Adult budget for 2013 -14

[amuir]

I very much welcome a discussion on allocation of funds at the next CS meeting in March.
I have £1,308 money left over for 2012-13 but don't know how to distribute it - everyone wants it !
Expenses paid:European Senior Team - nil, European Senior Individual £80 (Giulian),
Olympiad £5,016, World Senior Individual £96 (Pritchett), Total £5,192, Balance £1,308, Budget £6,500
I don't know 2013-14 allocation yet

For 2013 there are e.g.
European Team in November, perhaps £1500 for that, I'll play if selected
Entry fees for CS nominated players
Paul Motwani + other training
Players trying for titles
Would anyone want to organise a FIDE rated tournament ? etc

It would be good to get strong team for Norway Olympiad in 2014 & prepare for that. I quite fancy captaining the team for that too as a Scottish captain for a change.

[andyburnett]

Does the "everyone wants it!" include those sections of CS not involved in adult events?

The first thing that springs to mind is funding something like a pre-Euro teams training weekend where perhaps the top 10 players showing an interest in representing Scotland are joined by the top 10 juniors and have intensive coaching sessions (with someone like Arkady Naiditsch who played at the blitz event earlier this year).

If the money isn't used can it be carried forward to 2013-14? if so, something Olympiad or Commonwealth based might be an option.

I'm sure there are many other ideas out there - perhaps something involving the 'lesser lights' in the adult chess community who put a lot in but get (and have come to expect) very little in return?

[Jonathan Edwards]

Don't forget that the full budget doesn't have to be spent =).

(with someone like Arkady Naiditsch who played at the blitz event earlier this year)

He's coming back for the blitz next year and going to do a simul... problem is I'm struggling to find any sponsorship now I'm in my honours years and don't have much free time. Would there be much support in favour of the blitz getting any of this leftover budget? ;P

[andyburnett]

I was wondering, if it doesn't get spent, will the budget be reduced for future years?

[David G Congalton]

I very much welcome a discussion on allocation of funds at the next CS meeting in March.
I have £1,308 money left over for 2012-13 but don't know how to distribute it - everyone wants it !

Who is everybody? How do you come to have over 20% of your budget remaining and no idea how to distribute? What was included in your original budget calculations?

[Alex McFarlane]

In general terms, and therefore not with reference to this specific case, I would have thought if a director consistantly underspent then that would be grounds to reduce that budget in future. A one -off underspend would not normally affect the following year other than the underspend being used as part of the budget.

On international it certainly used to be the case that the budget was on a two year cycle in as much as the Olympiad years were a bigger spend than non-Olympiad years. Therefore I would guess that what might appear as a reduction is actually a reflection of normality.

I was about to say this seems rather a large amount and it should have been specified in the budget how it would be spent, but David seems to have beaten me to it.

[Donald Wilson]

As I understand it, money left unspent in any financial year cannot just be carried forward to the next year - the Government will simply reduce our grant for the second year by the amount underspent in the first year. In effect, they will just take the surplus off us.

If an underspend is likely on one director's budget, the first step should be to see if the money can be transferred to another director's budget where an overspend seems likely. Alternatively, the money can be used (for example) to buy more digital clocks for Chess Scotland - we could certainly do with some, as ten or so of our current stock are faulty, and it would be good to reach a stage where even the largest congresses in Scotland have no need for analogue clocks.

[Craig Pritchett]

An interesting debate!

Budgetting should always be led by explicit aims and principles in advance of spend. There is no rocket science about this. CS should decide on what activities it would like to support and cut its actual allocations accordingly. Aims always come first, followed by finance - ask any financial manager or chartered accountant!

At present, CS de facto appears to supports the biennial Olympiad team's expenses fully (plus costs of a coach) but no playing fees. It also supports about one third of the team's expenses to play in the biennial European team championships. It has also committed for the first time in 2011-12 to fund a small element (the entry fee only) for one (only) of its entrants in either of the annual Senior European or World championships.

CS need only decide whether it is happy with this de facto set of principles. Personally I think it would be helpful (and it would certainly be in accordance with best budgetting practice) to make these principles (or any changes thereto) explicit in advance of a spending year along with corresponding estimates of the future in-year costs expected.

Of course, over- or under-spends are essentially inevitable, as future costs rarely ever work out exactly as forecast in any business endeavour. However, if these are materially significant (as the current 2011/12 underspend seems to be - it seems at about 15% plus on budgetted expenditure), efforts should either be made urgently within year to re-allocate these scarce resources elsewhere within the international adult budget or release them to other CS budgets, subject to their making a "better" claim.

It is completely up to CS directors to decide these matters, subject to accountability through the AGM for their decisions. They should as far as possible try to make their decisions taking into account their view of the sense of members as a whole (and not necessarily any particularly perceived vociferous minority interest).

What do CS directors think they should support? What do members generally think that they should take into account? Such decisions do have a bearing on choices by potential Scottish representatives to play in events on behalf of Scotland. Perhaps in Scotland we're lucky that we still have a small but not insignificant amount of funds to spend!

I think that Andrew's underspend can probably be carried forward in the overall CS budget (which I think still operates on an overall three year balanced cycle). Our new CS Finance Director can no doubt keep us right on this. It is, however, certainly true that material underspends will almost certainly eventually be met by questions from the Scottish Government about whether we really need the funds that they still award us. We should spend them!

[David G Congalton]

I agree with much of what Craig has said and personally I would certainly like to see the members of Chess Scotland express their opinion, make suggestions and have an open, rational debate, through the forum, on how their funds should be spent.

I will officially be asking all parties concerned in early January for their proposed spending for the financial year starting 1st May 2013 to 30th April 2014 and will expect enough information to allow the Council and CS members to consider the merits of funding the proposed expenditure, the strategic direction the proposed expenditure takes that particular "branch" of Chess Scotland down and the goals and objectives that the funding hopes to achieve.

Without a plan, objectives and goals it is difficult to justify to members, government bodies and potential sponsors or supporters that Chess Scotland is worth investing in.

Again, my personal opinion, is that such objectives etc and proposed expenditure should be in the public domain for discussion, in advance of any final decision on them by CS Council. Part of the rationale behind this is the timing of the financial year, which runs from 1st May and the AGM which is generally around the start of September. By the time the AGM arrives, the major financial decisions have been made for most of the rest of the season and ordinary members have no real say in how funds will be spent for the rest of the season, other than to take the drastic action of voting one or more people out, which brings a whole, new set of issues.

Andy Muir's raising of the issue of what the adult 2013-14 budget should fund and to what extent is a good way to get the debate started, although it is perhaps clouded a little by the reference to the 2012-13 underspend.

So what are the priorities for all Chess Scotland members, at all levels of the game? Should the adult budget focus on the Olympiad and what is a reasonable expectation for such an event? Should we fund a team if it doesn't achieve a minimum level or look at improving the performance by directing funds at coaching or running another top class FIDE event where more of our players can gain experience?

Do we forget paying expenses for the Olympiad and fund more entry fees for top class international adult events?

What about the average club player? Investing in equipment benefits those who play congresses.

I'm sure someone will come up with an idea or two of what we should be supporting in the Junior International front but should we be looking at allocating more funds from both the International budgets to encourage more chess in schools and to support junior chess clubs throughout the country?

As for the current budget, it should be noted that at the start of the financial year there was a projected deficit for the year of £1,320.

[AndrewGreen]

Personally, I would love to see the money go towards the Scottish Blitz. There was a real buzz last time. I prefer this to some of the other proposals as everyone can enjoy it. Donald's suggestion of spending on chess clocks is also very sensible.