Out-of-turn Automatic allocation for Q2 2026

[jagflynn]

The day after my ward received our budget allocation for the second quarter, $396 was "transferred" (deducted) from our budget account. This transaction was described as an "Out-of-turn Automatic allocation for Q2 2026." Please help me make sense of this.

[eblood66]

That's a very good question. I'm seeing similar debits of varying amounts for most, if not all units, in our stake. I've also got transactions with the same label at the stake level (it looks like one for each unit) but those transactions are all for a zero amount. I don't see anything in the Q2 budget report that would explain them. Our standard Q2 budget allocations transfers match the amounts in the budget report for all the units I checked.

Hopefully there will be an explanation posted or they will be reversed. I may contact support about it if there isn't anything about it Monday.

[garystroble]

Someone goofed in finance initially with the new allocation, as it was significantly higher than the anticipated allocation which was previously communicated to us. The adjustment brought it back to where it should have been.

[swigginton]

The day after my ward received our budget allocation for the second quarter, $396 was "transferred" (deducted) from our budget account. This transaction was described as an "Out-of-turn Automatic allocation for Q2 2026." Please help me make sense of this.

We see the adjustment for all wards in our stake. I took a closer look. It appears they grabbed the wrong number for young women attendance when doing their calculations. In all cases, that number was significantly higher than the number submitted on the quarterly report. The adjustment reduces the allocation to the correct amount. You can see the difference in the 2 reports:
"Projected Quarterly Local Unit Budget Allowance Reports" has the incorrect YW counts. The amounts match the initial allocation.
"Quarterly Local Unit Budget Allowance Reports" has the correct YW counts and the totals match the allocation amount after the out-of-turn adjustment.

[eblood66]

You can see the difference in the 2 reports:
"Projected Quarterly Local Unit Budget Allowance Reports" has the incorrect YW counts. The amounts match the initial allocation.
"Quarterly Local Unit Budget Allowance Reports" has the correct YW counts and the totals match the allocation amount after the out-of-turn adjustment.

I didn't previously look at the 'Projected Quarterly Budget Allowance Q2 2026' report but only the 'Quarterly Budget Allowance Q2 2026' report. When I compare the two, the 'Projected' report appears to show the correct YW allocation and the correct total allocation and matches the amount after the adjustment. The final report shows the incorrect amounts but does match the amount of the initial Q2 allocation before the correction. Does that match what you see in your unit? It sounds the opposite of what you've described but maybe we're just using terms a little differently.

The zero amount adjustments for our stake make sense now because we don't keep any portion of the YW allocation at the stake level.

[swigginton]

Yep, I mixed up the 2 reports in my earlier message. The Projected report shows the real amount. Good catch.

[garystroble]

This was posted by headquarters today in the Finance section of LCR:

Budget Allocation Correction

The second quarter budget allocation was processed Thursday 9th as per the schedule but incorrectly included young women attendance at three times the correct number. An adjustment was made the following day to reduce the excess amount of budget given and the second quarter budget allocation now reflects the actual young women attendance shown on the quarterly report. We apologize for this error and any inconvenience it may have caused. We appreciate your patience and understanding and your continued efforts to manage budget funds.