Nonprofit Hospital Community Benefits

Medical Care ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol Publish Ahead of Print ◽  
Author(s):  
Tatiane Santos ◽  
Richard C. Lindrooth
1998 ◽  
Vol 26 (2) ◽  
pp. 116-137 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alice A. Noble ◽  
Andrew L. Hyams ◽  
Nancy M. Kane

Hospitals long ago shed their role as alms houses for the poor. What vestiges remain of the early American hospital are the tax-exempt, nonprofit hospital form and a general perception that hospitals, as charitable institutions, owe a duty to their communities. The appropriateness of the nonprofit hospital tax exemption has long been debated, and many theories have been advanced to justify the tax exemption of nonprofit hospitals. In a growing number of jurisdictions, however, state and local authorities have gone beyond the theoretical debate and are challenging the tax exemption of their nonprofit hospitals. For various reasons, efforts are afoot to capture greater community benefit from nonprofit hospitals.At the heart of such challenges is the debate over the nature and extent of the duty charitable institutions owe to their communities. A demand is growing for nonprofit hospitals to earn their tax exemptions by benefiting their communities in concrete ways. Some have been stripped of their tax-exempt status by local authorities or pressured to make payments in lieu of taxes. A number of states have recently implemented initiatives in an attempt to make hospitals more accountable for their community benefits. Many hospitals are responding to this heightened scrutiny in a proactive way, by voluntarily documenting community benefits. A number of nonprofit hospitals and hospital associations are cooperating with—or even sponsoring—state legislation in this area.


10.1596/26885 ◽  
2012 ◽  
Author(s):  
Raul Campusano ◽  
Luke Danielson ◽  
Nadia Ahmad ◽  
Kristi Disney
Keyword(s):  

2021 ◽  
Vol 97 (1) ◽  
pp. 35-55
Author(s):  
Christina Ankenbrand ◽  
Abrina Welter ◽  
Nina Engwicht

Abstract Artisanal and small-scale mining (ASM) has long been a vital source of livelihoods for rural populations in the global South. Yet, it has also been linked to a host of social, political and environmental adversities, including violent conflict. As environmental peacebuilding increasingly stresses the importance of livelihood improvement as a means of fostering peace in conflict-affected extractive societies, ASM formalization has been identified as a solution to mitigate the sector's challenges, thereby addressing underlying causes of conflict. This article critically investigates the contribution of ASM formalization to sustainable peace by focusing on its impact on the livelihood dimension of peacebuilding. It analyses the livelihood impact of three formalization interventions in the diamond sectors of two countries: cooperatives in Liberia, and, in Sierra Leone, ethical sourcing schemes and a community-based natural resource management initiative. In line with calls for a paradigm shift from a narrow legalization-centred understanding of formalization to a broader approach that accounts for livelihood quality, the analysis presented here focuses on interventions that were informed by the ideal of improving the well-being of ASM workers and communities. We propose three pathways through which ASM formalization could potentially contribute to livelihood enhancement: income security, working conditions and community benefits. Based on fieldwork, this article highlights the challenges of generating livelihood improvements through formalization. Even when specifically designed to address the needs of ASM communities, during implementation, they risk prioritizing a narrow conceptualization of formalization and thus failing to become a conductor of transformative change.


Author(s):  
John Glasson

The Offshore Wind sector is a major, dynamic, and rapidly evolving renewable energy industry. This is particularly so in Europe, and especially in the UK. Associated with the growth of the industry has been a growth of interest in community benefits as voluntary measures provided by a developer to the host community. However, in many cases, and for some of the large North Sea distant offshore wind farms, the benefits packages have been disparate and pro rata much smaller than for the well-established onshore wind farm industry. However, there are signs of change. This paper explores the issues of community benefits for the UK offshore sector and evolving practice, as reflected in a macro study of the adoption of community benefits approaches across the industry. This is followed by a more in-depth micro- approach, which explores approaches that have been adopted in three case studies of recent OWF projects — Aberdeen, Beatrice and the Hornsea Array. Whilst there is still much divergence in practice, there are also examples of some convergence, and the development of a more replicable practice. Particularly notable is the adoption of annual community benefits funds, as the key element of community benefits schemes/agreements between developers, local authorities and local communities.


1979 ◽  
Vol 2 (3) ◽  
pp. 1-18 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gerald Katz ◽  
Victor H. Auerbach ◽  
Albert E. Gaskill ◽  
Myles G. Turtz

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document