CAP Members' Input Sought on Corporate Governance

[lordmonar]

How so?

Wing Banker has made it easier at the squadron level IMHO.  Sure the individual member may have to wait a week or two to get paid.  Now we may have to take our personal money to buy something we need right now and wait for a check to be cut.  But we have better control of our money and less of it will be walking away.

Don't run a lot of squadron operations that require in and out transactions of money, do you?

sure we do.

We plan the operation ask for the funds need up front, get the check and pay for it and then send in money we take in.

Anyone who incures an expense fills out a check request, sends in the receipts and we get paid.
Wing does the book keeping and just have to do the cross checks.   I have to say it is a lot less work then the old system.

[Spaceman3750]

Don't run a lot of squadron operations that require in and out transactions of money, do you?

Such as?

Anything that requires a bunch of people to pay in to a pool,
Some of whom don't want to pay in cash, but write a check, to 'civil air patrol'

and then paying the group bills back out to any number of vendors.
vendors who don't invoice and take payment later.
vendors who are inconvenient or impossible to use without credit charge.

Food, Fuel, and Course Materials (exa: let's say rocket bulk packs and engines)
New member startup bulking


These things are all possible with wbp
but they are a colossal pain

The path of less resistance is for a member to assume all of the risk and liability of handling activity budgets out of personal pocket (which sometimes consist of several hundred or even thousands of dollars).  Which is an unacceptable risk and in some cases an impossible burden.  --and if the finance guys catch you doing that they will tell you not to.

The path of least resistance is for squadrons to just do fewer (or zero) activities.



WBP is GREAT for things like van maintenance fees.

It is horribly unagile for relatively short notice high volume transactions like a squadron with a high 'squadron activity' opstempo.

Get a squadron credit card. Some days I wish my squadron would get a credit card - it would make the logistics shop way easier, not to mention everything else, but last time I mentioned it in passing the response I got alluded to the fact that the previous CC (who is now the group CC) didn't want to get one because then they would have to answer one extra question on the SUI...

[Eclipse]

^ It's not just an extra question on an SUI, and the potential for misuse is high enough that it's not really worth the hassle.

WBP has made life easier and reduced risk for the majority of units, those that have special needs have options
for making their lives easier within that system.

I was an outspoken critic of the idea (actually got spanked for being "so" outspoken), and none of the doomsday predictions
have come true.  Those wings running the program as written, without special local filters, should not be seeing many issues,
it's only when people start writing supplements and adding rules that there are problems.

As someone who has laid out thousands of dollars at a time for CAP activities, and never been stiffed a penny, my personal experience
is that the people who make the most noise about the "assumption of financial risk to the member" are generally people
who wouldn't consider doing that  in any circumstances for anyone, while those of us in the consulting and freelance world
know it is just a part of the normal course of business.

Further to positive things in finance - I signed up to be a tester of the direct deposits for F108s.  What a pleasure!
Upload the doc to WMIRS, get a "check".  Can't ask for more than that.

[Spaceman3750]

Further to positive things in finance - I signed up to be a tester of the direct deposits for F108s.  What a pleasure!
Upload the doc to WMIRS, get a "check".  Can't ask for more than that.

You mean we had a choice? They hounded me about 6 times before I remembered to send my DD form in! (not that I mind, I like not having to go to the bank)

[Eclipse]

Further to positive things in finance - I signed up to be a tester of the direct deposits for F108s.  What a pleasure!
Upload the doc to WMIRS, get a "check".  Can't ask for more than that.

You mean we had a choice? They hounded me about 6 times before I remembered to send my DD form in! (not that I mind, I like not having to go to the bank)

I think DD will pretty much be "The Way" in the near future, but when I submitted the original form the message made it sound like the first couple tries would be a test run for all involved.  I know it significantly increases the work the SD's have to do, but reduces what the wing staff does, and takes them out of the loop on the disbursements, so everything moves a lot faster.

Let's sit back now and count "you can't make me..." " I would never give out my banking info..." responses.  For the record, I've worked for
several companies that required their employees to do payroll through DD, no exceptions, and more and more clients and vendors are moving to
direct payments as well.

[Spaceman3750]

I think DD will pretty much be "The Way" in the near future

I agree, and I don't think it's a bad thing. The "I won't give them my bank account info no I won't" crowd don't quite get it... After all, you hand over that information every time you write a check.

[coudano]

Eclipse, it's awful nice of you (and me) to have thousands of dollars in the first place, to lay out.
If you and me go away, are there other people in your scope who are willing, or face it, able, to do the same?  In mine, there aren't.  $30 or $50 maybe.  Over a hundred?  forget it.

The system shouldn't be set up in such a way that it requires that in the first place.
That's ridiculous.

Even collecting $5.00 cash from everyone who shows up (say 20 people) and then paying the $97.00 bill and depositing the leftover $3 into the WBP account is "wrong".  It works, and that's how we actually get it done quite a bit.  But we are "supposed to" deposit all that cash in, itemizing the contributors, and then request a $97.00 check back out.  Or deposit it all, someone pays the $97 on their own account and requests a reimbursement.

Like I acknowledged before, there are ways to get it done but they are certainly not convenient or expedient.  Which is fine for some situations, but sometimes those things matter.  Sometimes they make or break the difference in getting something done or not.

And if something does go wrong, or a mistake does get made, yes I have seen and heard "thanks for the donation" out of the corp (to the tune of hundreds of dollars), and yes I have seen peoples' money locked in the corporate account without a 'legitimate' way to get it back out.



On the "old way" as I recall it, we could cut a check for squadron banquet out of the squadron checkbook, to the caterer (who requires payment AT the time of service cash or check no credit) right there AT the banquet, for the exact amount charged (including deductions for no-shows and additions for late adds) and go on with life.  Enough signers were there to legit sign the check and reconcile at the next finance committee meeting.  Nobody paid anything out of pocket except the price of their own dinner ticket, nor had to transit several hundred dollars through their personal account, paying back leftovers or requesting reimbursement for over-run.  Doesn't work that way in WBP.

Maybe with the credit card.  I'm not sure my wing authorizes that, i'm quite sure we haven't asked.


I have never had a problem getting a mission reimbursement off a 108,
and I have no heartburn with direct deposit instead of a paper check, for the record.

However, a couple tanks of gas on a mission is a different story from a several hundred plus dollar weekend activity.  I *HAVE* witnessed threats made to people by mission staff that they wouldn't get their fuel expenses reimbursed (rejected 108) on operational missions that involved more than 'a couple tanks of gas'.

[lordmonar]

No reason why you can't do the same.....have the finacial committee sign off on the upfront expense need.  Have wing cut the check.  send the receipt and any left over monies and new monies after the event.

Just like before.

[Eclipse]

Eclipse, it's awful nice of you (and me) to have thousands of dollars in the first place, to lay out.
If you and me go away, are there other people in your scope who are willing, or face it, able, to do the same?  In mine, there aren't.  $30 or $50 maybe.  Over a hundred?  forget it.

I agree, but then in those cases, especially when we are talking hundreds (or more), it just requires better advanced planning, someting CAP is generally horrible at.

And if something does go wrong, or a mistake does get made, yes I have seen and heard "thanks for the donation" out of the corp (to the tune of hundreds of dollars), and yes I have seen peoples' money locked in the corporate account without a 'legitimate' way to get it back out.

I've had to intervene in "mistakes" as well (how about bouncing the fuel expense because of a missing toll receipt, etc.), but we can't let mistakes shape the program, and in many cases part of the issue is members who can't be bothered to submit things in a timely fashion.

I've nevert had an issue that was properly documented and followed up on that went to the "forget about it bucket", though I have had a couple where the member wasn't interested in making the second phone call and just wrote it off, which isn't kosher, but when people don't want to pursue, you can't force the issue.

On the "old way" as I recall it, we could cut a check for squadron banquet out of the squadron checkbook, to the caterer (who requires payment AT the time of service cash or check no credit) right there AT the banquet, for the exact amount charged (including deductions for no-shows and additions for late adds) and go on with life.  Enough signers were there to legit sign the check and reconcile at the next finance committee meeting.  Nobody paid anything out of pocket except the price of their own dinner ticket, nor had to transit several hundred dollars through their personal account, paying back leftovers or requesting reimbursement for over-run.  Doesn't work that way in WBP.

Convieiinet, yes, but also in the "old way" who was signing the contract with the facility - the unit CC, against regs.  We all did it, but the only person actually authorized to sign a contract is the Wing CC.

However, a couple tanks of gas on a mission is a different story from a several hundred plus dollar weekend activity.  I *HAVE* witnessed threats made to people by mission staff that they wouldn't get their fuel expenses reimbursed (rejected 108) on operational missions that involved more than 'a couple tanks of gas'.

what else would you expect?  Except in the cases where there is lodging and per diem, all the USAF will reimbusre
anyone for is to/from gas and comm expense (i.e. batteries and phone calls).

[coudano]

I agree, but then in those cases, especially when we are talking hundreds (or more), it just requires better advanced planning, someting CAP is generally horrible at.

In some cases more advanced planning isn't practical.
No matter what you do, you can't always reliably predict cadets' reliability to plan and pay in advance.

Another factor is the quantity of money in the bank account needs to be big enough in the first place to do an advance on funds.  If you are running a squadron banquet (i.e.) with a $1,000 budget, and you can and will collect the money from members to offset that expense; but your squadron only runs a balance of, say $650, then you CANT get an advance of $1,000 and repay the cash collected and receipts afterward.

MOST squadrons carry low balances like this.
(granted, most squadrons aren't running $1,000 budget activities on a monthly or more often  basis)
(but they SHOULD!!!, and the system should support it, rather than hinder it!)

Convenient, yes, but also in the "old way" who was signing the contract with the facility - the unit CC, against regs.  We all did it, but the only person actually authorized to sign a contract is the Wing CC.

Well 'signing' a 'contract' isn't always an issue.  We do a lot of stuff all the time without a paper contract signed.  ANY purchase AT ALL creates an obligation to pay which is a contract in a sense.  How pedantic do we want to be about that?

what else would you expect?  Except in the cases where there is lodging and per diem, all the USAF will reimbusre anyone for is to/from gas and comm expense (i.e. batteries and phone calls).

I was talking about multiple legit reimbursable expenses (lots of gas, multi day) but infact that is unrelated to WBP as well.  Drifted off topic.

[lordmonar]

Well what would you have done under the old system?  Pay out of pocket.  So what has changed?

Yes....the WBP is not as "adgile" as the old system...i.e. you actually have to go through someone else to cut the check.
But really......what sort of operation are you running where you have a sudden need for large sums of cash?

Prior planning (if the cadet can't do it...that's what CP officers are for).

So that is a con to WBP.....I'll conceed that.

But on the plus side:  We don't have any money simply walking away.
We don't have squadrons with hugh secret funds no one knows about.
We have a second set of eyes on squadron expenditures  "what do you mean you need $2000 for a disco ball!".
We get the unqualified audit....that may help us in the future to get those grants and other funding streams.
It helps establish the real ideal that it is CAP's money and not the squadrons's or worse the squadron commander's.

[Eclipse]

I agree, but then in those cases, especially when we are talking hundreds (or more), it just requires better advanced planning, someting CAP is generally horrible at.

In some cases more advanced planning isn't practical.
No matter what you do, you can't always reliably predict cadets' reliability to plan and pay in advance.

I gotta throw a flag here - they pay when you need them to or they don't attend.  I spent 10 years running an encampment,
and people do what they need to when they understand there is no wiggle room on the deadline.

Units are supposed to put together detailed budgets for each fiscal year, and that certainly should include financial planning for activities.
But a lot of units fly by their seat and figure it out as they go.  We're supposed to be bigger and better than that.

Another factor is the quantity of money in the bank account needs to be big enough in the first place to do an advance on funds.  If you are running a squadron banquet (i.e.) with a $1,000 budget, and you can and will collect the money from members to offset that expense; but your squadron only runs a balance of, say $650, then you CANT get an advance of $1,000 and repay the cash collected and receipts afterward.

MOST squadrons carry low balances like this.
(granted, most squadrons aren't running $1,000 budget activities on a monthly or more often  basis)
(but they SHOULD!!!, and the system should support it, rather than hinder it!)

If the above becomes a legit hindrance, than guess what?  More fundraising to create a surplus for this exact purpose.

[Eclipse]

But on the plus side:  We don't have any money simply walking away.
We don't have squadrons with hugh secret funds no one knows about.

This should not be discounted, especially the money growing mold in unit accounts.  My wing had units that carried 5-figure balances
in their unit accounts and would simply not spend the money.  You might as well just not have it then.

[coudano]

Well what would you have done under the old system?  Pay out of pocket.  So what has changed?

Turn around time.  Shorter turn around, on both the deposit and the check.  Local bank, allowed us to go through the official account on a day's notice.

But on the plus side:  We don't have any money simply walking away.

I don't have any problem believing that this happened though I never saw it (in CAP).
I've seen it happen elsewhere.

We don't have squadrons with hugh secret funds no one knows about.
We have a second set of eyes on squadron expenditures  "what do you mean you need $2000 for a disco ball!".

Who cares if they want to spend $2,000 on a disco ball.
If a squadron wants to do that, then they oughtta do it.
Now if you're spending $2,000 on a $20 disco ball and pocketing the other $1800 that's an issue, but wing banker is no more likely to catch that then the previous system.

We get the unqualified audit....that may help us in the future to get those grants and other funding streams.

Like the thing that started this whole thread,
yah we've heard about it, so let's see it.

It helps establish the real ideal that it is CAP's money and not the squadrons's or worse the squadron commander's.

It's helping the supporters of my squadron establish a booster club, that will fund the squadron's operations.  That money won't be CAP's property or concern, either.




With regards to making mistakes or filing on time, or using the right forms (which for a while there were changing and deprecating every few minutes).  I already have to be an expert on 25 things and keep up with all the changes on all of those things.  I'm maxed out.  We can't all be experts, mistakes are going to happen, members are going to get hosed, irritated, apathetic, and then leave.

Should I quit my involvement in finance since I obviously can't keep up with it?
What will that do to opstempo and activities that I manage funding for?

Should I reduce my time and energy in some other area so I can keep on top of the finance mountain?  What will that do to quality output in the other areas that I work in now?

[coudano]

Units are supposed to put together detailed budgets for each fiscal year, and that certainly should include financial planning for activities.

Sure and as your expected planning adjusts over time you have to redo stuff.
Cancelled a big activity that you did budget for?  Additional paperwork.
Added a big activity that you didn't forsee?  Additional administrativa.

But a lot of units fly by their seat and figure it out as they go.  We're supposed to be bigger and better than that.

yeah, take a good look around CAP.
there's what we are supposed to be
and then there's what we are.

If the above becomes a legit hindrance, than guess what?  More fundraising to create a surplus for this exact purpose.

I'm glad you have the spare time and energy to do that, on top of everything else you do.
I don't.  Got some time and energy to come on over and help my unit out?

How about the other 1500 units in CAP that have similar problems?
(or avoid problems by simply not doing anything, let alone spending any money)

[coudano]

But on the plus side:  We don't have any money simply walking away.
We don't have squadrons with hugh secret funds no one knows about.

This should not be discounted, especially the money growing mold in unit accounts.  My wing had units that carried 5-figure balances
in their unit accounts and would simply not spend the money.  You might as well just not have it then.

This is the exactly wrong attitude to have, and one of the initial objections to WBP up front.
The squadron's money is the squadron's money.

If they want a $2,000 disco ball, and the squadron commander and finance committee approve it, and the money is in the account, then they get it.

If they have $10,000 in the bank, and they aren't spending it, then that's just fine.

The "you might as well just not have it" attitude, over a longer period of time turns into "well we could REALLY use it, so we're just going to take it".

And THAT is where the BS flag has to be thrown.


Now forseeing that eventuality over time, how do you suppose that affects a squadron's willingness and ability to build and carry a large balance like that?  Or a donor's willingness to donate to the local program, knowing that the money may not, infact, stay local.

[lordmonar]

Well....I have seen it in CAP.

NVWG lost several $10,000 in cash....the guy got caught and went to jail....but the money is gone.

I heard a story that a unit in TXWG had a million dollar grant that simply disappeared one day.

You can't say that the buracracy of getting a check cut is all that bad.

I know here in NVWG it takes a simple form with the financial comittees signature and you get a check.

You turn in the receipt after the fact (that covers someone pocketing the $1800 for a $20 disco ball).

Is there really something going on in your squadron that a week or two is going to kill a program?

Remember the booster club is NOT supposed to paying for operational items.   Pay for the X-mas party and maybe a scholorship to encampment or NCSA....but paying for a FTX, model rocketry, flying, ES should all be paid out of unit funds.

[lordmonar]

This is the exactly wrong attitude to have, and one of the initial objections to WBP up front.
The squadron's money is the squadron's money.

No....it is not.  It never has been.  If the squadron folds....the money has always gone back to the corporation.  Before wing banker we had no way to get any of that cash......see the TXWG with the $1M grant.

If they want a $2,000 disco ball, and the squadron commander and finance committee approve it, and the money is in the account, then they get it.

To a point I agree with you.....but really?  People gave that money to CAP so you can do your mission.  Wasteing the funds on useless junk is just as bad as stealing it.  I have no problem with wing keeping an eye out for frivolous expenditures.  If you really need a disco-ball....the by all means get one.  I am sure you can justify it to wing.

If they have $10,000 in the bank, and they aren't spending it, then that's just fine.

To a point.....if Unit X has $10,000 in the bank and they don't use it.....Unit Y who just started could use some of that money to get on their feet.  WBP makes that sort of transfer much easier.  (not that I advocate any sort of hostile take over!  Your squadron raised that money.....no one should be taking it away from you with our your permission....that's just good manners!)

The "you might as well just not have it" attitude, over a longer period of time turns into "well we could REALLY use it, so we're just going to take it".

And THAT is where the BS flag has to be thrown.

That is a good point......but on the other hand sharing the wealth for the good of the larger program is not necessarily a bad idea either.  There is a happy medium between hording every penny and getting robbed for all your cash.

Now forseeing that eventuality over time, how do you suppose that affects a squadron's willingness and ability to build and carry a large balance like that?  Or a donor's willingness to donate to the local program, knowing that the money may not, infact, stay local.

If a local donor comes to you and you don't need the money.....why are you taking his money?   Why not send him to someone who needs it?  Why not suggest that they donate to the larger organisation at the group, wing. national level?

As of now....as far as I know....no unit has ever had monies forcefully pulled away.  I don't think I have ever heard of a donor not donating to a CAP unit because the thought the money may be spend out of town/state.  I think that argument is mostly just a straw man for the fear that wing may "steal" unit money.......even though it has always been the corporation's money.

[Al Sayre]

I'm one of the guy's who signs checks for our wing.  My wife is the Wing administrator.  If you email the correct paperwork, she's telling me the same day that I need to go in and sign checks.  One of the other check signers lives nearby and also comes in to sign checks as needed, so turnaround is usually less than 1 week.  Anything urgent can be handled in one day if necessary.

[ZigZag911]

The NEC is the executive committee of the NB, not a mere sub-committee or task force.

I still think we don't need the NB, too much politicking.

Let's find a less self-destructive manner to maintain 'checks & balances' on national leadership.

So here is my question to you...

When we cut the NB, you don't think the politicking will skyrocket to get into one of those 7 region commander slots?

There will still be politicking, of course, even for wing CC slots, even if not in capacity of NB member.

However, I truly feel that taking the power to elect National CC away from wing CCs and region CCs will help reduce the "eat one's own young" approach that presently seems the hallmark of these elections.

Subordinates should not be voting for commanders; the CG Aux is a dubious basis for comparison, because the Aux leadership seems less "commanders" than directors/coordinators liaising with USCG officers (from an outsider's perspective).

If we keep the NB, each wing ought to have a representative chosen by some means other than appointment as wing CC (election by senior members leaps to mind, perhaps with Level 3 completion as a qualification for voting)...and NB members should be ineligible for region or wing command or National office for the term for which they were eligible to vote (i.e., later of these two: as long as one is an NB rep, or as long as national CC elected during their tenure on NB is in office).

Will it kill politics in CAP? Of course not; but it will make it awfully difficult!