright © 2021 by the American Society of Plastic Surgeons.)

The COVID-19 pandemic has revealed the vulnerability of the US generic drug supply chain to foreign production. Many policies have been proposed to mitigate this vulnerability. In this article, we argue that nonprofit drug manufacturers have the potential to make important contributions.

This article examines the relationship between hospital profitability and efficiency. A cross-section of 1317 U.S. metropolitan, acute care, not-for-profit hospitals for the year 2015 was employed. We use a frontier method, stochastic frontier analysis, to estimate hospital efficiency. Total margin and operating margin were used as profit variables in OLS regressions that were corrected for heteroskedacity. In addition to estimated efficiency, control variables for internal and external correlates of profitability were included in the regression models. We found that more efficient hospitals were also more profitable. The results show a positive relationship between profitability and size, concentration of output, occupancy rate and membership in a multi-hospital system. An inverse relationship was found between profits and academic medical centers, average length of stay, location in a Medicaid expansion state, Medicaid and Medicare share of admissions, and unemployment rate. The results of a Hausman test indicates that efficiency is exogenous in the profit equations. The findings suggest that not-for-profit hospitals will be responsive to incentives for increasing efficiency and use market power to increase surplus to pursue their objectives.

Importance: In the United States, nonprofit hospitals receive tax-exempt status with the expectation that they provide a high level of benefit to local communities. Prior work has shown that Medicaid expansion reduced hospital spending on uncompensated care., Objective: To measure the association of tax-exempt hospital spending with community benefit and changes in uncompensated care after Medicaid expansion., Design, Setting, and Participants: This cohort study was performed using a difference-in-differences analysis (ie, a pre-post treatment-control design) to estimate changes in reported charitable categories associated with Medicaid expansion. Data from Internal Revenue Service form 990, Schedule H, tax filings for 2253 tax-exempt hospitals in the United States from 2012 to 2016 were used. Data were analyzed from June to November 2019., Exposure: The proportion of the hospital's tax filing that spanned the period after Medicaid expansion., Main Outcomes and Measures: Hospital-reported spending on uncompensated care, unreimbursed Medicaid expenses, and other community benefit spending categories., Results: Across 2253 hospitals, mean (SD) uncompensated care costs between 2012 and 2016 were $4.20 million ($8.80 million) and unreimbursed Medicaid expenses were $7.60 million ($18.62 million). Compared with tax-exempt hospitals in states that did not expand Medicaid, those in states that did expand Medicaid reported mean reductions in their provision of uncompensated care of $1.11 million (95% CI, $0.35 million to $1.87 million; P < .001), representing a mean change of -2% (95% CI, -6% to 2%; P < .001). These reductions have been offset by mean reported increases in the provision of unreimbursed Medicaid expenses of $1.63 million (95% CI, $0.31 million to $2.94 million; P = .02), representing a mean increase of 2% (95% CI, 1% to 4%; P = .01). Tax-exempt hospitals in states that expanded Medicaid reported no statistically significant mean increase in spending on other community benefit activities., Conclusions and Relevance: In this study, large decreases in uncompensated care among tax-exempt hospitals associated with Medicaid expansion were not accompanied by increases in other reportable categories of community health benefit spending. Instead, they were accompanied by increased spending on unreimbursed Medicaid expenses.

Leadership at the board and executive levels across the nonprofit sector remains predominantly composed of white individuals, despite an increasingly diverse society. Research documents distinct benefits associated with diversity and inclusion, but efforts to move the dial have fallen short. This article explores how voluntary associations can prioritize racial/ethnic equity in their governance and provides specific steps for the examination of culture, practices, and processes required to operationalize change. There are a variety of professional societies and associations, also known as business leagues, established under the Internal Revenue Code. To be exempt, these organizations must be devoted to improving an industry or profession, as distinguished from performing particular services for individuals, and when successful they serve to improve the economic and social well-being of the entire nation., (© The Author(s) 2019. Published by Oxford University Press for the Infectious Diseases Society of America. All rights reserved. For permissions, e-mail: journals.permissions@oup.com.)

Publicly (mainly Medicaid) funded long-term care (LTC) services have evolved from a nursing home dominated system of service to a much more balanced system including home- and community-based services (HCBS) programs over the last 30 years. The HCBS programs have been largely administered by the state and local level nonprofit aging networks (ANs) consisting of Area Agencies on Aging and thousands of service providers. Over the last decade, however, for-profit HMOs administered primarily by large insurance companies have begun to displace AN organizations. State policymakers have embraced for-profit privatizations under the rationale that this approach will generate greater savings, efficiencies, and higher quality outcomes than the traditional public or private nonprofit models of program administration. As we show here, there is very little evidence for this rationale; yet, this lack of evidence has not prevented the continuing growth of for-profit managed LTC programs supported more by an ideology of market fundamentalism than empirical evidence. We also describe six possible consequences of the trend toward corporate control of public LTC services in the years ahead., (© The Author(s) 2017. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of The Gerontological Society of America. All rights reserved. For permissions, please e-mail: journals.permissions@oup.com.)

Many markets maintain a nontrivial mix of both nonprofit and for-profit firms, particularly in health care industries such as hospice, nursing homes, and home health. What are the effects of coexistence vs. dominance of one ownership type? We show how the presence of both ownership types can lead to greater diversity in consumer types served, even if both firms merely profit-maximize. This is the case where firms serve consumers for multiple consumption durations, but where donations are part of a nonprofit firm objective function and happen after services have been provided. This finding is strengthened if the good or service has value beyond immediate consumption or the direct consumer. We show these predictions empirically in the hospice industry, using data containing over 90 percent of freestanding U.S. hospices, 2000-2008. Nonprofit and for-profit providers split the patient market according to length of stay, leading to a wider range of patients being served than in the absence of this coexistence., (Copyright © 2018 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Moving beyond personal responsibility-taking behaviors, this paper examines communicative (interpersonal talk and online message sharing) and civic (public policy support and intention to donate) behavioral outcomes in the context of narrative persuasion. A web-based experiment was conducted to test the mediating effects of two narrative engagement constructs, transportation and empathy, on these behavioral outcomes. Participants recruited via Amazon Mechanical Turk (n = 467) participated in an experiment conducted on Qualtrics, where they were randomized to read either a narrative or a nonnarrative message about factors contributing to obesity. The narrative message, compared to the nonnarrative message, generated greater transportation and affective empathy but had no overall advantage regarding behavioral outcomes. Path analyses showed consistent, significant indirect effects via transportation and affective empathy on all the outcome variables: online message sharing, interpersonal talk, public policy support, and intention to donate to a non-profit obesity organization. Our study contributes to the extant narrative research by shedding light on how narrative messages, via engaging the audience, could shape social responses beyond personal responsibility-taking. Implications and limitations of findings were discussed.

Executive Summary: Nonprofit hospitals achieve tax exemption through community benefit investments. The objective of this study was to characterize urban and suburban nonprofit hospitals' community benefit expenditures and to estimate regional per capita community benefit spending relative to community need. Community benefit expenditures, both overall and by subtype, were compared for urban versus suburban nonprofit hospitals in a large metropolitan area, the greater Philadelphia region. Estimated zip code-level per capita expenditures were mapped in the urban core area. We found that urban hospitals report higher overall community benefit expenditures than suburban hospitals yet invest less in community health improvement services, both proportionally and absolutely, despite spending similar proportions on charity care. There is an overlap in hospital-identified community benefit service areas in the urban core, but the degree of overlap is not related to community poverty levels. There is significant variation in zip code-level per capita community benefit expenditures, which does not correlate with community need. Community benefit investments offer the potential to improve community health, yet without regional coordination, the ability to maximize the potential of these investments is limited. This study's findings highlight the need to implement policies that increase transparency, accountability, and regional coordination of community benefit spending.

The tax-exempt status of nonprofit hospitals has received increased attention from policymakers interested in examining the value they provide instead of paying taxes. We use 2012 data from the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) Form 990, Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) Hospital Cost Reports, and American Hospital Association's (AHA) Annual Survey to compare the value of community benefits with the tax exemption. We contrast nonprofit's total community benefits to what for-profits provide and distinguish between charity and other community benefits. We find that the value of the tax exemption averages 5.9% of total expenses, while total community benefits average 7.6% of expenses, incremental nonprofit community benefits beyond those provided by for-profits average 5.7% of expenses, and incremental charity alone average 1.7% of expenses. The incremental community benefit exceeds the tax exemption for only 62% of nonprofits. Policymakers should be aware that the tax exemption is a rather blunt instrument, with many nonprofits benefiting greatly from it while providing relatively few community benefits.

Provisions of the Affordable Care Act (ACA) encouraged tax-exempt hospitals to invest broadly in community health benefits. Four years after the ACA's enactment, hospitals had increased their average spending for all community benefits by 0.5 percentage point, from 7.6 percent of their operating expenses in 2010 to 8.1 percent in 2014.

The health care market is substantially different from other areas of the economy and therefore the behavior of health care providers operating in the health care market is different, which is mainly related to the form of ownership. If the market is mainly characterized by the pursuit of maximum profit, medical services market has for some public good features. Because of this, non-profit hospitals in western countries are considered as an alternative form of commercial hospitals. The purpose of the research was to study the role of not-for-profit hospitals, and in this regard examine the situation of the medical market in Georgia. The existing literature about non-profit hospitals, relevant legislation and statistical data, scientific articles, and other related works. The majority of the hospitals in Georgia represent profitable (commercial) organizations. 41,1% of the hospitals owned by private insurance companies, 29,1% by individuals, 18,4% by other types of companies, 3,2% by other forms and 8% is state-owned. In contrast to this, more than 50% of the healthcare system of West Europe as well as USA is composed of non-profit (commercial) hospitals. In Georgia there is no sufficient motivation for operating of hospitals as non-profit organizations. It is necessary to further adjust tax benefit in the Tax Code of Georgia and share European experiences. It is reasonable to increase the role of non-profit hospitals on the health care market that will increase accessibility to healthcare services for population and moreover. It will bring Georgian healthcare system close to the experience of civilized world.

Non-profit hospitals are facing greater pressure to address the social determinants of health. Since 2012, with new requirements for greater transparency and community health needs assessments, non-profit tax exemption requirements are believed to incentivize investments in the community, particularly for vulnerable populations. We conducted a cross-sectional analysis of community benefit spending by private, acute care, non-profit hospitals from 2012-2014 to measure if hospitals have begun to address local community needs. We measured total community benefit spending and two subsets of spending-health care-related expenditures and community-directed contributions-as the proportion of their total expenditure. We obtained sociodemographic characteristics for their community, defined by ZIP code. In unadjusted and adjusted analyses using hospital-level and community-level covariates, community benefit spending has not varied and community-directed contribution amounts did not reflect local needs. Stronger incentives-tax-based or otherwise-are needed to steer non-profit hospitals to invest in community health.

Non-profit advocacy organizations have been important in raising public awareness, promoting education, and enhancing political activism for issues related to cancer. Grassroots efforts aimed at fund-raising have substantially augmented federal funding for community outreach and research. The objective of this review was to evaluate successful accomplishments of several major non-profit organizations that are focused on cancer. A review of news media, medical literature, and financial records (using GuideStar) was performed to access the organizational structure and productivity of several successful cancer advocacy organizations. Compared to other cancer advocacy groups, the American Cancer Society is the oldest (>100years old) and worth the most with net assets of over $1.25 billion dollars and an annual total revenue of over $900 million dollars. The ACS also has the highest overhead at 41%. Most of the gynecologic cancer advocacy groups are approximately 20years old and have collective total annual revenue of over $17M dollars. The Ovarian Cancer Research Fund has been the most successful at raising funds and building net assets to date while maintaining an overhead of <10%. The most active and financially successful cancer organizations tend to be older, have higher overhead, spend less on total administration, spend more on fund-raising, have more events (rather than a limited number), and use aggressive social media strategies., (Copyright © 2015. Published by Elsevier Inc.)

Objective: This pilot study examined differences in RN perception of the professional practice environment and financial indicators between salary-wage and hourly-wage compensation models., Background: There is a dearth of current information regarding use of salary-wage models for compensation for direct care nurses., Methods: A descriptive, comparative design was used to examine the Revised Professional Practice Environment Scale (RPPE) and financial indicators of nurses in a nonprofit healthcare system over a 6-month period., Results: Mean scores on the RPPE were significantly lower for hourly-wage RNs, and the hourly-wage model resulted in a 1.2% additional cost for overtime hours compared with the fixed cost of the salary-wage model., Conclusions: Nurses in an hourly-wage unit reported a significantly lower perception of the clinical practice environment than did their peers in a salary-wage unit, indicating that professional practice perceptions in a salary-wage unit may provide a more effective professional practice environment. Financial analysis resulted in a budget-neutral impact.

Unlabelled: POLICY POINTS: Health policy in the United States has, for more than a century, simultaneously and paradoxically incentivized the growth as well as the commercialization of nonprofit organizations in the health sector. This policy paradox persists during the implementation of the Affordable Care Act of 2010., Context: For more than a century, policy in the United States has incentivized both expansion in the number and size of tax-exempt nonprofit organizations in the health sector and their commercialization. The implementation of the Affordable Care Act of 2010 (ACA) began yet another chapter in the history of this policy paradox., Methods: This article explores the origin and persistence of the paradox using what many scholars call "interpretive social science." This methodology prioritizes history and contingency over formal theory and methods in order to present coherent and plausible narratives of events and explanations for them. These narratives are grounded in documents generated by participants in particular events, as well as conversations with them, observing them in action, and analysis of pertinent secondary sources. The methodology achieves validity and reliability by gathering information from multiple sources and making disciplined judgments about its coherence and correspondence with reality., Findings: A paradox with deep historical roots persists as a result of consensus about its value for both population health and the revenue of individuals and organizations in the health sector. Participants in this consensus include leaders of governance who have disagreed about many other issues. The paradox persists because of assumptions about the burden of disease and how to address it, as well as about the effects of biomedical science that is translated into professional education, practice, and the organization of services for the prevention, diagnosis, treatment, and management of illness., Conclusions: The policy paradox that has incentivized the growth and commercialization of nonprofits in the health sector since the late 19th century remains influential in health policy, especially for the allocation of resources. However, aspects of the implementation of the ACA may constrain some of the effects of the paradox., (© 2015 Milbank Memorial Fund.)

Medicaid reimbursements have become a key source of funding for nonprofit social service organizations operating outside the medical care sector, as well as an important tool for states seeking resources to fund social service programs within a devolving safety net. Drawing on unique survey data of more than one thousand nonprofit social service agencies in seven urban and rural communities, this article examines Medicaid funding of nonprofit social service organizations that target programs at working-age, nondisabled adults. We find that about one-quarter of nonprofit service organizations--mostly providers offering substance abuse and mental health treatment in conjunction with other services--report receiving Medicaid reimbursements, although very few are overly reliant on these funds. We also find Medicaid-funded social service nonprofits to be less accessible to residents of high-poverty neighborhoods or areas with concentrations of black or Hispanic residents than to residents of more affluent and white communities. We should expect that the role of Medicaid within the nonprofit social service sector will shift in the next few years, however, as states grapple with persistent budgetary pressures, rising Medicaid costs, and decisions to participate in the Medicaid expansion provisions contained within the 2010 Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act., (Copyright © 2014 by Duke University Press.)

Key Findings: Data from the National Study of Long-Term Care Providers. In 2012, more than one-third of participants in adult day services centers were younger than 65. A higher percentage of participants in nonprofit centers than in for-profit centers were younger than 65. About one-half of participants in adult day services centers were non-Hispanic white persons. A higher percentage of participants in for-profit centers than in nonprofit centers were Hispanic or were non-Hispanic and of a race other than black or white. Almost one-third of adult day services center participants had Alzheimer's disease or other dementias, and about one-quarter had a developmental disability. A lower percentage of participants in for-profit than in nonprofit centers had Alzheimer's disease or other dementias or a developmental disability. The 4,800 adult day services centers nationwide provide a variety of services to their 273,200 participants, the majority of whom are older adults and women (1). The number of for-profit adult day services centers has grown in recent years (2). The 1,900 for-profit centers, representing 40% of centers nationally, served nearly one-half (47%) of center participants in 2012 (3). Using data from the National Study of Long-Term Care Providers, this report presents selected characteristics of adult day services center participants in 2012 and compares the characteristics of participants in for-profit centers with those in nonprofit centers., (All material appearing in this report is in the public domain and may be reproduced or copied without permission; citation as to source, however, is appreciated.)

For-profit, or proprietary, home health agencies were banned from Medicare until 1980 but now account for a majority of the agencies that provide such services. Medicare home health costs have grown rapidly since the implementation of a risk-based prospective payment system in 2000. We analyzed recent national cost and case-mix-adjusted quality outcomes to assess the performance of for-profit and nonprofit home health agencies. For-profit agencies scored slightly but significantly worse on overall quality indicators compared to nonprofits (77.18 percent and 78.71 percent, respectively). Notably, for-profit agencies scored lower than nonprofits on the clinically important outcome "avoidance of hospitalization" (71.64 percent versus 73.53 percent). Scores on quality measures were lowest in the South, where for-profits predominate. Compared to nonprofits, proprietary agencies also had higher costs per patient ($4,827 versus $4,075), were more profitable, and had higher administrative costs. Our findings raise concerns about whether for-profit agencies should continue to be eligible for Medicare payments and about the efficiency of Medicare's market-oriented, risk-based home care payment system., (Project HOPE—The People-to-People Health Foundation, Inc.)

Large commercial publishers sell bundled online subscriptions to their entire list of academic journals at prices significantly lower than the sum of their á la carte prices. Bundle prices differ drastically between institutions, but they are not publicly posted. The data that we have collected enable us to compare the bundle prices charged by commercial publishers with those of nonprofit societies and to examine the types of price discrimination practiced by commercial and nonprofit journal publishers. This information is of interest to economists who study monopolist pricing, librarians interested in making efficient use of library budgets, and scholars who are interested in the availability of the work that they publish.

The U.S. social safety net is formed by governmental and nonprofit organizations, which are trying to respond to record levels of need. This is especially true for local level organizations, such as food pantries. The organizational capacity literature has not covered front-line, local, mostly volunteer and low resource organizations in the same depth as larger ones. This analysis is a consideration of whether grassroots nonprofit organizations have the ability to be a strong component of the social safety net. Based on the literature on organizational capacity, a model is developed to examine how service delivery at the local level is affected by organizational capacity. Surprisingly, we find few of the characteristics previously identified as important are statistically significant in this study. Even when so, the material effect is negligible. Current organizational capacity research may apply to larger nonprofits, but not to the tens of thousands of small community nonprofits, a significant limitation to the research to date.

Background and Objectives: The vast majority of US dialysis facilities are for-profit and profit status has been associated with processes of care and outcomes in patients on dialysis. This study examined whether dialysis facility profit status was associated with the rate of hospitalization in patients starting dialysis., Design, Setting, Participants, & Methods: This was a retrospective cohort study of Medicare beneficiaries starting dialysis between 2005 and 2008 using data from the US Renal Data System. All-cause hospitalization was examined and compared between for-profit and nonprofit dialysis facilities through 2009 using Poisson regression. Companion analyses of cause-specific hospitalization that are likely to be influenced by dialysis facility practices including hospitalizations for heart failure and volume overload, access complications, or hyperkalemia were conducted., Results: The cohort included 150,642 patients. Of these, 12,985 (9%) were receiving care in nonprofit dialysis facilities. In adjusted models, patients receiving hemodialysis in for-profit facilities had a 15% (95% confidence interval [95% CI], 13% to 18%) higher relative rate of hospitalization compared with those in nonprofit facilities. Among patients receiving peritoneal dialysis, the rate of hospitalization in for-profit versus nonprofit facilities was not significantly different (relative rate, 1.07; 95% CI, 0.97 to 1.17). Patients on hemodialysis receiving care in for-profit dialysis facilities had a 37% (95% CI, 31% to 44%) higher rate of hospitalization for heart failure or volume overload and a 15% (95% CI, 11% to 20%) higher rate of hospitalization for vascular access complications., Conclusions: Hospitalization rates were significantly higher for patients receiving hemodialysis in for-profit compared with nonprofit dialysis facilities.

Background: The purpose of this study was to identify associations between study sponsorship and the methodological quality and published outcomes of head and neck cancer randomized controlled trials (RCTs)., Methods: We systematically searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials for qualified RCTs, evaluating journal impact factor (IF), Jadad score (measure of study quality), and results favoring or not favoring experimental therapy., Results: Of 118 RCTs, the most common sponsor was government (38; 32%), followed by nonprofit organizations (30; 25%) and industry (26; 22%). Industry-supported RCTs were associated with publication in journals with higher IF compared with RCTs without industry support (p = .013). Government-supported RCTs were associated with higher mean Jadad score (p = .026) and results favoring experimental therapy (p = .034)., Conclusions: Government-supported, but not industry-supported, RCTs were significantly associated with positive study results. These findings may be confounded by broadly applied definitions of sponsorship., (Copyright © 2013 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.)

Nonprofit hospitals are exempt from federal income taxation if they pass organizational and operational tests, including satisfying the community-benefit standard. Policymakers, however, have questioned the adequacy of the community benefits that nonprofit hospitals provide in exchange for these exemptions. The Internal Revenue Service recently responded to these concerns by redesigning its tax forms for nonprofit hospitals. The new Form 990 Schedule H requires nonprofit hospitals to provide additional information about their community-benefit activities. This new reporting requirement, however, places an undue focus on input-based community-benefit indicators, in particular expenditures. We argue that expanding the current input-based reporting requirement to include not only monetary inputs but also population health outcomes would achieve greater benefit for society.

Given the preferential tax treatment afforded nonprofit firms, policymakers and researchers have been interested in whether the nonprofit sector provides higher nursing home quality relative to its for-profit counterpart. However, differential selection into for-profits and nonprofits can lead to biased estimates of the effect of ownership form. By using "differential distance" to the nearest nonprofit nursing home relative to the nearest for-profit nursing home, we mimic randomization of residents into more or less "exposure" to nonprofit homes when estimating the effects of ownership on quality of care. Using national Minimum Data Set assessments linked with Medicare claims, we use a national cohort of post-acute patients who were newly admitted to nursing homes within an 18-month period spanning January 1, 2004 and June 30, 2005. After instrumenting for ownership status, we found that post-acute patients in nonprofit facilities had fewer 30-day hospitalizations and greater improvement in mobility, pain, and functioning., (Copyright © 2012 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Kidney transplant education is associated with higher transplantation rates; however national policies regarding optimal timing and content of transplant education are lacking. We aimed to characterize nephrologists' attitudes regarding kidney transplant education, and to compare practices between nephrologists at for-profit and nonprofit centers. We surveyed 906 nephrologist practicing in the United States. Most respondents (81%) felt the ideal time to spend on transplant education was >20 min, but only 43% reported actually doing so. Spending >20 min was associated with covering more topics, having one-on-one and repeated conversations, involving families in discussions and initiating discussions at CKD-stage 4. Providers at for-profit centers were significantly less likely to spend >20 min (RR = 0.89, 95%CI: 0.80-0.99) or involve families (RR = 0.57, 95%CI: 0.38-0.87); they reported that fewer of their patients received transplant counseling (RR = 0.58, 95%CI: 0.37-0.96), initiated transplant discussions (RR = 0.58, 95%CI: 0.38-0.88), or were eligible for transplantation (RR = 0.45, 95%CI: 0.30-0.68). Of nephrologists who spent ≤20 min, those at for-profit centers more often cited lack of reimbursement as a reason (30.0% vs. 18.9%, p = 0.02). Disparities in quality of education at for-profit centers might partially explain previously documented disparities in access to transplantation for patients at these centers. National policies detailing the optimal timing and content of transplant education are needed to improve equity., (© Copyright 2012 The American Society of Transplantation and the American Society of Transplant Surgeons.)

Purpose: The medical community currently has no detailed source of information on philanthropic research funding. The authors sought to identify trends in research funding by members of the Health Research Alliance (HRA), a consortium of nonprofit funders of biomedical research, and compare findings with research support from the federal government., Method: Thirty-two HRA members uploaded information about grants with start dates in 2006, 2007, and 2008. Data were collected about each grant, investigator, and recipient institution. Disease categorization codes were assigned by a computer process similar to that used by the National Institutes of Health (NIH)., Results: In the three years under study, HRA members awarded 9,934 grants, totaling $2,712,418,254 in research and training support. Grant funding increased by 26% between 2006 and 2008. In contrast, NIH research spending increased by only 3% over the same time. Fifty-six percent of HRA grant dollars supported research projects, whereas 30% supported career development and training. During the same period, more than two-thirds of NIH grant dollars supported research projects, although NIH invested proportionally less in career development and training (7%). The largest proportion of HRA grant dollars addressed cancer, followed by diabetes and genetics. Sixty-three percent of HRA-supported investigators were men and 36% were women; 66% of investigators were white, 32% Asian, and fewer than 2% black., Conclusions: These results indicate that nonprofit organizations play an important role in developing careers and advancing research in significant disease areas such as cancer and diabetes, and in basic science areas such as genetics.

This article examines the recent trends (2006 to 2009) in capital spending among 25 of the largest nonprofit health systems in the United States and analyzes the financing sources that these large nonprofit health care systems used to fund their capital spending. Total capital spending for these 25 nonprofit health entities exceeded $41 billion for the four-year period of this study. Less than 3 percent of total capital spending resulted in mergers and acquisition activities. Total annual capital spending grew at an average annual rate of 17.6 percent during the first three year of this study's period of analysis. Annual capital spending for 2009 fell by more than 22 percent over prior year's level due to the impact of widespread disruption in US tax-exempt variable rate debt markets. While cash inflow from long-term debt issues was a significant source of capital financing, this study's primary finding was that operating cash flow was the predominant source of capital spending funding. Key words: nonprofit, mergers and acquisitions (M&A), capital spending, capital financing.