Increasing Engagement with Mental Health Non-Profit Organizations: An Economic Analysis
ECO 499-002: Economics of Altruism with Dr. Gail Hoyt
Group Members
Rowan West
FLIE-Japanese
Senior
John Langhi
Economics Major
Senior
Dana Pangburn
Economics Major
Senior
Alex Wood
Economics and Anthropology
Senior
About NAMI
Shannon Baker
Director of Communications and Development
Research Question and Thesis Statement
Research Question: How can mental health non-profit organizations increase their donation and volunteer numbers?
Hypothesis: We hypothesize that stigma and a lack of information are the two greatest barriers to increasing volunteers and donations. Based on the data collected, we will suggest strategies for how NAMI can better target individuals more likely to volunteer or donate. Furthermore, these strategies will be generalized for the use of other, similar mental health organizations.
Methodology
To observe what influences impact whether individuals are willing to volunteer or donate to NAMI and similar mental health organizations, a 90 question survey was administered digitally to University of Kentucky students, receiving 444 responses.
The following linear regression models were utilized to determine which factors have a significant relationship relative to a percentage likelihood of volunteering or donating to NAMI:
namivolunteer = β0+ substanceuse x β1+ namicatsunaware x β2+ valuetime x β3+ republican x β4+ male x β5+ mentalcrimeagree x β6+ mentalillness x β7 + workschizophreniaagree x β8 + ϵ
n = 444, R2 = 0.28
namidonate = β0+ candonate x β1+ namiunaware x β2+ environmentallyconscious xβ3+ workschizophreniaagree x β4+ male x β5+ republican x β6+ valuetime x β7 + mentalillness x β8 + ϵ
n =444, R2 = 0.259
Descriptive Statistics
Variable | Description | Mean or Percentage | Standard Deviation |
Male | Respondents who are male | 43.2% | |
Age | Age of respondents | 19.3 | 1.412 |
Republican | Political Affiliation | 50.5% | |
NamiUnaware NamiCatsUnaware | Respondents who are unaware of the nonprofit (or the student group) | 81.5% 90.1% | |
ValueTime | Amount of 100 percentage points allocated by respondents to time rather than money | 66.3 | 2.273 |
MentallIlness | Respondents who know someone who has been negatively impacted by mental illness | 61.9% | |
CanDonate | Respondents who feel they have enough money to donate to charitable causes | 49.7% | |
Variable | Description | Mean or Percentage | Standard Deviation |
EnvironmentalConAgree | Respondents who consider themselves environmentally conscious | 60.3% | |
WorkSchizophreniaAgree | Respondents who would be comfortable having a coworker with schizophrenia | 50.7% | |
SubstanceUse | Respondents who believe mental illness is caused by substance use | 61.2% | |
MentalCrimeAgree | Respondents who believe mental illness and crime are correlated | 45.7% | |
Results
Variable | Coefficient | Standard Error |
SubstanceUse* | -9.869 | 4.279 |
NamiCatsUnaware* | -9.411 | 4.499 |
ValueTime* | 2.183 | 0.607 |
Republican* | -7.236 | 2.748 |
Male* | -24.620 | 2.848 |
MentalCrimeAgree | 3.742 | 2.721 |
MentallIlness | 1.976 | 2.865 |
WorkSchizAgree* | 14.678 | 2.742 |
Volunteer Regression
Variable | Coefficient | Standard Error |
CanDonate* | 7.021 | 2.650 |
NamiUnaware* | -7.766 | 3.363 |
EnvironConAgree* | 4.787 | 1.448 |
WorkSchizAgree* | 10.732 | 2.725 |
Male* | -16.226 | 2.753 |
Republican* | -8.172 | 2.703 |
ValueTime* | 1.886 | .587 |
MentalIllness | -.846 | 2.757 |
Donating Regression
*An asterisk indicates variables significant at α = 0.05.
Conclusion