The Release and Obligation of Army Procurement Funds

Abstract

In recent years the Army has experienced both overobligation and underobligation of procurement funds. As explained more fully below, a Congressional change in the appropriation structure made the budget execution process much more complex, starting in FY 1972. After an overobligation occurred in FY 1974, many new procedures were developed by the Army to prevent further overobligations. Since then, the opposite situation, namely underobligation, has become a problem. The Army, like other Federal agencies, requests its procurement appropriations for a specific fiscal year, based on a planned requirement. When the funds are appropriated but not eventually obligated, the Army's budget estimating credibility is reduced. Delay in obligations can also unbalance carefully planned programs in which the planning for subsequent activity proceeds from initial spending assumptions that later prove invalid. Finally, if procurement funds are not obligated within three years, the funds expire.

Open PDF

Document Details

Document Type
Technical Report
Publication Date
Sep 01, 1978
Accession Number
ADA060097

Entities

People

  • Richard C. Brannon
  • Wayne V. Zabel

Tags

Communities of Interest

  • Human Systems
  • Weapons Technologies

DTIC Thesaurus Topics

  • Army Procurement
  • Business Administration
  • Contractors
  • Contracts
  • Databases
  • Department Of Defense
  • Finance
  • Financial Management
  • Governments
  • Information Systems
  • Law
  • Lead Time
  • Management Information Systems
  • Management Personnel
  • Procurement
  • Standards
  • Statistical Analysis

Readers

  • Military Leadership and Professional Education.
  • Public Financial Management and Budgeting