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:

[FW]

^I agree.  It's one of the reasons CAP established the CAP Foundation.
It's also a major reason why some wings get money from their respective state; thanks to the efforts of the members. 
However, one of the major problems with our getting major donations from outside indivduals, corporations, etc. is the perception we are a govt. agency.  Although this is slowly changing, we still have a ways to go before we get any major gifts, donations or endowments....
Of course, I would love to be wrong about this... anyone want to make a large deposit to the cause?  :angel:

[NIN]

My unit has between $5000 & $6000 in the bank.  We have that "nest egg" for a number of reasons, and last I looked "malfeasance" wasn't one of them.

In our case (and surely, other units can be different) we used to obtain our squadron funds thru car parking at the local NASCAR track. $7/person/hr was a nice way to spend 2 days on a weekend and get some fat cash for your unit.  At the track by 4-5am, out the door by 1pm, with around 12-15 people you just made about $2000 for the unit twice a year.   We did that for a lot of years, and the money made subsidized activities, gave us some startup captial to buy buy insignia and patches for resale without having to collect money up front, bought some things like a squadron computer, a banner for our parades, pay for the tiedown for our airplane, cover the ferry costs for O-flts, did maintenance on our CAP van, gave us top-notch color guard supplies and equipment, fronting the cost of gas to put in the van for activities, kept our FB-111 in fine shape, provided encampment scholarships to families who had a need, etc.

Then they changed the rules at the NASCAR track:  must be 16, need to agree to bring a minimum number of people, sign a performance stipulation with the track (wing commander wouldn't), etc. 

So now our pretty much guaranteed funding source dried up. 

Thankfully, we'd built up some $$ by some shrewd cash management and being fiscally responsible, which was a sufficient cushion to continue operations until we were able to change fundraising gears and find another fundraising avenue.  But you don't do that overnight.

So if you have a unit that raises $1000 a year and spends $995 of that, and their funding source is interrupted, they're pretty out of luck until they can ramp up another.  That's a significant disruption in their operations.  Is that malfeasance or just bad luck?

We built up that amount of money over a number of years.  Our annual run rate is somewhere around $2500-3000 a year.   We can afford to survive a full year with no fundraising if something went awry. 

And interestingly: things did.  Look at the economy. We've had more families than ever ask for help with encampment.  We can support it.  The cost of gas spiked up last year, making even the squadron's contribution to the cost of activities skyrocket.  We covered that.  Aerospace trip to the wind tunnel: What should have been $50/participant was $20 due to subsidization (and we were unable to get the aerospace grant we got the year before, so the squadron's subsidization was higher than the previous trip), and we had great turn out. 

Malfeasance or just trying to be cautious about where things are going?

And I'll tell you what: If you came to my unit and said "Hey, there, Colonel Ninness, you've raised $3000 this year, but only spent $1500, so we want you to give $1500 to the other units in the group, cuz, you know, they're not nearly as good as you guys are..." you'd better make sure you're wearing some protective sports gear.   

That money gets raised by the unit, it get spent by the unit. Period.  And while its not a democracy, my finance committee and CAPR 173-1 says so.

[swamprat86]

As soon as my check from Nigeria clears...I am sooo making a donation to CAP.   

[Eclipse]

Did you guys actually read my post?

I said the decision was subjective, then gave examples.

$5k in the bank with a run rate at $3 a year would not fall into that category in my opinion.  However $5k with no operating costs probably would.

At a minimum, in the second example, the money should be in something longer term, where the interest distributions becomes a non-issue. 

You're clearly using the money as intended, or plan to, vs. some units just stuffing it in their proverbial mattress.

That money gets raised by the unit, it get spent by the unit. Period.  And while its not a democracy, my finance committee and CAPR 173-1 says so.

Absolutely, and no one can give a single example of anything close to the above not happening, which is why these continues conspiracy theories about the WBP are so frustrating.

[RiverAux]

Absolutely, and no one can give a single example of anything close to the above no happening, which is why these continues conspiracy theories about the WBP are so frustrating.

And your examples to back up this?

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.

[Cecil DP]

Absolutely, and no one can give a single example of anything close to the above no happening, which is why these continues conspiracy theories about the WBP are so frustrating.

And your examples to back up this?

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.

No, Misfeasence is a National Headquarters cashing out several million dollars in bonds and CD's to finance a NASCAR entry. None of that money was ever recouped. 

BTW: Misfeasence is doing something stupid, Malfeasence is doing something illegal.

[Eclipse]

^ You can't prove a negative.  You show one unit that has had an issue with wing banker as is constantly being insinuated here.

As to the second statement, as I said, I am personally aware of several in my state alone, no I won't name them (duh), and would be willing to bet there's at least one in most states that falls into this category, thus "all over".

[Eclipse]

No, Misfeasence is a National Headquarters cashing out several million dollars in bonds and CD's to finance a NASCAR entry. None of that money was ever recouped. 

Which had nothing to do with Wing Bank, so why even bring it up?

Webster's online does not make much distinction between the two words.

[Cecil DP]

No, Misfeasence is a National Headquarters cashing out several million dollars in bonds and CD's to finance a NASCAR entry. None of that money was ever recouped. 

Which had nothing to do with Wing Bank, so why even bring it up?

Webster's online does not make much distinction between the two words.

1. To show that National is not above wasting money and that the idea of holding onto funds as dispareged in previous posts was not a bad idea.

2. To question why the National Board, The National Comptroller, and Finance Officers at that time allowed such a flood of money ($6-7 Megabucks)to disappear down a hole.


P.S. pend a few bucks to get a dictionary, mal and misfeasence are legal terms, look in a legal dictionary or the OED, not the internet.

[fireplug]

And don't forget the third brother, Non.

[ADCAPer]

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.

I'm sorry, but you're mistaken. I am not confusing anything.

There is no local action that can over-ride national policy. In other words, at the local level you can do what National allows you to do through the regulations, but that's all you can do.

Your claim carries no weight in this case because the original WB plan stated that there would be "no charges" to the units. And the claim that siphoning off the interest from the WB account has always been permitted is just flat out wrong. The ability to confiscate interest was never in the regulations, it was done by a back room deal and not in accordance with the regulations. That's why National is trying to weasel in a loosely worded item in the new regulation that will allow the Wings to ultimately confiscate all interest, and sadly, it appears that most people are okay with allowing that,

And I am sorry, but I do not remember you being on the conference call, which occurred prior to the regulations being revised to allow Wing Banking, when I was told that my unit could surrender our funds or surrender our charter by the end of the week.  In the end the regulations always win, because I'm still here, my unit is still going, and the idiot who offered that option was shown the door.

And as I've said before, yes it is all corporate money, and they can do whatever they want to with it; but the reality is that they can only play that card one time.  I guess I should thank you for the outstanding job of proving why so many people are skeptical of Wing Banking.  I bet that you consider yourself to be more than qualified to review the funds of every other unit in your Wing and determine who can have their funds reallocated to make sure they are fairly distributed to other units. Once again, I can see this happening, but only one time, because then the deposits from local supporters will immediately go away.

[Spike]

I have a Parents Club that "donates" money from a private Checking account.

When I say "donate" I do not mean donate.  We (the Squadron) tell them what we need and they go out and purchase it. 

Questions we all should ask about the financial issues at CAPNHQ....... Where is all the CAP Cares Money??  Why could a Cadet of mine not get their membership paid for them when they got sick, their mom and dad lost their jobs and had no money for dues.  Of course the SQD picked up the membership costs of said Cadet, but we first requested CAP Cares Money.  No response even after sending certified letters to NHQ. 

Second......Why does my Squadrons money all go into the same bank account as every other Squadron in my Wing, yet I have not once seen interest added to the bottom line of my units statement.  Where is that money going?

Wing Banker was invented to get those at NHQ out of trouble.  So that they can say...."see we know where the money is".  Yet it is still difficult to get financial statements from the wing and NHQ.

[FW]

I have no idea why you received no response from NHQ for a CAPCARES grant for your member.  It does seem odd.  Call the CAP/EX and find out (Gina Cone is the administrative assistant).

Your "interest" can be used for administrative costs of the WBP (postage and copying charges) for the wing.  Most interest rates for checking accounts are about 0.1%/year.  If you averaged about $2,000 in your account,  that would amount to $2.00 in interest for the year.  If you need the cash, I'm sure you can work something out with your wing.

NHQ just published complete financials for the preveious year and was presented to the BOG.  It is the most extensive financial disclosure for the public ever.  Each wing is included.  It may be online in the next week or so.

[RADIOMAN015]

I have a Parents Club that "donates" money from a private Checking account.

When I say "donate" I do not mean donate.  We (the Squadron) tell them what we need and they go out and purchase it. 

Second......Why does my Squadrons money all go into the same bank account as every other Squadron in my Wing, yet I have not once seen interest added to the bottom line of my units statement.  Where is that money going?

Wing Banker was invented to get those at NHQ out of trouble.  So that they can say...."see we know where the money is".  Yet it is still difficult to get financial statements from the wing and NHQ.

Well I think you would need to address those specific issues with your wing on financial statement.  I think they basically just send a check register anyways that show what was paid and what your checking account & savings/CD balances are (including what was deposited during the accounting period).

I think overall this entire program will need to be evaluated as far as the COSTS versus the BENEFITS to the membership in the organization 3 to 5 years out.  IF (and that's a big IF at that) in the end the organization gets more donated money (and this is specifically identified due to the unqualified opinion) such as grants, that do flow down to support at the squadron level, than that would be great :clap:

HOWEVER, again I've found that with grant money given, the grantor may have specific reporting requirements anyways (that may include submitting source documents to even obtain payment reimbursement, and not having an unqualified audit statement will NOT impact this type of grant administration.  BTW this does include the AF reimbursement for mission support that does get reviewed/audited.

I think even the AF Audit Agency or Defense Audit Service spends time auditing CAP also as far as the use of federal government funds, which in fact makes up the majority of CAP's budget & expenses anyways.

You have to realize that it is costing the membership more for this UNQUALIFIED audit also, because the sampling requires those accountants to fly out to wings anyways & you are paying them per diem & travel expense also.  Audit fees are something that should be reviewed & negotiated, especially in these trying economic times. 

RM

[FW]

All auditing expenses are paid with "appropriated" funds.  The membership does not pay for it. 
The AF audit agency does spot audits of some wings each year.  This is to provide a sample check of the independant audit.  These audits are paid by the Air Force and does not come from our budget, appropriated or corporate.

Anyway, we do have an complete unqualified audit for the first time in history.  This says much to the "donor community" and, hopefully, will be benifical to all.  Everyone should be proud of this accomplishment and, for those who still cry over some spilled milk, I would suggest you get over it.  The days of "good old boys" and it's "my money" are over.  There will be no going back however, every member has a duty to insure proper complience at all levels.  If there is "mis, mal or non" feasance (Fraud, Waste and/or Abuse), report it. 

Oh, and our FM department at NHQ monitors every transaction via "E Accounting". The WFAs usually spot "mistakes" before things get out of hand.  At this point in time, I think it would be almost impossible for a unit to get the short end of things.

[BillB]

I hope the Wing Bankers have better math than FW has.  a .01% interest on $2000 is $20 NOT $2.00

[IceNine]

Where did you get your math?

Try adding the % sign back in and see what you get.  .1% becomes .001

2000x .001= 2

In your example of .01% we are talking $0.20