Talk:Expenses 2012-2013

Thank you for putting together this page.Would it be possible to get a column added showing what budget each expense came out of? it is not always clear if something is an administration expense or if it can be directly attributed to a programme. Thanks. --Tango (talk) 16:49, 26 September 2012 (UTC)

Not for some time I think. That's a lot of work, which Richard won't be able to do at the moment. Johnbod (talk) 03:49, 27 September 2012 (UTC)

It is a little concerning that the charity's accounts aren't set up in such a way as to make running off these kinds of reports easy. --Tango (talk) 11:06, 27 September 2012 (UTC)

I've not yet had time to design the report to run off ;-) Richard Symonds (WMUK) (talk) 14:37, 1 October 2012 (UTC)

Can I repeat my request of a few months ago? I believe the accounts are in better shape now, so hopefully it is possible to add that budget column. --Tango (talk) 12:25, 1 March 2013 (UTC)

Updated figures for 2012/13

Any problems or questions, let me know! Richard Symonds (WMUK) (talk) 17:53, 28 February 2013 (UTC)

I'm just wondering about the total figure for JD's expenses. These were intended to be all his expenses since he was employed in 2011, and yet his expenses as a full time employee are ¼ of mine as a volunteer trustee. I'm not sure that makes sense. As an example, didn't Jon go to some conferences, like the one in Berlin and the one in Washington? Thanks --Fæ (talk) 23:31, 28 February 2013 (UTC)

What you see up at present is the bulk of the costs from some of the larger budgets. I haven't gone through the smaller budgets, like the staff travel budget, yet, but I intend to - but checking the entire general ledger is a lot of work, as I need to sort them, remove the irrelevant ones (and modify some to be understandable), add them to an Excel sheet, and then change the entire sheet into a series of wikitables. These will be all the expenses for the 2012-13 Financial Year, as the records for 2011 aren't good enough to pull all of the expenses from without considerable expenditure of staff time. This shouldn't be too much of a problem I hope. Richard Symonds (WMUK) (talk) 11:07, 1 March 2013 (UTC)

Okay, just to make sure nobody misreads what these tables represent, it would make sense to qualify the figures, either by saying what period they are valid for, or to say in what way they are provisional information. Thanks --Fæ (talk) 11:30, 1 March 2013 (UTC)