In the assessment field, some folks emphasize the difference and conflict between assessment for accountability and assessment for improvement. I don’t see them in opposition to each other. In my mind, they are actually closely related and even complementary, especially if you can plan in advance.
Accountability can elicit a negative connotation. It typically is associated with external requirements, reporting to another entity with specific information which may or may not be seen as important by the people doing the reporting. Other people or organizations are in charge of the process. There may be very specific criteria, or there may be some general guidelines that give the unit some latitude around what they report. It may even be seen as drudgery and certainly not fun!
Improvement, on the other hand, can be seen as internally focused and in control of the person doing the assessment. The assessor decides what to assess, how to assess, when to assess, and who to assess. The process can be flexible in data collection and use. It may even be fun because there is ownership in the content and process.
Realistically, both perspectives serve a purpose. I like to think of it this way: if you are taking care of improving your programs by assessing and using results in a systematic way, then the accountability piece will typically take care of itself for the most part. Obviously, it is important to know what accountability expectations are (when reports are due, the needed information, etc.) so you are not scrambling right before some deadline trying to find information that meets the requirement. Ideally, the process you use to collect data for improvement will meet many of the requirements of accountability processes. Be strategic in planning your assessment, so that you are getting the information you need to improve and are able to use that same process in your reporting and accountability requirements.