The Urgent HVAC Requisition That Failed Funds Check
Northwind's Facilities cost center has a FY budget of $250,000 entered at the account level, with budgetary control set to Absolute and funds check level Detail. On 12 March, open commitments total $238,000: two purchase orders of $96,000 and $88,000, plus $54,000 recorded against a service contract. A requisition for $18,000 of emergency HVAC repair fails the funds check and cannot be submitted. Investigating, you find the $88,000 purchase order was cancelled on 5 February but its commitment still appears in the budget inquiry, and $22,000 of the service contract was invoiced and paid in January while its obligation was never liquidated. The facilities manager wants you to switch the cost center to Advisory control for the rest of the year so emergencies can proceed, and separately to post a journal moving $50,000 from a central contingency account to increase the Facilities budget.
1. Quantify the genuinely available budget and decide whether the requisition is truly over budget.
Read the worked answer
Walk the commitment balance back to reality:
| Item | Amount |
|---|---|
| Budget | $250,000 |
| PO 1 (open) | ($96,000) |
| PO 2 (cancelled 5 Feb) | ($88,000) - stale, should be zero |
| Service contract obligation | ($54,000) - $22,000 already invoiced and paid |
Corrected commitment position: $96,000 + $0 + ($54,000 − $22,000) = $134,000. Corrected available = $250,000 − $134,000 = $116,000, comfortably above the $18,000 requisition.
The funds check failed because budgetary control is comparing the requisition against stale commitment balances, not because the cost center is out of money. Two data conditions caused it: a cancelled PO whose commitment was never relieved, and an obligation that was not liquidated when the invoice was recorded. Neither is a budget shortage.
Recommended action: run the budgetary control rebuild/refresh process for the cost center so commitments reflect open documents, verify the cancelled PO shows zero commitment and the service contract shows $32,000, then resubmit the requisition. Do not increase the budget - the money already exists.
2. Assess the proposal to move the cost center to Advisory control for the remainder of the year.
Read the worked answer
Decline as proposed. Advisory control lets transactions proceed with a warning when funds are insufficient. It does not fix stale commitments, so the underlying data would remain wrong and the warnings would be ignored within a month. It also converts a hard control into a notification for a whole cost center, for a whole year, to solve a one-off data problem - a disproportionate and hard-to-reverse control change.
Better options, in order of preference:
- Fix the data now (rebuild commitments). This alone clears the emergency requisition, so no control change is needed.
- If a genuine over-commitment exists later, use a budget transfer with approval from an account with available funds, rather than loosening control.
- If Advisory is genuinely wanted for a narrow class of spend (for example utilities emergencies), apply it at the account or account-range level for that specific category, with an expiry, not at the cost center level for the year.
If a control-level change is still requested, it needs change-control approval, a documented rationale, and a review date. Advisory should be the exception path, not the standing setting for a department that keeps surprising you.
3. What is wrong with moving $50,000 via a journal from the contingency account, and what is the correct mechanism?
Read the worked answer
A general journal does not change budget. In budgetary control, available funds are driven by budget balances, not by actual or encumbrance postings. A journal crediting Facilities and debiting contingency would move actual balances and create a confusing variance; the funds check for the requisition would still fail.
The correct mechanism is a budget transfer or budget journal between the contingency and Facilities accounts within the same budget and period, approved through the budget approval workflow. It increases the Facilities budget balance, funds check passes, and the transfer is auditable as a budget decision with an approver, not as an accounting entry.
Sequence to do this properly:
- Fix the commitment data first, so the transfer requested reflects the real shortfall (which is currently zero).
- If a transfer is still needed, submit a budget transfer with justification and correct approval authority.
- Keep the actual journal ledger clean - actuals record what was spent, budgets record what was authorized.
Mixing the two produces a budget position that no one can reconcile at quarter end.