Suchergebnisse

Testimony issued by the General Accounting Office with an abstract that begins "Pursuant to a congressional request, GAO discussed its ongoing monitoring of the Forest Service's efforts to improve its financial accountability, focusing on: (1) the historical pattern of the Forest Service's financial management weaknesses; (2) the fundamental problems which the Forest Service must resolve in order to achieve financial accountability; (3) GAO's criteria for placing Forest Service financial management on its high-risk list and what must take place for the agency to be removed from the list; and (4) highlighting corrective measures the agency has under way."

While useful proposals to reform International Financial Institutions (IFIs) have been widely discussed, the lack of meaningful financial accountability has received little attention. Considering the substantial damage done by IFIs, this is surprising both from an ethical and an economist's point of view. In a market economy anyone must face the economic consequences of their actions and decisions. If consultants give advice negligently or without obeying minimal professional standards, they have to pay compensation for the damage they have caused. National liability and tort laws serve the purpose of compensating those suffering unlawful damages and of deterring such behavior. By contrast, tortious damage caused by IFIs must be paid by IFIs' borrowers, including many of the world's poorest people. IFIs may even gain financially from their own negligence by extending new loans necessary to repair damages done by their prior loans. One failed adjustment program calls for the next. This mechanism makes IFI-flops generate IFI-jobs and additional income. This perverted incentive system rewarding errors, negligence, and even violations of the very constitutions of IFIs is absolutely at odds with the principles on which Western market economies rest. It must be brought to an end. This essay presents the idea of financial accountability, showing how easily reforms making IFIs financially accountable could be implemented. Moreover, embracing financial accountability would bring IFI operations closer to the intentions of their founders, who wanted IFIs subject to the basic legal and economic concepts of financial accountability not exempt from it. The market mechanism and its beneficial incentive system must finally be brought to IFIs.

The framework for public financial accountability in Sri Lanka is founded in the principles of governance associated with the model inherited from the British, widely accepted as appropriate for the country. The primary accountability institutions, and organizations for financial management, control, audit and legislative scrutiny have, however, not evolved in line with the changes in the more advanced democracies of a similar background. This lapse has reduced the effectiveness of the system of public financial accountability in Sri Lanka, resulting in less than adequate assurance, that public funds are used for the purposes intended with due consideration to economy and efficiency. Financial accountability at the sub-national level is less well developed than at the center. The reasons for this are similar to those concerning the central Government, but more acute and pronounced. Public enterprises are characterized by excessive staff; weak management; inefficiencies; heavy losses; dependency on budget transfers; and delayed publication of audited accounts, thus, further eroding public financial accountability. Discussions with stakeholders on reforms, centered around the urgent need to improve public financial accountability, showing five priority areas of concern: 1) Parliamentary control of the public purse has become ineffective, which can be restored by strengthening the oversight function provided by the public accounts and public enterprises committees; 2) the accountability of the executive is too focused on 'spending to budget', rather than on 'managing for results', therefore, introducing, on a progressive basis, a performance based culture with incentives focused on achievement of outputs and outcomes, and, holding government officials accountable for meeting objectives and performance standards should be considered; 3) need for strengthening the public audit function; 4) removing obstacles, and re-visiting the Establishment Code could prod good governance practices; and, 5) addressing greater ...

Abstract The aims of this study is to explore the financial and managerial accountability of public sector and its institutionalization. The process of institutionalization was comprehended through the perspective of New Institutional Theory (NIT). The Type of this research is qualitative approach using a case study in The Government of Jombang in Indonesia. The New Institutional Theory (NIT) in organizational studies is related to the fact that the structure of an organization is influenced by the social environment where it is located. Organization has a function to maintain its existence through the process of adaptation or institutionalization. Symptoms of isomorphism occurs where the formal organization similar to the environment through the mechanism of coercive, normative and mimetic. On financial accountability, coercive and normative mechanisms seem to be the most dominant. While on managerial accountability, the coercive mechanisms is the most dominant. Decoupling behavior emerges as a response of the organization in addressing changes in financial and managerial accountability. The response shown in the process of institutionalization of financial accountability is acquiescence and compromise strategy. While, managerial accountability tends to use acquiescence and avoidance strategy. Financial accountability has been institutionalized in everyday practice of organization members. Meanwhile, managerial accountability, is a mere formality for compliance with regulations (ceremonial administrative). The results showed that the mechanism of Reward and Punishment (RNP) from the central government supports the process of institutionalization of accountability.

International audience ; The paper examines changes in the Cohesion policy approach to financial management, control and audit in the 2000s in the context of broader shifts in governance towards greater financial accountability. It focuses in particular on the question of who is responsible to whom in relation to financial accountability; the instruments being used to ensure financial accountability; the impact of financial control on spending; and perceptions of the effects of financial accountability, including the ways that it interacts with other goals, notably administrative efficiency and policy effectiveness. It draws on extensive desk research, published quantitative data, and qualitative data collected via 60 interviews with senior staff in the managing, certifying and audit authorities of regional and sectoral programmes in 15 Member States, and also in the European Commission.

Financial accountability is now a fact of life for nonprofit as well as profit-making organizations. This article describes the useful ratio analysis technique, provides relevant examples, discusses problems and issues, and makes suggestions for needed changes.

Financial accountability is the cornerstone of ensuring that schools disburse funds allocated to them for the sole purpose of advancing the best interests of the learners. The prescriptions of the South African Schools Act clearly locate financial accountability on school governing bodies and, as such, make financial accountability a legal requirement. We examined the challenges experienced by school governing bodies in executing their financial accountability responsibilities. It emerged from the findings that schools do experience challenges in this regard. The main contributory factor seems to be largely attributed to the lack of capacity to execute financial accountability functions as manifested in budgeting, accounting and reporting functions. While there could be reasons for this, including the supposed illiteracy of the parent-governors, the implications seem to relate to the very core of legislation concerned with school governance. In essence, this implies a review of the Schools Act in terms of functions that are specialised and that require expertise