Financial and Budget Administration
Financial and Budget Administration
This domain tests whether you can spend appropriated funds lawfully and account for them. The framework is the purpose, time, and amount tests, enforced by the Antideficiency Act (31 U.S.C. 1341 and 1517) and the bona fide needs rule (31 U.S.C. 1502).
Core rules and concepts
- Purpose. Funds are used only for the purpose the appropriation was enacted to support. Operations and maintenance funds do not buy what procurement funds must buy.
- Time. The federal fiscal year runs 1 October through 30 September. An obligation must serve a bona fide need arising in the period of availability, not a future-year need bought early to avoid losing funds.
- Amount. No obligation may exceed an appropriation, apportionment, or allotment. Violations are reportable Antideficiency Act violations requiring investigation and notice to Congress.
- Continuing resolutions. Under a CR, only activities covered by the CR and not involving new starts may continue.
- Purchase cards. Splitting a requirement into smaller orders to stay below a threshold is a prohibited split purchase and a reportable violation.
- Separation of duties. The cardholder, the approving official, and the Certifying Officer are different people. Travel follows the Joint Travel Regulations and is settled in DTS after return.
Worked example
A unit needs $18,000 of office furniture and the cardholder's single-purchase limit is $10,000. The proposal is two orders of $9,000 placed on consecutive days. That is a split purchase: the requirement is a single bona fide need, and the division exists only to evade the limit. Correct handling is to route the full requirement through the contracting office or seek a properly authorized approval. The reasoning: the test is the intent and the underlying requirement, not the size of each transaction.
Traps that cost marks
- Obligating before funds are apportioned and allotted.
- Buying next year's requirement this year to spend expiring funds.
- Same person approving and certifying a transaction.
- Missing the Antideficiency Act implication when a question describes an overobligation.