PL Report with tracking code of "blank"

1

I use tracking codes and great feature but not on all transactions just ones I want to separate out for PL reporting.

Is it possible to add “blank” ie no code to the PL report drop down?

You can select “any” and selected code but not the “no tracking code” transactions set.

This is useful for all others reports - ie no code reports and also finding any transactions not coded but should be.

Currently you have to code all transactions and have a “default” code for all else to get reports without codes.
Can we have a “blank” default?

Thanks

2

No, you don’t have to code all transactions. You can just code those transactions which you want to track and leave the others blank. To get reports for “all”, just select the reports without specifying any tracking codes, in other words - leave blank.

3

@Brucanna, I believe what @peterp wants is the ability to select only those transactions without a tracking code, not all tracking codes.

@peterp, if I am correct, the solution is to create a tracking code named None or Uncoded or something similar. The underlying design philosophy is to allow you to select transactions that fit whatever predetermined parameters you established a tracking code to track. You said it yourself: “I use tracking codes … on … just ones I want to separate out for PL reporting.” According to your own criteria, if you want to separate the uncoded transactions on a report, they should have a code.

However, if you are just looking for transactions you forgot to code, use the Tracking Exceptions Report. That is why it exists.

You already do. You are just trying to use it in a way that is not intended. Manager follows a minimalist approach. You only need to select a tracking code for transactions you want to segregate. With your suggested approach, you would also require an All code or something similar so you could get undifferentiated reports, making more work on every line item in every transaction. Remember, many and possibly most users don’t use tracking codes at all, which were originally intended for different divisions of a business (and are probably going to move back in that direction with future program changes).

4

Yes @Tut you are correct re what my requirement is.

The tracking exception report is what I used but it’s not quite formatted as a nice PL report and raises eyebrows when presented as a PL to committee meetings!

I do a lot of work with small NGO and 90% of transactions don’t need a code only some projects that may be funded by a grant that needs tracking for acquittal etc.

But it’s nice to get organisation PL without those projects - dare I say the likes of QBooks/MYOB do the no code reports (sorry to swear or use dirty words!)
I love the minimalist approach and as a software developer i love this approach and Manager is my favorite app (both my IT & accountant friends are sick of my always going on about it and how great it is)

Your solution of a None or Uncoded is a good work around if the Tracking Exception Report had the bulk update added to “find & recode” the tracking code like in the bank transactions. It would be a logical addition to the Exception Report - ie easy fix up those exceptions…

5

I can only comment that the Tracking Exception Report doesn’t look like a P&L because it isn’t one.

6

Grants received for projects shouldn’t be handled via the P&L.
Grants are funds received in Trust to be spent on behalf of a project, they aren’t income to the NGO.

The Grants should be posted to a BS - Liabilities account in the projects name and any expenditure for the project gets posted to that same account, then a printout of that account creates the acquittal tracking - income less expenses.

If part of the Grant is administration income to the NGO, then that gets “journal-ed” from the liability account to the P&L income account.

So the Grants over time don’t clutter the BS, create them via the Special Accounts feature.

And you will if they aren’t incorrectly posted to there.

I think that opinion may change now knowing why you were needing it.

7

I concur.

8

As you say @Brucanna that is the correct accounting standard and is fine for a small grant for a few specific items.
Sometime grants may be for a project staff member embedded in the organisation so need to track their wage, share of office expenses, mobile etc.
For some large grants it may be best to use separate bank accounts and could even use separate business file but then you can’t easily do consolidated reports for whole group and transfers between businesses get tricky - invoicing yourself when GST applies is messy!

Tracking codes work well here for all different requirements and consolidated reporting is ok.
As you say the accounting standards require you to journal unexpended funds to the BS at end of accounting periods & audit periods.

9

Let me open by saying I am a Treasurer to NGO’s heavily involved with grants, funding third parties and managing projects (many with six figure sums) and none, “repeat”, none of these ever get anywhere near the organisations P&L except where they are actual operational funding - the income actual belongs to the NGO.

If a grant includes the coverage / recovery of operational costs such as for when “staff member embedded in the organisation”, then yes a tracking code may be used to identify those expenses, but those identified expenses are then transferred to the projects BS liability account - the grant itself doesn’t become P&L income. In fact, if done correctly the tracking code nets to zero.

Larger grants can be managed via separate bank accounts. in more recent times, it is being specified that they must be conducted via separate bank account but this simplifies not complicates the overall process.

What’s the very first thing you do whenever a grant is received - “read the projects reporting requirements”, then make sure that your projects management meets those on a day to day basis. In most cases the project’s reportable income & expenses can be reproduced as a spreadsheet.

However, if you want to create more P&L style reports then this can also be achieved with Manger, all without resorting to consolidation entries as the NGO’s primary books always contains all the primary data, any sub-group is just that a sub-group and they don’t require any consolidation.
NOTE - sub-group not subsidiary, meaning that there is no transfers required between businesses.

Well it shouldn’t be messy as you can’t invoice GST between yourself - what’s the point ?

Can’t read anywhere where I stated that - however, all projects (regardless of size) should ONLY ever be the BS so there is NEVER a need to Journalise at year end. That is the accounting standard.

Handling a project’s surplus or overrun is a completely separate issue.

If you are mixing operation income and grant receipts within the P&L then you need to review your processes as that shouldn’t be acceptable within a most basic audit, if yes, then the auditor is questionable.

If you have any difficulty, then detail it here and it can be resolved.