Account Space: How Accountability Requirements Shape Nonprofit Practice

Abstract

Improving nonprofit accountability is one of the most important issues facing the sector. Improving nonprofit accountability in ways that are attentive to what we might consider unique and valuable about how nonprofits address public problems is the challenge at hand. This article presents a framework for examining the consequences of accountability systems for nonprofit practice. Drawing on empirical findings from three case studies and early sociological work on accounts, the framework considers four questions (i.e., When do organizations give accounts? What is the purpose of the account? When are those accounts accepted or rejected by important stakeholders? And with what consequence?) but makes a distinction between a verification and explanatory accountability process. By making this distinction and clarifying the relationship between these two accountability processes, the proposed framework can be used to identify conflicts between accountability systems and nonprofit practice and to understand how efforts to ensure accountability can spur a change in nonprofit practice, change stakeholder expectations for nonprofits or leave both intact.

Steering International NGOs through Time: The Influence of Temporal Structuring in Government Accountability Requirements

“…In particular, Benjamin's (2008) framework underscores four key areas: when nonprofits give accounts; the purposes of those accounts; when such accounts are accepted or rejected by funders; and how all this shapes a nonprofit organization's practices (the consequences of the accounting process). As such, the framework is well-suited for discerning the conditions or circumstances under which accounts are given and with what consequences on nonprofits' decision-making processes.…”

“…Benjamin's (2008) account space framework, in particular, allows for an exploration of the complex environment of nonprofit accountability from the vantage point of the circumstances under which nonprofits give accounts. The framework draws from institutional research on how organizations give accounts in response to environmental pressures or to prevent conflicts, in an attempt to reinstate their legitimacy (e.g., Scott and Lyman 1968;Giddens 1984;Feldman and Pentland 2003).…”

A Typology for the Relationship Between Local Governments and NPOs in Welfare State Regimes: The Belgian case revisited

“…It was found that, especially in Western countries, public funding is a very important income source, representing a significant share, and in some cases even more than half, of the NPOs total budget (Salamon, Anheier et al 1999). Furthermore, a substantial amount of literature focuses on the accountability requirements attached to these public funds and the processes through which governments try to exert control over these non-public actors involved in public service delivery (Ospina, Diaz et al 2002;Whitaker, Altman-Sauer et al 2004;May 2007;VanSlyke 2007;Benjamin 2008). …”

Evaluation Logics in the Third Sector

“…As such, claims of 'illegitimacy' regarding particular evaluation approaches may be explained, at least in part, by an analysis of conflicting logics of evaluation. For example, stakeholders are increasingly demanding that evaluation information be quantitative in nature and directed towards demonstrating the impact of third sector organizations (e.g., McCarthy, 2007;LeRoux & Wright, 2010;Benjamin, 2008), an approach that can conflict with techniques focused on dialogue and story-telling. It is here that an analysis of evaluation logics can make explicit the ideals that generate preferences for particular forms of knowledge and information in the evaluation process.…”

“…Performance measurement and evaluation is an important and increasingly demanding practice in the third sector (Reed & Morariu, 2010, Benjamin, 2008Carman, 2007, Eckerd & Moulton, 2011Charities Evaluation Service, 2008;Bagnoli & Megali, 2010). There is a focus on how to improve the measurement and evaluation of third sector organisations through multi-dimensional frameworks (Bagnoli & Megali, 2010) and balanced scorecards (Kaplan, 2001) and through linkages to strategic decision making (LeRoux & Wright, 2010).…”