Year End?

Discuss questions around local unit policies for budgeting, reconciling, etc. This forum should not contain specific financial or membership information.
User avatar
wrigjef
Member
Posts: 395
Joined: Sun Mar 01, 2009 8:38 am
Location: Chesapeake, Virginia
Contact:

Year End?

Postby wrigjef » Sat Dec 11, 2010 9:08 am

What will happen when units close out the year? Will budgets be cleared and returned to 0 (till the Q1 allocation transfer)?

User avatar
aebrown
Community Administrator
Posts: 14685
Joined: Tue Nov 27, 2007 8:48 pm
Location: Sandy, Utah

Postby aebrown » Sat Dec 11, 2010 10:48 am

wrigjef wrote:What will happen when units close out the year? Will budgets be cleared and returned to 0 (till the Q1 allocation transfer)?


No. Under CUBS, all balances carry forward. If a unit (ward or stake) wants its organizations to start the year fresh with a 0 balance, the clerk will need to make appropriate transfers (to or from some category such as Budget:Administration) to bring those balances to 0.
Questions that can benefit the larger community should be asked in a public forum, not a private message.

atticusewig
Member
Posts: 308
Joined: Fri Jan 19, 2007 9:48 am

Postby atticusewig » Sat Dec 11, 2010 11:22 am

Alan_Brown wrote:No. Under CUBS, all balances carry forward. If a unit (ward or stake) wants its organizations to start the year fresh with a 0 balance, the clerk will need to make appropriate transfers (to or from some category such as Budget:Administration) to bring those balances to 0.


My understanding was that Budget:Administration was no longer supposed to
be used by units, much like the subcategories of Budget Allocations. That is,
they are accounts used by the transition and now retired. I could have
misread the various posts, but I would recommend creating an account like
Budget: PriorYearBalance and transfer funds there if you want to isolate
carryover (or carryunder) from the Q1 allocation and auxillary budgets. Of
course, it is only is a reporting issue - Budget surplus or shortfall still will
affect next year.

- Atticus

russellhltn
Community Administrator
Posts: 20726
Joined: Sat Jan 20, 2007 2:53 pm
Location: U.S.

Postby russellhltn » Sat Dec 11, 2010 12:05 pm

From what I understand, balances carry forward. But any budget the Ward sets for itself starts at zero. So it depends on if you run a income & expense report on the budget category or run a budget report.
Have you searched the Wiki?
Try using a Google search by adding "site:tech.lds.org/wiki" to the search criteria.

User avatar
aebrown
Community Administrator
Posts: 14685
Joined: Tue Nov 27, 2007 8:48 pm
Location: Sandy, Utah

Postby aebrown » Sat Dec 11, 2010 12:39 pm

atticusewig wrote:My understanding was that Budget:Administration was no longer supposed to be used by units, much like the subcategories of Budget Allocations. That is, they are accounts used by the transition and now retired.


What is your source for that claim? I see nothing in any of the documentation sent by the Church that says that, and although I didn't feel like sifting through all the posts on this topic, I couldn't find any post that suggested that Budget:Administration should not be used.
Questions that can benefit the larger community should be asked in a public forum, not a private message.

RossEvans
Senior Member
Posts: 1346
Joined: Wed Jun 11, 2008 8:52 pm
Location: Austin TX
Contact:

Postby RossEvans » Sat Dec 11, 2010 12:52 pm

Alan_Brown wrote:What is your source for that claim? I see nothing in any of the documentation sent by the Church that says that, and although I didn't feel like sifting through all the posts on this topic, I couldn't find any post that suggested that Budget:Administration should not be used.


I was taught by my stake clerk to leave Budget:Administration untouched. Our understanding about that category is the same as atticuswig's -- that it is a catchall category specific to the conversion phase.

User avatar
aebrown
Community Administrator
Posts: 14685
Joined: Tue Nov 27, 2007 8:48 pm
Location: Sandy, Utah

Postby aebrown » Sat Dec 11, 2010 1:27 pm

boomerbubba wrote:I was taught by my stake clerk to leave Budget:Administration untouched. Our understanding about that category is the same as atticuswig's -- that it is a catchall category specific to the conversion phase.


It's interesting that someone else thinks that. I still haven't heard any source for what seems like a rumor to me.
Questions that can benefit the larger community should be asked in a public forum, not a private message.

User avatar
ffrsqpilot
Member
Posts: 247
Joined: Fri May 09, 2008 7:51 am
Location: Montrose, Colorado

Postby ffrsqpilot » Sat Dec 11, 2010 1:44 pm

I concur with Alan's take on the "Budget Administrative" category. I saw nowhere that said we were not to use it.

We used to have a budget category "Stake Presidency" where we put all our expenses for actions directly attributable to the stake presidency. Since it was deleted with the CUB's transition I saw the "Administrative" category as a logical place to start placing those expenses. If we are not to use it I hope someone in LUS sees this thread and clarifies as I don't much feel like going back and doing another bunch of transfers!

If someone has seen direction that we are not to use the Administrative Category please speak up and point it out to us. AUB.

atticusewig
Member
Posts: 308
Joined: Fri Jan 19, 2007 9:48 am

Postby atticusewig » Sat Dec 11, 2010 1:46 pm

Alan_Brown wrote:It's interesting that someone else thinks that. I still haven't heard any source for what seems like a rumor to me.


Like I said, I could have misread the posts. I thought one of crislapi's
posts touched on this, but am probably remembering incorrectly.

In any event, I don't like mixing any transactions with the Budget:Administration account which is something created by
CHQ for the transition to CUBS. Perhaps it is just personal
preference, but I'm retiring local use of the account. There might
not be an outright prohibition, but using it does seem to group
transactions together that are unlike each other.

Perhaps, when (or should I say if ?) new documentation is provided,
a clear purpose of the Standardized accounts will be defined.

- Atticus

User avatar
aebrown
Community Administrator
Posts: 14685
Joined: Tue Nov 27, 2007 8:48 pm
Location: Sandy, Utah

Postby aebrown » Sat Dec 11, 2010 2:02 pm

atticusewig wrote:In any event, I don't like mixing any transactions with the Budget:Administration account which is something created by CHQ for the transition to CUBS.


I certainly agree that for 2010 (and before) the Budget:Administration category is rather ugly, with all those transactions from the past, and possibly a variety of transfers related to the transition. But we're stuck with that ugliness for those years no matter what we do going forward.

But I see no reason to assume that the Budget:Administration category was "created by CHQ for the transition to CUBS." In my opinion, the Budget:Administration category is one created by CUBS as a useful category going forward, no different from all the other standard categories we now have. For the transition to CUBS, the MLS developers had to choose which of the existing useful standard categories they would put transactions in; they chose Budget:Administration. I don't see how the fact that it was used for the transition purpose means that it can't be used for other useful purposes.

I don't know for certain, but I think it is highly likely that Budget:Administration is a category we will have going forward (just like Budget:Relief Society or Budget:Elders Quorum). Of course anyone is welcome not to use it, but that decision means that you will have an unused category with a zero balance and no activity showing up on all your reports for the Budget category.
Questions that can benefit the larger community should be asked in a public forum, not a private message.


Return to “Local Unit Finance”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest