Effects of the Vermont Mental Health and Substance Abuse Parity Law

Table D.3: Characteristics of Vermont Employers, by Firm Size

	All Firms	Number of Employees
	All Firms	Fewer Than 10	10 to 25	26 to 50	More Than 50
Total	100.0%	100.0%	100.0%	100.0%	100.0%
Ownership (chi-sq = 49.96*)
For-profit	83.0	86.0	88.2	73.6	65.2
Not-for-profit	9.6	7.7	7.7	14.1	18.7
Local government	7.4	6.4	4.2	12.3	16.1
Type of industry (chi-sq = 51.33*)^a
Agriculture, forestry, fishing, mining, construction, wholesale trade	17.6	19.2	18.9	16.9	8.3
Manufacturing	11.3	7.5	12.1	12.3	22.4
Transportation, communication, utilities	4.2	4.0	3.6	5.3	5.4
Retail trade	26.1	28.3	25.4	27.4	18.3
Finance, insurance, real estate	3.4	4.4	2.3	2.0	4.2
Services	37.4	36.6	37.6	36.1	41.5
Location of headquarters (chi-sq = 30.12*)
Vermont	92.9	94.6	95.6	88.0	82.5
Outside Vermont	7.1	5.4	4.4	12.0	17.6
Unionization (chi-sq = 87.94*)
Any unionization	6.7	1.8	5.3	14.1	23.0
No unionization	93.3	98.2	94.7	85.9	77.0
Years of operation (chi-sq = 117.58*)
2-5	9.4	8.3	13.9	6.6	2.7
6-20	45.5	50.3	50.1	39.8	17.9
More than 20	45.2	41.3	36.0	53.7	79.4
Self-reported financial status (chi-sq = 31.76*)
Excellent	31.1	24.6	32.3	46.5	38.5
Good	48.0	49.8	47.1	44.2	46.9
Fair or Poor	21.0	25.6	20.6	9.3	14.7
Location (chi-sq = 0.34)
Urban	34.1	33.0	35.8	34.0	33.7
Rural	65.9	67.0	64.2	66.0	66.3

Sources:	Mathematica Policy Research Survey of Vermont Employers to Assess the Impact of the Vermont Parity Act.

Note:	The survey includes Vermont businesses that were in operation as of January 1, 1998 and that remained in operation as of the time of the survey (Fall 2000). The survey excluded those that had, on average, fewer than five employees across establishments in calendar year 1999 and businesses operated by Federal and State government entities.

a	Excludes businesses operated by local governments.
*	Distribution by firm size significantly different than what would be expected by chance alone, based on chi-square test (p < .01).