Disciplinary Reports

Hello all,

I was asked by my Bishop for a report on members that have outstanding disciplinary issues. For example, a report on any members who are on probation or disfellowshipped.

I don't really see this type of option in the "custom reports".

Has anyone tried to do this before?

Thanks!!

I don't think custom reports will help you. And, I think only he (a bishop) can assess that information anyway, other than discipline in progress....But, I've never been a bishop so I don't know what he can see in MLS or LDS.org tools.
The Access table lists a "Confidential Member Information Report" that only he can access on LDS.org Leader resources, but a don't know what that is....

Have the bishop Sign into MLS and from the toolbar go to Other Resources > Confidential Reports and Forms > Confidential Member Information.

I think that will give him everything that is in MLS.

I know that "active" disfellowshipments are recorded. I'm not sure about formal probation. Informal is not recorded. That would have to come from the bishop's own files.

The only other thing you can do is to "print" (perhaps to PDF) every membership record and look for any notations. (I'll add this is why it's important to at least preview new records moving into the ward. This is about the only place a clerk can see and notify the bishop of a situation.)

RussellHltn wrote:Have the bishop Sign into MLS and from the toolbar go to Other Resources > Confidential Reports and Forms > Confidential Member Information.

I think that will give him everything that is in MLS.

RussellHltn is correct. The Confidential Member Information Report will provide the bishop the information he asked you to get; however, only the bishop can access it.

PartridgeRM wrote:however, only the bishop can access it.

Can we request to extend that function to at least the ward clerk (if not the membership clerk as well)? The reason I ask is that part of the clerk's job is to ease the bishop's workload. In this case, he either can't take on this job, or has to use the bishop's login (not a good idea). Anyone doing a send/receive can see that notation on any record when it moves in via the send/receive report.

While I understand the extra sensitive nature of this, it seems to me this needs to be run periodically to make sure nothing has been overlooked. If only the bishop can do it, it's not likely to get done.

PartridgeRM wrote:The Confidential Member Information Report will provide the bishop the information he asked you to get; however, only the bishop can access it.

The stake president also has access to the same report, but for all members of the stake. The stake level works the same as the ward level -- only the stake president (not any clerks or anyone else) can access that particular report.

RussellHltn wrote:Can we request to extend that function to at least the ward clerk (if not the membership clerk as well)? The reason I ask is that part of the clerk's job is to ease the bishop's workload.

With many of the tools, it is interesting to sit in a ward / stake presidency meeting when a bishop/ stake president delegates, only to have him be told not all of us can do certain tasks he can, due to some surprising and "rigid" access rights. (Although for this report, it's not so surprising....)

kisaac wrote:With many of the tools, it is interesting to sit in a ward / stake presidency meeting when a bishop/ stake president delegates, only to have him be told not all of us can do certain tasks he can, due to some surprising and "rigid" access rights. (Although for this report, it's not so surprising....)

This reminds me of a stake PH leadership meeting in which the area authority suggested that bishops delegate everything they can (even breathing if possible) to their counselors and clerks.

The solution to this might be to allow the bishop to authorize specific callings for "additional powers". I can understand that in the general case, not all wards may delegate a specific function to the same position. And you may not want everyone to whom it might be delegated to have that power. So it seems like the way to do it is allow the bishop to set "added rights" in his ward. Once he's released, all delegation is removed. The new bishop has to set it to correspond to how he runs his ward.

RussellHltn wrote:The solution to this might be to allow the bishop to authorize specific callings for "additional powers".

If memory serves isn't there something like this for the online missionary application? I think the Stake President and Bishop can grant different levels of access to clerks to assist in the procedure.

simonawright wrote:If memory serves isn't there something like this for the online missionary application? I think the Stake President and Bishop can grant different levels of access to clerks to assist in the procedure.

Yes, that's true. But in the case of the online missionary application, that's the only model for permissions for people beyond the bishop and stake president (who have permissions based only on their calling). If the stake president of bishop doesn't grant permissions to a clerk or executive secretary, they have no rights at all for that application.

So there are some differences, but I suppose it could be used as a model. It does seem like it could get unwieldy, since there are so many potential permissions that bishops or stake presidents might want to delegate.

aebrown wrote: It does seem like it could get unwieldy, since there are so many potential permissions that bishops or stake presidents might want to delegate.

Administrators for MLS can assign access rights, based on calling, by ticking a box. I wouldn't have thought the same principle couldn't be used for Bishops and Stake Presidents to assign rights in the future to clerks and exec secs, probably through LDS.org.

aebrown wrote:It does seem like it could get unwieldy, since there are so many potential permissions that bishops or stake presidents might want to delegate.

The only way to know is to list them. I'm guessing there's only about half-dozen things a bishop/stake president can do that say, a clerk can't, and it's a function that can be delegated.