OLE Consolidation, Level, and Object Codes Lehigh University - 7/23/2014 (Original Presentation) Lehigh University – 11/4/2014 (Post-Implementation Update) By Daniel L. Huang - Lehigh University

Library Chart of Accounts Fund CodeSubaccount # ACT ART AV CEM EBK HUM PHY What do our accounts payable staff and what do our librarians need to know about how we are spending money within our chart of accounts? By Daniel L. Huang - Lehigh University

What does Accounts Payable need? To know which receipts and invoices were billed against a university subaccount (“University Account Number” in OLE) All spending must be submitted and accounted for For the purposes of Accounts Payable, they have no necessity for the granularity of knowing the fund codes or internal OLE Purchase Order information By Daniel L. Huang - Lehigh University

What do our librarians need? However, librarians need far more granularity in the spending data for effective decision making. For example: How many electronic vs. print items did I purchase? And in what dollar amounts? Under what method of purchasing did I acquire these items? Approvals? Firm orders? Slips? In short, we need more details to identify the trends, while still fulfilling our obligations to Accounts Payable By Daniel L. Huang - Lehigh University

What do Consolidation, Level, and Object Codes do in OLE? Consolidation, Level, and Object Codes allow us to add descriptive meaning to our accounts in OLE and group them together meaningfully These codes exist independently of the university account structure. The codes are descriptive, they do not change the structure of the accounts. By Daniel L. Huang - Lehigh University

How would this work? To avoid confusion let us use a non library example For example, an organization might have an office supplies budget as part of their total operations budget Total Operations Budget: $20,000 Purchases = $10000 (Acct# 3000) Other = $1000 (Acct#5000) Office Supplies Budget = $9,000 (Acct# 4000) By Daniel L. Huang - Lehigh University

What details are important? In our hypothetical example, the supervisor needs to know what the funds are spent on between all the offices and breakdown the spending so each spending type is assigned a descriptive tag Office Supplies Budget = $9,000 (Acct# 4000) Pens (PENS): $3,000 Staplers (STAPLE): $3,000 Office Paper (PAPER): $3,000 By Daniel L. Huang - Lehigh University

The Accounts The Accounts Payable office accepts invoices for each office based on their subaccount. The tags don’t affect how invoices are processed since the AP office only sees the invoices and subaccount number Office 1: $2,000 (Account# ) Staplers (Code STAPLE) Pens (Code PENS) Paper (Code PAPER) Office 2: $4,000 (Account# ) Staplers (Code STAPLE) Pens (Code PENS) Paper (Code PAPER) Office 3: $3,000 (Account# ) Staplers (Code STAPLE) Pens (Code PENS) Paper (Code PAPER) By Daniel L. Huang - Lehigh University

So from top to bottom, the organization’s funding looks like this. Each office that is spending money receives their own account (a subaccount of the original main budget for office supplies). By Daniel L. Huang - Lehigh University

How would this organization create reports on what they spent? The total money spent by the organization on operations is CONSOLIDATED by the main budget line for Operations ($20,000). That office supplies budget ($9,000) is divided between various purposes on the LEVEL below the CONSOLIDATION level. This differentiates the purchases for office supplies from everything else. Below that, there is additional specificity regarding which subaccount was used (which office spent the money). However, our office (purely for statistics, not accounting purposes) also wants to know what was the breakdown of what was spent by each office, so the OBJECT (Staplers, Paper, Pens) that money was spent on is important to our boss. By Daniel L. Huang - Lehigh University

Assume: All billing occurs at the subaccount level, which feed into the main account. The tags (Object Codes) are not actually a place where billing occurs. They are purely for statistical purposes internally. All billing occurs against the subaccount number. Regardless of which office spent the money on office supplies or what office supplies were ordered, each of the three offices spends money against their #4000-X subaccount. Office 1: $2,000 (Account# ) Staplers (Code STAPLE) Pens (Code PENS) Paper (Code PAPER) Office 2: $4,000 (Account# ) Staplers (Code STAPLE) Pens (Code PENS) Paper (Code PAPER) Office 3: $3,000 (Account# ) Staplers (Code STAPLE) Pens (Code PENS) Paper (Code PAPER) By Daniel L. Huang - Lehigh University

The beauty of this is that you can also set budgets for each subaccount by assigning an object code to the funds in each account. Again, the AP office doesn’t see this since it is all internal. Office 1: $2,000 (Account# ) Staplers (Code STAPLE)$500 Pens (Code PENS)$1750 Paper (Code PAPER)$250 Office 2: $4,000 (Account# ) Staplers (Code STAPLE)$1900 Pens (Code PENS)$50 Paper (Code PAPER)$50 Office 3: $3,000 (Account# ) Staplers (Code STAPLE)$200 Pens (Code PENS)$800 Paper (Code PAPER)$1000 By Daniel L. Huang - Lehigh University

When running a report, the boss can query on each level of this organization. How much did we spend on pens overall? “I’ll query the OBJECT code PENS so that I know how much was spent on writing implements.” How much did Office #2 spend total? “Oh, I can query on the Office #2 account.” How much was budgeted for operations overall? “Aha, I can just look at the code that CONSOLIDATES all the spending for operations.” How much was spent on office supplies? “I’ll query the level code for office supplies.” The codes let an organization set up budgets and organize their spending! Why is this helpful? By Daniel L. Huang - Lehigh University

What might this look like for OLE? The same structure happens as it does with office supplies, but let us replace the values with library terminology. None of this is DEFINITIVE. We can customize these to suit our needs in any meaningful way before we implement. By Daniel L. Huang - Lehigh University

EBKS = “eBooks” PRBK = “Print Books” APEB = “Approval eBooks”FIEB = “Firm eBooks” FIPB = “Firm Print” APPB = “Approval Print” By Daniel L. Huang - Lehigh University

Why does this help our statistics? Let us assume that under LTS subaccount (ART, CEM, CUR) we budget $3,000 for the purchase of books as part of the larger $100,000 book budget. Instead of “People” doing the purchasing we are dividing the purchasing between library fund codes (ART, CEM, CUR). What would this look like? Just as in the office supplies budget… … There is an upper level CONSOLIDATION code that tracks (but remember, all billing occurs at the subaccount level) all of the spending under BOOKS. For purposes of tracking what was spent on BOOKS, there is a LEVEL code underneath it that divides up the total book spending in a meaningful way. For example, between eBooks and Print books. Remember, tracking the STATISTICS of what we spent is separate from the actual billing on the subaccount level. The Object Codes under each Level Code further helps us describe what we purchased in a way that is meaningful to library statistics. By Daniel L. Huang - Lehigh University

EBKS = “eBooks” PRBK = “Print Books” APEB = “Approval eBooks”FIEB = “Firm eBooks” FIPB = “Firm Print” APPB = “Approval Print” By Daniel L. Huang - Lehigh University

Questions Librarians Ask Remember the supervisor asking questions about the breakdown of what office supplies were purchased and by which department? Let us apply that to the library example. How much did we spend on Firm Print Books? “I’ll query the OBJECT code FIPB so that I know how much was spent on actual physical books.” How much did we spend on eBooks total? “Oh, I can query on the LEVEL code, EBKS.” How much was budgeted for BOOKS (both electronic or print) total? “Aha, I can just look at the CONSOLIDATION code for BOOKS!” Hmm, can I find out how much was spent by the ART fund on Approval eBooks? “I’ll run a report based on the ART fund and what was spent under the Object code APEB!” Do my totals match what was supposed to be spent under ? Well, I can run a report on the relevant object codes for any fund code with the university account number and I’ll get my answer!” By Daniel L. Huang - Lehigh University

Why does this help our budgeting? So assume we have $3,000 under the subaccount. No matter how we set up the structure of our Consolidation, Level, and Object codes, we will only be spending $3,000 from The codes are purely for informative purposes for the librarians. The money from is budgeted INTERNALLY by the librarians amongst the various fund codes under that subaccount. The benefit now is that we can assign Object Codes to describe what was spent within each individual fund code. The dollars in each Object Code can be shuffled at will within the library fund code (so you can shift money from APEP in ART to FIPB in ART, for example). This is also tracked in OLE and leaves an audit trail and gives us a road map for trends in how our spending changes through the year. By Daniel L. Huang - Lehigh University

Budgeting using Object Codes ART ( ) - $1000 Budgeted APEB (Approval eBooks)$200 FIEB(Firm eBooks)$300 FIPB(Firm Print Books)$400 APPB(Approval Print Books)$100 CEM ( ) - $1000 Budgeted APEB (Approval eBooks)$300 FIEB(Firm eBooks)$200 FIPB(Firm Print Books)$100 APPB(Approval Print Books)$400 CUR ( ) - $1000 Budgeted APEB (Approval eBooks)$200 FIEB(Firm eBooks)$200 FIPB(Firm Print Books)$200 APPB(Approval Print Books)$400 Total Spending under to Report to Accounts Payable = $3000 By Daniel L. Huang - Lehigh University

Future Planning This method of setting up the Consolidation, Level, and Object codes are also very EXTENSIBLE. It takes into account that there are the future possibilities of different formats. You can add anything under each of the three levels. For example, there might be a future Book format that requires you to plug your brain into a computer or Commander Spock. By Daniel L. Huang - Lehigh University

OLE can be customized! Here is a possible way to do it based on WHO is buying, not WHAT is purchased. By Daniel L. Huang - Lehigh University

Summary A structure of these codes based on library terminology would not only organize things, but also become a descriptive means of structuring our purchasing. It is also extensible enough for future plans This division of funds in an Account in OLE means that there is a means to report upon what was purchased within these categories INHERENT to the accounting structure of OLE that are descriptive and extensible, instead of relying on a report mechanism to do so. Furthermore this specifically leaves intact any Fund structures and university account numbers, applying OLE's strengths to create meaningful data. This is our chance to create a structure of codes that helps us understand our data and budget, without affecting the actual university subaccounts or any of that reporting. We would still send invoices and receipts to the SAME subaccounts we always had before. However, we could INTERNALLY track our data with greater clarity. By Daniel L. Huang - Lehigh University

Three Months Later… By Daniel L. Huang - Lehigh University

Okay, so now it’s November… How do we feel about this after three months? What does it look like now? How do we feel about this structure? Why has it helped us? What problems did it solve? What issues came up? By Daniel L. Huang - Lehigh University

Fund Codes Organized by Subject and Book/Cons/Periodicals By Daniel L. Huang - Lehigh University

Object Codes Defined by Purchase Method and Format By Daniel L. Huang - Lehigh University

Level Codes Organize Object Codes into Groups by Format By Daniel L. Huang - Lehigh University

Codes (with a picture!) By Daniel L. Huang - Lehigh University

Allows for Efficient Reporting Allows user to run a query such as “in all the book funds, how much did we spend on approval books?” Search based on PRAP (Print Approvals) object code and book funds By Daniel L. Huang - Lehigh University

Data is Export-Ready Available Balances lookup in OLE allows queries based on object code, thus all funds are sorted by that parameter Provides “global” view of expenditures, but can get even more granular Export as spreadsheet, etc. By Daniel L. Huang - Lehigh University

Positives! (first) We can make a report very easily that answers those global questions with parameters that are meaningful to librarians It’s easy to add and take away Object Codes. This method is extensible This let us keep our original Account structure with funds organized around subject area By Daniel L. Huang - Lehigh University

Problems We made it far too granular. Had a couple codes we don’t use often, such as “Microfilm” Naming conventions could have been more unified or intuitive (PRAP sounds funny don’t it??) This let us keep our original Account structure with funds organized around subject area (but not every library does it that way) By Daniel L. Huang - Lehigh University

Reminders Object Codes are unique to each Level Code Object Codes are sorted by Level Codes, Level Codes are sorted by Consolidation Codes There is no limit on the number of Consolidation, Level, or Object Codes. Or the number of hierarchies (create as many as you want) By Daniel L. Huang - Lehigh University

Are we sticking with this? YES This method allows for us to report on acquisitions with the specific parameters we want This method is “future proof” in the sense that the Object Codes are independent of any changes to the Chart of Accounts This method is extensible so we can account for any changes in purchase methods or formats! By Daniel L. Huang - Lehigh University

Thoughts on Consortiums Object Codes can be used on any fund/account, even across separate Chart of Accounts (useful for consortiums) So why not just let each institution use its own Chart of Accounts and just decide on a unified Object Code structure for global reporting? OR each institution can use its own Object Codes, but are similar enough to group “like things” together By Daniel L. Huang - Lehigh University

Questions? Daniel Huang (Acquisitions) By Daniel L. Huang - Lehigh University