Private, not-for-profit hospitals, which dominate the California
hospital landscape, rack up tax exemption benefits of close to $2
billion a year beyond what they return to communities in charity care,
according to a new report released today.
The report by the Institute for Health and Socio-Economic Policy,
research arm of the California Nurses Association/National Nurses
United, was presented today in a Sacramento hearing of a special
California Senate Select Committee on Charity Care and Nonprofit
Hospitals chaired by State Sen. Ellen Corbett. CNA is calling on state
officials to pass legislation to rein in the abuses.
Several of the state’s biggest and best known
hospitals, Cedars Sinai Medical Center, Stanford University Hospital,
and Sutter Health’s California Pacific Medical Center and Alta Bates
Medical Center, have the worst records, the report found, in providing
charity care relative to the government subsidies they receive in
favorable tax benefits.
Key findings of the report (available upon request) are:
* California private, not-for-profit hospitals reaped more than $1.8
billion in government subsidies and benefits from their tax exempt
status beyond what they provided in charity care in 2010, the most
recent year for which the data was publicly available.
* Kaiser Permanente and Sutter Health dwarfed the other large hospital
chains in tax benefits compared to provision of charity care, together
comprising over 45 percent of the total tax benefits for all California
non-profits. Both were also near the bottom in percentage of charity
care they provide relative to their profits.
* Economically struggling California counties and cities lose more than
$1 billion as a result of the tax exemption of non-profit hospitals, and
what the counties pay directly to hospitals in their geographic area to
provide hospital care for the poor.
* Half of California non-profit hospitals provide 2.46 percent or less
of their operating expenses on charity care, a figure well below what
was once the federal standard under which hospitals would lose their
tax-exempt status if falling below 5 percent of gross revenues spent on
charity care.
* Three-fourths of California non-profit hospitals harvest tax benefits
in excess of what they return to communities in charity care.
* Despite their image as not-for-profit institutions, the private,
non-profit hospitals, especially the giant chains, are accumulating huge
profits, some $4.5 billion in 2010 alone. Kaiser and Sutter alone
accounted for nearly half that total.
* California non-profit hospitals are paying lavish salaries and pay
packages to top executives. In 2010, 100 top executives at California
non-profits received over $1 million in total compensation. Sutter, with
28 executives in the millionaire’s club, and Kaiser accounted for 45 of
the 100. Kaiser CEO George Halvorson won the gold medal with a pay
package of $7.7 million.
* While providing scant levels of charity care and amassing huge
profits, many of the non-profit hospitals and systems have also engaged
in controversial pricing practices as well as sharply cutting patient
services they deem insufficiently profitable.
CNA Policy Director Michael Lighty, who presented the nurses report,
said CNA is calling on the state to enact legislation that would:
* Establish a mandatory minimum level of charity care all hospitals must
meet to maintain eligibility for tax-exempt status. CNA proposes a
charity threshold of 8 percent of combined operating and non-operating
(mostly non healthcare related investments) revenues, a percentage
recommended by the Illinois Attorney General in 2006.
* Require hospitals to meet the charity threshold to qualify for tax-exempt bonds.
* Clearly define what constitutes charity care, which must be direct
provision of care, not promotional activities or cost containment
(interpreted by many hospitals as cutting services), as are currently
within the guidelines of “community benefit.”
* Improve reporting requirements for greater public transparency in how
hospitals are meeting their charity care obligation, with rigorous
financial penalties for hospitals that fail to meet reporting
requirements.
State Auditor: ‘It’s like the Wild West of What is Required’
The IHSP/CNA report follows the release last week of another report on
non-profit hospitals by the California State Auditor. Speaking at the
hearing, Grant Parks, Principal Auditor of the Auditor’s Office, noted
that “state law does not require specific amounts of community benefit
to justify (hospital’s) tax exempt status.” Further “state law is fairly
permissive on what can be counted as community benefit…It’s like the
Wild West of what is required,” said Parks.
State Board of Equalization member Betty Yee raised eyebrows across the
room, which was filled with CNA members in red, when she noted that many
non-profit hospitals actually provide “significantly less” charity care
than do for-profit hospitals.
Ellen Shaffer, director of the EQUAL Health Network, a project of the
Center for Policy Analysis, noted that, unlike California, 11 states can
suspend tax exempt status, Texas and Alabama require specific
thresholds for how much charity care a non-profit must provide, and
Indiana, Maryland, and Texas levy civil penalties for late filings of
reports – all of which are well beyond what California requires.
Lighty emphasized the disparity in what the non-profit hospitals
provide, and cited an example from the Auditor’s report. The Auditor
cited Sutter’s California Pacific Medical Center and found that the
level of charity care as a percentage of profits was 17 percent for
CPMC’s St. Luke’s Hospital, which serves a working class and low income
community, compared to just 4 percent for CPMC other facilities that
cater to wealthier neighborhoods.
Same city, San Francisco, same hospital system, great disparity, Lighty
noted. If a level playing field is not established, those hospitals
serving lower income communities and doing more to meet their obligation
will be the ones most in danger of closing, just as Sutter/CPMC has
been trying to do with St. Luke’s
In urging the state to enact legislation, CNA Co-President DeAnn McEwen,
RN, said “the provision of uncompensated or ‘charity care’ is inherent
in the social contract and the provision of charity care is an essential
component of the community safety net.”
It is time, she said, “that private hospitals and multispecialty clinics
operated by nonprofit corporations actually meet the social obligations
for which they receive favorable tax treatment and patients receive the
care they need.”
The IHSP report examined 196 California not-for-profit hospitals that
are presently required to provide community benefit plans. IHSP arrived
at the finding of $1.8 billion in excess by subtracting the total
charity care profited for the 196 hospitals from the benefits they
received in exemption from federal and state income taxes, property
taxes, sales taxes, and benefits from qualifying for tax-exempt bonds
and charitable donations.
Data sources include IRS 990 filings, reports to the California Office
of Statewide Health Planning and Development (OSHPD), and other public
sources.
via Beyond Chron
Take Action California is a virtual, one-stop, for political activism, action alerts, fact sheets, and events in support of grassroots advocacy throughout the state of California.
Community News
Open dialogue among community members is an important part of successful advocacy. Take Action California believes that the more information and discussion we have about what's important to us, the more empowered we all are to make change.
Thursday, August 30, 2012
New Report: California Non-Profit Hospitals Save Billions While Providing Little Charity Care in Return
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Thanks for sharing ....very informative...
ReplyDelete