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

Impact of good governance, economic growth and universal health coverage on COVID-19 infection and case fatality rates in Africa

BACKGROUND

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has disrupted lives across all countries and communities. It significantly reduced the global economic output and dealt health systems across the world a serious blow. There is growing evidence showing the progression of the COVID-19 pandemic and the impact it has on health systems, which should help to draw lessons for further consolidating and realizing universal health coverage (UHC) in all countries, complemented by more substantial government commitment and good governance, and continued full implementation of crucial policies and plans to avert COVID-19 and similar pandemic threats in the future. Therefore, the objective of the study was to assess the impact of good governance, economic growth and UHC on the COVID-19 infection rate and case fatality rate (CFR) among African countries.

METHODS

We employed an analytical ecological study design to assess the association between COVID-19 CFR and infection rate as dependent variables, and governance, economic development and UHC as independent variables. We extracted data from publicly available databases (i.e., Worldometer, Worldwide Governance Indicators, Our World in Data and WHO Global Health Observatory Repository). We employed a multivariable linear regression model to examine the association between the dependent variables and the set of explanatory variables. STATA version 14 software was used for data analysis.

RESULTS

All 54 African countries were covered by this study. The median observed COVID-19 CFR and infection rate were 1.65% and 233.46%, respectively. Results of multiple regression analysis for predicting COVID-19 infection rate indicated that COVID-19 government response stringency index (β = 0.038; 95% CI 0.001, 0.076; P = 0.046), per capita gross domestic product (GDP) (β = 0.514; 95% CI 0.158, 0.87; P = 0.006) and infectious disease components of UHC (β = 0.025; 95% CI 0.005, 0.045; P = 0.016) were associated with COVID-19 infection rates, while noncommunicable disease components of UHC (β = -0.064; 95% CI -0.114; -0.015; P = 0.012), prevalence of obesity among adults (β = 0.112; 95% CI 0.044; 0.18; P = 0.002) and per capita GDP (β = -0.918; 95% CI -1.583; -0.254; P = 0.008) were associated with COVID-19 CFR.

CONCLUSIONS

The findings indicate that good governance practices, favourable economic indicators and UHC have a bearing on COVID-19 infection rate and CFR. Effective health system response through a primary healthcare approach and progressively taking measures to grow their economy and increase funding to the health sector to mitigate the risk of similar future pandemics would require African countries to move towards UHC, improve governance practices and ensure economic growth in order to reduce the impact of pandemics on populations.

How China controls the Covid-19 epidemic through public health expenditure and policy?

AIMS

How the Chinese government controls the Covid-19 epidemic? This paper aims to answer this question from the perspective of public health expenditure, and policy, and then to help the government to perform better in infectious disease prevention and public health emergency management.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

We reviewed the development phases of the COVID-19 epidemic in China and divided it into four stages (incubation stage, outbreak stage, resolution stage, and stable stage). Then we adopted a content analysis method via MAXQDA2020, to analyze the combined application of four different types of policy tools in different stages with 571 texts of epidemic governance policy from the Chinese central government. We also calculated and compared the Chinese public health expenditure between epidemic and non-epidemic periods. Moreover, we also discussed implications for public health emergency management and for infectious disease prevention and control in China.

RESULTS

(1) in the incubation stage, the potential epidemic has not attracted enough attention from the government; (2) the combination of the 4 types of policies is not only an important reason in controlling epidemic during the outbreak stage and resolution stage, but also the reason why the small-scale epidemic has not expanded in the stable stage; (3) the increasing Chinese public health expenditure, involving public health emergency treatment (114.81 billion yuan), government hospitals (284.84 billion yuan) and major public health service projects (45.33 billion yuan), is another critical reason for the rapid control of the epidemic.

CONCLUSION AND IMPLICATIONS

Public health expenditure and policy played an important role in the governance and control of the COVID-19 epidemic in China. Some limitations of China's infectious disease prevention system and public health emergency management system have been exposed to the public in this epidemic, which the Chinese government needs to improve in the future.

Are Nonprofit Hospitals Addressing the Most Critical Community Health Needs That They Identify in Their Community Health Needs Assessments?

CONTEXT

Virtually all nonprofit hospitals are in compliance with the Affordable Care Act's new Community Health Needs Assessments requirements.

OBJECTIVE

To assess what needs have emerged in the Community Health Needs Assessments hospitals complete nationally, the degree to which identified needs reflect the most pressing community health issues, and the extent to which hospitals address identified needs.

DESIGN

Using both bivariate and logistic regressions, we analyzed the Community Health Needs Assessments and implementation strategies of nonprofit hospitals to determine whether identified needs overlapped with county health-ranking indicators of need and whether institutional or community-level factors predicted hospital willingness to address identified needs.

PARTICIPANTS

We included a 20% random sample of US nonprofit hospitals (n = 496).

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Our main outcome measures were whether nonprofit hospitals addressed each of the most common needs.

RESULTS

Mental health, access to care, obesity, substance abuse, diabetes, cancer, and the social determinants of health were the most commonly identified needs across the sample. The rate at which hospitals chose to address each of these needs in their implementation strategies, however, varied considerably, ranging from 56% (cancer) to 85% (obesity). We found that several institutional and community characteristics predicted hospital willingness to address each need; whether the community ranked a need as number 1 was a better predictor of hospital investment than the severity of the need, as measured by county health-rankings data.

CONCLUSIONS

These findings may help inform local, state, and federal policy makers as they consider interventions aimed at encouraging hospitals to invest in improving the health of their communities.

Can Collaboration Between Nonprofit Hospitals and Local Health Departments Influence Population Health Investments by Nonprofit Hospitals?

BACKGROUND

The patient protection and Affordable Care Act (ACA) sought to improve population health by requiring nonprofit hospitals (NFPs) to conduct triennial community health needs assessments and address the identified needs. In this context, some states have encouraged collaboration between hospitals and local health department (LHD) to increase the focus of community benefit spending onto population health.

OBJECTIVES

The aim was to examine whether a 2012 state law that required NFPs to collaborate with LHDs in local health planning influenced hospital population health improvement spending.

RESEARCH DESIGN

We merged Internal Revenue Service data on NFP community benefit spending with data on hospital, county and state-level characteristics and estimated a difference-in-differences specification of hospital population health spending in 2009-2016 that compared the difference between hospitals that were required to collaborate with LHDs to those that were not, before and after the requirement.

MEASURES

The primary outcome was population health spending divided by operating expenses.

RESULTS

We found that the requirement for hospital-LHD collaboration was associated with increased mean population health spending of ∼$393,000-$786,000 (P=0.03). This association was significant in 2015-2016, perhaps reflecting the lag between assessments and implementation. Urban hospitals were responsible for most of the increased spending.

CONCLUSIONS

Policymakers have sought to encourage hospitals to increase their investment in population health; however, overall community benefit spending on population health has remained flat. We found that requiring hospital-LHD collaboration was associated with increased hospital investment in population health. It may be that hospitals increase population health spending because collaboration improves expected effectiveness or increases hospital accountability.

Identifying Opportunities to Strengthen the Public Health Informatics Infrastructure: Exploring Hospitals' Challenges with Data Exchange

Policy Points Even though most hospitals have the technological ability to exchange data with public health agencies, the majority continue to experience challenges. Most challenges are attributable to the general resources of public health agencies, although workforce limitations, technology issues such as a lack of data standards, and policy uncertainty around reporting requirements also remain prominent issues. Ongoing funding to support the adoption of technology and strengthen the development of the health informatics workforce, combined with revising the promotion of the interoperability scoring approach, will likely help improve the exchange of electronic data between hospitals and public health agencies.

CONTEXT

The novel coronavirus 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has highlighted significant barriers in the exchange of essential information between hospitals and local public health agencies. Thus it remains important to clarify the specific issues that hospitals may face in reporting to public health agencies to inform focused approaches to improve the information exchange for the current pandemic as well as ongoing public health activities and population health management.

METHODS

This study uses cross-sectional data of acute-care, nonfederal hospitals from the 2017 American Hospital Association Annual Survey and Information Technology supplement. Guided by the technology-organization-environment framework, we coded the responses to a question regarding the challenges that hospitals face in submitting data to public health agencies by using content analysis according to the type of challenge (i.e., technology, organization, or environment), responsible entity (i.e., hospital, public health agency, vendor, multiple), and the specific issue described. We used multivariable logistic and multinomial regression to identify characteristics of hospitals associated with experiencing the types of challenges.

FINDINGS

Our findings show that of the 2,794 hospitals in our analysis, 1,696 (61%) reported experiencing at least one challenge in reporting health data to a public health agency. Organizational issues were the most frequently reported type of challenge, noted by 1,455 hospitals. The most common specific issue, reported by 1,117 hospitals, was the general resources of public health agencies. An advanced EHR system and participation in a health information exchange both decreased the likelihood of not reporting experiencing a challenge and increased the likelihood of reporting an organizational challenge.

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings inform policy recommendations such as improving data standards, increasing funding for public health agencies to improve their technological capabilities, offering workforce training programs, and increasing clarity of policy specifications and reporting. These approaches can improve the exchange of information between hospitals and public health agencies.

How the Chinese Government Has Done with Public Health from the Perspective of the Evaluation and Comparison about Public-Health Expenditure

The COVID-19 epidemic has crashed on the social and economic stability of China and even the world, and raised the question: how has the Chinese government done with public health in recent years? The purpose of this paper is to clarify the definition and items of Chinese public-health expenditure, then to objectively evaluate the Chinese government’s performance, so as to help the government to perform better in public health. To achieve this goal, we measure the Chinese public-health expenditure at national and provincial levels based on our definition, and then compare it with the expenditures of other countries. The results show that: (1) the level of public-health expenditure in China is relatively low and far lower than that in developed countries; (2) Chinese governments have not paid enough attention to the prevention and control of major public-health emergencies, which may be an important reason for the outbreak of COVID-19; (3) Chinese public-health expenditure shows a fluctuating growth trend, but the growth rate is so slow that it is lower than that of GDP and fiscal expenditure; (4) although the Chinese government inclines the public-health expenditure to the poor provinces in central and western regions, the imbalance and inequity of public-health resource allocation are still expanding among provinces; (5) there is a lot of waste of resources in the public-health system, which seriously reduces the efficiency of public-health expenditure in China. Therefore, the Chinese government should improve the quantity and quality of public-health expenditure in the above aspects.

Determinants of Community-Related Expenses of US Tax-Exempt Hospitals, 2013

CONTEXT

Tax-exempt hospitals in the United States are required to report community benefit expenses on their federal tax forms. Two categories of expenses critical to the public health mission of hospitals are the "community health improvement" and "community-building" expense categories. The community health improvement expenses formally qualify as a community benefit, whereas community-building expenses do not. Increasing both types of spending would be consistent with the growing evidence on the effects of social determinants on population health.

OBJECTIVE

To identify characteristics associated with the level of community health improvement and community-building expenses reported by tax-exempt hospitals.

DESIGN

The general acute care hospital is the unit of analysis. We utilize secondary data for all US general acute care hospitals that filed their own Internal Revenue Service Form 990 Schedule H for 2013 (n = 1508). We apply linear regression analysis to an explanatory model with 8 independent variables.

MEASURES

The primary dependent variables are percentage of operating expenses devoted to community health improvement and to community building. The independent variables include 4 hospital-level measures, 3 county-level measures, and a measure of state requirements for community benefit.

RESULTS

The level of community health improvement expenses is positively associated with bed size, system membership, profit margin, and urban location. In states where tax-exempt hospitals are required to demonstrate community benefit to the state, there is lower community health improvement spending. Teaching hospitals also demonstrate lower community health improvement spending. Results for community-building expenses mirror those for community health improvement except that teaching hospital status and per capita income lose significance and hospital competition gains significance in the negative direction.

CONCLUSIONS

Leaders among tax-exempt hospitals in community-related spending are hospitals that are larger, more profitable, members of systems, and located in urban areas and in states that do not have community benefit requirements.

Non-profit Hospital Targeted Health Priorities and Collaboration With Local Health Departments in the First Round Post-ACA: A National Descriptive Study

We examined the community health needs assessments (CHNA) and implementation strategies of a national sample of 785 non-profit hospitals (NFPs) from the first round after the ACA. We found that the priorities targeted in the implementation strategies were well-aligned with the top community health priorities identified in CHNAs as reported in previous studies. The top five targeted priorities included obesity, access to care, diabetes, cancer, and mental health. We also found that 34% of sample NFPs collaborated with their local health department (LHD) to produce a single CHNA for their jurisdiction. Non-profit hospitals that collaborated with a LHD on the CHNA had higher odds of selecting behavioral health community issues (i.e., substance abuse, alcohol, and mental health), while hospitals located in counties with high uninsurance rates had lower odds of targeting these community issues. Our contribution was 3-fold; first, we examined a large sample of implementation strategies to extend on previous work that examined CHNAs only. This gives a more complete picture of which community issues identified in the CHNA are actually targeted for implementation. Second, this study was the first to present information on the status of NPF collaboration with LHDs to produce a single CHNA (from the NFP perspective). Third, we examined the association between targeted priorities with NFP and county-level characteristics. The community benefit requirement and Section 9007 of the ACA present an opportunity to nudge NFPs to improve the conditions for health in the communities they serve. The ACA has also challenged institutions in the health care sector to approach health through the social determinants of health framework. This framework moves beyond the provision of acute health services and emphasizes other inputs that improve population health. In this context, NFPs are particularly well-positioned to shift their contribution to improve population health beyond their four walls. Section 9007 is one mechanism to achieve such shift and has shown some promising changes among NFPs since its passage as reflected in the findings of this study. This study can inform future research related to NPF community benefit and local health planning.

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.

Changes in Teaching Hospitals' Community Benefit Spending After Implementation of the Affordable Care Act

PURPOSE

U.S. teaching hospitals that qualify as 501(c)(3) organizations (a not-for-profit designation) are required to demonstrate community benefit annually. Increases in health insurance access driven by Affordable Care Act (ACA) implementation, along with new regulations, research opportunities, and educational expectations, may be changing hospitals' allocations of community benefit dollars. This study aimed to describe changes in teaching hospitals' community benefit spending between 2012 (pre-ACA implementation) and 2015 (post-ACA implementation), and to explore differences in spending changes between hospitals in Medicaid expansion and nonexpansion states.

METHOD

In 2017, for each teaching hospital member of the Association of American Medical Colleges' (AAMC's) Council of Teaching Hospitals and Health Systems required to submit Form 990s to the Internal Revenue Service, the authors sought community benefit spending data for 2012 and 2015 as reported on Schedule H.

RESULTS

The analysis included 169 pairs of Form 990s representing 184 AAMC member teaching hospitals (93% of 198 eligible hospitals). Compared with 2012, hospitals in 2015 spent $3.1 billion (20.14%) more on community benefit despite spending $804 million (16.17%) less on charity care. Hospitals in Medicaid expansion states increased spending on subsidized health services and Medicaid shortfalls at rates higher than hospitals in nonexpansion states. The latter increased spending at higher rates on community health improvement and cash/in-kind contributions.

CONCLUSIONS

After ACA implementation, teaching hospitals increased their overall community benefit spending while their charity care spending declined. Changes in community benefit spending differed according to states' Medicaid expansion status, demonstrating hospitals' responsiveness to state and local realities.