ward audit question 16. is MLS Expense Report no longer acceptible proof of bishops

Discuss questions around local unit policies for budgeting, reconciling, etc. This forum should not contain specific financial or membership information.
User avatar
aebrown
Community Administrator
Posts: 15153
Joined: Tue Nov 27, 2007 8:48 pm
Location: Draper, Utah

#11

Post by aebrown »

Gary_Miller wrote:Maybe this instruction is all do to the what handbook states Under Funding For Activities, "Expenditures must be approved by the stake presidency or bishopric before they are incurred." (Handbook 2, 13.2.8). The printout is done after the expense has incurred at the time the reimbursment check is being written.

The problem I see is the handbook does not state how this approval is to be done, and the approval can be done by any member of the bishopric. And I have yet to see any formal approval until the reimbursment form is turned in to the bishop. For our ward this approval happens when the bishop approve the Budget, at which time each organization president is responsible for thier budget.

One of the things our AAA stated in our training was that the reimbursment form must be handed to a member of the bishopric which cause quite a stir among the clerks as usually they are turned into us and then we send them to the bishop for approval before we cut the check. This was his personnal opion though.
That section 13.2.8 of Handbook 2 provides general guidance related to activities. The requirement to approve expenditures before they are incurred can be satisfied by the budgeting process and oversight of upcoming activities throughout the year.

But there is a separate requirement for formal approval, following the more explicit instruction in Section 14.7.1 of Handbook 1, which makes it clear that the presiding authority (stake president or bishop) must approve each expenditure. And if there is any doubt, the audit question on this topic is "Did the bishop (stake president) approve all payments?" That leaves no wiggle room for saying that a counselor can satisfy this particular requirement.

It is the formal approval that is the topic of this thread, not the more general budgetary approval.
Questions that can benefit the larger community should be asked in a public forum, not a private message.
daveywest
Member
Posts: 96
Joined: Mon Dec 28, 2009 2:19 pm
Location: Mesquite, Nevada, United States

#12

Post by daveywest »

You may be in the same region as I am. Our regional audtior was our former stake auditor. He frequently attempts to apply policies he followed in his professional career to church audits. I've dealt with it for years.

I've used the example of a Young Men's leader who bought ice cream after scouts as an example to debunk his overzealous approach. Technically, the bishop didn't (and reasonablly couldn't) approve that expense before it was incurred. However, the bishop did authorize that leader to incure expenses within a buget allotment, and the bishop did approve the expense both in signing the check and the expense report, so there is no audit exception.
Bro. West
Assistant Stake Clerk - Finance (2 years)
Former Assistant Ward Clerk - Finance (3 years)
taniwha1971
New Member
Posts: 1
Joined: Tue Sep 18, 2012 8:17 pm
Location: Redlands, CA

#13

Post by taniwha1971 »

After our last audit, we were also given the same instruction that the signature of the Bishop on the Expense report would no longer be sufficient in and of itself for approval of the expenses. Is this a policy change? Is someone interpreting things their own way? Does every single receipt or expense need the Bishop's signature?
User avatar
aebrown
Community Administrator
Posts: 15153
Joined: Tue Nov 27, 2007 8:48 pm
Location: Draper, Utah

#14

Post by aebrown »

taniwha1971 wrote:After our last audit, we were also given the same instruction that the signature of the Bishop on the Expense report would no longer be sufficient in and of itself for approval of the expenses. Is this a policy change? Is someone interpreting things their own way?
It does appear that this instruction is coming through some assistant area auditors, who do have the authority to say how the audits are conducted in the stakes they are responsible for. I haven't heard this from the AAA over my stake, so I don't see any reason to apply this rule to my stake. But then again, we've heard this from multiple stakes, so it's conceivable that it is coming from the Auditing Department. I'll patiently wait for official information that applies to my stake.
taniwha1971 wrote:Does every single receipt or expense need the Bishop's signature?
What we've heard on this forum is that those AAAs are saying that the bishop's signature is required on each expense, but since a single expense may have more than one receipt, I see no reason why a signature would be required on each receipt.
Questions that can benefit the larger community should be asked in a public forum, not a private message.
waynecooke
Member
Posts: 170
Joined: Wed Oct 27, 2010 12:05 pm
Location: Kalama, Washington

#15

Post by waynecooke »

The way I have always done it (14 years) is that the Bishop does not have to "pre-approve" each expense, but does have to personally approve the dispersal of the funds for reimbursement of the funds spent. For the leader to be reimbursed for the ice cream, he would have to submit a "Request for Reimbursement" slip, sign it, have the President of his Auxiliary sign it, and the Bishop sign it. I would then cut the check to him. That way the President of the Auxiliary also knows where and how his/her Budget funds are being spent.
Post Reply

Return to “Local Unit Finance”