title: How do the approaches to accountability compare for charities working in international development?
abstract: Approaches to accountability vary between charities working to reduce under-five mortality in underdeveloped countries, and healthcare workers and facilities in Canada. Comparison reveals key differences, similarities and trade-offs. For example, while health professionals are governed by legislation and healthcare facilities have a de facto obligation to be accredited, charities and other international organizations are not subject to mandatory international laws or guidelines or to de facto international standards. Charities have policy goals similar to those found in the Canadian substudies, including access, quality, cost control, cost-effectiveness and customer satisfaction. However, the relative absence of external policy tools means that these goals may not be realized. Accountability can be beneficial, but too much or the wrong kind of accountability can divert resources and diminish returns.
authors.affiliation: Research Fellow, Global Health Diplomacy Program, Munk School of Global Affairs, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON.
authors.forename: David
authors.initials: D
authors.lastname: Kirsch
mesh_terms: D002170:Canada; D002608:Charities / Q000191:economics / Q000458:organization & administration / Q000592:standards*; D046688:Child Mortality; D002675:Child, Preschool; D003695:Delivery of Health Care / Q000191:economics / Q000331:legislation & jurisprudence*; D003906:Developing Countries; D005378:Financial Support; D033161:Government Regulation; D006282:Health Personnel / Q000191:economics / Q000331:legislation & jurisprudence*; D006801:Humans; D007223:Infant; D007226:Infant Mortality; D007390:International Agencies / Q000191:economics / Q000331:legislation & jurisprudence / Q000592:standards; D012941:Social Responsibility; D000078329:Workforce