Wing Banker

[Flying Pig]

Is anyone else tired of this stupid wing banker system?  This program and its changes is making my stack of CAP paperwork almost unbearable.    CAP is almost literally becoming a full time job at the Sq. level with our regs and paperwork that we have generated for ourselves.

[IceNine]

Nope, I think it is GREAT.

No more reporting, no more extra finance BS.

I simply send in a receipt, and check request.  And forget about it.  I punch the number into quick books and done.  Oh and on occasion I send out an email to my finance committee on what we did/need to spend.

Prior preparation prevent P.. Poor performance

Plan ahead, and call it a day.

[Eclipse]

Why would your paperwork increase?

1) Email to (unit) finance committee mailing list for approval of expense with attached scan of receipt.

2) Email .pdf file of approved state check request form w/ receipt to Wing Admin.

3) Profit! (i.e. check shows up about a week later).

I have 7 units including HQ that use WBP, and run an encampment with a $10k budget that uses WBP procedures for most transactions, and have not a single word of complaint.

[Flying Pig]

Form 11's, Form 5's, Form 2's Form 4's,  vs just having your own Sq. checking account.  Now we have to do Quicken Finance reports.  Getting my people reimbursed immediately vs. 2-3 weeks down the road.  I havn't talked to anyone in CA who does like it.

[Eclipse]

That must all be local, none of those exist in my wing.

We have one form that indicated who is authorized, and one to do a check request.

Wing sends >us< a statement every month, and I don't believe any reporting is actually required by the units.  We only keep our own records to make sure everything is kosher.

[IceNine]

Eclipse- Just looked, CAWG is using 6 forms for what we use the 321 and 322.

Flying Pig- Your wing is creating extra work for you.  I understand your dilemma's now

[Eclipse]

Well, I guess anything can be overcomplicated if you work hard enough at it.   

[FW]

Gee, I love the WBP :angel:

PAWG has the most transactions of any wing in the nation.  6 groups,  about 70 squadrons and, I think, 2 flights.  The last time I spoke with the Wing/FM, she told me things were going just fine.  Reimbursements take no more than 2 weeks, recurrent expenses are paid on time and squadrons no longer deal with CAPF 173-2's every year.  Paperework is not an issue anymore since "Sertifi" is used for requests.  

CAWG, being the largest wing in the nation, has many transactions and a wide geographic range to deal with.  However, the CAP pays for a wing administrator and a senior wing administrator.  I understand the CAWG/FM is competent.  I would suggest the wing take up some of the "best practices" of the other large wings and figure out an easier way to do things.  

[ADCAPer]

Well, I just noticed that National has quietly rolled out their latest revision to the financial regulations.

I've just made a quick review, and I see that Wing Banking is obviously not working as advertised. We were told from the beginning that this would not create any additional cost to the units, but it appears that now you will be taxed for participating in the program.

http://members.gocivilairpatrol.com/media/cms/R173_001_draft_FB1B013D2A9C4.pdf

CAPR 173-1 Draft /

11. q. All wings will establish and maintain consolidated checking and savings accounts designated for the units below wing level. Checking account interest on subordinate unit accounts may be used to defray wing administrative costs of the Wing Banker Program. Interest and dividends on unit savings, certificates of deposit and investment accounts will be allocated at least quarterly. Except for unit deactivation, wings will not be permitted to co-mingle wing
funds with subordinate unit funds nor use subordinate unit funds for any purpose not approved by the subordinate unit.


It's also interesting to note that whoever wrote this included a specific section on fund raising for Units Below Wing Level. They obviously missed the fact that 173-4 specifically states that it applies to the National, region, wing, and subordinate unit-level.

I also see that the prohibition on Petty Cash is targeted only at the Units, not at the Wings.

[Eclipse]

I've just made a quick review, and I see that Wing Banking is obviously not working as advertised.

Keep reviewing, Wing Banker works exactly as proposed and is very efficient in Wings that have implemented it properly without unnecessary additional bureaucracy.

We were told from the beginning that this would not create any additional cost to the units, but it appears that now you will be taxed for participating in the program.

It hasn't see above.

Most units have a couple of grand for operating expenses tops in their accounts, and these days that amounts to pennies a year in interest.  Wing can keep it.

Anything more than that needs to be in something longer term. Under WBP units are still free to place their money in interest-bearing certificates, etc. (assuming they have any), and the interest goes to the unit.

Any unit keeping enough money in a WBP account to be worried about the interest needs to have a financial review, because either they are charging too much in dues, received grant money that isn't being used, or aren't managing their money properly.  Last time I checked, CAP was a non-profit entity, and these units that sit on large sums of money "just in case" are doing themselves and CAP a disservice.

[FW]

It's also interesting to note that whoever wrote this included a specific section on fund raising for Units Below Wing Level. They obviously missed the fact that 173-4 specifically states that it applies to the National, region, wing, and subordinate unit-level. 
I also see that the prohibition on Petty Cash is targeted only at the Units, not at the Wings.

The fundraising paragraph (27) clarifies responsibility of the wing/fm for accounting of unit fundraising activities in accordance with CAPR 173-4.  Chapter 28 refers to grants and specifies complience with 173-4.  Chapter 29 deals with raffles and the need to comply with IRS regulations and coordination/approval with NHQ.  Nothing really new here.

The prohibition on Petty Cash should be for ALL units.  The draft statement was a carry over from the old reg and will be changed to reflect past practice.  Good catch;  nice to know someone other than me is actually reading this

[ADCAPer]

The fundraising paragraph (27) clarifies responsibility of the wing/fm for accounting of unit fundraising activities in accordance with CAPR 173-4.  Chapter 28 refers to grants and specifies complience with 173-4.  Chapter 29 deals with raffles and the need to comply with IRS regulations and coordination/approval with NHQ.  Nothing really new here.

I'm looking at a different section, and this section should deal with all levels, not just the Units Below Wing Level.

Section 9 - Finance Committee
Sub-section a. is Wings
Sub-section b. is Units Below Wing Level
Item b. (3) Conduct fundraising activities only in accordance with CAPR 173-4, Fund Raising/Donations.

And I would be much more interested in hearing why there is an on-going effort by National to allow the Wings to siphon money away from the Units to the Wing. Almost three years ago, when some units were being told that their charters would be revoked because they were asking questions instead of transferring all their money to the wings on two days notice I said that this was one of the first things that was going to happen, and I was told by everyone up to and including National that I was wrong. 

I know that there are a few people out there who are happier to get rid of the responsibility for managing their funds than doing the work that is necessary, but I wonder how long it will be until National decides that all funds in the WB "may" be divided equally among all units because some have so much more money than others that they obviously need to have a financial review to find out why they have so much money.

I know it'll never happen...

[Eclipse]

You are confusing local action with National Policy.

Yes, unit charters were threatened - not because of the WBP, per se, but because Unit CCs either couldn't be bothered, or failed to comply with a directive from Higher HQ.  That's how it works.  For some reason a lot of people labor under the mistaken belief that CAP is democracy.  Its not.

It wasn't done in 2 days by a long shot.

There is no ongoing effort to "siphon money" by NHQ.  BTW - its all corporate money, they can do whatever they want with it and direct units to do the same.

I was one of the most vocal skeptics of WBP here and elsewhere, to the point of Region telling me my comments had national visibility and to knock it off.

I was wrong and I've admitted it here.

Local implementation should not be confused with the basic program.

[LTC Don]

I've just made a quick review, and I see that Wing Banking is obviously not working as advertised.

Keep reviewing, Wing Banker works exactly as proposed and is very efficient in Wings that have implemented it properly without unnecessary additional bureaucracy.

We were told from the beginning that this would not create any additional cost to the units, but it appears that now you will be taxed for participating in the program.

It hasn't see above.

Most units have a couple of grand for operating expenses tops in their accounts, and these days that amounts to pennies a year in interest.  Wing can keep it.

Anything more than that needs to be in something longer term. Under WBP units are still free to place their money in interest-bearing certificates, etc. (assuming they have any), and the interest goes to the unit.

Any unit keeping enough money in a WBP account to be worried about the interest needs to have a financial review, because either they are charging too much in dues, received grant money that isn't being used, or aren't managing their money properly.  Last time I checked, CAP was a non-profit entity, and these units that sit on large sums of money "just in case" are doing themselves and CAP a disservice.

I think you are mistaking the meaning of 'non-profit'.  In our case, it merely means that the volunteer board of directors cannot benefit financially from any funds raised by whatever means by the organization.

Any unit that can raise millions of dollars, and then survive/flourish from the interest is certainly allowed to do so.  It just happens that there probably aren't any that do.

I used to work for a private non-profit, and believe me, it was multimillion dollar operation.

You might be interested if not downright shocked to know that the National Football League is actually a 501(c)(3) non-profit entity.

When you consider what it actually should take monetarily to not just pay lip service to our three missions, but to pursue them aggressively and with excellence, it takes a whole lot more than just a couple thousand bucks in a checking account.

Seems to me that even though the WBP has not been popular, I think it's has reduced a unit's financial exposure to be much more uniform across the breadth of the organization.

Now the next big important step is to begin working on developing the expertise in the philanthropic community to begin raising funds, either on a regional or national scale. 

Cheers,

[FW]

^Col Don, you are so right. 

The WBP is to insure financial accountablity at the squadron level.  After 3 years, we can say this is successful.  The WBP is here to stay however, like all programs, it can be changed to make things run better when necessary.

The new CAPR 173-1 combines the old 173-1 and 173-2.  Any comments on improving the document should go through correct channels; not CAPTALK. 

NHQ doesn't "siphon off" funds from any unit unless they bounce a check. 

WHQ wouldn't dare siphon off unit funds.  There are numerous checks and balances built into the system preventing it.  That is what "transparency and good goverance" means.  BTW, using interest to offset costs has been part of the WBP since inception.

CAPR 173-4 applies to all units; including NHQ.

It is a shame some feel a need to stay apart from the organization.  We are all part of the same team and, each member has a responsibility to act professionally.  The WBP and new CAPR 173-1 are guides to help achieve this.

[Eclipse]

I think you are mistaking the meaning of 'non-profit'.  In our case, it merely means that the volunteer board of directors cannot benefit financially from any funds raised by whatever means by the organization.

Any unit that can raise millions of dollars, and then survive/flourish from the interest is certainly allowed to do so.  It just happens that there probably aren't any that do.

No, I chose my words specifically to illicit this response.

Any unit which is aggressively pursuing all three missions will have operating expenses which are likely close to their cash flow - I get that.

But we have units all over the country with large sums of money in the bank who won't spend dollar one because they like seeing the number in the bank.  That's malfeasance.

Any unit with excessive cash needs to either use it, or divest it to the rest of CAP - the term "excessive" being a subjective call by the Wing CC.

For a unit with $5K annual operating expenses and a capital plan, $20K might not be enough cushion, for a 10-member unit meeting in a church basement that hasn't written a check in 2 years, $20k is a waste and should be used elsewhere.

We are not an investment club.  People donate money to us for it to be used towards our missions, not sitting in a bank account accruing pennies a year interest that cost dollars to calculate and disseminate.

For all the random negative comments about the WBP here and on other forums, no one can point to a single instance where a wing has redistributed funds, or taken over accounts for any reason other than malfeasance or mismanagement on the unit cc's part, or the dissolution of a charter.

WBP is like consolidated maintenance.  It works and shows objective cost savings, but because of unrelated political nonsense, some people just don't "like" it, and continue to look for smoking guns of conspiracy.

There's no conspiracy here, this is an organization trying to professionalize itself so it can look Congress and other benefactors in the eye when it says it is making good use of its resources.

[LTC Don]

I think you are mistaking the meaning of 'non-profit'.  In our case, it merely means that the volunteer board of directors cannot benefit financially from any funds raised by whatever means by the organization.

Any unit that can raise millions of dollars, and then survive/flourish from the interest is certainly allowed to do so.  It just happens that there probably aren't any that do.

No, I chose my words specifically to illicit this response.

Any unit which is aggressively pursuing all three missions will have operating expenses which are likely close to their cash flow - I get that.

But we have units all over the country with large sums of money in the bank who won't spend dollar one because they like seeing the number in the bank.  That's malfeasance.

Any unit with excessive cash needs to either use it, or divest it to the rest of CAP - the term "excessive" being a subjective call by the Wing CC.

For a unit with $5K annual operating expenses and a capital plan, $20K might not be enough cushion, for a 10-member unit meeting in a church basement that hasn't written a check in 2 years, $20k is a waste and should be used elsewhere.

We are not an investment club.  People donate money to us for it to be used towards our missions, not sitting in a bank account accruing pennies a year interest that cost dollars to calculate and disseminate.

For all the random negative comments about the WBP here and on other forums, no one can point to a single instance where a wing has redistributed funds, or taken over accounts for any reason other than malfeasance or mismanagement on the unit cc's part, or the dissolution of a charter.

WBP is like consolidated maintenance.  It works and shows objective cost savings, but because of unrelated political nonsense, some people just don't "like" it, and continue to look for smoking guns of conspiracy.

There's no conspiracy here, this is an organization trying to professionalize itself so it can look Congress and other benefactors in the eye when it says it is making good use of its resources.

Yes, how a unit is using their funds is more important than how much they have, and is a topic all of it's own, unrelated to the WBP.  I'm in general agreement that units who have healthy sums of money, but that are not 'performing' the missions, should be looked at. 

Your assertion though, that we have units all over with 'large sums' of money is rather ambiguous.  A large sum to one, is small to another, depending on the unit and it's level of activity. So that's a pretty big paint brush, unless you are on National finance staff and know such numbers specifically.

Any unit worth it's salt, should be doing whatever it can to build up a capital fund, so that it can survive operationally off of the interest that capital generates.

The drive of your statement enters into the nebulous realm of 'performance standards' in relation to income, and whether a unit is indeed paying lip-service to our three missions or executing those missions with vigor.  That would be an interesting ratio to see...... activity vs expenses in relation to income.

I believe it is a common paradigm throughout CAP that units are supposed to be poor because CAP is a 'non-profit' organization, so that units chronically nickel and dime their members to death, and that simply is not true.

CAPR 52-16 requires that cadets must pass a minimum of two achievements a year in order to remain a cadet member.  Perhaps other performance standards should be established for a unit to exist?  Or are there already other standards listed?


Cheers,

[RiverAux]

I think it would be great if a CAP squadron had 50-100K in the bank and was using interest from that to further their programs.  That is pretty much how every non-profit in the country tries to operate if at all possible.  However, I very much doubt that their are very many units in that situation.     

[swamprat86]

It would be even better if National and Wings handled all the fundraising and allocated funds to the unit based on approved budgets submitted.

Then the units can focus on the missions and not on fundraisers to pay the bills.

[cnitas]

It would be even better if National and Wings handled all the fundraising and allocated funds to the unit based on approved budgets submitted.

Then the units can focus on the missions and not on fundraisers to pay the bills.

Wow! This deserves a  :clap: