The changing accountability relationship between NGOs and government grant funding agencies under NPM
Ken Crofts
Working Paper 16/06
November 2006
About the Author
Ken Crofts, Lecturer in Accounting, Charles Sturt University,
Panorama Avenue Bathurst NSW 2795
Charles Sturt University – Faculty of Business Working Paper Series
Managing Editor: Associate Professor Jayne Bisman, School of Accounting, Bathurst
Editors: Dr P. Mathews, School of Commerce, Wagga Wagga
Associate Professor M. O'Mullane, School of Business, Albury
Dr R. Tierney, School of Marketing and Management, Bathurst
The Faculty of Business Working Paper Series is intended to provide staff and students with a means of communicating new and evolving ideas in order to encourage academic debate. Working papers, as the title suggests, should not necessarily be taken as completed works or final expressions of opinion. All working papers are subject to review prior to publication by one or more editors or referees familiar with the discipline area. Normally, working papers may be freely quoted and/or reproduced provided proper reference to the author and source is given. When a working paper is published on a restricted basis, notice of such restriction will appear on this page.
Table of Contents
- Abstract
- Introduction
- Literature Review
- Research Methods
- Results
- Findings and conclusions
- References
- Appendix – Questionnaire Used
Abstract
There has been an increasing flow of funds to non-government organisations NGOs through grants, and various performance agreements, as a result of services devolved from government to (NGOs) under the New Public Management (NPM). There have been concerns expressed about the accountability of NGOs to the wider community in general, and to government funding agencies in particular, in respect of grant funds received. This paper reports on an investigation concerning the use of accountability information requested of NGOs by government funding agencies, and the problems that can arise in providing this information. Recommendations for changes to accountability reporting that will assist outcome improvement are raised in the paper.