{"id":{"repo_id":"uiuc","oai_identifier":"oai:www.ideals.illinois.edu:2142/19822"},"canonical_url":"https://search.dev.ndltd.org/etd/uiuc/oai:www.ideals.illinois.edu:2142/19822","repository":{"repo_id":"uiuc","name":"University of Illinois - Urbana-Champaign","base_url":"https://www.ideals.illinois.edu/oai-pmh"},"display":{"title":"The political-economics of privatizing mental health: A study of the relationships between ownership of mental health clinics with professional advocacy and client creaming","abstract":"This study examines the relationships among legal ownership (governmental, nonprofit, and proprietary) professional reports of advocacy on behalf of clients, client reductions in services for clients unable to pay, and client terminations for clients unable to pay. Executives in 73 licensed mental health clinics responded to semi-structured questionnaires administered in an interview format, and 605 master and doctoral level professionals responded to questionnaires. Privatization is the context for the study. Political-economic theory provides the framework for the study. The study discusses the methodological problems of empirically investigating propositions in the privatization debate, and the problems involved in operationalizing classifications of organizations. The study operationalizes dimensions of polyarchial and market influence on organizational behavior by using legal ownership and funding sources. Professionals responded to items comprising an advocacy scale measuring the amount of time they engage in a list of advocacy activities within the agency and within the community on behalf of clients on their caseloads. Professionals also responded to items on a disposition scale identifying the percentage of clients on their caseloads who receive reduced services or are terminated from services when they become unable to pay previously agreed-upon fees. Demographic data used in the study include: gender, age, professional degree, education, professional experience, clinic experience, and income. Additional data include hours worked per week and hours of face-to-face contact with clients per week. Data were analyzed using analysis of variance and regression techniques. Although the study found that types of clinic ownership do distinguish between professionals' reports of advocacy, service reductions, and service terminations, fee-for-service funding was found to be a more powerful predictor of differences in professionals' reports than were the other variables included in the study. Small clinic size and fee-for-service funding were found to be more powerful predictors of service reductions. The study also found that most of the control variables differed by legal ownership of the clinics. Implications for social welfare policy and recommendations for further research are offered.","abstract_html":"This study examines the relationships among legal ownership (governmental, nonprofit, and proprietary) professional reports of advocacy on behalf of clients, client reductions in services for clients unable to pay, and client terminations for clients unable to pay. Executives in 73 licensed mental health clinics responded to semi-structured questionnaires administered in an interview format, and 605 master and doctoral level professionals responded to questionnaires. Privatization is the context for the study. Political-economic theory provides the framework for the study. The study discusses the methodological problems of empirically investigating propositions in the privatization debate, and the problems involved in operationalizing classifications of organizations. The study operationalizes dimensions of polyarchial and market influence on organizational behavior by using legal ownership and funding sources. Professionals responded to items comprising an advocacy scale measuring the amount of time they engage in a list of advocacy activities within the agency and within the community on behalf of clients on their caseloads. Professionals also responded to items on a disposition scale identifying the percentage of clients on their caseloads who receive reduced services or are terminated from services when they become unable to pay previously agreed-upon fees. Demographic data used in the study include: gender, age, professional degree, education, professional experience, clinic experience, and income. Additional data include hours worked per week and hours of face-to-face contact with clients per week. Data were analyzed using analysis of variance and regression techniques. Although the study found that types of clinic ownership do distinguish between professionals' reports of advocacy, service reductions, and service terminations, fee-for-service funding was found to be a more powerful predictor of differences in professionals' reports than were the other variables included in the study. Small clinic size and fee-for-service funding were found to be more powerful predictors of service reductions. The study also found that most of the control variables differed by legal ownership of the clinics. Implications for social welfare policy and recommendations for further research are offered.","abstract_has_math":false,"creators":["Stevens, Wes E."],"institution":"University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign","degree_name":"Ph.D.","degree_level":"Dissertation","degree_discipline":"Health Sciences, Mental Health","degree_department":null,"school":null,"contributors":["Cowger, Charles D."],"advisors":[],"committee_chairs":[],"committee_members":[],"year":2011,"date_issued":"2011-05-07T12:19:43Z","date_published":"2011-05-07T12:19:43Z","updated_at":"2026-07-22T22:25:14Z","subjects":["Health Sciences, Mental Health","Economics, General","Political Science, Public Administration","Sociology, Public and Social Welfare","Health Sciences, Health Care Management"],"languages":["eng"],"rights":["Copyright 1996 Stevens, Wes E."],"rights_urls":[],"identifier_entries":[{"key":"dc:identifier","label":"Identifier","values":["9780591200027","AAI9712445","(UMI)AAI9712445"],"render_values":[{"text":"9780591200027","href":null,"code":true},{"text":"AAI9712445","href":null,"code":true},{"text":"(UMI)AAI9712445","href":null,"code":true}]}]},"links":{"outbound_url":"http://hdl.handle.net/2142/19822","outbound_label":"Handle","outbound_source":"dc:identifier"},"metadata_groups":[{"id":"people","label":"People","entries":[{"key":"dc:contributor","label":"Contributor","values":["Cowger, Charles D."]},{"key":"dc:creator","label":"Author","values":["Stevens, Wes E."]}]},{"id":"academic_context","label":"Academic Context","entries":[{"key":"dc:date","label":"Dc Date","values":["2011-05-07T12:19:43Z","10000-01-01","1996"]},{"key":"dc:type","label":"Dc Type","values":["text"]},{"key":"thesis:degree_discipline","label":"Discipline","values":["Health Sciences, Mental Health","Economics, General","Political Science, Public Administration","Sociology, Public and Social Welfare","Health Sciences, Health Care Management"]},{"key":"thesis:degree_level","label":"Degree Level","values":["Dissertation"]},{"key":"thesis:degree_name","label":"Degree Name","values":["Ph.D."]},{"key":"thesis:institution_name","label":"Thesis Institution Name","values":["University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign"]}]},{"id":"subjects_keywords","label":"Subjects and Keywords","entries":[{"key":"dc:subject","label":"Dc Subject","values":["Health Sciences, Mental Health","Economics, General","Political Science, Public Administration","Sociology, Public and Social Welfare","Health Sciences, Health Care Management"]}]},{"id":"language_rights","label":"Language and Rights","entries":[{"key":"dc:language","label":"Dc Language","values":["eng"]},{"key":"dc:rights","label":"Dc Rights","values":["Copyright 1996 Stevens, Wes E."]}]},{"id":"identifiers","label":"Identifiers","entries":[{"key":"dc:identifier","label":"Identifier","values":["9780591200027","AAI9712445","(UMI)AAI9712445","http://hdl.handle.net/2142/19822"]}]},{"id":"additional","label":"Additional Metadata","entries":[{"key":"dc:description","label":"Description","values":["This study examines the relationships among legal ownership (governmental, nonprofit, and proprietary) professional reports of advocacy on behalf of clients, client reductions in services for clients unable to pay, and client terminations for clients unable to pay. Executives in 73 licensed mental health clinics responded to semi-structured questionnaires administered in an interview format, and 605 master and doctoral level professionals responded to questionnaires. Privatization is the context for the study. Political-economic theory provides the framework for the study. The study discusses the methodological problems of empirically investigating propositions in the privatization debate, and the problems involved in operationalizing classifications of organizations. The study operationalizes dimensions of polyarchial and market influence on organizational behavior by using legal ownership and funding sources. Professionals responded to items comprising an advocacy scale measuring the amount of time they engage in a list of advocacy activities within the agency and within the community on behalf of clients on their caseloads. Professionals also responded to items on a disposition scale identifying the percentage of clients on their caseloads who receive reduced services or are terminated from services when they become unable to pay previously agreed-upon fees. Demographic data used in the study include: gender, age, professional degree, education, professional experience, clinic experience, and income. Additional data include hours worked per week and hours of face-to-face contact with clients per week. Data were analyzed using analysis of variance and regression techniques. Although the study found that types of clinic ownership do distinguish between professionals' reports of advocacy, service reductions, and service terminations, fee-for-service funding was found to be a more powerful predictor of differences in professionals' reports than were the other variables included in the study. Small clinic size and fee-for-service funding were found to be more powerful predictors of service reductions. The study also found that most of the control variables differed by legal ownership of the clinics. Implications for social welfare policy and recommendations for further research are offered.","Made available in DSpace on 2011-05-07T12:19:43Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 2 license.txt: 4922 bytes, checksum: 910b249b4beec47e7ab768910c8f966f (MD5) 9712445.pdf: 9354843 bytes, checksum: 7e5297ad57915f74345b62024fabc1ba (MD5) Previous issue date: 1996","Item marked as restricted to the 'UIUC Users [automated]' Group (id=2) by Howard Ding (hding2@illinois.edu) on 2011-05-07T14:39:39Z Item is restricted indefinitely.","Restriction data tranferred 2014-07-01T11:16:46-05:00 Original Data Group with Access UIUC Users [automated] Release Date: none Reason: ETDs are only available to UIUC Users without author permission","ETDs are only available to UIUC Users without author permission","U of I Only"]},{"key":"dc:title","label":"Title","values":["The political-economics of privatizing mental health: A study of the relationships between ownership of mental health clinics with professional advocacy and client creaming"]}]}],"canonical_facts":{"dc:contributor":["Cowger, Charles D."],"dc:creator":["Stevens, Wes E."],"dc:date":["2011-05-07T12:19:43Z","10000-01-01","1996"],"dc:description":["This study examines the relationships among legal ownership (governmental, nonprofit, and proprietary) professional reports of advocacy on behalf of clients, client reductions in services for clients unable to pay, and client terminations for clients unable to pay. Executives in 73 licensed mental health clinics responded to semi-structured questionnaires administered in an interview format, and 605 master and doctoral level professionals responded to questionnaires. Privatization is the context for the study. Political-economic theory provides the framework for the study. The study discusses the methodological problems of empirically investigating propositions in the privatization debate, and the problems involved in operationalizing classifications of organizations. The study operationalizes dimensions of polyarchial and market influence on organizational behavior by using legal ownership and funding sources. Professionals responded to items comprising an advocacy scale measuring the amount of time they engage in a list of advocacy activities within the agency and within the community on behalf of clients on their caseloads. Professionals also responded to items on a disposition scale identifying the percentage of clients on their caseloads who receive reduced services or are terminated from services when they become unable to pay previously agreed-upon fees. Demographic data used in the study include: gender, age, professional degree, education, professional experience, clinic experience, and income. Additional data include hours worked per week and hours of face-to-face contact with clients per week. Data were analyzed using analysis of variance and regression techniques. Although the study found that types of clinic ownership do distinguish between professionals' reports of advocacy, service reductions, and service terminations, fee-for-service funding was found to be a more powerful predictor of differences in professionals' reports than were the other variables included in the study. Small clinic size and fee-for-service funding were found to be more powerful predictors of service reductions. The study also found that most of the control variables differed by legal ownership of the clinics. Implications for social welfare policy and recommendations for further research are offered.","Made available in DSpace on 2011-05-07T12:19:43Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 2 license.txt: 4922 bytes, checksum: 910b249b4beec47e7ab768910c8f966f (MD5) 9712445.pdf: 9354843 bytes, checksum: 7e5297ad57915f74345b62024fabc1ba (MD5) Previous issue date: 1996","Item marked as restricted to the 'UIUC Users [automated]' Group (id=2) by Howard Ding (hding2@illinois.edu) on 2011-05-07T14:39:39Z Item is restricted indefinitely.","Restriction data tranferred 2014-07-01T11:16:46-05:00 Original Data Group with Access UIUC Users [automated] Release Date: none Reason: ETDs are only available to UIUC Users without author permission","ETDs are only available to UIUC Users without author permission","U of I Only"],"dc:identifier":["9780591200027","AAI9712445","(UMI)AAI9712445","http://hdl.handle.net/2142/19822"],"dc:language":["eng"],"dc:rights":["Copyright 1996 Stevens, Wes E."],"dc:subject":["Health Sciences, Mental Health","Economics, General","Political Science, Public Administration","Sociology, Public and Social Welfare","Health Sciences, Health Care Management"],"dc:title":["The political-economics of privatizing mental health: A study of the relationships between ownership of mental health clinics with professional advocacy and client creaming"],"dc:type":["text"],"thesis:degree_discipline":["Health Sciences, Mental Health","Economics, General","Political Science, Public Administration","Sociology, Public and Social Welfare","Health Sciences, Health Care Management"],"thesis:degree_level":["Dissertation"],"thesis:degree_name":["Ph.D."],"thesis:institution_name":["University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign"]},"updated_at":"2026-07-22T22:25:14Z"}