Error between Unit Financial Statement and Consolidated Financial Statement

Discuss questions around local unit policies for budgeting, reconciling, etc. This forum should not contain specific financial or membership information.
msnow73
New Member
Posts: 3
Joined: Wed Jan 05, 2011 12:33 am

Error between Unit Financial Statement and Consolidated Financial Statement

Postby msnow73 » Thu Jan 13, 2011 12:40 am

On my Stake Unit Financial Statement I have an outstanding check listed that was sent to one of my wards for their post CUBS budget allocation and on the Stake Consolidated Financial Statement the check shows as income on the ward's monthly summary on the budget line. Both reports are dated Dec 1 to Dec 31st.

Also the ward missionary summary numbers for each ward on the consolidated financial statement don't match up with the ward missionary line on each ward's monthly summary on the same report - the ending balances match but the beginning balance, income, expense and transfers in/out do not match. Any ideas why?

User avatar
aebrown
Community Administrator
Posts: 14693
Joined: Tue Nov 27, 2007 8:48 pm
Location: Sandy, Utah

Postby aebrown » Thu Jan 13, 2011 1:18 am

msnow73 wrote:On my Stake Unit Financial Statement I have an outstanding check listed that was sent to one of my wards for their post CUBS budget allocation and on the Stake Consolidated Financial Statement the check shows as income on the ward's monthly summary on the budget line. Both reports are dated Dec 1 to Dec 31st.


Was the deposit very close to the end of the month? If so, it would seem reasonable that a deposit made for example on 30 Dec 2010 would result in a credit in 2010, but the check would not finish its processing until after 31 Dec 2010. Thus the income for the ward could be in December, but for the stake the check would still be outstanding as of the end of December.

msnow73 wrote:Also the ward missionary summary numbers for each ward on the consolidated financial statement don't match up with the ward missionary line on each ward's monthly summary on the same report - the ending balances match but the beginning balance, income, expense and transfers in/out do not match. Any ideas why?


I don't trust the numbers in the Ward Missionary Summary section of the CFS at all. They're pretty fishy, since they don't even add up. I take the Beginning Balance + Income + Expense + Transfers, and I don't get anywhere near the Endign Balance. The Expense number is written as a positive amount in this section, which is odd. But even if I treat it as a negative amount, the Ending Balance is in no way a sum of the other numbers. The Ending Balance does seem to match the amounts on the individual ward statements, and the Transfers sometimes match, but that's about it.

Also, on my November CFS, all the detail for the subcategories for all the missionaries was present and correct. But on the December CFS, there is no detail at all -- all the missionary names are there, but no amounts are listed in any column for any of them. That's another indication that there is something seriously wrong with this section.

So I would just disregard the Ward Missionary Summary section. It wouldn't be the first time that a monthly statement had some errors. I have reported this in an MLS message. I would guess that updated statements will eventually be sent down to us.
Questions that can benefit the larger community should be asked in a public forum, not a private message.

crislapi
Senior Member
Posts: 1265
Joined: Mon Jul 07, 2008 3:05 pm
Location: USA

Postby crislapi » Thu Jan 13, 2011 10:38 am

msnow73 wrote:On my Stake Unit Financial Statement I have an outstanding check listed that was sent to one of my wards for their post CUBS budget allocation and on the Stake Consolidated Financial Statement the check shows as income on the ward's monthly summary on the budget line. Both reports are dated Dec 1 to Dec 31st.

I've also become quite suspicious of my UFS. My latest one has 10 checks listed 2X and the budget balance is incorrect - it's about 1/3 of what it should be. For the first time that I can remember, MLS is actually more accurate than the UFS. As for why, I don't know exactly but it doesn't take a huge leap to guess that it's more CUBS-related bugs.

msnow73
New Member
Posts: 3
Joined: Wed Jan 05, 2011 12:33 am

Postby msnow73 » Wed Jan 19, 2011 3:11 pm

Thanks for the responses. At least it seems to be a bigger issue and not just my reports. I will take this into consideration when evaluating the reports.


Return to “Local Unit Finance”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest