Don’t Kill the Golden Goose: Rethinking Accountability Standards in the Nonprofit Sector

Disclaimer​: ​​This ​​is ​​not ​​a ​​goose. ​​This ​​is ​​a ​​golden​​ Mandarin ​​Duck;​​ this​​ photo ​​is​​ meant ​​to ​​be ​​visual​​aid ​​only and ​​not​​ a ​​true ​​representation ​​of ​​a​​ Golden​​ Goose.

Golden​​·Goose

Noun

  1. The ​​golden​​ goose​​ of​​ TSOs, ​​in​​ many ​​situations, ​​comes ​​to ​​be ​​seen​​ as​​ the​​ state’s​​ only ​​or​​best​​ hope in ​​tackling ​​‘wicked ​​problems’ ​​such ​​as ​​reducing ​​health ​​inequalities ​​(​Tenbensel,​​,​​ Dwyer,​​J., ​​& Lavoie,​​J.,​​2014).

Large-scale ​​migration ​​into ​​the ​​Britain ​​in ​​the​​ 1960s ​​and ​​70s ​​prompted ​​the ​​development ​​of ​​third-sector organizations ​​to ​​tackle ​​unmet ​​needs​​ of ​​the ​​new ​​populations ​​and ​​communities. ​​Government ​​funders turned ​​to ​​third-sector ​​organizations ​​(TSOs)​​ to ​​provide ​​cheap ​​and​​ effective ​​services ​​to ​​fill​​ gaps.

With ​​government ​​funders ​​providing ​​the​​ capital ​​​for ​​TSO ​​work, ​​ another ​​issue​​ came ​​to ​​the ​​forefront. “Accountability ​​measures ​​imposed ​​by ​​governments​​ can ​​be ​​debilitating​​ or ​​ ‘killing ​​of​​the​​ golden ​​goose” (Tenbensel​​et​​al. ​​,​​2014). ​​While ​​trying ​​to​​ expand​​ services​​ TSOs ​​are ​​burdened​​ by​​stringent​​ accountability measures. ​​A​​ conflict ​​arises ​​between ​​government ​​funder’s​​ needs ​​for​​transparency​​ and ​​accountability ​​and being ​​mindful ​​that​​ accountability ​​measures​​ can ​​stifle ​​a ​​TSOs ​​impact.

Tenbensel​​et​​al. ​​ (2014) ​​ describes ​​the ​​different “pulls” ​​that​​ TSOs ​​encounter.

Downward ​​Pull-​​community ​​ (members, ​​clients, ​​community​​leaders, ​​and​​ other ​​organizations).

Lateral ​​Pull-​​ one ​​another​​ and ​​themselves​​ (staff, ​​volunteers, ​​community​​ board​​ members, ​​and​​community agencies). ​with​​ whom​​ they​​ work’​

Upward-​funders. ​

Tenbensel​​ et ​​al. ​​(2014)​​ developed ​​a​​ comprehensive ​​framework ​​to ​​address ​​overburdened ​​TSOs.

  1. Do​​no​​harm​​-​​ do​​not​​in advertently ​​increase ​​overall​​ accountability ​​measures ​​for ​​TSOs.
  2. ‘Best ​​fit’​ generation​​-​​public ​​managers ​​should​​ play ​​an ​​active ​​role ​​in ​​facilitating ​​environments ​​in which​​ TSO ​​accountability ​​requirements ​​between ​​the ​​points​​ of ​​the ​​triskele ​​are​​ better ​​aligned.
  3. Consideration ​​of ​​collateral ​​impact​​ of ​​accountability ​​measures.
  4. Use ​​triskele​​ as ​​a ​​foundation​​ for ​​conversation ​​between ​​TSOs ​​and ​​all​​ stakeholders​​about accountability.
  5. Triskele ​​framework ​​can ​​be ​​used ​​to​​ assess ​​new ​​or ​​prospective ​​developments ​​that ​​are​​ likely ​​to impact ​​the​​ organization’s ​​accountability ​​environment.

The​​ Triskele ​​framework ​​and  ​​knowledge ​​of ​​how ​​accountability ​​measures ​​can ​​impact ​​TSOs ​​is ​​beneficial ​​for nonprofit ​​scholars ​​to ​​have ​​awareness ​​and ​​become ​​advocates ​​for ​​organizations ​​we ​​work ​​with ​​now​​ and ​​in the​​ future.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *