Márcia R.C. Santos – Escola Superior de Ciências Empresarias at Instituto Politécnico de Setúbal, Portugal and Information
Sciences and Technologies and Architecture Research Center (ISTAR-IUL) at Instituto Universitário de
Lisboa (ISCTE-IUL), Portugal
Rui Dias – Escola Superior de Ciências Empresarias at Instituto Politécnico de Setúbal, Portugal and CEFAGE-UE,
IIFA, University of Évora, Portugal
5th International Scientific Conference – EMAN 2021 – Economics and Management: How to Cope With Disrupted Times, Online/Virtual, March 18, 2021, CONFERENCE PROCEEDINGS published by: Association of Economists and Managers of the Balkans, Belgrade, Serbia; ISBN 978-86-80194-43-1, ISSN 2683-4510
Through accountability, organizations provide key information for stakeholders enabling the
latter to make an informed assessment of organizational performance. To achieve transparency, organizations
must make information accessible and timely. During the crisis, as in the COVID-19 pandemic
period, accurate accountability and transparency practices are most necessary so stakeholders can make
informed decisions in an ongoing complex emergency. This study uses data available in an online crowdfunding
platform to investigate to what extent are nonprofits implementing accountability and transparency
policies regarding applications for funds published during the COVID-19 pandemic. A case study
methodology is applied for providing evidence that nonprofits are not timely implementing transparency
policies regarding fundraising campaigns. Nevertheless, results identify, in some cases, innovative accountability
practices which impact funds raised must further be analyzed. These findings open up further
investigations on the accountability of nonprofits during the crisis and on the online organizational
transparency regarding fundraising.
COVID-19, Accountability, Transparency, Nonprofits. Crowdfunding.
Auger, G. A. (2014). Trust Me, Trust Me Not: An Experimental Analysis of the Effect of Transparency
on Organizations. Journal of Public Relations Research, 26(4), 325–343.
Becker, A. (2018). An Experimental Study of Voluntary Nonprofit Accountability and Effects on
Public Trust, Reputation, Perceived Quality, and Donation Behavior. Nonprofit and Voluntary
Sector Quarterly, 47(3), 562–582. https://doi.org/10.1177/0899764018756200
Calabrese, T. (2013). Running on Empty: The Operating Reserves of U.S. Nonprofit Organizations.
Nonprofit Management and Leadership, 23(3), 281–302. https://doi.org/10.1002/nml
Deitrick, L. et al. (2020). Nonprofit Sector Response to COVID-19: The Immediate Impact of the
COVID-19 Pandemic on San Diego County Nonprofits.
Deng, G. et al. (2015). Transparency of Grassroots Human Service Organizations in China: Does
Transparency Affect Donation and Grants? Human Service Organizations: Management,
Leadership & Governance, 39(5), 475–491. https://doi.org/10.1080/23303131.2015.1076751
Ebrahim, A., & Rangan, V. K. (2010). The limits of nonprofit impact: A contingency framework for
measuring social performance (No. 10–099). Social Enterprise Initiative, Harvard Business
School. Boston, MA. Retrieved from http://www.hbs.edu/faculty/Publication Files/10-099.pdf
Gent, S. E. et al. (2015). The reputation trap of NGO accountability. International Theory, 7(3),
Kirsch, D. C. (2016). Conversations in accountability: Perspectives from three charities. Family
Medicine and Community Health, 4(1), 15–21. https://doi.org/10.15212/FMCH.2016.0103
Liket, K. C., & Maas, K. (2015). Nonprofit Organizational Effectiveness: Analysis of Best Practices.
Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 44(2), 268–296.
Rashid, Y. et al. (2019). Case Study Method: A Step-by-Step Guide for Business Researchers.
International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 18, 1–13.
Santos, M. R. C. et al. (2020). Unveiling Research Trends for Organizational Reputation in the
Nonprofit Sector. Voluntas, 31(1). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11266-018-00055-7
Torres-Moraga, E. et al. (2010). Antecedents of donor trust in an emerging charity sector: The
role of reputation, familiarity, opportunism and communication. Transylvanian Review of
Administrative Sciences, (29 E), 159–177.