Community benefits provided by religious, other nonprofit, and for-profit hospitals: a longitudinal analysis 2000-2009

Provision of Social Care Services by US Hospitals

Policy Points Hospitals address population health needs and patients' social determinants of health by offering social care services. Tax-exempt hospitals are required to invest in community benefits, including social care services programs, though most community benefits spending is toward unreimbursed health care services. Tax-exempt hospitals offer about 36% more social care services than for-profit hospitals. Among tax-exempt hospitals, those that allocate more resources to community benefits spending offer more types of social care services, but those in states with minimum community benefits spending requirements offer fewer social care services. Policymakers may consider specifically incentivizing community benefits expenditures toward particular social care services, including linking tax exemptions to implementation, utilization, and outcome targets, to more directly help patients.

CONTEXT

Despite growing interest in identifying patients' social needs, little is known about hospitals' provision of services to address them. We identify social care services offered by US hospitals and determine whether hospital spending or state policies toward community benefits are associated with the provision of these services by tax-exempt hospitals.

METHODS

National secondary data about hospitals were collected from the American Hospital Association Annual Survey, with additional Internal Revenue Service (IRS) Form 990 data on community benefits spending from CommunityBenefitInsight.org and state-level community benefits policies from HilltopInstitute.org. Descriptive statistics for types of social care services and hospital characteristics were calculated, with bivariate chi-square and t-tests comparing for-profit and tax-exempt hospitals. Multivariable Poisson regression was used to estimate associations between hospital characteristics and types of services offered and among tax-exempt hospitals to estimate associations between social care services and community benefits spending and policies. Multivariable logistic regressions modeled associations between community benefits spending/policies and each type of social care services.

FINDINGS

Private US hospitals offered an average of 5.7 types of social care services in 2018. Tax-exempt hospitals offered about 36% more social care services than for-profit hospitals. Larger number of beds, health system affiliation, and having community partnerships are associated with more social care services, whereas rural hospitals and those managed under contract offered fewer social care services. Among tax-exempt hospitals, greater community benefits spending is associated with offering more total (incidence rate ratio [IRR] = 1.10, p < 0.01) and patient-focused social care services (IRR = 1.16, p < 0.01). Hospitals in states with minimum community benefits spending requirements offered significantly fewer social care services.

CONCLUSIONS

Although tax-exempt status and increased community benefits spending were associated with increased social care services provision, the observation that certain hospital characteristics and state minimum community benefits spending requirements were associated with fewer social care services suggests opportunities for policy reform to increase social care services implementation.

Community Coalitions' Perspectives on Engaging with Hospitals in Ohio to Address the Opioid Crisis

Community coalitions have been leading the multisector response to the opioid epidemic in the Unites States. However, with the medicalization of opioid use disorder and changing health care policies, hospitals have moved to the forefront, becoming more active in collaborating with community coalitions. Little is currently known about how community coalitions view and approach collaborating with hospitals despite its importance for understanding and advancing interorganizational approaches to combating the opioid epidemic. Using data from semistructured interviews (n = 119) conducted from November 2019 to January 2020 as part of the HEALing Communities Study (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT04111939), the authors examined how community coalition members perceive hospital collaborations and explored the opportunities and challenges of these partnerships. They characterized 3 emergent themes: coalition approaches to collaborating with hospitals, barriers to collaboration, and opportunities for sustainable relationships. This new evidence highlights the value that coalitions place on hospital collaborations, as well as mechanisms that may help support ongoing partnerships.

The Importance of Governmental and Nongovernmental Investments in Public Health and Social Services for Improving Community Health Outcomes

OBJECTIVE

To explore whether health outcomes are influenced by both governmental social services spending and hospital provision of community health services.

DESIGN

We combined hospital provision of community health services data from the American Hospital Association with local governmental spending data from the US Census Bureau. Longitudinal models regressed community health outcomes for 2012-2016 on local government spending on health, social services, and education from 5 years previously, controlling for sociodemographic and hospital marketplace characteristics, spatial autocorrelation, and state-level random effects. For counties with hospitals, models also included county-level data on hospitals' provision of community health services.

SETTING

All analyses were performed at the county level for US counties between 2012 and 2016.

PARTICIPANTS

Complete spending, hospital, and health outcomes data were available for a total of 2379 counties.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

We examined relationships between governmental spending, hospital service provision, and 5 population health outcome measures: years of potential life lost prior to age 75 years per 100 000 population, percentage of population in fair or poor health, percentage of adults who are physically inactive, deaths due to injury per 100 000 population, and percentage of births that are of low birth weight.

RESULTS

Governmental investments in health, social services, and education positively impacted key health outcomes but mainly in counties with 1 or more hospitals present. Hospitals' provision of community health services also had a significant positive impact on health outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS

Hospital provision of community health services and increases in local governmental health and social services spending were both associated with improved health. Collaboration between local governments and hospitals may help ensure that public and private community health resources synergistically contribute to the public's health. Local policy makers should consider service provision by the private sector to leverage the public investments in health and social services.

Nonprofit Hospital Community Benefit in the U.S.: A Scoping Review From 2010 to 2019

Background: U.S. nonprofit hospital community benefit recently underwent significant regulatory revisions. Starting in 2009, the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) required hospitals to submit a new Schedule H that provided greater detail on community benefit activities. In addition, the Affordable Care Act (ACA), which became law in 2010, requires hospitals to conduct community health needs assessments (CHNA) and develop community health implementation plans (CHIP) as a response to priority needs every 3 years. These new requirements have led to greater transparency and accountability and this scoping review considers what has been learned about community benefit from 2010 to 2019.

Methods: This review identified peer-reviewed literature published from 2010 to 2019 using three methods. First, an OvidSP MEDLINE search using terms suggested previously by community benefit researchers. Second, a PubMed search using keywords frequently found in community benefit literature. Third, a SCOPUS search of the most frequently cited articles in this topic area. Articles were then selected based on their relevance to the research question. Articles were organized into topic areas using a qualitative strategy similar to axial coding.

Results: Literature appeared around several topic areas: governance; CHNA and CHIP process, content, and impact; community programs and their evaluation; spending patterns and spending influences; population health; and policy recommendations. The plurality of literature centered on spending and needs assessments, likely because they can draw upon publicly available data. The vast majority of articles in these areas use spending data from 2009 to 2012 and the first cycle of CHNAs in 2013. Policy recommendations focus on accountability for impact, enhancing collaboration, and incentivizing action in areas other than clinical care.

Discussion: There are several areas of community benefit in need of further study. Longitudinal studies on needs assessments and spending patterns would help inform whether organizations have changed and improved operations over time. Governance, program evaluation, and collaboration are some of the consequential areas about which relatively little is known. Gaps in knowledge also exist related to the operational realities that drive community benefit activities. Shaping organizational action and public policy would benefit from additional research in these and other areas.

Government Health and Social Services Spending Show Evidence of Single-Sector Rather Than Multi-Sector Pursuit of Population Health

Population health improvements can be achieved through work made possible by government spending on health care, public health, and social services. The extent to which spending allocations across these sectors is synergistic with or trade-off against one another is unknown. Achieving a balanced portfolio with multi-sector contributions is key to improving health outcomes. This study tested competing hypotheses regarding achievement of balanced multi-sector resources for health. County-level U.S. Census Bureau data on all local governmental spending measured each county’s average per capita local government spending for public hospitals, public health, social services, and education. American Hospital Association (AHA) Annual Survey data on hospital community health service provision were used to calculate an index of hospital community service provision aggregated to county level by year. County Health Rankings data measured each county’s health outcomes and health factors. Longitudinal mixed-effects regression models (n = 1877 counties) predicted changes in spending for each government spending category based on two sets of predictors (government spending vs community health services and needs) from current and prior year. Models account for average spending in each category and county-, state-, and time-trends. Models showed that spending increases in each of the four spending categories examined (public hospitals, public health, social services, and education) were not associated with changes in spending across other categories in current or prior years. For all categories, an increase from baseline spending levels in Year 1 was always significantly associated with an increase from baseline spending level in that same category in Year 2 (ie, spending stayed above baseline in Year 2). Multi-sector initiatives to health outcomes require funding across sectors, yet there was little evidence to suggest that communities that invest in public hospitals, public health, or other social services see commensurate increases in other areas. Underlying funding decisions may reflect strategic decisions within a community to scale up single sectors, constrained resources for multi-sector scale up, or a host of additional factors not measured here.

Establishing a Baseline: Community Benefit Spending by Not-for-Profit Hospitals Prior to Implementation of the Affordable Care Act

Supplemental Digital Content is Available in the Text.

Context:

Community Benefit spending by not-for-profit hospitals has served as a critical, formalized part of the nation's safety net for almost 50 years. This has occurred mostly through charity care. This article examines how not-for-profit hospitals spent Community Benefit dollars prior to full implementation of the Affordable Care Act (ACA).

Methods:

Using data from 2009 to 2012 hospital tax and other governmental filings, we constructed national, hospital-referral-region, and facility-level estimates of Community Benefit spending. Data were collected in 2015 and analyzed in 2015 and 2016. Data were matched at the facility level for a non-profit hospital's IRS tax filings (Form 990, Schedule H) and CMS Hospital Cost Report Information System and Provider of Service data sets.

Results:

During 2009, hospitals spent about 8% of total operating expenses on Community Benefit. This increased to between 8.3% and 8.5% in 2012. The majority of spending (>80%) went toward charity care, unreimbursed Medicaid, and subsidized health services, with approximately 6% going toward both community health improvement and health professionals' education. By 2012, national spending on Community Benefit likely exceeded $60 billion. The largest hospital systems spent the vast majority of the nation's Community Benefit; the top 25% of systems spent more than 80 cents of every Community Benefit dollar.

Discussion:

Community Benefit spending has remained relatively steady as a proportion of total operating expenses and so has increased over time—although charity care remains the major focus of Community Benefit spending overall.

Implications:

More than $60 billion was spent on Community Benefit prior to implementation of the ACA. New reporting and spending requirements from the IRS, alongside changes by the ACA, are changing incentives for hospitals in how they spend Community Benefit dollars. In the short term, and especially the long term, hospital systems would do well to partner with public health, other social services, and even competing hospitals to invest in population-based activities. The mandated community health needs assessment process is a logical home for these sorts of collaborations. Relatively modest investments can improve the baseline level of health in their communities and make it easier to improve population health. Aside from a population health justification for a partnership model, a business case is necessary for widespread adoption of this approach. Because of their authorities, responsibilities, and centuries of expertise in community health, public health agencies are in a position to help hospitals form concrete, sustainable collaborations for the improvement of population health.

Conclusion:

The ACA will likely change the delivery of uncompensated and charity care in the United States in the years to come. How hospitals choose to spend those dollars may be influenced greatly by the financial and political environments, as well as the strength of community partnerships.

Trends in US Hospital Provision of Health Promotion Services, 1996-2014

Hospitals have long played important roles in the provision of health promotion services (HPS) in local communities, defined as activities that enable people to increase control over and improve their health, including programs such as disease prevention and wellness. Nearly 2 decades ago, researchers cross-sectionally documented the provision of HPS by hospitals, but little research has been done to update this work or document how HPS have changed over time. This study assessed changes in the provision of HPS among US hospitals between 1996 and 2014. Relationships were assessed using random effects Poisson regression models. The overall number of HPS reported by hospitals was relatively modest (approximately half of all possible services, on average). The number of services increased modestly over time, although the rate of increase became less positive over time. The findings highlight a number of opportunities to improve hospital provision of HPS.

Tax-Exempt Hospitals' Investments in Community Health and Local Public Health Spending: Patterns and Relationships

OBJECTIVES

To investigate whether tax-exempt hospitals' investments in community health are associated with patterns of governmental public health spending focusing specifically on the relationship between hospitals' community benefit expenditures and the spending patterns of local health departments (LHDs).

STUDY DESIGN

We combined data on tax-exempt hospitals' community benefit spending with data on spending by the corresponding LHD that served the county in which a hospital was located. Data were available for 2 years, 2009 and 2013. Generalized linear regressions were estimated with indicators of hospital community benefit spending as the dependent variable and LHD spending as the key independent variable.

PRINCIPAL FINDINGS

Hospital community benefit spending was unrelated to how much local public health agencies spent, per capita, on public health in their communities.

CONCLUSIONS

Patterns of local public health spending do not appear to impact the investments of tax-exempt hospitals in community health activities. Opportunities may, however, exist for a more active engagement between the public and private sector to ensure that the expenditures of all stakeholders involved in community health improvement efforts complement one another.

The Impact of IRS Tax Policy on Hospital Community Benefit Activities

The Internal Revenue Service (IRS) recently introduced tax code revisions requiring stricter oversight of community benefit activities (CBAs) conducted by tax-exempt, not-for-profit hospitals. We examine the impact of this tax requirement on CBAs among these hospitals relative to for-profit and government hospitals that were not subject to the new policy. We employed a quasi-experimental, difference-in-difference study design using a longitudinal observational approach and used secondary data collected by the American Hospital Association (years 2006-2010 including 20,538 hospital year observations). Findings show a significant increase in the reporting of 7 of the 13 CBAs among tax-exempt, not-for-profit hospitals compared with other hospitals after the policy change. Examples include partnering to conduct community health assessments ( b = 0.035, p = .002) and using capacity assessments to identify unmet community health needs ( b = 0.041, p = .001). Recent tax revisions are associated with increases in reported CBAs among tax-exempt, not-for-profit hospitals. As the debate continues regarding tax exemption status for not-for-profit hospitals, policy makers should expand efforts for enhanced accountability.

Tax-exempt hospitals and community benefit: new directions in policy and practice

The current community benefit standard for nonprofit hospital tax exemption has been the subject of mounting criticism. Many different constituencies have advanced the view that in its present form it fails to ensure that nonprofit hospitals provide adequate benefits to their communities in exchange for their tax exemption. In contrast, hospitals have often expressed the concern that the community benefit standard in its current form is vague and therefore difficult to comply with. Various suggestions have been made regarding how the existing community benefit standard could be improved or even replaced. In this article, we first discuss the historical and legal development of the community benefit standard. We then present the key controversies that have emerged in recent years and the policy responses attempted thus far. Finally, we evaluate possible future policy directions, which reform efforts could follow.

Analysis of hospital community benefit expenditures' alignment with community health needs: evidence from a national investigation of tax-exempt hospitals

OBJECTIVES

We investigated whether federally tax-exempt hospitals consider community health needs when deciding how much and what types of community benefits to provide.

METHODS

Using 2009 data from hospital tax filings to the Internal Revenue Service and the 2010 County Health Rankings, we employed both univariate and multivariate analyses to examine the relationship between community health needs and the types and levels of hospitals' community benefit expenditures. The study sample included 1522 private, tax-exempt hospitals throughout the United States.

RESULTS

We found some patterns between community health needs and hospitals' expenditures on community benefits. Hospitals located in communities with greater health needs spent more as a percentage of their operating budgets on benefits directly related to patient care. By contrast, spending on community health improvement initiatives was unrelated to community health needs.

CONCLUSIONS

Important opportunities exist for tax-exempt hospitals to improve the alignment between their community benefit activities and the health needs of the community they serve. The Affordable Care Act requirement that hospitals conduct periodic community health needs assessments may be a first step in this direction.