Posts tagged with "FASB"

Simplifying FY2018-2019 Implementation of the new Nonprofit Financial Reporting Standards

Fiscal Year 2018-2019 should be implementing the new Nonprofit Financial Reporting and Accounting Standards.  We are providing this simplified guide to assist your organization with this implementation.  We can help you modify your accounting software to meet this requirements so just let us know how we can assist your organization.

Update:

White Paper Available: “Understanding. Preparing. Implementing.  FASB ASU 2016-14 reporting requirements for Not-for-Profit Organizations

Overview

In November 2011, the Financial Accounting Standards Board (FASB) added a project to its agenda focusing on the financial reporting of not-for-profit (NFP) entities. The project has resulted in the issuance of Accounting Standards Update (ASU) No. 2016-14, Not-for-Profit Entities (Topic 958): Presentation of Financial Statements of Not-for-Profit Entities. The update strives to improve how a NFP organization classifies its net assets and provides information in its financial statements and notes about its financial performance, cash flows and liquidity.  We have summarized the full 270-page standard into this brief guide which outlines the primary changes to the financial statements of not-for-profit organizations.

Net Asset Classes

  • Replaces the current three net asset classes with the following two:
    • Net assets with donor restrictions
    • Net assets without donor restrictions
  • Removes hardline distinction between temporary and permanent restrictions
  • Enhances disclosure requirements:
    • Amounts and purposes of board-designated net assets
    • How restrictions affect the use of resources

In order to implement the new changes, you will need to modify your financial report formats and chart of accounts to insure your internal financial reports are modified for the new financial reporting requirements.  You will need to determine appropriate level of disaggregation of the net assets for Statement of Financial Position, Statement of Activities, and footnote disclosures.

What to know: Previously, not-for-profit organizations had three distinct net asset classifications: unrestricted, temporarily restricted, and permanently restricted. ASU 2016-14 combines temporarily restricted and permanently restricted net assets into “net assets with donor restrictions” and renames unrestricted net assets as “net assets without donor restrictions.” This reflects the fact that permanently restricted net assets can be spent as long as the organization acts prudently.

Previously reported New reporting
Unrestricted Net assets without donor restrictions
Temporarily restricted Permanently restricted Net assets with donor restrictions

Organizations should consider reformatting their internal financial statements to comply with the two net asset classifications, which is not a significant change. However, these two net asset classes are required at a minimum; further disaggregation of net assets can be disclosed in the footnotes. Net assets with time or purpose restrictions could be segregated from those held in perpetuity (such as an endowment) if this is beneficial to the users of the financial statements.

Not-for-profit organizations are required to disclose board- designated net assets either on the face of the financial statements or in the notes to the financial statements. Board-designated net assets are net assets without donor restrictions that are subject to self-imposed limits by action of the governing board. They may be earmarked for a specific purpose, for example, and they can be undesignated at the board’s discretion.

Smaller organizations may need to adopt new policies and practices for tracking board-designated net assets. They should identify all board-designated net assets and understand the purpose of such funds for disclosure purposes. Funds unnecessarily designated may need to be undesignated.

Underwater Endowments

  • Presents deficits relative to original gift amounts of donor-restricted within the donor-imposed restrictions class of net assets
  • Enhances disclosure requirements:
    • Governing board’s policy related to appropriations from such funds
    • Any action taken during the period related to such funds
    • Original gift amount or level otherwise required to be maintained by the donor or law
    • Amount of the underwater endowments in the aggregate

In order to implement the changes, you will need to recast your note to conform to the new two net asset categories.  Remember that the underwater portion of endowments is now presented entirely in net assets with donor restrictions.  The investment return is now presented net of external and direct internal investment expenses, and does not require a separate break-out of the components of investment return.

Organizations should have an investment policy that clearly complies with UPMIFA and addresses how management, within prudence, interprets spending funds from endowments. Organizations should take advantage of the opportunity to communicate their stories and decision-making processes in this area of the disclosures.

Expiration of Restrictions – Long-lived Assets

  • Requires use of the “placed-in-service approach” for determination of when restrictions expire
  • No longer allows the recognition of the expiration of restrictions over the asset’s useful life

Statement of Cash Flows

  • May continue to elect either the direct or indirect method
  • When using the direct method, no longer requires the reconciliation of changes in net assets to cash flows from operating activities

The statement of cash flows update does not change the underlying transactions in the statement. In deciding whether to switch from the indirect to the direct method, organizations should consider the needs of their financial statement users. The direct method of presenting the statement of cash flows is more intuitive and generally more understandable,    as it provides more visibility into the sources and uses of the organization’s funds. In ASU 2016-14, FASB noted that many organizations that implemented the direct method found that it was not that difficult or costly, particularly after the first year. If an organization switches to the direct method, in the year of adoption it should build a good template for use in future years.

Liquidity and Availability of Resources

  • Requires disclosure of qualitative information about how liquid resources are managed
  • Requires disclosure of quantitative information related to availability of financial assets to meet cash needs for general expenditures within one year, including impact of the following on financial assets:
    • Nature of the financial assets
    • External limits by donors, grantors, laws and contracts
    • Internal limits by the governing board

In order to implement the changes, you will need identify all financial assets, and any limitations on availability for expenditure in the next 12 months.   You will need to determine the format to present the required quantitative disclosure.   You can either display amounts of financial assets then adjustments to arrive at an available for expenditures amount or you can display only the net amounts available for expenditure.  You could determine whether presenting a classified statement of financial position could enhance or simplify the quantitative disclosure requirements considering other effects elsewhere in the financial statements and related notes.  You might want to develop a formal policy for managing the organization’s liquidity needs which might be disclosed in the qualitative portion of the note disclosure.

The use of liquidity ratios such as days of unrestricted cash available can be an important tool in monitoring cash reserves. Management should have a realistic forecast of revenues, expenses, and capital expenditures. If a negative result is anticipated, management should implement actions such as capital campaigns, key donor requests, or expense by department analysis to reduce costs. Areas that aren’t strategic to the entity’s mission can be analyzed to determine if they are an effective use of the organization’s resources. In addition, the organization should monitor a cash flow forecast regularly with the help of all supervisors. Organizations should also consider whether alternate sources of funds could be obtained through a fundraising campaign or a line of credit to improve liquidity.

Investment Return

  • Requires external and direct internal investment expenses to be net against investment returns
  • Removes requirement to disclose amount of investment expenses net against investment returns
  • Clarifies what activities constitute direct internal investing activities:
    • Salaries and related expenses of staff responsible for the development and execution of investment strategy
    • Allocable costs associated with internal investment management and supervising, selecting, and monitoring of external investment management firms
  • Permits separate, appropriately labeled line items on the statement of activities for net investment return managed differently or derived from different sources
  • Eliminates the requirement to present investment return components for changes in endowment net assets

Reporting of Expenses

  • Requires all NFPs to report expenses by nature
  • Retains requirement to report expenses by function
  • Requires expense analysis by nature and function to be presented in one location, in either:
    • The statement of activities
    • A separate statement of expenses (similar to the statement of functional expenses)
    • A schedule in the notes
  • Enhances disclosures related to methods used to allocate costs among functions
  • Updates descriptions of management and general activities

In order to implement the changes, you will need to determine where and how to present all expenses by nature and function in one place which might a in the statement of functional expense, statement of activities, or a note to the financial statements.  You will need to evaluate whether your current accounting system will support preparation of this required information.  You will need to develop formal allocation methodologies to be used to allocate expenses among program and supporting services categories.  You will need to draft note disclosure of the methods utilized in the expense allocation process.  It might be time to put together a formal cost allocation plan.

ASU 2016-14 includes clarifying guidance on the definition of management and general activities to assist in better depicting costs that can (or cannot) be allocated among program or support functions. Supporting activities are clarified to mean those “that are not directly identifiable with one or more program, fundraising, or membership development activities.” The update does not change the definition of program expense or supporting service.

Organizations should take the opportunity to revisit their existing functional allocation methodologies and substantiate assumptions used. Research time may be needed to properly allocate items such as employee time between program and supporting activities. Inconsistencies in allocation methods should be identified, and a line-by-line analysis of accounts may be needed. Certain areas such as information technology should be analyzed for direct supervision or direct conduct of program activities.

Organizations should also consider revising their chart of accounts to easily identify natural expenses. Consider whether accounts with programmatic descriptions, such as “Local and Global Outreach,” “Missionary Support,” “Easter Services,” or “Adult and Youth Programs,” should be eliminated and replaced with accounts that have natural expense descriptions for the related costs.

Effective Date and Transition

  • Annual financial statements issued for fiscal years beginning after Dec. 15, 2017
  • Early application is permitted
  • Requires adoption on retrospective basis for all years presented, except for:
    • Analysis of expenses by nature and function
    • Disclosures related to liquidity and availability of resources

Don’t forget to take advantage of our free resource.   “Understanding. Preparing. Implementing.  FASB ASU 2016-14 reporting requirements for Not-for-Profit Organizations

Part 3 FASB ASU 2016-14 Reporting Requirements White Paper

Part 3 FASB ASU 2016-14 Reporting Requirements White Paper

We’re pleased to make available the third and final segment of the three-part white paper series on FASB ASU 2016-14:

Click here to access FASB ASU 2016-14 Reporting Requirements for Not-For-Profit Organizations White Paper Series Part 3 of 3.

This 8-page document is a project plan to help you and your organization focus on task oriented items detailed in all three phases: understanding, preparing, and implementing.

Haven’t accessed Part 1 or Part 2? No problem! Use the links below.

Part 1 – Understanding. Preparing. Implementing. FASB ASU 2016-14 Reporting Requirements White Paper

Part 2 – Understanding. Preparing. Implementing. FASB ASU 2016-14 Reporting Requirements White Paper

Financial Technologies Management works exclusively with nonprofits – providing affordable accounting services, software, and technology.

With the Financial Accounting Standards Board (FASB) issuing a new accounting standards update specifically for nonprofits (ASU 2016-14) to improve the current net asset classification requirements and the information presented in financial statements and notes about a nonprofit entity’s liquidity, financial performance, and cash flows, this is considered a big change.

In fact, this is the first major set of changes to nonprofit financial statement presentation standards since 1993.

Part 3 in our 3-Part White Paper Series on Understanding. Preparing. Implementing. FASB ASU 2016-14 Reporting Requirements for Not-For-Profit Organizations is an active project plan to help you and your organization focus on task-oriented items detailed in all 3 phases; understanding, preparing and implementing.

Feel free to edit and alter this to make it work for your unique nonprofit environment. Not every task will apply to your nonprofit, and there will probably be tasks you will need to add. Part 3 is meant to help guide you and your team as you embark on satisfying the new FASB ASU 2016-14 reporting requirements.

If you don’t want to go it alone – the team at FTM is here to help. We’ve been serving nonprofits exclusively since 1999. We work with nonprofit to select and implement leading nonprofit accounting solutions.

We also provide accounting services, including outsourced accounting, for organizations that understand that professional attention to the organization’s financial accounting is a prerequisite for proper stewardship.

FASB proposes clarifications to accounting for grants and contributions

FASB proposes clarifications to accounting for grants and contributions

At a glance

A new FASB proposal will become effective in 2019 and will require nonprofits to account for grants from the government differently and may affect the timing of revenue and expense recognition for both recipients and funders of condition grants and gifts.

What happened?
On August 3, the FASB proposed rules that would require some grants received by not-for-profit entities (NFPs) to be accounted for under the contribution accounting model instead of the new revenue recognition standard. The proposed changes could also alter the timing of recognition of revenues or expenses for conditional grants and gifts under the contribution accounting model. While accounting for contributions primarily affects NFP entities, the proposed amendments would apply to all entities, including business entities that make contributions or grants.

Five-step approach for revenue recognition

The core principle of the new standard is that revenue recognition should “depict the transfer of promised goods or services to customers in an amount that reflects the consideration to which the entity expects to be entitled in exchange for those goods or services” (ASC 606-10-05-3). To accomplish this objective, reporting entities are to apply a five-step approach:

  • Identify the contract with the customer.
  • Identify the performance obligations in the contract.
  • Determine the transaction price.
  • Allocate the transaction price to the performance obligations in the contract.
  • Recognize revenue when (or as) the entity satisfies a performance obligation.

Key provisions
The differentiator between a contribution and an exchange transaction is whether there has been an “exchange of commensurate value.” The exposure draft proposes enhanced guidance for determining when such an exchange has taken place between the parties to a grant or gift arrangement. In an exchange transaction accounted for under the new revenue recognition standard, reciprocal benefits flow directly between the parties to the arrangement. If benefits ultimately flow to the general public, rather than to the funder, the proposal would require that the arrangement be accounted for as a contribution, rather than as an exchange transaction. This might occur when, for example, a government agency uses a grant arrangement to outsource its own obligation to provide certain benefits to the public. Because NFPs and business entities generally account for federal grant awards as exchange transactions today, the proposal would be a significant change for NFPs. However, business entities would not be affected, because transfers of resources from governments to business entities are outside the scope of the contribution accounting guidance.

The proposal would shift revenue recognition for many grants received by NFPs from an exchange model to the model for “conditional contributions.” Consequently, the FASB also proposes changes that would clarify the accounting for conditional contributions.
Those changes would also affect donors and donees in gift transactions. When a gift or grant is conditional, neither the giver nor the receiver can recognize expense or revenue until the condition is satisfied. The proposal would redefine a “conditional” gift or grant as one that specifies a barrier that must be overcome to be entitled to the promised funds, along with a requirement that the funds be returned (or the promisor released from its obligation) if the barrier is not overcome. Unless a gift or grant includes these more restrictive provisions, gifts or grants deemed to be “conditional” today would no longer qualify. As a result, recipients would recognize contribution income, and grantors
or donors would recognize contribution expense, earlier than they do today.

Effective date
The proposed amendments would have the same effective date as the new revenue standard. For public business entities and conduit bond obligors with publicly-traded debt, the proposed rules would be effective for annual reporting periods beginning after December 15, 2017. Other entities would have an additional year.

Why is this important?
The proposed ASU would provide a more robust framework to determine when a transaction should be accounted for under the contribution accounting model or as an exchange transaction accounted for under other guidance (for example, ASC 606). In doing so, it seeks to harmonize the revenue recognition model used by NFPs for government grants, foundation grants, and charitable contributions. However, NFPs and
business entities could end up applying different revenue recognition models to similar grant transactions. The proposal also underscores the FASB’s intent that accounting for contributions should be consistent from the perspective of both the maker and the recipient of a contribution
or grant. Thus, the proposed changes for determining whether a contribution is conditional would apply equally to both resource providers and recipients.