LUFAS suggestions/ feedback

Is there a dedicated place to leave feedback or suggestions from auditors to the LUFAS development team? Since I'm not finding another avenue I'll list a few here.

1. There are some questions in the audit that don't require any audit tests, which could and should be answered by the unit leader. Could those be moved to the bishop review step of the audit?

2. The question about clerks and bishopric members watching the training video, "Sacred Funds, Sacred Responsibilities" could be tracked just like the training video "Protecting Children and Youth Training" is tracked and recorded.

3. The process of entering receipts electronically and receiving direct payments could be made available to auditors so we could better understand how it works and train clerks how it should be used. They can then train the members of the ward council, particularly when audit results indicate more training is needed.

4. Could auxillary leaders be given access to submit receipts for fast offering expenditures? It is my understanding bishops have been counseled to delegate FO assistance efforts to the RS & EQ presidents, the approval process could also have stronger controls in place for authorization, with some ability to override in exigent circumstances.

5. This relates to another auditors question about having to review donation records in LCR. If corrections are made to a donation/deposit batch after it is recorded in the system could it be flagged by LCR and given a higher priority in LUFAS? LCR might also teach which data elements were changed so the auditor could decide if further examination is required.

ke5dak wrote: Sat Feb 08, 2025 6:32 am Is there a dedicated place to leave feedback or suggestions from auditors to the LUFAS development team? Since I'm not finding another avenue I'll list a few here.

I am not aware of a dedicated method; but leaving it here will do nothing in getting it to the decision makers. The forum is user-to-user discussion and collaborative self help. If there is not a feedback link at the bottom of the LUFAS page then any other Church web page that does have a feedback link can be used. Just make sure to identify LUFAS as the target system.

As jdlessley said, the official feedback mechanism is to use a feedback link on churchofjesuschrist.org. I don't see one available anywhere in LUFAS itself. However, another path is to send them to your Assistant Area Auditor. If they and the Area Auditor agree then their voices are likely to have greater influence on the priority the suggestions are given.

I do have a few comments (just my thoughts and opinions as a former stake auditor and current stake finance clerk):

ke5dak wrote: Sat Feb 08, 2025 6:32 am Is there a dedicated place to leave feedback or suggestions from auditors to the LUFAS development team? Since I'm not finding another avenue I'll list a few here.

1. There are some questions in the audit that don't require any audit tests, which could and should be answered by the unit leader. Could those be moved to the bishop review step of the audit?

I don't think there is anything that says the auditor has to ask the questions in the order listed. So I think an auditor can do them just prior to the review step (and after the audit tests) if they so desire. In my recent audits at the stake level, the auditor has completed all audit tests before our actually meeting so all we do is the questions and review.

ke5dak wrote: Sat Feb 08, 2025 6:32 am 2. The question about clerks and bishopric members watching the training video, "Sacred Funds, Sacred Responsibilities" could be tracked just like the training video "Protecting Children and Youth Training" is tracked and recorded.

The audit requirement expects the clerks and bishopric to watch the video together as a group. I suppose they could set something up so that each person had to provide their credentials in turn before or after they watch the video to verify they group but that feels like a lot of hassle both on the development side and for those watching it. Plus we sometimes watch on zoom which would make that hard. So personally I think the current question is just fine.

ke5dak wrote: Sat Feb 08, 2025 6:32 am 3. The process of entering receipts electronically and receiving direct payments could be made available to auditors so we could better understand how it works and train clerks how it should be used. They can then train the members of the ward council, particularly when audit results indicate more training is needed.

Although I'm all for making sure those who train can actually use the systems they are supposed to train on, I'm not sure how many auditors would have actual expenses to submit so I'm not sure this would be that useful to many auditors. The stake finance clerk should be familiar with this process and should make sure clerks are trained.

ke5dak wrote: Sat Feb 08, 2025 6:32 am 4. Could auxillary leaders be given access to submit receipts for fast offering expenditures? It is my understanding bishops have been counseled to delegate FO assistance efforts to the RS & EQ presidents, the approval process could also have stronger controls in place for authorization, with some ability to override in exigent circumstances.

This makes a lot of sense to me and would probably reduce the load on bishops. But, as you hint at, it might be best to require the bishop's electronic approval before processing such expenses. Exigent circumstances could he handled by having a clerk or bishopric member set up the expense using the normal process (after getting verbal approval from the bishop).

ke5dak wrote: Sat Feb 08, 2025 6:32 am 5. This relates to another auditors question about having to review donation records in LCR. If corrections are made to a donation/deposit batch after it is recorded in the system could it be flagged by LCR and given a higher priority in LUFAS? LCR might also teach which data elements were changed so the auditor could decide if further examination is required.

LUFAS does already flag some expenses as likely to need special attention. This would definitely make sense on the donation side.