When taxpayers shell out money, they deserve a full accounting of where and how it was spent and if it did any good -- even when the money went to the most admirable charity or service organization in the state.
During Fiscal Year 2008, North Carolina appropriated $694 million for 2,758 nonprofit agencies across the state. But, according to the legislature's Program Evaluation Division, there is no standard process that evaluates whether the money is accomplishing what is expected.
In short, taxpayers don't always know what they are getting for their dollars.
The Associated Press recently reported that John Turcotte, the division's director, described the varying accountability programs required by state departments as a "hodgepodge from agency to agency."
The General Assembly has been wary of loading accounting responsibilities on nonprofits. Many are small agencies that receive much less than a half million dollars a year. As incoming Senate Majority Leader Martin Nesbitt of Asheville said, legislators want to avoid paperwork requirements that would overwhelm these groups and, maybe, keep them from doing the good work they do.
No one wants to see money intended for community projects needlessly spent on administration.
On the other hand, North Carolina does have some unfortunate history with small nonprofits. Former state representative, state senator and U.S. congressman Frank Ballance spent several years in federal prison, being released only this June, on a fraud conviction related to a nonprofit he ran.
The legislature tightened reporting requirements in the wake of Ballance's conviction, but Turcotte is suggesting more. He wants the grant recipients to provide more information about the number of people served or the services delivered. That way, state officials can determine whether the state is getting a good return on its investment in the program.
It is not unreasonable that taxpayers expect to know if a small-town organization is really helping senior citizens as much as it promised when it got a grant for a couple of hundred thousand dollars. That's a lot of money, even if in a $20-billion budget it looks like pocket change.
Turcotte's division has another recommendation, and this one has little chance of being instituted. The legislature should create grant programs for specific purposes and then have nonprofits compete for those grants. But legislators prefer to send money directly to their home districts and to the agencies they prefer. That's the definition of politics.
The Program Evaluation Division was created to help government work more efficiently. If the General Assembly is serious about reaching that goal, it will institute a better accountability system for these nonprofits.
Email
Facebook
Google
Twitter
Favorites
More
Advertisement