IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/jfr/afr111/v4y2015i1p151.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Who Writes the Biggest Check for Charitable Care: A Comparison of For-Profit, Not-for-Profit, and Government Hospitals

Author

Listed:
  • John G. Irwin
  • Carmen C. Lewis
  • Cherie Fretwel
  • Randi E. Myers

Abstract

The current environment in the United States surrounding health care issues such as spending, costs, access, and affordability points toward a societal obligation to help provide for those who cannot pay the costs of their own care. Hospitals are often one of the largest employers in communities, and like many other organizations, view providing charitable care as an aspect of their corporate social responsibility (CSR). This study compares the recent levels of charitable care of for-profit, not-for-profit, and government hospitals. The authors attempt to determine which type of hospital is the most charitable, what the relationship between CSR and profitability may be, and the differences in the relationship between CSR and profitability for various hospital types. Data from a sample of 167 short-term, general hospitals were examined and results indicated that there were significant differences in CSR for government, not-for-profit and for-profit. Higher levels of CSR did not affect firm profitability, although significant interactions were found between control and CSR for varying levels of profitability.Â

Suggested Citation

  • John G. Irwin & Carmen C. Lewis & Cherie Fretwel & Randi E. Myers, 2015. "Who Writes the Biggest Check for Charitable Care: A Comparison of For-Profit, Not-for-Profit, and Government Hospitals," Accounting and Finance Research, Sciedu Press, vol. 4(1), pages 151-151, February.
    • Handle: RePEc:jfr:afr111:v:4:y:2015:i:1:p:151
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.sciedupress.com/journal/index.php/afr/article/download/6051/3754
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.sciedupress.com/journal/index.php/afr/article/view/6051
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Charles W. L. Hill & Thomas M. Jones, 1992. "Stakeholder‐Agency Theory," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 29(2), pages 131-154, March.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Fabrizio Rossi & Maretno Agus Harjoto, 2020. "Corporate non-financial disclosure, firm value, risk, and agency costs: evidence from Italian listed companies," Review of Managerial Science, Springer, vol. 14(5), pages 1149-1181, October.
    2. Du Jianguo & Rauf Ibrahim & Peter Lartey Yao & Rupa Jaladi Santosh & Amponsah Clinton Kwabena, 2019. "The Effectiveness of Internal Controls in Rural Community Banks: Evidence from Ghana," Business Management and Strategy, Macrothink Institute, vol. 10(1), pages 202-218, December.
    3. Nguyen Hoang Tien & Dinh Ba Hung Anh & Nguyen Minh Ngoc, 2020. "Corporate financial performance due to sustainable development in Vietnam," Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 27(2), pages 694-705, March.
    4. Mohammad Badrul Haider & Kimitaka Nishitani, 2022. "Ownership structure, corporate governance, and assurance in sustainability reporting: evidence from Japan," International Journal of Disclosure and Governance, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 19(4), pages 374-388, December.
    5. Elizabeth-Anne Thomas, 2019. "How Useful Is the Global Reporting Initiative (GRI) Reporting Framework to Identify the Non-financial Value of Corporate Social Performance (CSP)?," CSR, Sustainability, Ethics & Governance, in: Nicholas Capaldi & Samuel O. Idowu & René Schmidpeter & Martin Brueckner (ed.), Responsible Business in Uncertain Times and for a Sustainable Future, pages 37-87, Springer.
    6. Anggita Langgeng WIJAYA & Ima Widha RATNASARI, 2023. "The Effect of the Audit Committee on the Firm Value of State-Owned Enterprises in Indonesia: The Mediation Role of Financial Performance," CECCAR Business Review, Body of Expert and Licensed Accountants of Romania (CECCAR), vol. 4(6), pages 60-72, June.
    7. Clara Pérez‐Cornejo & Esther de Quevedo‐Puente & Juan Bautista Delgado‐García, 2020. "Reporting as a booster of the corporate social performance effect on corporate reputation," Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 27(3), pages 1252-1263, May.
    8. Eduard Ary Binsar Naibaho & Amirah Mahdi Shahab, 2025. "The Role of Corporate Governance Mechanism and Sustainability Reporting in Firm Performance: Evidence on Resource Based Sectors," Advances in Management and Applied Economics, SCIENPRESS Ltd, vol. 15(2), pages 1-4.
    9. Henning Madsen & John P. Ulhøi, 2001. "Integrating environmental and stakeholder management," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 10(2), pages 77-88, March.
    10. Ghafoor, Abdul & Šeho, Mirzet & Sifat, Imtiaz, 2023. "Co-opted board and firm climate change risk," Finance Research Letters, Elsevier, vol. 52(C).
    11. Estévez-Mendoza, Carlos & Montoro-Sánchez, Ángeles, 2024. "Exploring the relationship between innovation and corporate governance," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 209(C).
    12. Thierry Poulain-Rehm & Xavier Lepers, 2012. "Does Employee Ownership Benefit Value Creation? The Case of France (2001–2005)," Post-Print hal-01382074, HAL.
    13. Ayman Hassan Bazhair & Mohammed Naif Alshareef, 2022. "Dynamic relationship between ownership structure and financial performance: a Saudi experience," Cogent Business & Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 9(1), pages 2098636-209, December.
    14. Isabel Gallego-Álvarez & Luis Rodriguez-Dominguez, 2025. "Board of directors and environmental practices: the effect of board experience, culture, and tenure," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 27(1), pages 1643-1668, January.
    15. Chowdhury, Rajib & Doukas, John A. & Park, Jong Chool, 2021. "Stakeholder orientation and the value of cash holdings: Evidence from a natural experiment," Journal of Corporate Finance, Elsevier, vol. 69(C).
    16. Justice Nyigmah Bawole & Peter Adjei-Bamfo, 2020. "Public Procurement and Public Financial Management in Africa: Dynamics and Influences," Public Organization Review, Springer, vol. 20(2), pages 301-318, June.
    17. Hannah Charlotte Joos, 2019. "Influences on managerial perceptions of stakeholder salience: two decades of research in review," Management Review Quarterly, Springer, vol. 69(1), pages 3-37, February.
    18. Zhou, Taiyun & Liu, Mingxuan & Zhang, Xiyu & Qi, Zheng & Qin, Ni, 2024. "Does institutional ownership affect corporate social responsibility? Evidence from China," Economic Analysis and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 81(C), pages 84-98.
    19. D. Vázquez-Brust & C.J.C. Jabbour & J.A. Plaza-Úbeda & M. Perez-Valls & Ana Beatriz. Lopes de Sousa Jabbour & D.W.S. Renwick, 2023. "The Role of Green Human Resource Management in the Translation of Greening Pressures into Environmental Protection Practices," Post-Print hal-04434120, HAL.
    20. José V. Frias‐Aceituno & Lázaro Rodríguez‐Ariza & Isabel M. Garcia‐Sánchez, 2014. "Explanatory Factors of Integrated Sustainability and Financial Reporting," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 23(1), pages 56-72, January.

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • R00 - Urban, Rural, Regional, Real Estate, and Transportation Economics - - General - - - General
    • Z0 - Other Special Topics - - General

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:jfr:afr111:v:4:y:2015:i:1:p:151. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sciedu Press (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/cepflch.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.