[sof-forum] Fw: problems with SOF-DOI draft list

[Julie_Ehrlichman@xxxxxxx]

----- Forwarded by Julie
A. Ehrlichman/FC/R9/FWS/DOI on 03/27/2007 09:55 AM -----

Julie A. Ehrlichman/FC/R9/FWS/DOI

03/26/2007 10:41 AM

To	Diane Washington/PFM/OS/DOI
cc	Chris R Miskovich/APS/USGS/DOI@USGS
Subject	problems with SOF

Diane,

Here's a list of concerns/areas of difficulty
that cause the current crosswalk to be inefficient and causes difficulty
in trying to automate the statement...
Please combine with any other comments
and send to Don.... Thanks

1.        The
crosswalk doesn't take into consideration the variations in postings for
the different fund types.  Currently the crosswalk has to be modified
depending on fund type.  Fund types that have to be separately modified
are:  Special Receipt, Unavailable Receipts, Miscellaneous Receipts,
Trust Funds and Reimbursable and Revolving Funds.

2.        SGL's
crosswalk to more than one line depending on what types of transactions
are happening in the account.  Example SGL 6790 -- credit balances
related to vendor overpayments and debit balances for all other activity
crosswalk to one line, while net debit balance for vendor overpayments
to another.  All the other "Statements" crosswalks are based
on SGL totals (trial balance amounts) and SGL's are not split between lines.
 There are several Government Departments that use a separate Financial
Statement application and do not have transactional data available for
the SOF.  To review these account balances and manually assign the
amounts to the respective lines is cumbersome and then the balances cannot
be traced back to the Trial balances.

3.        There
are several lines in the current crosswalk that report the net change in
an account (EB-BB).  There are several lines that indicate if an increase,
then the amount is on one line, but if a decrease the amount is reported
on a different line.  Again, like the split SGL, this makes it very
hard to automate the SOF and requires manual analysis and intervention.
 Additionally, if in one year you have an increase, and the following
year you have a decrease, then the two amounts are reported on separate
lines and the statements are not comparable.

4.        Section
Headers and line titles are cumbersome and not easily readible or understandable.

5.        The
SOF is supposed to be a reconciliation of the SNC to the SBR (proprietary
to budgetary).  So the only things included should be the actual items
needed for the reconciliation.  It is cumbersome and worthless to
include things in the statement that have no bearing on the reconciliation,
cause then we just have to take the amounts out again on a different line.
 

That's all I can think of at this time

Julie Ehrlichman
Staff Accountant
Fish and Wildlife Service
303-984-6821
_________________________________________________________________
Message Archives: http://colab.cim3.net/forum/sof-forum/  
Subscribe/Unsubscribe/Config: http://colab.cim3.net/mailman/listinfo/sof-forum/     (01)

Shared Files: http://colab.cim3.net/file/work/CFO/CFO-A136-SOF/ 
Community Wiki: 
http://colab.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?CFOsOMB_A136FormAndContent_SOF
Community Portal: http://colab.cim3.net/
To Post: mailto:sof-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx    (02)