Financial Accounfability t

3 Manngrmmt, 6(4), Winter 1990 0267-4424 $2.50

CHARITY ACCOUNTING - AN EMPIRICAL STUDY

OF THE INFORMATION NEEDS OF CONTRIBUTORS
TO UK FUND RAISING CHARITIES
NOEL H Y N D M A N *

ACCOUNTING, USER NEEDS AND CONTRIBUTORS T O CHARITIES

By comparison with financial reporting by business enterprises, the area of

accounting and reporting by charities is relatively underdeveloped in the United
Kingdom. Until recently little attention has been paid to the charity sector in
terms of accounting and reporting, with the first major work in the area being
carried out by Bird and Morgan-Jones (1981). As a result of this study, the
Accounting Standards Committee (ASC) set up a working party in 1982 to
consider the area and subsequently published three documents on the subject
(ASC 1984, 1985 and 1988).

Accounting and User Needs

A contemporary view of accounting has been to see it in terms of providing
information to satisfy the information needs of users. The American Accounting
Association’s (1966) definition of accounting saw it as being concerned with
the provision of economic information to permit informed judgements and
decisions by the users of information. Similar ideas were contained in the
‘Corporate Report’ published by the ASC (1975) and ‘Corporate Reporting: Its Future
Evolution’, published by the Canadian Institute of Chartered Accountants
(CICA, 1980a).
This view of accounting highlights the paramount importance of the users
of information. A logical progression from this position would be that a
consideration of the information needs of users is necessary prior to the
determination of the information that will be provided by the reporting entity.
Rutherford (1983) considers this need to provide information to users in terms
of the concept of accountability. He views the concept as being the requirement
to be answerable for one’s conduct and responsibilities. Jackson (1982, p. 220)
expands on this by stating that:
. . . one party is accountable to another in the sense that one of the parties has a
right to call upon the other to give an account of his activities.
To apply this to charity accounting requires the identification of those groups

The author is from the Department of Accounting, Queen’s University, Belfast. He is currently
Visiting Professor at the University of Ottawa, Canada.

295
296 HYNDMAN

which have a right to receive information and the determination of the

information that they need.

Lack of Empirical Work

Charities can be viewed as a subset of the much larger not-for-profit organisation
(NFPO) sector. Such a sector includes primarily service organisations and, in
addition to charities, examples include trade unions, schools, hospitals, political
parties and local authorities. While a general consensus exists that the disclosure
of accounting information should be directed towards meeting the information
needs of users, there has been very little empirical work carried out in NFPOs
generally, and specifically in charities, to identify important users and their
information needs.
Luthy (1979), in an investigation into the needs of users of local government
information, argued that there was a lack of direct empirical evidence as
justification for suggested disclosure practices and challenged what he saw as
the implicit assumption that providers of information know what users need
and are responsive to this need. A similar position was taken by Skousen, Smith
and Woodfield (1975) when considering college and university reporting. They
viewed the lack of empirical work as undermining the potential value of reports
(P. 4):
If financial reports of colleges and universities are to be of real value, there must
be a fundamental understanding and specific identification of the major users of the
reports and their information needs.

Anthony (1978) was also aware of this problem. He argued that neither the
Trueblood Committee nor the Financial Accounting Standards Board (FASB)
had been able to support suggested disclosures with any convincing evidence
regarding the information needs of users. Each of the above writers implies
that without empirical research it is possible, if not probable, that the
information disclosed and the information required by users of NFPO reports
may be significantly different.
The case with charity reporting is similar. Bird et al. (1981) were aware of
the lack of empirical work on user needs and argued that studies of needs must
be undertaken before anything else was done. Their research formed the basis
of the three ASC publications on accounting by charities, which culminated
in a Statement of Recommended Practice (ASC, 1988). Each of the ASC
publications stated its objective in terms of improving the quality/usefulness
of reporting by charities, and the argument was promulgated that this should
be viewed in terms of the extent to which users’ information needs are met.
However, the recommendations made by the ASC were not based on empirical
evidence regarding users’ information needs. As a result of this, the potential
value of the recommendations may be limited. It would seem appropriate that
empirical research regarding the needs of users of charity reports be carried
out to underpin future developments in this area.
 CHARITY ACCOUNTING 297
Contributors to Charities
The FASB (1980), when considering the information needs of the external users
of NFPO reports, argued that the most obvious and important were resource
providers. Furthermore, Reynolds, when considering information disclosure
by health and welfare organisations, stated that (p. 69):
Resource providers are the primary supporters of non-business organisations.
Therefore, they may be considered the primary external users of the organisation’s
information.

Although the above references relate to all resource providers as important

external users of NFPO reports, this paper concentrates on the information
needs of a group referred to as contributors. Contributors can be defined as
those who contribute to a charity but do not receive direct economic gain from
their contributions.
This group normally has no right to demand information, although some
individual contributors, due to the size of their contributions, may be able to
make such demands on a charity. The majority of contributors, however, must
rely on charity reports. The position of this group is akin to the users the
Corporate Report (1975) was concerned with when it identified a large class
of general users to whom a responsibility to report is owed and who are not
in a privileged position to enforce special demands. The Corporate Report
argued that information should be provided to all those who have a reasonable
right ot such information. Contributors provide a significant proportion of
resources for a charity (see Rajan, 1987) while they receive no direct economic
benefit themselves. Therefore it can be argued that they have a reasonable right
to call upon the charity to account for its actions regarding the use of the
resources provided. Due to the fact that contributors normally have no powers
of interrogation, they must rely on charity reports to meet their information
needs.

DESCRIPTIVE ANALYSIS OF EXTANT CHARITY REPORTS

Methodology
The research attempted to identify the information which is routinely made
available to contributors to large fund raising charities. The researcher
concentrated on the largest ‘Fund Raising Charities’ as identified by the
Charities Aid Foundation (CAF) in their annual publication ‘Charity Statistics’.
Fund raising charities solicit contributions and are listed in ‘Charity Statistics’
on the basis of annual total voluntary income.
The ‘Top Two Hundred Fund Raising Charities’, as identified by the CAF,
were used as the survey population, and each was asked to provide information
which is routinely made available to contributors. For analysis purposes, only
an identifiable accounting period, normally a year, was analysed. The
298 HYNDMAN

information received was analysed to identify the types of information routinely

made available to contributors.
Hyndman (1989) developed an a priori model for reporting to contributors.
The model was based on the premise that accounting was concerned with
meeting the information needs of users. Drawing on contemporary NFPO and
charity accounting literature, he developed a model which was basically an
enumeration and prioritisation of the main types of information which, it was
argued, were relevant to the information needs of contributors.
The model recommended greater disclsoure of non-financial information,
in particular information regarding the objectives and outputs of the charity.
This was based on the argument that contributors provided resources for
altruistic rather than economic reasons and would be primarily interested in
the past achievement of, and future plans regarding, charitable objectives. These
objectives would largely be expressed in non-financial terms. It was also argued
that while financial information may be of some importance to contributors,
possibly to identify the liquidity of the charity or whether or not it had ‘lived
within its means’, it is only of secondary importance. This is because objectives
and output measures of charities, which may be key concerns of contributors,
are rarely expressed in financial terms. Furthermore, it was recommended that
the disclosure of financial information should be achieved through the use
of simplified formats, rather than traditional audited formats, because
contributors may have difficulty understanding, and therefore using, audited
financial statements.
An initial analysis of ten charities, coupled with the recommendations made
in the Hyndman model, was used as the basis for the construction of an analysis
table of different types of information. This table was refined as the analysis
progressed. The information received from charities was analysed by type as
per the analysis table.
For analysis purposes, information was considered disclosed if it was
highlighted in some way (hard copy) and not contained in the main narrative
of the document (soft copy). The information contained in ‘soft copy’ was not
analysed because it may be difficult for the user to isolate and use this
information as it is often embedded in a mass of subjective comment. In
addition, it is sometimes given in a form which may make it difficult for the
user to understand its significance. The analysis was not concerned with the
particular rubrics or degree of disclosure, only whether or not particular
information types were disclosed.

Results
A total of two hundred requests were sent to charities. A summary of the
response rate is shown in Table 1. Over eighty-one per cent of charities supplied
information in a manner that could be analysed in accordance with the
methodology set out above.
 CHARITY ACCOUNTING 299
The most frequently used document title was ‘annual report’ or a title
approximating this. Over seventy-five per cent of charities produced a document
with such a title. An analysis of non-respondents by size and type indicated
that the non-responses were not from an identifiable sub-group. The response
rate of over eighty per cent, coupled with no evidence of non-response bias,
was considered satisfactory in drawing conclusions about the population as a
whole.
Only four information types were disclosed by the majority of charities. These
are shown in Table 2.
Hyndman’s (1989) a priori model for meeting the information needs of
contributors contained ten separate information types. These were: goals and
objectives of the charity; problem or need area information; measures of output
and efficiency; administration costs to total expense information; simplified
operating statement and balance sheet; and future objectives and budget
information (p. 28). These information types were included in the analysis table
and the extent to which they were disclosed by charities is shown in Table 3.
The results in Table 2 indicate that traditional audited financial statements
are the most frequently disclosed type of information. One hundred and forty-
eight charities (91 per cent) disclosed an audited operating statement, 89 per
cent an audited balance sheet and 58 per cent an audited funds flow statement.
The only other type of information which was disclosed by over 50 per cent
of charities was a listing of officers, which was given in 83 per cent of cases.
From Table 3 it can be seen that each of the information types suggested in

Table 1
Response Rate to Request for Information

Number %
Requests made 200 100
Usable responses 163 81.5
Unusable responses 10 5
Total responses 173 86.5

Table 2
Information Content - Most Frequently
Disclosed Types

Tvbe of Information Number %

Audited operating statement 148 91

Audited balance sheet 145 89
List of officers 136 83
Audited funds flow statement 95 58
300 HYNDMAN

Table 3
Information Content - Disclosure of Suggested Information

Type of Information Number 70

Statement of goals 62 38
Statement of objectives 0 0
Problemheed area information a 5
Measure(s) of output 47 29
Measure(s) of efficiency 4 2
Administration cost percentage information 31 19
Simplified operating statement 34 21
Simplified balance sheet 10 6
Statement of future objectives 1 1
Budget information a 5

the Hyndman model was disclosed in less than 50 per cent of cases, with a
number of types disclosed in less than ten per cent of cases.

SURVEY OF CONTRIBUTORS’ INFORMATION NEEDS

Met hodohu
Due to the identified lack of empirical evidence regarding the information needs
of contributors to charities, a questionnaire was developed to identify the most
important information sought by contributors. Because of the confidential
nature of contributor lists, it was decided to ask charities to dispatch
questionnaires to contributors themselves. This overcame the problem of
confidentiality but ruled out the possibility of prompting respondents. A
covering letter from the researcher explaining the purpose of the questionnaire
was included with the questionnaire as well as a letter from the charity
explaining its involvement.
The population surveyed was all individual contributors to the largest two
hundred fund raising charities. T h e actual size of this population is unknown
because of the confidential nature of contributor lists. T o make the sample as
representative as possible it was decided to draw it from a number of charities
reflecting the range of charitable activities within this sector. Using the Charity
Commissioners’ classification system as a basis, the largest two hundred fund
raising charities were classified into various spheres of activity and a sample
of eight chosen from within these classifications. Charities from within each
classification of charitable activity were chosen at random and asked if they
would participate in the study. A number declined to participate. O n the basis
of a refusal to participate by any charity a substitute charity was selected from
within the same field of charitable activity. After contacting fifteen charities,
 CHARITY ACCOUNTING 301
eight agreed to participate. Such a n approach was used to avoid the possibility
of drawing a large proportion of contributors from one particular area of
charitable activity.
Each participating charity was asked to distribute thirty copies of the
questionnaire on a random basis to contributors. The sample size therefore
was two hundred and forty. T h e major part of the questionnaire asked
contributors to rate fourteen specific information types in terms of level of
importance to them. T h e fourteen information types were a n amalgam of
Hyndman’s a psiosi model information and the most common information
disclosures, as revealed by the previous analysis. These are shown in Table
4.Other questions, including two relating to receipt and readership of annual
reports, were also included in the questionnaire.
T o ensure that no information types important to contributors were omitted
a preliminary survey was conducted. Twenty-one documents were distributed
to and returned by persons who were known by the researcher to be contributors
to charities. Respondents were asked to indicate the information they would
require if they were considering contributing to a charity. This preliminary
survey indicated that no other information types should be included.

Results
A total of two hundred and forty questionnaires were sent to charities for distri-
bution to contributors. A summary of the response rate is shown in Table 5.
The significant number of unusable responses was probably due to the statement
in the covering letter requesting that the questionnaire be returned if the
contributor felt unable or desired not to participate. Of the unusable responses

Table 4
Information Types Included in Contributors’ Questionnaire

Type 1 - Statement of the goal(s) of the charity.

Type 2 - Information concerning the general problem or need area(s) with which
the charity is dealing.
Type 3 - Statement of the quantifiable objective(s) of the year being reported upon.
Type 4 - A list of the main officers of the charity.
Type 5 - Measure(s) of the output of the charity during the year.
Type 6 - Measure(s) of the efficiency of the charity.
Type 7 - Administration costs as a percentage of total expenditure.
Type 8 - Simplified operating statement.
Type 9 - Simplified balance sheet.
Type 10 - Audited operating statement.
Type 11 - Audited balance sheet.
Type 12 - Audited funds flow statement.
Type 13 - Statement of quantifiable objectives of the next year.
Type 14 - Budget information for the next year.
302 HYNDMAN

Table 5
Contributors’ Questionnaire - Response
Rate

Number %
Distributed 240 100
Usable responses 133 55
Unusable responses 23 10
Total responses 156 65

Table 6
Receipt and Readership of Annual Report

Receipt Readenhip
Number % Number %
Yes 109 83 97 89
No 23 17 12 11
- - - -
Total 132 100 109 100

eighteen stated they were unable to reply for a variety of reasons, most
commonly the age of the contributor.
The first two questions attempted to establish whether the contributor
received an annual report and whether such a report was read. The results
are given in Table 6 . The results indicate that 83 per cent of contributors recall
receiving annual reports and 89 per cent of recipients claimed to have read
them. Although the results do not indicate the thoroughness of readership, they
do indicate that the annual report is widely distributed to contributors, is read
by the vast majority of recipients, and is therefore an important medium of
communication between the charity and the contributors.
The major part of the questionnaire asked contributors to rate fourteen
specific types of financial and non-financial information (see Table 4) in terms
of importance to them. A five point scale was used to measure responses of
subjects as follows:
Scale Number Level of Importance
1 Not important
2 Slightly important
3 Moderately important
4 Very important
5 Of vital importance
 CHARITY ACCOUNTING 303
As in some cases there was a possibility that the description of the information
type used in the questionnaire may not have been easily understood by the
respondent, examples were given for explanation purposes. T h e survey results
are shown in Tables 7 and 8.
T h e results given in Table 8 show that the ten information types from
Hyndman's a priori model occupy positions one to ten in the overall ranking.

Table 7
Detail of Rating of Information Types

Info' Brief'
TvDe Describtion I 2 3 4 5 Total

1 Goals No, 1 4 4 50 74 133

% 1 3 3 37 56 100
2 Problemheed area No. 2 1 30 63 36 132
% 2 1 23 47 27 100
3 Objectives No. 1 4 41 72 13 131
% 1 3 31 55 10 100
4 Officers No. 22 39 41 24 7 133
% 17 29 31 18 5 100
5 Output No. 1 2 34 68 28 133
% 1 1 26 51 21 100
6 Efficiency No. 3 7 37 61 24 132
% 2 6 28 46 18 100
7 Administration No. 1 7 30 53 40 131
cost % % 1 5 23 40 31 100
8 Simplified operating No. 2 12 52 49 15 130
statement % 2 9 40 38 11 100
9 Simplified No. 6 24 53 36 10 129
balance sheet % 5 18 41 28 8 100
10 Audited operating No. 16 28 36 37 15 132
statement % 12 21 27 28 12 100
11 Audited balance No. 23 29 39 29 12 132
sheet % 17 22 30 22 9 100
12 Audited funds flow No. 27 33 35 27 8 130
statement
% 21 25 27 21 6 100
13 Future objectives No. 0 11 38 64 17 130
% 0 9 29 49 13 100
14 Budget information No. 1 15 48 51 12 127
% 1 12 38 40 9 100
For full description, see Table 4.
304 HYNDMAN

Table 8
Means and Ranking of Information Types

Info. * Briey Total Rank

TYP Description Responses Mean * * Position

1 Goals 133 4.44 1

2 Problemheed area 132 3.98 2
3 Objectives 131 3.70 6
4 Officers 133 2.66 13 =
5 output 133 3.90 4
6 Efficiency 132 3.73 5
7 Administration cost % 131 3.95 3
8 Simplified operating statement 130 3.48 8
9 Simplified balance sheet 129 3.16 10
10 Audited operating statement 132 3.05 11
11 Audited balance sheet 132 2.83 12
12 Audited funds flow statemcnt 130 2.66 13 =
13 Future objectives 130 3.67 7
14 Budget information 127 3.46 9

For full description see Table 4.

* * The higher the mean the greater the importance of the information

The four information types most prevalent in the descriptive analysis occupy
positions eleven to fourteen. This indicates that the a priori information was
viewed as relatively more important than the information which is usually
disclosed.
From Table 7 it can be seen that information type 1, a statement of goals,
which had the highest mean rank, indicating that it was considered the most
important of the fourteen information types, was rated as ‘of vital importance’
by 56 per cent of contributors and as ‘very important’ by another 37 per cent
of contributors. T h e simplified balance sheet, information type 9, which was
tenth in the overall ranking, was rated ‘moderately important’ or above by
7 7 per cent of contributors.
The four information types most prevalent in charity reporting were
considered to be the least important of the fourteen. Type 10, audited operating
statement, which was ranked eleventh, was considered ‘moderately important’
or above by 67 per cent of contributors and type 12, audited funds flow
statement, which was equal last, was considered ‘moderately important’ or
above in 54 per cent of cases. There appeared to be a tendency to rank all
fourteen information types highly, with the overall mean rank of all information
types being 3.48.
Information types which would be useful in assessing the present performance
of the charity in terms of output and efficiency were viewed as the most
 CHARITY ACCOUNTING 305
important. The six most important information types, Types 1 , 2, 3 , 5, 6 and
7, may all be useful in assessing present performance.
The ten most important information types contain five non-financial
information types, while the most usual information disclosed, as identified
in the descriptive analysis, is predominantly financial. Of the top six information
types, four were non-financial. This indicates the perceived importance of non-
financial information to contributors. The only non-financial information type
which was usually disclosed, a listing of the main officers of the charity, was
however ranked relatively low, being equal last.
Simplified operating statements and balance sheets were ranked more
highly than audited opetating statements and balance sheets, thus providing
some evidence of the desire of contributors to be provided with financial
information in a simplified manner. Audited funds flow statements were ranked
equal last, although this information type is one of only four which is usually
disclosed by charities.

SUMMARY AND ANALYSIS

It is argued that contributors have a reasonable right to be provided with

information that meets their needs. However, due to the fact that they normally
have no powers of interrogation, they must rely on charity reports to meet their
needs.
From a descriptive analysis of charity reports, covering the largest fund raising
charities, it is apparent that extant charity reporting is dominated by audited
financial information. The summary of the information needs of contributors
indicates that this inforination is perceived by contributors as being relatively
less important than other information that is seldom disclosed. This brings into
question the relevance to contributors of present charity reporting, and points
to a charity sector where accountability is not discharged in the most effective
manner.
Hyndman’s a priori model for reporting to contributors, which is validated
by the survey of contributors, provides an appropriate basis for reporting to
contributors. Although it predominantly contains a general statement of the
types of information that are considered relevant to the information needs of
contributors, the adoption of such as a framework for charity reporting would
improve the present situation. The model does not concern itself with the
manner in which information is disclosed and research into the effectiveness
of various presentations of information could lead to further improvements.
Many of the most important types of information sought by contributors
are non-financial, while the most usual information disclosed is predominantly
financial. This highlights the need for a shift of emphasis from financial to non-
financial disclosure if charity reports are to be as relevant as possible to
contributors.
306 HYNDMAN

A number of information types rated highly by contributors relate to the

assessment of performance of a charity. This is a notoriously difficult area in
charities, as it is in most not-for-profit organisations. A number of writers,
for example Williams (1985) and Anthony and Herzlinger (1980), have
suggested that progress can be made by investing effort in identifying goals
and translating them into measurable objectives wherever possible. Further
research in developing reliable, acceptable and comparable measures of
performance is crucial to the improvement of charity reporting in meeting the
information needs of contributors. Furthermore, it could prove useful if charities
within the same sphere of charitable activity worked together to develop
measures appropriate to their area.
This research would suggest that if financial statements are disclosed,
contributors would be better served by simplified, rather than traditional audited
financial statements. Such a change of emphasis requires that complex financial
statements are changed in format and reduced in complexity. Various writers
have made suggestions as to how to achieve this, including Hamill(l979) with
regard to business enterprises and the Canadian Institute of Chartered
Accountants (1 980b) with regard to not-for-profit organisations.
This change of focus, whereby simplified financial statements are emphasised
in the reporting process and traditional audited financial statements de-
emphasised, was an area that received little attention in the recent Statement
of Recommended Practice (SORP) relating to charities (ASC, 1988). The SORP
concentrated on technical issues related to the provision of traditional audited
financial statements with ten and a half pages out of twelve and a half pages
of recommendations, dealing with such matters.
O n the basis of the survey of contributors to charities, the adoption of the
ASC’s proposals would achieve little in meeting their information needs. Indeed
it might be argued that, at worst, the SORP may actually decrease the relevance
of charity reports to contributors, by encouraging charities to concentrate on
the production of more comparable and technically correct traditional audited
financial statements at the expense of other more relevant disclosures.
If changes to meet the information needs of contributors are to be made,
then it is important that those concerned with the administration and control
of the charity sector and those concerned with providing guidance on the
provision of accounting information by charities should highlight the
accountability of charities to contributors. Without this there may be little
incentive for charity managers to change existing reporting practices. Such
parties would include the Charity Commissioners, the Charities Aid Foundation
and the Accounting Standards Committee.
This research identifies the information needs of contributors to large fund
raising charities. The empirical work has been restricted to such contributors
and therefore generalisations beyond this group should be made with caution.
However, it is argued that studies of this nature are necessary to underpin
further developments in the area of charity accounting. While this study
 CHARITY ACCOUNTING 307
concentrated on one group of users, contributors, similar studies of other user
groups could augment the understanding of the total role of charity reports
in information provision.

REFERENCES

Accounting Standards Committee (ASC) (1975). The Corporate Reporf, ASC (London, 1975).
-(1984). Accounting by Charifies: A Discussion Paper, (London, 1984).
-(1985), ED 38: Accounting by Charities, ASC (London, 1985).
-(1988). S O R P 2: Accounfing by Charities, ASC (London, 1988).
American Accounting Association (AAA) (1966), A S f a h e n f o f h i c Accounting Theory, AAA (Illinois,
1966).
Anthony, R.N. (1978), Financial Accounting in Non-business Orgnniralions: A n Explorafory S f d y OfConccptuaI
Issues, Financial Accounting Standards Board (FASB), (Stamford, 1978).
~ (1980b) and R.E. Herzlinger (1980), M a n a g m t Control in Non-Pro& Orgonisafions, Revised
Edition, Irwin (Illinois, 1980).
Bird, P. and P. Morgan-Jones (1981). Financial Reporting by Charifits, ICAEW (London, 1981).
Canadian Institute of Chartered Accountants (CICA) (1980a), Corpora& Repoffing: I& Fufure Euolufion
(A Research Study), CICA (Toronto, 1980).
~ (1980b), Financial Reporfingfor Non-Projif Organisations (A Research Study), (Toronto, 1980).
Charities Aid Foundation (CAF), Charify Sfatisfics, CAF (Tonbridge, published annually up to 1986).
From 1987 new title Charity Trends.
FASB (1980), Sfatmenf of Financial Accounting Concepts, No. 4: Objectiues of Financial Reporting by
Nonbusinas Organisafions, FASB (Stamford, 1980).
Hamill, A.E. (1979), Simplifid Financial S f a f m e n f s , ICAEW (London, 1979).
Hyndman, N.S. (1989), Charify Accounfing: A Comparison of Confributors’ Information Needs and fhe
A S C Approach, Paper presented at the Irish Accounting Association Annual Conference (Cork,
1989).
Jackson, P . M . (1982), The Political Economy of Bureaucracy (Philip Allan, London, 1982).
Luthy, D.H. (1979), Consensus on Municipal Disclosure, Paper presented at the American Accounting
Association Annual Conference (Hawaii, 1979).
Rajan, L. (1987), Charity Sfafisfics1977-1986: A n Analysis of Trends, In Charity Trends 1986187
(CAF, Tonbridge, 1987).
Reynolds, R .G . ( 1981), Resource Providers ’ and Pracfising Accounfanfs’ Pncepfions of the Imporlance and
Qualify ofAccounfing Informafion on Volunfary Health and Weyare Agencies, Georgia State University
(Georgia, 1981).
Rutherford, B.A. (1983), Financial Reporfing in fhc Public Secfor, Butterworth (London, 1983).
Skousen, K.F., J . M . Smith and L.W. Woodfield (1975). Usn Needs: A n Empirical Study of College
and Universify Financial Reporting, National Association of College and University Business
Officers (Washington, 1975).
Williams, A. (1985). Performance Measurmmf in the Public Secfor: Paving fhe Road lo Hell, Arthur Young
Lecture No. 7, University of Glasgow Publications (Glasgow, 1985).