Where are values coming from within the Job Cost Report for the “actual per part” cost of raw components?  
 
Looking into the material cost variances listed within the Job Cost Report for specific work orders, I verified via JC-E that no material was issued to scrap, that only the required material for the work order was issued to the work order; I have double checked the pricing of the component (average/last/standard) and the cost associated with the part upon issuing the material and they all match to what the “estimated per part” yet upon running the Job Cost Report, the report reflects a substantial variance.  What could be causing this?  What am I missing?
 
Thanks in advance!

Cathy -
 
That is how we are noticing it - using JC-A in detail, we can see a component where the estimated per part costs is accurate but the actual per part costs are all off.  To check further, I evaluate the material issues to make sure there was no scrap.  For example, part 420019 is estimated to cost 5.985 but the actual cost is 10.86 though we only paid 5.985 for part 420019 and it was issued at 5.985 and no scrap was issued against the work order for the part.  Therefore I am rather confused as to how DBA is generating the cost of 10.86.  Mind you this is not happening on every Job Cost Report, but a handful here and a handful there each day....
 
Thanks again for your feedback!

Cathy -
 
Thanks for your input!  I am so stumped by this one
 
We issue at the point of kitting the job, there is no backflushing of material.  I have also checked the parts to make sure there was no percentage for scrap and there is not (does not surprise me because we do not use that function), rather if we scrap something we issue it to the job using a scrap code...
 
I am stumped....
 
Thanks again!