Tech Forum

I am a ward financial clerk, and typically our ward and Stake share the costs of several events, such as the annual Girls Camp. Typically, the Stakes pays the vendors directly and the wards are required to provide a check to the Stake for the ward's contribution of the number of girls and leaders participating.

When our ward has provided checks to the Stake in the past, I've always given them to the Stake clerk or to the Stake assistant clerk for finances, and they've accepted them without hestitation, such as that this is common practice in the Stake. Also, whenever the Stake makes out a check to reimburse our ward of shared expenses, the Stake clerks have tried giving the check directly to me, but I've directed them to a Bishopric member.

What are the policies of who can accept reimbursement checks between units (wards and stakes)? Can only the Stake presidency receive a ward check, or can only a Bishopric member receive a stake check? Or is it appropriate for ward and stake clerks to be passing checks back and forth to each other, if it's simply from one unit to another?

This also applies to handing out checks between wards, such as when a ward shares library expenses with another ward in the same building (paper, toner). The ward clerks have typically given checks to each other, when one ward buys the paper and toner and the other ward reimburses the "purchasing" ward 50%.

How common are these practices among wards and Stakes, and is this "kosher"? Or should I be concerned, and if so, how concerned? Any recommendations for moving forward?

Since a donation slip should accompany the check I would say that it needs to go to a Bishopric member or a member of the Stake Presidency.

djcoombs wrote:What are the policies of who can accept reimbursement checks between units (wards and stakes)? Can only the Stake presidency receive a ward check, or can only a Bishopric member receive a stake check? Or is it appropriate for ward and stake clerks to be passing checks back and forth to each other, if it's simply from one unit to another?

Although these are not Tithing and Other Offerings contributions from members, Handbook 1, 14.6.1 is clear that only the stake president and his counselors should receive funds for the stake. They then maintain custody of the funds until they are recorded and prepared for deposit by a member of the presidency and a clerk.

If that is the requirement for the stake, it would also make sense that this would be the proper procedure for a ward.

If the funds were being mailed between units, the checks would be sent to the home address of the presiding officer (bishop or stake president). Since they are being handcarried, I think they may be given to a counselor.

I think it is appropriate to point out that in a properly budgeted stake, it would be a rare exception for a ward to cut a check to the stake.

Ideally under CUBS, the stake should budget for and retain funds from the ward and branch quarterly allocations to administer any authorized programs paid for at the stake level.

daveywest wrote:I think it is appropriate to point out that in a properly budgeted stake, it would be a rare exception for a ward to cut a check to the stake.

Ideally under CUBS, the stake should budget for and retain funds from the ward and branch quarterly allocations to administer any authorized programs paid for at the stake level.

This assumes all stake activities can, and will be, funded from the budget. There will be those stake activities in which the cost incurred will be based on participation. Or in other words there is a capitation fee. The fee could be paid from the budget, collected and paid through the Other:AMFA category, or a combination of the two. When a capitation fee is involved there is a problem equitably determining what the participation for a unit is going to be, even when the cost will be paid entirely from budget funds.

Even if it is a rare for a check to be cut from a ward to the stake or from a ward to another ward we must expect it is going to happen and properly handle the disbursement and receipt of such funds in accordance with policies.

daveywest wrote:I think it is appropriate to point out that in a properly budgeted stake, it would be a rare exception for a ward to cut a check to the stake.

Rare does not mean never, no matter how good the budgeting is. One example: forwarding missionary donations that are in excess of the ward's needs.

When I became stake clerk, the clerks in my ward started handing me checks for the stake. At one point, I tried to give my personal tithing envelope to one of them in return. He said, "Whoa! I can't take that!" And I replied, "Well, I can't accept checks for the stake, either!"

My biggest battle has been getting the ward clerks to include the white copy of a donation slip in the envelope with their checks to the stake, and to keep the yellow copy for their records. We usually just get a check in an envelope with no explanation.

We can't trust the stake president to hold anything important, and the first counselor is the chairman of the stake audit committee, so all checks go to the second counselor for safekeeping until the next deposit.

drepouille wrote:My biggest battle has been getting the ward clerks to include the white copy of a donation slip . . .

. . . the first counselor is the chairman of the stake audit committee, so all checks go to the second counselor for safekeeping until the next deposit.

We do not require a donation slip. The check has a purpose stub, so we have everything we need from that. (Well, it is supposed to, but that's another issue.)

And our audit committee chairman will accept the checks. Then he hands them off to the other counselor for the deposit. Otherwise, he normally does nothing with the finances.

If we did not do that, 2/3 of our checks would have to be mailed to the stake president, and I won't comment any further on that.

Thank you all for the very helpful information and practical insights. It sounds like, for sure, that we should not be submitting anything directly to the Stake clerks and, from some of the comments it sounds like sending them directly to the Stake President may not get them processed in a timely fashion based on some users' practical experience. Submitting checks to the 1st or 2nd counselors in the Stake Presidency sounds like the best way to go.

djcoombs wrote:and, from some of the comments it sounds like sending them directly to the Stake President may not get them processed in a timely fashion based on some users' practical experience. Submitting checks to the 1st or 2nd counselors in the Stake Presidency sounds like the best way to go.

I'm sure that depends on individual circumstances.