Impact of new reporting requirements on local charity organisations in the Waikato

Before the new reporting requirements came into effect in April 2015, charity organisations had no reporting requirements, and many charity organisations did not prepare financial statements. The aim of this research is to investigate the impact of the new reporting requirements on charity organisations. A qualitative research method in which semi-structured interviews of three charity organisations were carried was used for this research. Each organisation interviewed falls under a different tier according to the new reporting requirements. This will provide information on the impact of new reporting requirements for charity organisations which fall under different tiers. The results of the research are that the new reporting requirements have had some positive and negative impacts. They encourage transparency, provide marketing opportunity, produce difficulties in revenue recognition, and increase costs for charities. There is also a template issue. The findings are compatible with those of the literature review, for instance, that the new reporting requirements have encouraged transparency. Furthermore, charity organisations need more guidance and training regarding the new reporting requirements so that charity organisations can overcome the issues of revenue recognition and understanding the templates

Impact of new reporting requirements on local charities in the Waikato region

This study is designed to analyse the impact of new reporting requirements on local charities in the Waikato Region. A charity can be defined as an entity that is established to provide a public benefit. In New Zealand, there are 27,000 registered charity organisations. Prior to 2013, it was not a mandatory requirement for charities to prepare financial statements. There was evidence of a lack of accountability. The Financial Reporting Act, 2013 was introduced to improve transparency in financial reporting of charities. All charities are now required to follow the accounting standards implemented by XRB (External reporting board). XRB divides the charities into four tiers which are based on volume and size of expenses. Due to new reporting requirements, it is difficult for the charities to understand the new requirements. Semi-structured interview was the method chosen for data gathering purposes in this research. Sample size for this interview was three accountants. From findings, one out of three accountants thinks that the new reporting requirements are restrictive in nature, as past reporting requirements were flexible. According to the second accountant, the reporting requirements are positive because they increase the accountability and comparability of charity organisations. All accountants of the charities commented that the new reporting requirements are complex and increased costs. In conclusion it can be said that the amendments of the new reporting requirements are challenging for some charities but these changes are designed to for improve the accountability and transparency of financial reporting of charities in New Zealand

Charities’ new non-financial reporting requirements: preparers’ insights

The purpose of this paper is to obtain insights from preparers on the new Performance Report requirements for New Zealand charities, in particular the non-financial information included in the ‘Entity Information’ section and the ‘Statement of Service Performance’ for Tier 3 and 4 charities. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 11 interviewees, each involved with governance and reporting of one or more Tier 3 or Tier 4 charities. These interviews were analysed in terms of accountability and legitimacy objectives, which motivated the regulators to introduce the new reporting regime. Key findings are summarised under three themes. Manageability relates to perceptions and suggestions regarding implementation of the new requirements. Scepticism concerns some doubts raised by interviewees regarding the motivations for performance reports and the extent to which they will be used. Effects include concerns about potentially losing good charities and volunteers due to new requirements making their work ‘too hard’, although increased focus on outcomes creates the potential for continuous improvement. The subjectivity that is inherent in thematic analysis is acknowledged and also that multiple themes may sometimes be present in the sentences and paragraphs analysed. We acknowledge too that early viewpoints may change over time. Themes identified may assist regulators, professional bodies and support groups to respond to the views of preparers. Findings will also be of interest to parties in other jurisdictions who are considering the implementation of similar initiatives. This paper provides early insights on new reporting requirements entailing significant changes for New Zealand charities for financial periods beginning on or after April 2015. The focus is on small charities (97% of all New Zealand charities) and key aspects of the Performance Report: Entity information and the Statement of Service Performance.fals

Improving the reporting efficiency for Aboriginal Community Controlled Health Organisations: progress over a decade

This issues brief examines the evolution of the reporting requirements of Aboriginal Community Controlled Health Organisations (ACCHOs) over the last ten years, with a particular focus on programs funded by the Australian Government Department of Health (the Department). With one exception, the issues brief examines key initiatives implemented by the Department, up to the end of 2013, in an attempt to improve reporting arrangements for ACCHOs. It also examines the impacts of these changes on reporting efficiency. The exception is the Healthy for Life Program. The program is included here because it pioneered Continuous Quality Improvement and outcomes based reporting and as such influenced subsequent reporting developments. The key initiatives are: the Service Development and Reporting Framework (SDRF) (2005 to 2011); the Healthy for Life program (2005 and continuing); the Indigenous and Rural Health Division (formerly Office for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Health) Risk Assessment Process (2008 to 2013); developments in Information Technology and Information Management, with a particular focus on the OCHREStreams web-based reporting tool (2011 and continuing); and a multi-year funding agreement (2011 and continuing). These initiatives have brought about some significant improvements in reporting efficiency, including: standardisation of reporting requirements across several programs under the SDRF, with a consequent reduction in reporting complexity and effort and adoption of a more strategic cross-program approach to planning and reporting; a shift to outcomes based planning and reporting as part of a continuous quality improvement cycle, and an increase in the data management skills and systems needed to support continuous quality improvement; progressive move to independent risk assessment that focused primarily on governance and financial management, which has driven improvements in the quality of financial reporting; the development and roll-out of a web-based reporting tool that allows ACCHOs to submit organisational and service activity data, as well as data for national Key Performance Indicators; and further standardisation of reporting requirements under the Department’s multi-year funding agreement. Despite these improvements, ACCHOs still face a complex and resource intensive reporting load. Current reporting requirements are discussed in some detail, along with a range of possible improvements that could be made with the aim of avoiding unnecessary reporting yet maintaining information flows for policy and programme design implementation and review supporting the accountability requirements of public funds and supports continuous quality improvement in the sector. These include: working with other funders, particularly the states, to coordinate and standardise reporting requirements, with a possible extension of OCHREStreams to enable it to be used by states for some aspects of reporting; reviewing the extensive data reporting-related requirements with a view to removing those that are of least value to the Commonwealth and the sector; and where formal accountability requirements permit, moving progressively away from reporting on inputs and throughputs in favour of outcomes-based reporting, with possible use of targets and benchmarks to enable organisations to track performance. The identified improvements provide a framework for continuing to work towards maximising reporting efficiency which will help to address a range of strategic outcomes including the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Health Plan (2013–2023) priorities. It should be noted that whilst this issues brief references only arrangements until the end of 2013, there have been considerable reporting changes and initiatives since that time

Review of child protection mandatory reporting laws for the early childhood education and care sector

This discussion paper seeks submissions on a review of child protection mandatory reporting requirements for the early childhood education and care sector. The Queensland Law Reform Commission has released a discussion paper (WP 73) seeking submissions on its review of child protection mandatory reporting requirements for the early childhood education and care sector (the ECEC sector). The Child Protection Act 1999 (Qld) requires certain people (including doctors, nurses, teachers, certain police officers and statutory office holders) to report suspected cases of child abuse to the Department of Communities, Child Safety and Disability Services. Those mandatory reporting requirements do not apply to the ECEC sector. The review will consider whether the mandatory reporting requirements under the Act should be expanded to apply to the ECEC sector, including long day care and family day care services and kindergartens. If the Commission recommends the expansion of the mandatory reporting requirements to the ECEC sector, the Commission must also make recommendations as to which professionals, office holders or workers within that sector should be subject to those requirements. See Related Content below for questions for discussion, terms of reference, and privacy statement

Issues for charities applying the new requirements for financial reporting

This research is to determine the issues that charities/non-profit organisations (charities/NPOs) have encountered when applying the new requirements for financial reporting introduced in 2015. Currently in New Zealand, there are 27,217 registered charities affected by these new requirements. This primary, semi-structured research uses a quantitative method and a convenience approach. Literature reviews were gathered and divided into seven themes, from which the questionnaire survey questions were developed. Nine charities/NPOs in New Zealand respondent to the questionnaire survey with results showing 45% of respondents were under Tier 4; 33% for Tier 3 and 22% for Tier 2. Results further revealed that 67% of the respondents find the new requirements clear. The majority of respondents (56%) also indicated increased accounting costs as a result of applying new requirements for financial reporting. Also, 66% respondents indicated a need for staff training. Overall the new requirements for financial reporting have a positive side as they ensure that financial reports are standardised, comparable, readable, consistent, reliable, and transparent to users such as donors, benefactors, government agencies, businesses, funders, and stakeholders. Thus, the financial reports help in the decision-making of external users

The implications of new financial reporting standards on New Zealand charities

This research aims to analyse the impact of new reporting standards on NZ charities. The research specifically focuses on the implications of new reporting standards of charities in areas like transparency, convenience for practitioners and accounting costs under new reporting standards. The research covers transparency aspects by trying to find the difference in truthful and accurate representation of charities in their annual financial reports after the introduction of new standards, compared to when charities were self-regulated under Generally Accepted Accounting Principles. The research also covers the aspect of practitioners’ convenience, by investigating whether new reporting standards made accounting practices for charities easier and clearer, or more complicated. Lastly, research was conducted to ascertain the increase or decrease in accounting cost for charities to comply with new financial reporting standards. The study used qualitative methodology for research. The data was collected through semi-structured interviews to gain in-depth knowledge of the impact of new reporting standards on charities. There were four participants in total, accountants working for different charities. The duration of each interview was approximately 20 minutes, and were conducted at the charity organisation’s premises. The method of analysis used for the research was content analysis. The findings of the research suggest that the new reporting standards and statutory audit requirements have generally increased transparency within the charity sector in New Zealand. On the other hand, accounting costs have gone up for charities, especially Tier 2 and tier 3 charities. Charities that previously complied with IFRS have to face minimal effect on accounting cost. The convenience for practitioners has decreased since smaller charities are finding it difficult to comply with new reporting requirements and preparation of service performance reports which are now part of annual reporting. New financial reporting standards have provided a much-needed reporting structure, especially to Tier 3 and Tier 4 charities. Charities that complied with IFRS for their annual reporting found it easy to make the transition to the new reporting standards. In conclusion, the new reporting standards are a step in a right direction. However charities services need to hold regular workshops in every region for charities in order to provide more awareness about new reporting requirements to help charities through this transition phase. Small charities usually operate on a very limited budged, so templates and training for service performance reporting should be provided these are now a part of annual reports for Tier 3 and Tier 4 charities

Accountability in patenting of federally funded research

Bayh-Dole allows academic grantees to patent federally-funded research for purposes of promoting the commercialization of this research. To ensure commercialization goals are achieved, the Act requires grantees to report to funding agencies not only the existence of federally-funded patents but also utilization efforts they and their licensees/assignees are making. Although reporting is a cornerstone of accountability under Bayh-Dole, information about grantee compliance with reporting requirements is incomplete and dated. In fact, the last significant study of the question dates back to the late 1990s and analyzes only 633 patents. Since that time, concerns have emerged that federally-funded university patents are being asserted improperly against independent commercializers or even assigned to so-called “patent trolls.” This article provides fresh evidence indicating substantial under-reporting of the existence of federal funding in over 30,000 academic biomedical patents issued between 1980 to 2007. The article finds substantial under-reporting of federal funding even in the case of patents on FDA-approved drugs, which should presumably receive significant attention from universities. Grantees’ failure to report federal funding suggests similar, or even more significant, noncompliance with requirements to report utilization information. However, compliance with reporting requirements on utilization cannot be assessed because of secrecy associated with relevant government databases. Accordingly, the article makes a fresh argument that the Commerce Department, which has the requisite regulatory authority, work with funding agencies, to improve transparency. Greater transparency would not only motivate grantees to improve reporting but would also allow assessment of whether grantee patent management is actually achieving Bayh-Dole\u27s utilization goals

UK Research Information Shared Service (UKRISS) Final Report, July 2014

The reporting of research information is a complex and expensive activity for research organisations (ROs). There is little alignment between funders of the reporting requests made to institutions and requests made to individual researchers about their research outputs and outcomes. This inevitably results in duplication and increased costs across the sector, whilst limiting the potential sharing and reuse of the information. The UK Research Information Shared Service (UKRISS) project conducted a feasibility and scoping study for the reporting of research information at a national level based on CERIF (Common European Research Information Format), with the objective of increasing efficiency, productivity and quality across the sector. The aim was to define and prototype solutions which are compelling, easy to use, have a low entry barrier, and support innovative information sharing and benchmarking. CERIF has emerged as the preferred format for expressing research information across Europe. To date, CERIF has been piloted for specific applications, but not as a format for reporting requirements across all UK ROs. The final report presents the work carried out by the UKRISS project, including requirements gathering, modelling and prototyping, as well as recommendation for sustainability. UKRISS was divided into two phases. Phase 1, mapping the reporting landscape, ran from March 2012 to December 2012. Phase 2, exploring delivery of potential solutions, began in February 2013 and ended in December 2013