The UK public sector has been transformed over the past few decades. In an increasingly global economy, the main lever by which central governments can influence the success of the domestic economy is by ensuring its public sector operates efficiently. The central governments of the developed economies have adopted similar change agendas to transform their public sectors. These change agendas entail the introduction of new structures, new kinds of organizations and a ‘reinvention’ of many parts of the public sector. The intention of successive governments has been the creation of a ‘New Public Sector’, which is more strategic and corporate in its thinking. This ‘New Public Sector’ is intended to replace a public sector characterized by bureaucracy, professionalism and departmentalism. In this paper we take a specific look at the National Offender Management Service (NOMS) from an accounting perspective to shed light on the influence and changes involved of defining something as an accounting entity. We will look closer at and critically evaluate the issues involved in the representation of NOMS as an accounting entity. Furthermore, we will analyze the implications of the representation of NOMS as an accounting entity on definitions of organizational accountability. Therefore, we look in a next step which aspects of NOMS’ accountability are highlighted in the Accounts and what aspects are left out? Finally we examine what issues, items and risks are kept “off-balance sheet”? And what might be consequences of this.
According to Hendrikson (1970) defining something as an accounting entity is to represent an area of interest, to make real and to circumscribe the objects and activities of which financial reports will speak. Therefore the concept of an economic or accounting entity assumes a more or less common agreement that something concrete, bounded and whole