Set yearly budgets based on quarterly "estimates"

[aebrown]

And contrary to what has been said we SHOULD do, most of the organizations DO do the same activities from year to year.

I can't find any place where anyone said that organizations should not do the same activities from year to year.

So using last years budget as a base line is quick and easy. At least for non-accountant types.

The instructions (which have been quoted multiple times) say that you should consider recurring expenses. And if all the activities are the same, then everything is a recurring expense. If everything is a recurring expense, then last year's budget is a great proposal for next year.

I personally have found it to be quite rare for an organization to repeat the same activities year to year (particularly if the youth are taking an active role in planning them), but if that happens to occur, then I would agree with you on this procedure.

[Gary_Miller]

Some organizations want to save their money and carry it over to next year so they can have a bigger activity next year.

We don't do carry overs to the next year. At the end of the year I zero out the total budget by making adjustments to YM/YW camp fees collected from individuals and from fund risers. If possible we return money for camp back to the individuals. Budget money is there to be used for activities during the year.

And contrary to what has been said we SHOULD do, most of the organizations DO do the same activities from year to year. With minor variations. So using last years budget as a base line is quick and easy. At least for non-accountant types.

In my ward the new budget is calculated based on the percent of funds used from the year before. After estimating the expected income we divide the funds up base on the percentage the organization used the year before.

While I have no problem with base line budgeting. I prefer activity based budgeting because it causes organization to develop a yearly activity plan which also helps with calendaring of activities.

[TinMan]

We don't do carry overs to the next year. At the end of the year I zero out the total budget by making adjustments to YM/YW camp fees collected from individuals and from fund risers. If possible we return money for camp back to the individuals. Budget money is there to be used for activities during the year.

Perhaps your ward is more affluent than mine. For example, organized scout camps are way expensive. So we only do them every other year, and on the off year we do a "wilderness" (on our own) camp that we can do much less expensively. The scouts carry over the money saved on wilderness camps and use some of it for the organized camps next year. That way, our organized camp fees are (mostly) spread over two years.

In my ward the new budget is calculated based on the percent of funds used from the year before. After estimating the expected income we divide the funds up base on the percentage the organization used the year before.

While I have no problem with base line budgeting. I prefer activity based budgeting because it causes organization to develop a yearly activity plan which also helps with calendaring of activities.

So, it is okay for the ward to use last years budget as a baseline for allotment, but not okay for the auxiliaries to use last years budget for their baseline of planned expenditures? Or am I confused?

Likely the later...

[TinMan]

As a tangential note: We rotate our quorum/class presidents every six months or so. Therefoe, we ask our YM/YW to only plan the first six months at the first of the year. We want to give the new quorum and class presidencies a chance to plan the activities for the last half of the year. I feel it gives them a little more feeling of ownership.

[Gary_Miller]

Perhaps your ward is more affluent than mine.

I seriously doubt that. We have to ask for individual participation as well as do fund raisers for our camps.

For example, organized scout camps are way expensive. So we only do them every other year, and on the off year we do a "wilderness" (on our own) camp that we can do much less expensively. The scouts carry over the money saved on wilderness camps and use some of it for the organized camps next year. That way, our organized camp fees are (mostly) spread over two years.

This sounds good as long as there is no additional funds being provided by individual participants and/or fund risers the off year when you do the "wilderness" camp. If there is then you would not be within budget guidelines, in my view.

So, it is okay for the ward to use last years budget as a baseline for allotment, but not okay for the auxiliaries to use last years budget for their baseline of planned expenditures?

No auxiliaries can also use baseline budgeting as well. However, I feel you get better activity planning if the auxiliaries were to estimate expenses for each activity instead of just using what they spent last year.

Or am I confused?

It can get confusing.

[Gary_Miller]

As a tangential note: We rotate our quorum/class presidents every six months or so. Therefoe, we ask our YM/YW to only plan the first six months at the first of the year. We want to give the new quorum and class presidencies a chance to plan the activities for the last half of the year. I feel it gives them a little more feeling of ownership.

So do you do this with your HP Group, Elders Quorum, Primary and Relief Society as well?

[TinMan]

Oh no. I am so sorry I confused you. The HP Group leaders, Elders Quorum Presidency and Relief Society Presidency all stay in their callings for about 3 years. It is only the Deacons, Teachers and Priest Quorum presidencies that rotate every six months (Less the Priest Quorum President, or bishop, of course.) And the Beehive, MiaMaid and Laurels class presidencies that rotate about every six months.

If the group of young men and young women that are in their callings in January plan all the activities for the year, the group that comes in six months later has nothing to plan.

And since the YM and YW have the largest budgets by far of any of our organizations, (especially when compared to the Elders and HP group's budgets), that means the budgets for class activities cannot be planned completely until summer.

Does that make sense?

[Gary_Miller]

Does that make sense?

Not at all.

Oh no. I am so sorry I confused you. The HP Group leaders, Elders Quorum Presidency and Relief Society Presidency all stay in their callings for about 3 years.

You did not confuse me I knew you where only talking about the YM/YW programs I was just trying to make a point.

It is only the Deacons, Teachers and Priest Quorum presidencies that rotate every six months (Less the Priest Quorum President, or bishop, of course.) And the Beehive, MiaMaid and Laurels class presidencies that rotate about every six months.

I have seen and heard lots of Bishops do this with the thought that allows for more youth to gain experience in leadership positions. However, I have always thought it was an odd thing to do, for three reasons. First if you truly believe the Lord called that youth to that position why would you remove them from the position for any reason than the lord said it was time or the youth aged out of the class. Second, in six months a person in a leadership position is just now starting to figure out what they are doing and what they feel they need to do to help those who they have stewardship over. Third, the longer a youth is in the leadership position the more effective they will be in helping those in need among their group.

If you would not do this to the EQ, HP, RS, SS, Primary, why would you do it to the youth programs?

If the group of young men and young women that are in their callings in January plan all the activities for the year, the group that comes in six months later has nothing to plan.

And since the YM and YW have the largest budgets by far of any of our organizations, (especially when compared to the Elders and HP group's budgets), that means the budgets for class activities cannot be planned completely until summer.

If the groups built their activities around the interests, and with input from of quorum and class members then the activities are set. Then they all know the plan, the budget is set the based on an estimate, the activity is calendar. The only thing left to do is work out the details as the activity gets closer. It should not matter who is in the leadership position at that time as the members of the quorum/class all had input on what activities they wanted to do.

[gregwanderson]

Time out. I don't think TinMan intends to do anything wrong nor has he done anything wrong. So I think the tone of this discussion is getting too harsh. I see that all of TinMan's points are based on practical situations and trying to understand when what's practical seems to conflict with what "should" happen on paper.

The budgets and the activities for High Priests and for any youth auxiliary are apples-and-oranges compared to each other. Even the Relief Society (which has a budget closer to the youth budget in my experience, compared to the very small amount needed by the High Priests) is based on activities and needs which are very different from the concerns of any youth organization. So I cry "foul" on trying to sustain this discussion with some kind of one-size-fits-all approach.

TinMan said that quorum and class presidents are replaced "every six months or so" (emphasis added by me). It doesn't sound like a hard-and-fast rule he has imposed. There are practical reasons. First (and most common), those youth leaders get older and move on to the next class or quorum anyway. Second, if you have one youth who is an outgoing, naturally-gifted leader, it's tempting to just let him be the president for a long, long time but it limits the experiences of people who could grow more with the same calling. So it's entirely unfair to compare that "turnover" to the frequency of callings and releases with adult leaders. And, since I'm not the Bishop of TinMan's ward, I wouldn't presume to tell him when to keep or release people.

Suppose the Deacon's Quorum President is extremely interested in, say, Martial Arts and he plans a year's worth of activities which include a lot of Martial Arts stuff. But then, four months into the year, he's moved on and none of the other Deacons are very interested in his activities. They might have been more enthusiastic when he was their president and his enthusiasm was infectious. But, now that he's gone, should they be locked in?

Again, I see this whole topic to be about balancing the textbook instructions (which sometimes say "should" instead of "must") with what's really happening on the ground. TinMan's being practical while seeking a better understanding of whatever is a firm policy. I see a lot of good in being practical.

[allenjpl]

I think the point is that the youth, ideally, anyway, should already be planning a twelve months ahead. The more detailed planning, again done by the youth themselves, takes place as the activities draw nearer. There is no reason for a new presidency to ever have a blank slate.

As for what happens when the youth aren't interested in a particular activity, that's easy. People who don't include the participants' interests and needs in the planning discussions quickly find out that they have no participants.