Too late to make all the post-CUBS transfers?

Discuss questions around local unit policies for budgeting, reconciling, etc. This forum should not contain specific financial or membership information.
Quicky
New Member
Posts: 38
Joined: Sat Aug 28, 2010 1:16 pm
Location: USA

Too late to make all the post-CUBS transfers?

Postby Quicky » Tue Jan 25, 2011 6:35 pm

Just was made aware that not all of the wards in the stake have made the transfers required post-CUBS rollout. Despite their protestations to the contrary, it just wasn't done. Is it too late to post date a transfer date and have them go back and clean things up? Is their Budget:Administration number even still there? It seems they took an "it will all blow over" approach, despite my repeated phone calls and their repeated assurances. Or they going to have to live with big numbers forever more? KQ

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

Postby aebrown » Tue Jan 25, 2011 9:27 pm

Quicky wrote:Just was made aware that not all of the wards in the stake have made the transfers required post-CUBS rollout. Despite their protestations to the contrary, it just wasn't done. Is it too late to post date a transfer date and have them go back and clean things up? Is their Budget:Administration number even still there? It seems they took an "it will all blow over" approach, despite my repeated phone calls and their repeated assurances. Or they going to have to live with big numbers forever more? KQ


It's not too late. All the numbers will still be the same if no one has taken action.

They can still make transfers, and they can even date them back in 2010 (and they should). By making the transfers in 2010, they can clean up balances so that when they do 2011 reports, the balances forward will be nice and clean.
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 » Wed Jan 26, 2011 9:54 am

aebrown wrote:It's not too late. All the numbers will still be the same if no one has taken action.


This is the key, no action taken, and backdating the transfers.
I know that between Oct 24-Dec 31 of last year we used
quite a number of our "Other" accounts for expenses and
as income.

If you are making transfers to restore Oct 17th balances,
make sure you use immediately-post-CUBS balances as
your starting point, or factor in the subsequent transactions.

- Atticus

jaleake
New Member
Posts: 3
Joined: Sat Dec 25, 2010 9:03 pm

Postby jaleake » Fri Jan 28, 2011 12:17 pm

Why is all of the cleanup from the CUBS and the latest round of migration on the finance clerk? Why is not automated and done all at once at years end? When will we ever get a real month end all transactions report (I've asked for it many times in 6 years, never got a response)? I do software migrations and well as other roles for a major IT company and what we as finance clerks are expected to work with would be totally unacceptable at work. My 30+ years of experience in IT as a programmer and manager would rate our MLS software etc as less than satisfactory.

All of the instructions etc are more like hackers instructions than real finance instructions. Yet the audit questions act like the software is perfect and expect the results to be perfect. This is a real joke and not a funny one. I cannot wait for the stake auditors to audit our ward for 2H2010... it will be 'interesting' and not pretty.

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

Postby aebrown » Fri Jan 28, 2011 12:41 pm

jaleake wrote:Why is all of the cleanup from the CUBS and the latest round of migration on the finance clerk? Why is not automated and done all at once at years end?


The Church didn't have all the information needed to do it automatically. The financial clerk does it because he has the information available to him that is needed to get the records in order.

jaleake wrote:When will we ever get a real month end all transactions report (I've asked for it many times in 6 years, never got a response)?


What are you asking for that you cannot get with an Income and Expense Detail report for the previous month? If you did have an "all transactions report", what would you do with it? And would most clerks use it, or is this just something you're used to in other situations?

jaleake wrote:I do software migrations and well as other roles for a major IT company and what we as finance clerks are expected to work with would be totally unacceptable at work. My 30+ years of experience in IT as a programmer and manager would rate our MLS software etc as less than satisfactory.


I'm sorry you feel that way and that you choose to be so critical. I'll agree that the CUBS transition was a bit rocky, but those who have followed the instructions and worked through the issues are in good shape moving forward now. Although MLS has room for improvement, I have been a financial clerk in the days when we typed up donations so that the Church could do OCR on them. I definitely prefer the current system, and it is getting better all the time.

jaleake wrote:All of the instructions etc are more like hackers instructions than real finance instructions.


I don't agree with this at all. While the instructions are not perfect, they contain a wealth of helpful information.

If you have constructive suggestions for improving those instructions, please share your insights and experience here or on the wiki so that others can benefit from your wisdom.

jaleake wrote:Yet the audit questions act like the software is perfect and expect the results to be perfect. This is a real joke and not a funny one. I cannot wait for the stake auditors to audit our ward for 2H2010... it will be 'interesting' and not pretty.


The audit questions do not "act like the software is perfect and expect the results to be perfect." Rather, the purpose of an audit is to determine how well the current financial practices of a unit compare with the way they should be. Exceptions are noted and communicated. Thus the audits lead to opportunities for improvement, not only at the local level in financial practices, but also at higher levels. The feedback can be used to improve Church audit procedures, financial procedures, and MLS.
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 » Fri Jan 28, 2011 10:17 pm

In response to the earlier comments, all I can
say is that I am very happy that LDSTech exisists.

I can't imagine what the CUBS transition would be
like without the well-informed and friendly people
here sharing their experiences with such a frustrating
process of moving to a new banking system.

I agree that better documentation could be produced
by the Church and MLS is always somewhat buggy
in one way or another, but I think I would have
pulled out all my hair if it weren't for this forum.

- Atticus

User avatar
ckmcdonald
Member
Posts: 171
Joined: Sun Oct 31, 2010 10:33 pm
Location: Middleton, ID, USA (near Boise)

Postby ckmcdonald » Sat Jan 29, 2011 1:00 am

atticusewig wrote:In response to the earlier comments, all I can
say is that I am very happy that LDSTech exisists.

I can't imagine what the CUBS transition would be
like without the well-informed and friendly people
here sharing their experiences with such a frustrating
process of moving to a new banking system.

I agree that better documentation could be produced
by the Church and MLS is always somewhat buggy
in one way or another, but I think I would have
pulled out all my hair if it weren't for this forum.

- Atticus


I agree, but just think of all the clerks out there that don't know about or for whatever reason don't use this forum. I was one of them until a few months ago, and I'm indeed bald. ;)


Return to “Local Unit Finance”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests