Transitioning Prefix Usage in GL Accounts from Location Identification to Restricted/Unrestricted Classification

Sabrina Wong

Hi

We have been using the prefixes "10-" and "20-" to identify our locations instead of distinguishing between restricted and unrestricted GL accounts. However, we now plan to use these prefixes specifically for restricted and unrestricted accounts. As part of this change, we are currently transferring all balances in the "20-" prefix accounts to the "10-" prefix accounts before repurposing the "20-" prefix for restricted transactions.

Should we reclassify the balances in the "Due to Affiliate" and net asset accounts in the 20-prefix as part of this process? Also, are all the entries in these two accounts automatically generated? Thank you!

Patricia Nowak

@Sabrina Wong We use the first two digits of our account code string, we refer to it as “fund code” to identify restriction and entity. We have 4 entities that we are accounting for and each has it's own UR, TR, and PR fund code. Our system was set up before the FASB reporting change to with and without donor restriction. Our UR fund codes feed into without donor restrictions and our TR and PR fund codes feed into with donor restriction for reporting. Our account code string is XX-XXXXX-XX. The middle 5 digits are our account code, i.e. revenue or expense, and then the last 2 digits identify project type, i.e. expendable, endowment, trust, etc. Regarding balances at a net asset level they will need to be realigned under the new restriction codes as well for everything to balance by restriction overall.