Purpose

The purpose of this article is to investigate the effectiveness of accountability mechanisms employed in financial management practices of school principals in the Eastern Cape Provincial Department of Education. The strengths and weaknesses of the systems and mechanisms of the processes to hold school principals accountable are explored in detail in this study. The argument that this article seeks to advance is that accountability of the school principal to the school governing body (SGB) does not yield the best results in terms of efficiency. It creates a loose arrangement in terms of which the school principal takes part in financial mismanagement in schools.

Design/methodology/approach

Data collection was made through semi-structured interviews whose purpose was to draw experiences from SGBs, particularly the finance committees who are in fact the sub-committees of the SGBs; as well as literature review. The finance committee is made up of the chairperson of the SGB, the secretary of the SGB, the treasurer of the SGB, and the financial officer who is a clerk responsible for the keeping and the management of financial records of the school. The process started with semi-structured interviews, then transcribing, coding, developing themes, making meaning of the themes and subsequently developing a principle.

Findings

Mechanisms employed by schools and the Department of Education to hold principals accountable for their financial management practices fail to make them fully accountable and effectively face the consequences of acts on their part that are illegal and unlawful. The mechanisms need a great deal of overhauling. The argument that this article seeks to advance is that this account of the school principal to the SGB does not yield the best results in terms of efficiency. It creates a loose arrangement in terms of which the school principal easily gets away with a crime when financial mismanagement occurs in the school.

Research limitations/implications

Participants could possibly not be comfortable and willing, to tell the truth as it is. Participants might have the fear that telling the truth could land them in trouble with the law. Whilst participants were assured by the researchers of their anonymity and the confidentiality of the information given by them, there was no guarantee that the fear of being exposed would subdue completely. There was also a possibility that some participants would not be willing to say the truth as it is for fear of being victimised by other participants for exposing the status quo in their schools.

Practical implications

The findings and recommendations from this study may be used by the Department of Basic Education as a source of information for policymakers and stakeholders to understand the effectiveness of their mechanisms to ensure the accountability of school principals on issues of financial management. On the basis of this study, policymakers will then be able to revisit their policies for the purpose of strengthening them. The principal is therefore responsible for the day-to-day administration and management of school funds because of this mandatory delegation. However, when things go wrong, it is the SGB that is held liable.

Social implications

School principals hold dual accountability in terms of which they are accountable to the employer only in so far as their professional responsibilities are concerned on financial management in the first instance. They are by no means accounting officers in schools. In the second instance, they are fully accountable to the SGB for issues relating to financial management. Section 16A of SASA lists the functions and responsibilities for which the principal as an employee of the Department of Basic Education, and in his official capacity as contemplated in Sections 23(1) and 24(1) (j) of the same Act, is accountable to the head of department (HOD).

Originality/value

The study provides a theoretical and empirical contribution to the existing literature on the effectiveness of the mechanisms employed to ensure the accountability of school principals in their financial management practices in schools. It offers practical recommendations putting in place mechanisms that effectively hold school principals wholly accountable for their financial management practices in schools. Most of the time, it is easy for the principal to get away with a crime even in instances where he or she is called upon to account for alleged financial mismanagement.

中文翻译：

---

校长财务管理实践中的问责制

目的

本文的目的是调查东开普省教育厅校长财务管理实践中采用的问责机制的有效性。本研究详细探讨了追究校长责任的制度和机制的优缺点。本文试图提出的论点是，校长对学校管理机构 (SGB) 的问责制在效率方面并没有产生最佳结果。它创造了一种松散的安排，即校长参与学校的财务管理不善。

设计/方法/方法

数据收集是通过半结构化访谈进行的，其目的是从 SGB 中汲取经验，特别是实际上是 SGB 下属委员会的财务委员会；以及文献综述。财务委员会由 SGB 主席、SGB 秘书、SGB 司库和财务官组成，财务官是负责保存和管理学校财务记录的文员。该过程从半结构化访谈开始，然后转录、编码、制定主题、确定主题的含义，然后制定原则。

发现

学校和教育部采用的让校长对其财务管理行为负责的机制未能使他们完全承担责任并有效面对他们非法和非法行为的后果。这些机制需要大量检修。本文试图提出的论点是，校长对 SGB 的这种说明在效率方面没有产生最佳结果。它创造了一种松散的安排，当学校发生财务管理不善时，校长很容易逃脱犯罪。

研究限制/影响

参与者可能不会感到舒服和不愿意，如实说实话。参与者可能担心说实话会让他们触犯法律。虽然研究人员向参与者保证他们的匿名性和他们提供的信息的机密性，但不能保证完全消除对暴露的恐惧。也有可能一些参与者不愿意说实话，因为害怕被其他参与者暴露在他们学校的现状而受害。

实际影响

本研究的结果和建议可被基础教育部用作政策制定者和利益相关者的信息来源，以了解其机制的有效性，以确保校长在财务管理问题上的问责制。在这项研究的基础上，政策制定者将能够重新审视他们的政策，以加强政策。因此，由于这一强制性授权，校长负责学校资金的日常管理和管理。但是，一旦出现问题，则由 SGB 承担责任。

社会影响

校长负有双重责任，即他们只在其专业职责首先涉及财务管理时才对雇主负责。他们绝不是学校的会计人员。在第二种情况下，他们对与财务管理有关的问题完全向 SGB 负责。SASA 第 16A 条列出了校长作为基础教育部雇员的职能和责任，以及同一法案第 23(1) 和 24(1) ( j ) 条规定的官方身份对部门负责人（HOD）负责。

原创性/价值

该研究为现有文献提供了理论和实证的贡献，这些文献涉及确保校长在学校财务管理实践中的问责制的有效性。它提供了切实可行的建议，以建立有效地使校长对其在学校的财务管理实践完全负责的机制。大多数情况下，即使在要求委托人对涉嫌财务管理不善负责的情况下，委托人也很容易逃脱犯罪。