This study empirically examines the relationship between several accountability aspects and perceived work performance in the specific context of child-welfare services in the State of Virginia. The results show mixed evidence. For example, legal and ethical accountabilities positively affect performance, but each type of accountability (formal and informal) influences the work performance of child-welfare caseworkers differently—directly or indirectly—through a compliance strategy. Hierarchical accountability and the adoption of a discretionary strategy do not affect performance, at least in this context. Accountability management appears to play a meaningful role as a mediator within the accountability-performance link.
AcarM.GuoC.YangK. (2008). Accountability when hierarchical authority is absent. The American Review of Public Administration, 38(1), 3–23.
2.
AleksovskaM.SchillemansT.GrimmelikhuijsenS. (2022). Management of multiple accountabilities through setting priorities: Evidence from a cross-National conjoint experiment. Public Administration Review, 82, 132–146. https://doi.org/10.1111/puar.13357
3.
AliM. U.Nicholson-CrottyS. (2021). Examining the accountability-performance link: The Case of citizen oversight of Police. Public Performance & Management Review, 44, 523–559. https://doi.org/10.1080/15309576.2020.1806086
4.
American Humane Association. (2011). Child welfare policy. Child Welfare Workforce American Humane Association.
5.
AndersonJ. C.GerbingD. W. (1988). Structural equation modeling in practice: A review and recommended two-step approach. Psychological Bulletin, 103(3), 411–423.
6.
AndrewsR.EntwistleT. (2010). Does cross-sectoral partnership deliver? An empirical exploration of public service effectiveness, efficiency, and equity. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 20, 679–701.
7.
AucoinP.HeintzmanR. (2000). The dialectics of accountability for performance in public management reform. International Review of Administrative Sciences, 66(1), 45–55.
8.
BaronR. M.KennyD. A. (1986). The moderator-mediator variable distinction in social psychological research: Conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51(6), 1173–1182.
9.
BehnR. D. (2001). Rethinking democratic accountability. Brookings Inst Pr.
10.
BouckaertG.HalliganJ. (2008). Managing performance: international comparisons. Psychology Press.
11.
BovensM. (2010). Two concepts of accountability: Accountability as a virtue and as a mechanism. West European Politics, 33(5), 946–967.
12.
BrewerG. A.SeldenS. C. (2000). Why elephants gallop: Assessing and predicting organizational performance in federal agencies. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 10(4), 685–712.
13.
BrodkinE. Z. (2008). Accountability in street-level organizations. International Journal of Public Administration, 31(3), 317–336.
14.
Casey Family Programs. (2011). Ensuring safe, nurturing and permanent families for children: The role of accountability in child welfare finance reform improving child welfare: Casey family programs.
15.
CourtneyM. E.NeedellB.WulczynF. (2004). Unintended consequences of the push for accountability: The case of national child welfare performance standards. Children and Youth Services Review, 26(12), 1141–1154.
16.
DeHaven-SmithL.JenneK. C.II (2006). Management by inquiry: A discursive accountability system for large organizations. Public Administration Review, 66(1), 64–76.
17.
DubnickM. J. (2003). Accountability and ethics: Reconsidering the relationships. International Journal of Organization Theory and Behavior, 6(3), 405–441.
18.
DubnickM. J. (2005). Accountability and the promise of performance: In search of the mechanisms. Public Performance & Management Review, 28(3), 376–417.
19.
DubnickM. J.FredericksonG. H. (2011). Public accountability: Performance measurement, the extended state, and the search for trust. The Kettering Foundation.
20.
DunnD. D.LeggeJ. S. (2001). US local government managers and the complexity of responsibility and accountability in democratic governance. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 11(1), 73–88.
21.
EbrahimA. (2005). Accountability myopia: Losing sight of organizational learning. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 34(1), 56–87.
22.
ForrerJ.KeeJ. E.NewcomerK. E.BoyerE. (2010). Public-private partnerships and the public accountability question. Public Administration Review, 70(3), 475–484.
GormleyW. T.BallaS. J. (2010). Bureaucracy and democracy: Accountability and Performance (3rd ed.). CQ Press.
25.
HairJ.BlackW.BabinB.AndersonR. (2010). Multivariate data analysis (7 ed.). Prentice Hall.
26.
HanY.HongS. (2019). The impact of accountability on organizational performance in the U.S. Federal Government: The moderating role of autonomy. Review of Public Personnel Administration, 39(1), 3–23.
27.
HarmonM. M. (1995). Responsibility as paradox: A critique of rational discourse on government (Vol.1). SAGE Publications, Inc.
28.
HupeP.HillM. (2007). Street-level bureaucracy and public accountability. Public Administration, 85(2), 279–299.
29.
HwangK. (2016). Accountability practices in public child welfare services. International Journal of Public Administration, 39(8), 587–596.
30.
HwangK.HanY. (2017). Public caseworkers’ strategies coping with accountability demands. Journal of Public Affairs, 17(4), 1–8.
31.
HwangK.HanY. (2020). Exploring the sources of cognitive gap between accountability and Performance. Public Personnel Management, 49(3), 393–420.
32.
JoaquinM. E.GreitensT. J. (2011). The accountability-performance link. Public Performance & Management Review, 34(3), 323–349.
33.
JosP. H.TompkinsM. E. (2004). The accountability paradox in an age of reinvention. Administration & Society, 36(3), 255–281.
34.
KasselD. S. (2008). Performance, accountability, and the debate over rules. Public Administration Review, 68(2), 241–252.
35.
KearnsK. P. (1994). The strategic management of accountability in nonprofit organizations: An analytical framework. Public Administration Review, 54, 185–192.
36.
KimS. E. (2005). Balancing competing accountability requirements: Challenges in performance improvement of the nonprofit human services agency. Public Performance & Management Review, 29(2), 145–163.
37.
KimS. E.LeeJ. W. (2010). Impact of competing accountability requirements on perceived work performance. The American Review of Public Administration, 40(1), 100–118.
38.
KoppellJ. G. (2005). Pathologies of accountability: ICANN and the challenge of “multiple accountabilities disorder. Public Administration Review, 65(1), 94–108.
39.
LeddenJ. (2011). Virginia’s annual report on the five year child welfare plan. Richmond, VA.
40.
LernerJ. S.TetlockP. E. (1999). Accounting for the effects of accountability. Psychological Bulletin, 125(2), 255–275.
41.
LipskyM. (2010). Street-level bureaucracy: Dilemmas of the individual in public services (updat ed.). Russell SAGE Foundation Publications.
42.
LynnL. E.HeinrichC. J.HillC. J. (2000). Studying governance and public management: Challenges and prospects. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 10(2), 233–262.
43.
LynnL. E.HeinrichC. J.HillC. J. (2001). Improving governance: A new logic for empirical research. Georgetown Univ Pr.
44.
Maynard-MoodyS.MushenoM. (2000). State agent or citizen agent: Two narratives of discretion. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 10(2), 329–358.
45.
Maynard-MoodyS.MushenoM. (2003). Cops, teachers, counselors: Stories from the front lines of public service. Univ of Michigan Pr.
46.
MeierK. J.O’TooleL. J. (2013). I think (I Am doing well), therefore I Am: Assessing the validity of administrators’ self-assessments of performance. International Public Management Journal, 16(1), 1–27.
47.
MeyersM. K.VorsangerS. (2003). Street-level bureaucrats and the implementation of Public Policy. In PetersB. G.PierreJ. (Eds.), Handbook of public administration (pp. 245–256). SAGE.
48.
MorrisonJ. B.SalipanteP. (2007). Governance for broadened accountability: Blending deliberate and emergent strategizing. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 36(2), 195–217.
49.
National Conference of State Legislatures. (2006). Child Welfare Caseworker Visits with Children and Parents: National Conference of State Legislatures: NCLS.
50.
NoonanK. G.SabelC. F.SimonW. H. (2009). Legal accountability in the service-based welfare state: Lessons from child welfare reform. Law & Social Inquiry, 34(03), 523–568.
51.
NunnallyJ. C. (1978). Psychometric theory. McGraw-Hill.
52.
O’DonnellS. S. (1992). Re-thinking accountability in child welfare. Child and Adolescent Social Work Journal, 9(3), 261–270.
53.
OssegeC. (2012). Accountability – Are we better off without it?Public Management Review, 14(5), 585–607.
54.
PaddockS. (2003). Accountability at a distance. Public Performance & Management Review, 27(2), 123–131.
55.
PosnerP. L. (2002). Accountability challenges of third party governance. In SalamonL. M. (Ed.), The tools of government: A guide to the new governance (pp. 523–551). Oxford University Press.
56.
RaelinJ. A. (2011). The end of managerial control?Group & Organization Management, 36(2), 135–160.
57.
RaineyH. G.SteinbauerP. (1999). Galloping elephants: Developing elements of a theory of effective government organizations. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 9(1), 1–32.
58.
RobertsN. C. (2002). Keeping public officials accountable through dialogue: Resolving the accountability paradox. Public Administration Review, 62(6), 658–669.
59.
RomzekB. S.DubnickM. J. (1987). Accountability in the public sector: Lessons from the Challenger tragedy. Public Administration Review, 47, 227–238.
60.
RomzekB. S.IngrahamP. W. (2000). Cross pressures of accountability: Initiative, command, and failure in the Ron Brown plane crash. Public Administration Review, 60(3), 240–253.
61.
RomzekB. S.LeRouxK.BlackmarJ. M. (2012). A preliminary theory of informal accountability among network organizational actors. Public Administration Review, 72(3), 442–453.
62.
SchillemansT. (2015). Managing public accountability: How public managers manage public accountability. International Journal of Public Administration, 38, 433–441.
63.
SchillemansT.OvermanS.FawcettP.FlindersM.FredrikssonM.LaegreidP.MaggettiM.PapadopoulosY.RubecksenK.RykkjaL. H.SalomonsenH. H.SmullenA.VerhoestK.WoodM. (2021). Conflictual accountability: Behavioral responses to conflictual accountability of agencies. Administration & Society, 53(8), 1232–1262.
64.
SchuermanJ.NeedellB. (2009). Download report: The child and family services review composite scores: Accountability off the track. Chapin Hall at the University of Chicago.
65.
SchwartzR.Sulitzeanu-KenanR. (2004). Managerial values and accountability pressures: Challenges of crisis and disaster. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 14(1), 79–102.
66.
van LoonN. M.JakobsenM. L. (2018). Connecting governance and the front lines: How work pressure and autonomy matter for coping in different performance regimes. Public Administration, 96(3), 435–451.
67.
WhitakerG. P.Altman-SauerL.HendersonM. (2004). Mutual accountability between governments and nonprofits. The American Review of Public Administration, 34(2), 115–133.
68.
WilsonJ. Q. (1989). Bureaucracy: What government agencies do and why they do it: Basic Books (AZ).
69.
YangK. (2011). The sisyphean fate of government-wide performance accountability reforms. Public Performance & Management Review, 35(1), 149–176.
