This qualitative dissertation study conducted from February through May of 2006 examined how selected 54 Twin Cities social services nonprofit professionals, amidst national and local controversies of nonprofit fraud and abuse, viewed their responsibilities to achieve "accountability and transparency" against specific and differing public, donor, client and government expectations, while at the same time facing new pressures and threats to meet complex regulatory reforms from the U.S. Congress, the IRS and other government entities.

This dissertation research was designed to determine if the terms "accountability" and "transparency" had any common definitions among selected Twin Cities social services nonprofit professionals, and specifically how these participants viewed accountability and transparency against specific stakeholder expectations, be it a donor or fonder, a client, a government entity or the general public. The study attempted to find out if nonprofit leaders had any awareness of the federal Sarbanes Oxley Act of 2002 (SOX) legislation and if they planned on altering any of their practices in order to comply with these SOX provisions or related reforms. The study investigated if and how nonprofit professionals translated the language of "accountability" and "transparency," into operational procedures and practices.

The research project included individual in-depth interviews with 39 leaders and two focus groups of 14 representatives—all from nonprofits located in the Minneapolis-St. Paul area of Minnesota.