Akuntabilitas Pengelolaan Dana Desa Di Desa Umbulsari, Kabupaten Jember

This research was conducted to describe and study the Village Fund Management Accountability System from the planning, implementation and accountability stages. This research uses a qualitative exploratory method through a case study approach. This study uses interviews which are carried out in depth to each informant. The results of this study indicate that the implementation stage of the Village Fund in Umbulsari Village has implemented the principles of participation and transparency. For the implementation stage of village funds, the principles of participation, transparency and accountability have been implemented. Meanwhile, at the accountability stage, village funds have implemented the principle of accountability.

The Accountability of Voluntary Organisations: Implications for Government Funders

<p>The mechanisms of accountability of government-voluntary sector contracting are problematic for both government agencies and voluntary organisations. If they are to be revised, new mechanisms need to be appropriate for both parties. While the public accountability system has been relatively well described and analysed, the accountability systems of voluntary organisations have not. This research aimed to explore accountability from the perspective of voluntary sector managers and board members asking to whom, for what and why they thought themselves accountable. Four organisational case studies were undertaken involving 34 in-depth interviews with managers and board members. Interview data was triangulated with document analysis and supplemented with field observations. The results showed that respondents thought themselves most accountable to their clients. Clients were prioritised because respondents were focused on maintaining their organisations' legitimacy. Being seen to provide quality services to clients meant that their organisations were viewed in a positive light by key stakeholders, including funders. A group of internal stakeholders (staff, members and the board) were considered second most important. Staff were seen as important because they delivered the organisations' services. The support of members also brought legitimacy. Government agencies were ranked third. Government funding was viewed as a 'means to an ends': an input needed to provide a quality service to clients. An implication of the findings for the reform of the accountability mechanisms of contracting is that the assumptions that the current system is based on - influenced by agency theory - may not be valid. Respondents were found to have similar goals to government agencies: achieving positive outcomes for clients. The goal incongruence assumed by agency theory was not identified.</p>

The Accountability of Voluntary Organisations: Implications for Government Funders

<p>The mechanisms of accountability of government-voluntary sector contracting are problematic for both government agencies and voluntary organisations. If they are to be revised, new mechanisms need to be appropriate for both parties. While the public accountability system has been relatively well described and analysed, the accountability systems of voluntary organisations have not. This research aimed to explore accountability from the perspective of voluntary sector managers and board members asking to whom, for what and why they thought themselves accountable. Four organisational case studies were undertaken involving 34 in-depth interviews with managers and board members. Interview data was triangulated with document analysis and supplemented with field observations. The results showed that respondents thought themselves most accountable to their clients. Clients were prioritised because respondents were focused on maintaining their organisations' legitimacy. Being seen to provide quality services to clients meant that their organisations were viewed in a positive light by key stakeholders, including funders. A group of internal stakeholders (staff, members and the board) were considered second most important. Staff were seen as important because they delivered the organisations' services. The support of members also brought legitimacy. Government agencies were ranked third. Government funding was viewed as a 'means to an ends': an input needed to provide a quality service to clients. An implication of the findings for the reform of the accountability mechanisms of contracting is that the assumptions that the current system is based on - influenced by agency theory - may not be valid. Respondents were found to have similar goals to government agencies: achieving positive outcomes for clients. The goal incongruence assumed by agency theory was not identified.</p>

Perception of Financial Statement Preparation and Efforts to Increase Accountability Awareness

This study aimed to analyze the researcher's perception of research financial responsibility system, what factors make researchers feel difficulties and objections in conducting financial reports, and how to develop strategies to improve literacy of researchers' understanding to prepare financial reports. This type of research was descriptive qualitative. The research location is at Universitas Negeri Semarang. The total informants were 33 researchers who were taken by the technique of purposive sampling. Methods of data collection used interviews, observation and documentation. The data analysis technique used data reduction, data presentation and conclusion drawing. The results of study indicated that the preparation of accountability reports was very important in research, because it helped in monitoring the use of research funds, controlling expenditures, and making the use of research funds more effective and efficient. The obstacles that researchers face in preparing financial statements were the limited time of researchers, some expenses that could not be reported in the accountability system, as well as various regulatory changes. Efforts to overcome existing obstacles by reporting and consulting with related parties, namely the finance department, involved a team that was competent in finance and asked for help from related administrative staff and improved the financial literacy of researchers.

Accountability for refugee resettlement in New Zealand

<p><b>Public governance in many countries has been moving toward a model called New Public Governance (NPG) to deal with the increasing complexity in the provision of public services. NPG adopts a new perspective that emphasises the importance of managing the interaction between and among organisations within and outside the government to achieve efficiency and effectiveness of public policy and service delivery. The interdependent relationships of these cross-working organisations are reflected in their accountability processes. Thus, a robust accountability system is central to managing public governance. However, accountability is complicated, and its definition is regularly debated. Accountability is even more intricate in network relationships where it is challenging to identify who has contributed in what way. However, research on accountability in networks is limited.</b></p> <p>To contribute to the understanding of the problems of accountability in public governance, this study examines the nature of accountability and evaluates the discharge of accountability in the provision of public services in practice, using a case study of refugee resettlement in New Zealand. The following research question is addressed, “What is the nature of the accountability relationships between different parties involved in, or affected by, the provision of social services to former refugees in New Zealand?”. In answering this question, the study developed a research framework that was built on insights from prior literature and stakeholder theories and employed a case study approach that analysed 32 semi-structured interviews and a range of documents related to refugee resettlement in New Zealand.</p> <p>The study finds that the current accountability system has not reflected the broader conception of multiple and interrelated accountability relationships identified in the literature on NPG. Upward accountability to powerful stakeholders is mostly prioritised, downward accountability to beneficiaries has not significantly improved, and horizontal accountability to cross-working partners is limited. The tensions between a bureaucratic need for control and a more devolved governance model that allows for the recognition of multiple contributions to both policy formation and implementation are still strong. Moving from the New Public Management (NPM) perspective involving control over public money, still codified in the Public Finance Act 1989, to something closer to NPG is evidently not easy.</p> <p>iiThe key academic contribution of this study is in adding an important piece to the nearly “empty land” of horizontal accountability research, providing an understanding of how accountability mechanisms are used in practice, and raising the voices of less powerful stakeholders about the discharge of accountability by social service providers. Regarding its practical contributions, the study provides a typical case study for research on accountability of non-government organisations (NGOs) in an NPG context, which can be valuable for policymakers wishing to develop policies that lead to an improvement in the appropriate expectations in NPG and accountability relationships between different parties in the delivery of social services. It also provides recommendations for the government, NGOs, and refugee communities for achieving greater accountability.</p>

Accountability for refugee resettlement in New Zealand

<p><b>Public governance in many countries has been moving toward a model called New Public Governance (NPG) to deal with the increasing complexity in the provision of public services. NPG adopts a new perspective that emphasises the importance of managing the interaction between and among organisations within and outside the government to achieve efficiency and effectiveness of public policy and service delivery. The interdependent relationships of these cross-working organisations are reflected in their accountability processes. Thus, a robust accountability system is central to managing public governance. However, accountability is complicated, and its definition is regularly debated. Accountability is even more intricate in network relationships where it is challenging to identify who has contributed in what way. However, research on accountability in networks is limited.</b></p> <p>To contribute to the understanding of the problems of accountability in public governance, this study examines the nature of accountability and evaluates the discharge of accountability in the provision of public services in practice, using a case study of refugee resettlement in New Zealand. The following research question is addressed, “What is the nature of the accountability relationships between different parties involved in, or affected by, the provision of social services to former refugees in New Zealand?”. In answering this question, the study developed a research framework that was built on insights from prior literature and stakeholder theories and employed a case study approach that analysed 32 semi-structured interviews and a range of documents related to refugee resettlement in New Zealand.</p> <p>The study finds that the current accountability system has not reflected the broader conception of multiple and interrelated accountability relationships identified in the literature on NPG. Upward accountability to powerful stakeholders is mostly prioritised, downward accountability to beneficiaries has not significantly improved, and horizontal accountability to cross-working partners is limited. The tensions between a bureaucratic need for control and a more devolved governance model that allows for the recognition of multiple contributions to both policy formation and implementation are still strong. Moving from the New Public Management (NPM) perspective involving control over public money, still codified in the Public Finance Act 1989, to something closer to NPG is evidently not easy.</p> <p>iiThe key academic contribution of this study is in adding an important piece to the nearly “empty land” of horizontal accountability research, providing an understanding of how accountability mechanisms are used in practice, and raising the voices of less powerful stakeholders about the discharge of accountability by social service providers. Regarding its practical contributions, the study provides a typical case study for research on accountability of non-government organisations (NGOs) in an NPG context, which can be valuable for policymakers wishing to develop policies that lead to an improvement in the appropriate expectations in NPG and accountability relationships between different parties in the delivery of social services. It also provides recommendations for the government, NGOs, and refugee communities for achieving greater accountability.</p>

The Direct Expenditures: Impact of Local Revenue and Special Allocation Fund

The strengthening of demands for a good financial management and accountability system encourages the government to improve performance in financial management in order to produce good and transparent financial reports. The purpose of this study was to determine the effect of local revenue and Special Allocation Funds on Direct Expenditures for City Government in West Java Province for the 2015-2019 period. The method used is descriptive and verification methods with a quantitative approach. The analysis samples in this research are 5 City Government Financial Reports in West Java Province for 5 periods. The data analysis technique used in this study is the Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS) using the IBM SPSS Statistics 20 software. The results show that local revenue has a positive effect on Direct Expenditures and Special Allocation Funds have a positive effect on Direct Expenditures in City Government. In West Java Province for the period 2015-2019.

Charter schools and equity: The power of accountability

Many proponents of charter schools suggest that, by providing an option outside traditional public schools, they are helping disadvantaged students who might otherwise be confined to low-quality neighborhood schools. But market-based accountability structures are insufficient to ensure that charter schools are actually enrolling students (i.e., students from economically distressed families, students with disabilities, English learners, and students of color) and, once they are enrolled, providing them sufficient support. Helen Ladd and Edward Fiske use the Massachusetts system of authorization, data collection, and site visits to illustrate a high quality public accountability system for charter schools that is focused on promoting equity.