Charity accountability in the UK: through the eyes of the donor

Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to explore accountability from the perspective of charity donors.

Design/methodology/approach – The research utilises semi-structured interviews with a range of donors. In addition, it summarises the main findings from key related research (that uses document content analysis and questionnaire surveys) as a basis for better appreciating donor engagement.

Findings – This research offers evidence that while donors are viewed as the key stakeholder to whom a charity should be accountable, the relevance of the information commonly disclosed in formal charity communications is questionable. This is viewed as significant in terms of small dependent donors, although less critical in the case of non-dependent large donors who have power to demand individualised information. However, although all donors do not particularly engage with these formal communications, they are viewed by them as having significance and their production and publication serves as an important legitimising tool in the sector (enhancing trust and reputation).

Research limitations/implications – This research is based on semi-structured interviews with individual small donors and large institutional donors to large UK charities and therefore any generalising of the conclusions beyond large charities, and beyond the UK, should be undertaken with care. In addition, it focuses solely on the perceptions of donors, and other stakeholder groups are also important in this process.

Originality/value – Despite the widespread acceptance that charities have a duty to discharge accountability to their stakeholders, there is limited knowledge of their information needs and whether the performance information currently being disclosed fulfils them. This study provides a unique insight into the perspective of a key stakeholder group (donors) with respect to accountability.

UK charity accounting: an exercise in widening stakeholder engagement

Given the economic and social impact of the charity sector in the United Kingdom (UK), the importance of good governance has been recognised as a basis for underpinning effective and ef?cient performance, and for ensuring that charities meet the legitimate aspirations of key stakeholders. A major aspect of this is high-quality accounting and reporting. Over the past 25 years attempts have been made to improve this through the medium of successive, evolving versions of a Statement of Recommended Practice (SORP) for charities. As a foundation for the future review of the SORP (expected to be published in 2015), the SORP Committee undertook its largest ever consultation on an accounting pronouncement. This paper presents the ?ndings of that consultation and, analysing them using stakeholder theory, concludes that this ambitious exercise facilitated much wider stakeholder engagement than had been experienced before and has the potential to legitimise further the SORP.

The Hand of Government in Shaping Accounting and Reporting in the UK Charity Sector

Accounting in the UK charity sector has changed massively over the last 25 years, with various stakeholders influencing what has occurred. Using insights from stakeholder theory, and interviews with a number of key actors, this article focuses on the influence of one definitive stakeholder – government – in developing a regime of quality accounting and reporting in the sector. In particular, the evolution of the Statement of Recommended Practice for charities is explored. It is argued that a much tighter and more meaningful regime of accounting and reporting has been encouraged by government, amongst other stakeholders, and this has led to a more accountable and healthier charitable sector.

Epidemiology of giant retinal tears in the United Kingdom: The British giant retinal tear epidemiology eye study (BGEES)

To determine the incidence of giant retinal tear (GRT) in the United Kingdom and to provide epidemiologic data, clinical characteristics, treatment methods, and short-term outcomes in affected and fellow eyes. METHODS. Patients with a newly developed GRT (90° or greater in circumferential extent associated with posterior vitreous detachment) were identified prospectively over a 13-month period (January 2007-January 2008, inclusive) by active surveillance through the British Ophthalmic Surveillance Unit. Questionnaire-based data were obtained from reporting ophthalmologists at baseline and 12 months. RESULTS. Sixty patients (62 eyes) developed a new GRT, giving a U.K. annual incidence of 0.094 (95% CI 0.072-0.120) cases or 0.091 (95% CI 0.069-0.117) patients per 100,000. The GRTs were mostly idiopathic (54.8%), affected middle-aged (mean, 42.2 years), white British (93.3%) males (71.7%), with presenting vision worse than 20/40 in 59.7%, foveal detachment in 45.2%, and proliferative vitreoretinopathy of grade C (PVR-C) or worse in 11.3%. Treatment in most was managed by pars plana vitrectomy (93.5%) with laser retinopexy (52.5%) and silicone oil endotamponade (75.8%). Prophylactic 360° laser or cryotherapy was applied to 39.0% of the fellow eyes. At mean follow-up of 11.3 months, eventual retinal reattachment was attained in 94.7%, although only 42.1% achieved vision of =20/40. Neither GRT nor RD developed in any of the 19 nontraumatic, noniatrogenic, prophylactically treated fellow eyes. CONCLUSIONS. This study is the first population-based prospective effort to evaluate the epidemiology of GRT. Although onlya minority presented with PVR-C and high retinal reattachment rates were achieved, fewer than half had vision sufficient for driving in the GRT eye.