BUDGET AND CONTROL BOARD ACCOUNTABILITY REPORT 2005-2006

The Technical College of the Lowcountry reports to the State Budget and Control Board its annual accountability report that includes an executive summary, a description of the leadership system, customer focus and satisfaction and other performance criteria, mission, and program descriptions and budgets.

BUDGET AND CONTROL BOARD ACCOUNTABILITY REPORT 2006-2007

The Technical College of the Lowcountry reports to the Budget and Control Board its annual accountability report that includes an executive summary, a description of the leadership system, customer focus and satisfaction and other performance criteria, mission, and program descriptions and budgets.

SOUTH CAROLINA STATE BUDGET AND CONTROL BOARD ACCOUNTABILITY REPORT 2007-2008

The Technical College of the Lowcountry reports to the Budget and Control Board its annual accountability report that includes an executive summary, a description of the leadership system, customer focus and satisfaction and other performance criteria, mission, and program descriptions and budgets.

SOUTH CAROLINA STATE BUDGET AND CONTROL BOARD ACCOUNTABILITY REPORT 2008-2009

The Technical College of the Lowcountry reports to the Budget and Control Board its annual accountability report that includes an executive summary, a description of the leadership system, customer focus and satisfaction and other performance criteria, mission, and program descriptions and budgets.

SOUTH CAROLINA STATE BUDGET AND CONTROL BOARD ACCOUNTABILITY REPORT 2009-2010

The Technical College of the Lowcountry reports to the Budget and Control Board its annual accountability report that includes an executive summary, a description of the leadership system, customer focus and satisfaction and other performance criteria, mission, and program descriptions and budgets.

SOUTH CAROLINA STATE BUDGET AND CONTROL BOARD ACCOUNTABILITY REPORT 2010-2011

The Technical College of the Lowcountry reports to the Budget and Control Board its annual accountability report that includes an executive summary, a description of the leadership system, customer focus and satisfaction and other performance criteria, mission, and program descriptions and budgets.

SOUTH CAROLINA BUDGET AND CONTROL BOARD ACCOUNTABILITY REPORT 2011-2012

The Technical College of the Lowcountry reports to the Budget and Control Board its annual accountability report that includes an executive summary, a description of the leadership system, customer focus and satisfaction and other performance criteria, mission, and program descriptions and budgets.

SOUTH CAROLINA BUDGET AND CONTROL BOARD ACCOUNTABILITY REPORT 2012-2013

The Technical College of the Lowcountry reports to the Budget and Control Board its annual accountability report that includes an executive summary, a description of the leadership system, customer focus and satisfaction and other performance criteria, mission, and program descriptions and budgets.

BUDGET AND CONTROL BOARD ACCOUNTABILITY REPORT 2005-2006

Spartanburg Community College reports to the Budget and Control Board its annual accountability report that includes an executive summary, a description of the leadership system, customer focus and satisfaction and other performance criteria, mission, and program descriptions and budgets.

Integrating agency and resource dependence theory : firm profitability, industry regulation, and board task performance

Boards of directors are key governancemechanisms in organizations and fulfill twomain tasks:monitoringmanagers and firm performance, and providing advice and access to resources. In spite of a wealth of researchmuch remains unknown about how boards attend to the two tasks. This study investigates whether organizational (firm profitability) and environmental factors (industry regulation) affect board task performance. The data combine CEOs' responses to a questionnaire, and archival data from a sample of large Italian firms. Findings show that past firm performance is negatively associatedwith board monitoring and advice tasks; greater industry regulation enhances perceived board task performance; board monitoring and advice tasks tend to reinforce each other, despite their theoretical and practical distinction.

Accountability and board functionality: National Australia Bank's experience

The National Australia Bank’s (NAB) experience of corporate governance has been contrary to current standards of good corporate governance, accountability and risk management. Over the last few years NAB’s misadventures have brought it under intensive media scrutiny with the HomeSide losses and the investigation by the Securities and Exchange Commission in the USA for breaches of auditor independence. More recently the unauthorised trading by its foreign exchange dealers violated NABs risk management practices and the subsequent board crisis resulted in significant downgrading of the share price on the Australian Stock Exchange (ASX). This paper briefly reviews the international history of corporate accountability and its growth in Australia. The increasing shareholder and legislative pressure to improve sustainability, accountability and board functionality have driven these issues to the forefront of Governing Boards’ agendas worldwide. The board remains ultimately responsible for all actions of the company and this is highlighted by APRA’s recent release of the new governance standard APG510 for implementation by October 2006. The impact of NAB’s board dysfunction on its overall performance is compared with the other major banks in Australia. Cost efficiency ratios, share price and total shareholder return are used as measures of performance and profitability. It is clear, from NAB’s recent experience, as the worst performer of all the majors, with a 19.7% fall in net profit and a cost to income ratio of 57.4% in 2004, that the NAB board needs to improve its performance and accountability to meet a sustainable increase in profitability and higher return for investors.

Accountability, quality assurance and performativity : the changing role of the academic board

This article undertakes a review of Australian and international literature and higher education policy in response to the changing nature of university academic boards (also known as academic senates or faculty senates). It shows that governance has become an issue for both the state and for universities and that within this context risk management and accountability mechanisms such as academic quality assurance are taking an increasingly prominent role. These developments have altered the form and function of academic governance and have fundamentally affected the academic board. For example, some literature reports that the role of Australian academic boards now largely revolves around academic quality assurance and it is argued that this is potentially problematic because of a focus on audit-driven accountability mechanisms. However, the article concludes by suggesting that as part of a broader quality assurance framework there is also an opportunity for academic boards to have a central role in the development of academic standards that focus on enhancing learning outcomes rather than on compliance.

Accountability as a main ingredient of getting marketing back in the board room

Today it is said that marketing influence is in decline. But how can marketing regain its influence? Empirical evidence based on data from seven Western companies demonstrates that accountability, innovativeness and customer connections are three major drivers of marketing influence. We claim that an influential marketing department is necessary in order to achieve superior performance. Through a stronger focus on accountability, the department can indeed regain this influence.

Accountability Report to State Budget and Control Board

Winthrop University annually presents an accountability report to the governor and General Assembly with descriptions and budget of each program, objectives, and performance measures.