Year-end commitments and virement at a provincial health department
The Provincial Department of Health has an annual appropriation of LKR 1.2 billion for 2026: LKR 600 million recurrent and LKR 600 million capital for a new hospital wing. At 31 December 2026, capital work certified by the engineer is LKR 520 million, of which LKR 90 million remains unpaid to the contractor. Retention of 5% is held. Materials costing LKR 45 million were ordered and delivered to site in December but not yet incorporated; the supplier's invoice is unpaid. A dengue outbreak has increased overtime and drug costs, and the provincial health secretary proposes to vire LKR 60 million from the capital vote to recurrent expenditure before year-end. Separately, a donor transferred LKR 100 million in December for medical equipment; LKR 35 million is still unspent and the donor agreement requires repayment if not used by 31 March 2027. The Auditor General has requested the year-end financial statements and a report on financial irregularities.
1. Advise whether the proposed LKR 60 million virement is permissible. Identify the approvals and controls required, and the risks of using capital funds for recurrent expenditure.
Read the worked answer
Virement is not a free reserve. The department must first check the Appropriation Act, the annual estimates, the Financial Regulations and the applicable Treasury or Provincial Treasury circulars. Those rules normally set limits on virement between sub-heads, prohibit virement that changes the purpose of a vote, and require prior approval for transfers between capital and recurrent expenditure. A transfer of LKR 60m from a capital project to meet salary and drug costs is likely to need special approval, not a routine official-level transfer. If the rules prohibit it, the correct route is a supplementary estimate or an emergency allocation, not virement.
The secretary should document the dengue outbreak, the revised recurrent requirement, the effect on the hospital wing, and the availability of any recurrent contingency. Approval should be obtained from the relevant treasury authority and recorded in the minutes. The accounting officer should not authorise expenditure beyond the approved provision merely because cash is available.
The risks are significant. Capital funds may be diverted from a committed project, causing delays, price escalation and abandoned work. Recurrent overspending may recur, and using capital money to fund it disguises the true operating deficit. The transfer may breach the appropriation and become an audit query or a financial irregularity. It may also distort the year-end financial statements by showing capital expenditure that was not actually incurred. The department should instead reprioritise within the recurrent vote and seek a proper supplementary provision.
2. Explain how the certified unpaid bills, retention and the LKR 45 million of undelivered/incorporated materials should be treated at 31 December 2026 under cash-based government accounting, and what disclosures are needed.
Read the worked answer
Under cash-based government accounting, expenditure is generally recognised when payment is made, not when the liability is incurred. The certified work of LKR 520m does not all become expenditure at 31 December. Only the amount actually paid should be recorded as expenditure for the year. If LKR 90m remains unpaid, that amount is not yet an expenditure in the cash statement, but it is a real liability and must be disclosed as an unpaid bill or commitment. The 5% retention is part of the contract price withheld from payments; it should not be counted twice. It should be disclosed separately as retention money held, and recognised as expenditure only when paid or released in accordance with the contract.
The LKR 45m of materials delivered to site but not incorporated raises a different issue. If the supplier has not been paid, there is no cash expenditure. If the materials have been paid for, they are not necessarily an expense of the year; they are inventory or work in progress until consumed or incorporated. The department should record them as stocks or advances, depending on the accounting framework, and disclose the commitment. If the materials are incorporated after year-end, they should be charged to the capital project in the period of use, not automatically in 2026.
The financial statements should disclose unpaid contractor bills, retention, material commitments, the capital project's progress and any significant commitments not yet reflected in the accounts. The accounting officer should ensure that the disclosures are complete enough for the Auditor General to reconcile certified work, payments, liabilities and commitments. Simply omitting the unpaid bills would understate liabilities and could mislead the reader about the project's financial position.
3. Advise on the accounting and reporting treatment of the unspent LKR 35 million donor grant and the audit implications for the Auditor General and COPA.
Read the worked answer
The donor grant is not unconditional income. Because the agreement requires repayment if the LKR 35m is not used by 31 March 2027, the unspent amount is a restricted resource with a refund condition. It should not be recognised as revenue or as a surplus available to the department. It should be recorded as restricted cash and a corresponding liability or refundable advance until the condition is met. If the equipment is purchased and the condition is satisfied, the amount can be recognised as grant income and the equipment capitalised or expensed according to the government accounting framework. If the deadline is missed, the repayment should be recorded as a liability and paid from the correct vote.
The department should disclose the grant agreement, the purpose, the unspent balance, the repayment condition, the deadline and the planned use. The Auditor General's audit should test whether the grant was used for the specified equipment, whether the unspent balance is correctly classified, whether the repayment condition is disclosed, and whether any expenditure was diverted to recurrent costs. If the LKR 60m virement proceeds and affects the same financial statements, the auditor should consider whether it breaches the appropriation or the donor agreement.
A report on financial irregularities should identify any misuse of the grant, any unauthorised virement, any unpaid bills omitted from the accounts and any weakness in commitment control. The Auditor General may report the matter to COPA, which can summon the accounting officer to explain the diversion of funds, the status of the hospital wing and the repayment of the unspent grant. The department should prepare a remediation plan and keep evidence of approvals.