Does Non-profit Mean Unaccountable?

I recently read a blog post by Diane Ragsdale in which she discusses the amount of nonprofit arts organizations and the funding pool in which they exist.  She accurately used the metaphor of "too many fish in the pond."  In a simple economic look at our sub-sector, we have a surplus and not enough demand. While the arts help make a community vibrant, is there a point at which we have too much?  Is our market so saturated with arts organizations that our audiences, current and potential, are so overwhelmed to the point of indifference?  This begs the time old question:  quality versus quantity?  If our revenue streams vis a vis individual and corporate contributions were more focused on a smaller number of organizations, would the quality improve?  Would more people be willing to donate if there were fewer organizations asking for money?

Is there something we as citizens can do to deal with this potential problem?  I've been thinking about the possibility of a policy that could help cut down on the number of arts organizations.  Before you get your panties of righteousness in a bunch, hear me out.  There is a definite problem with arts organizations being poorly managed and having to close their doors as a result.  The worse the economy gets the more organizations are forced to file for bankruptcy or dramatically scale back their seasons or cease to exist altogether.  The strongest factor in this problem is the reliance upon public funding.  Ragsdale suggests that "the lack of ‘ownership’ in the nonprofit system too often seems to result in a lack of ‘accountability.’"  Meaning that because nonprofits are for public benefit with boards of directors seeing over the administrative staff there isn't always a clear communication stream nor a clear sense of ownership.

I am suggesting that we, the public, demand accountability of our nonprofit organizations.  They are here for us, why not insist upon not only quality products and services, but quality management?  With the installation of some sort of policy that requires nonprofits to be more accountable, we would stipulate that companies do what they can to mitigate the possibility of running a deficit.  I know we already have some regulations in place such as tax filings, etc.  However, so many companies continually end their fiscal year in the red and don't do anything to change their practices.  Perhaps what I'm suggesting is the establishment of implications, consequences for poor management.  I am not completely sure how this will happen in our capitalistic free market.  Maybe Adam Smith's invisible hand needs speed up and use the proverbial fly swatter to help eliminate these mismanaged nonprofits from the market place for good.  I'm not sure how to solve this problem, but it's definitely something to think about.

--Caro