|Year to Date (in thousands of dollars)|
|Budget||Actual||Budget vs Actual Variance
|Operational & Supply||61||109||(47)||(43.5%)|
|Occupancy & Infrastructure||5,934||5,653||282||5.0%|
|Equipment, Vehicles, Technology||2,059||2,458||(398)||(16.2%)|
|Equipment, Vehicles, Technology||174||155||20||12.7%|
|Federal & Provincial Grants||(60)||(78)||18||(22.7%)|
|By-Law Charges & Sales||(2.55)||(189)||(67)||35.4%|
|Total Intercompany Charges||(266)||(313)||47||(15.0%)|
|Net Expenditure (Revenue) Before Transfers & Indirect Allocations||27,892||27,932||(40)||(0.1%)|
|Transfers from Funds||(642)||(739)||97||(13.1%)|
|Transfers to Funds||-||196||(196)||(100.0%)|
|Expense Allocations to Capital||(2)||-||(2)||0.0%|
|Indirect Allocations & Debt|
|Total Indirect Allocations & Debt||(27,248)||(27,389)||141||(0.5%)|
|Net Expenditure (Revenue) After Transfers & Indirect Allocation||$-||$-||$-||0.0%|
Corporate Services operated at a deficit before indirect allocations of $141. The following factors contributed to this deficit:
The unfavourable variance of $273 is primarily due to sustainment costs related to the Enhanced Financial Management System which will be offset by savings throughout the Region.
The favourable variance of $461 is primarily due to the timing of consulting on multi-year projects not being completed in 2016, as well as contract positions not being required that had been budgeted. A portion of the unspent consulting budget has been committed and is included in the 2016 encumbrances reported in Transfers to Funds.
The unfavourable variance of $47 is mainly due to costs associated with emergency repairs of the SAEO building and extension of food services contract.
The favourable variance of $282 is a result of utilities and maintenance costs being less than budgeted due to the delay in occupancy at the new Niagara Regional Police (NRPS) headquarter facility, partially offset by unanticipated emergency repairs to a Social Assistance and Employment Opportunities (SAEO) building which are eligible for 50 per cent Provincial funding.
The unfavourable variance of $398 is primarily due to higher than anticipated costs of computer software license renewals and furniture replacement related to an SAEO building which is eligible for 50 per cent Provincial funding. This variance was mitigated by lower IT Solutions expenditures in Administrative.
The favourable variance of $20 is a result of favourable exchange rates compared to budget and lower than anticipated principal payments on printer/photocopiers.
The favourable variance of $18 is a result of higher than anticipated revenue for a funded position, partially offsetting the unfavourable variance in Compensation.
The unfavourable variance of $67 is a result of lower than anticipated rental revenue related to other occupants in Regional facilities and less legal work for external clients who now have their own in-house lawyers.
The unfavourable variance of $82 is a result of not filling a funded position, offset by anticipated MicroFIT project revenues being greater than budgeted.
The unfavourable forecasted variance of $99 related to the 2016 encumbrances.