A fund approval hierarchy (FAH) allows you to require up to four levels of approval for a given edit test. You can define separate and distinct tolerance thresholds for each approval level for tolerance based edit tests.With a fund approval hierarchy, you can define the approval role levels used for Control Center edits and can assign an approval level to an edit test, such that edit does not clear until all defined Eagle users in the approval hierarchy verify the edit. The approval process, in turn, can use the fund approval hierarchy to help you approve edits more efficiently based on approval hierarchy role levels and to view edits based on approval hierarchy role levels.
Understand User Roles
When you create a fund approval hierarchy, you can set up user roles that correspond to the available approval levels from 1 to 4. You can change the role names and descriptions. The default roles provided include Annotator (Role 0), Preparer (Role 1), Reviewer (Role 2), Accounting Manager (Role 3), and Unit Manager (Role 4). You can change the role name and description for your business. You do not need to use all the levels in your hierarchy. After you create user roles, you can assign specific user roles to specific Eagle users.
Understand the Highest Approval Level That an Edit Test Requires
At a minimum, the systematic accounting checks that Control Center provides demand one level of business approval as long as the user role level meets, or is above, the error tolerance level that was raised. Within each edit test that uses the fund approval hierarchy, you can configure up to four approval levels required. Eagle provides a set of FAH edit tests designed for use with a fund approval hierarchy.
For tolerance related edit tests, you can configure separate and distinct thresholds for each role level. You can set up and change the approval levels based on your current and future business needs. You can also set up error severity based on role level. For example, you can specify an error severity as a warning (LOW) or an error (HIGH) at the edit test level. If not assigned, the system uses the default error severity from the error dictionary. You can also assign a warning (LOW) or an error (HIGH) at the individual error tolerance level.
writers note: need more info about tolerance and error severity changes.
Understand Dual Approvals
When you use a fund approval hierarchy, you can require a minimum of two unique approval users. This process is modeled after a European workflow that requires two sets of eyes to review every exception prior to final approval. You can select the dual approval option at the status map level. If you require dual approvals, where you require two Eagle users for final approval, you can set up the Annotator (Role 0) user role as first level who provides initial approval and adds approval notes that another level can review for final approval.
When you use dual approvals, the first level of approval is always the Annotator (Role 0) level. The final approval is needed from at least one other different Eagle user at one of the other levels. This ensures two sets of eyes reviewed the exception. The edits raise as a "-1" and the system reflects initial approval as Annotator (Level 0) regardless of approver role level. Because all edits need at a minimum a role level of 1 for final approval, this prevents a role level 0 Annotator from final approving any edits. Approval at the user role level that is equal to the edit test tolerance level acts as final approval and triggers a check for another unique approval user. If another approval user exists, the edit clears. If one does not exist, the final approval fails with a warning: Not all edits selected meet the dual approval requirements. Up until final approval, Eagle users can continue to add notes to the edit’s approval history.
WRITERS NOTE: need more info for clarity. If an Annotator of level 2 and a final reviewer of level 4 look at it, exactly what do they do? What error severities occur when defined at different levels? What do the two people do when they use the system? Do they both approve or does only one approve?
Understand Approvals for Sign-Off Edits
A user-level option allow users with certain rights the ability to approve Sign-Off edits (Transaction, Valuation and Audit Sign off edits), similar to allowance to clear prior period edits. Status sign-off edit tests allow you to ensure that approval role levels 1 and 2 completed the necessary review for a fund.
Approve Edits with the Fund Approval Hierarchy
When you use a fund approval hierarchy, Control Center allows you to approve edits in a sequential role level manner, disabling higher level approvals until the lower level approvals are complete.
Control Center allows you to view data based on its approval status,in addition to other criteria. The Fund Group Summary view displays the Fund Group Summary results only by Control Center composite. You can view a count of the edits approved or not approved at each role level by a set status. You can view all edits at the entity level, transaction status, valuation status, or audit status by accounting date. The Fund Group Details view allows you to view by your approval user role level. The options for approving edits include: Approve As, Approve All As, Approve At All Levels, and Approve All At All Levels. The Edit Test Results view shows all Control Center edits or a view based on the edit’s approved, cleared, or unapproved status. You can view edits by edit test type, security type, expense type, or corporate action type. You can see the status of all edits and if they were approved by specific role level users. And you can view a history of approval notes from an edit test result.
Understand Approval Options
???? DEFINE THE APPROVAL OPTIONS HERE
Add Comment