11.14. Funding Distinctive Uniforms and Functional Clothing. Commanders may approve these items for issue as organizational clothing if the functions of an organization or group require the wear of these items (as authorized in AFI 36-2903). The commander puts in writing the justification for the uniform or clothing necessitating the expenditure of the APF. (T-2). Charge the cost of the distinctive uniforms, functional clothing and authorized alterations to the unit of assignment’s O&M funds. For the DAF Reserve, pay the expense from the Reserve Personnel, DAF appropriation.
This chapter implements within the Department certain provisions of Title 31, United States Code, relating to expired and canceled accounts. The governmentwide amendments to Title 31 are contained in Title XIV of the National Defense Authorization Act for FY 1991 (Public Law 101-510, dated November 5, 1990)
The concern should be to make the budget as realistic and accurate as possible because a reasonable budget based on a reasonable plan encourages reasonable performance
A budget is a measurement tool; accountability, discipline and reviews are necessary for control
A budget requires complete participation by all levels of management
Large variances between planned performance and budget objectives indicate a weakness in one or multiple areas:
Poor estimates
Poor feedback and lack of timely, corrective action
Know your operation. Know the people in your operation. Seek feedback. Experience your mission hands-on.
Don’t gloss over this. Get to know each of your missions intimately
How many supplies does each unit have available?
Where are the supplies stored? Are they controlled? Are folks scraping by unnecessarily?
Do you have excess between units that could be shared?
Who is actually watching the cable TV? Are we driving every vehicle on the GSA lease? Who is using the MiFi and why?
How many people are under each cost center? Have you done a cost per person analysis on things like TDY or GPC? Are there outliers? Why might that be (rank, job, special equipment, specific conferences/training)?
Is your unit deploying this year? If so, when? Will that cause your requirements to increase or decrease? Both scenarios are plausible, but not possible.
Do you know how your budget was determined? Could you explain it to the Wing Commander?
How are you evaluating performance? What is the benchmark?
Have you created a feedback loop with your managers? Periodic budget reports should generate feedback on performance variance against budgets
For feedback to work properly, it should be regular, expected, consistent and timely.
The best feedback loop is to sit down monthly with each cost center manager to review the budget-to-actual variance report.
Constantly incorporate changes. Budgets are living, breathing documents.
Find the right balance. Generic or vague estimates are worthless. But the cost benefit analysis must be reasonable. Commanders can’t know every single detail months in advance, but should be able to provide enough of an outline to “frame out” a budget.
Initiate Responsibility Accounting. Responsibility accounting means structuring systems and reports to highlight the accountability of specific people (cost center managers). Individuals within each organization must be empowered with both the budget and authority to execute their mission. One without the other is pointless.
Separate your budget into fixed versus variable costs. This greatly reduces the number of lines to review.
Unfortunately, fixed costs, because of their apparent static behavior, are not always reviewed regularly and critically to determine reasonableness. These are your biggest cost drivers; give them the attention they deserve each year.
Variable costs like GPC and travel are the areas to scrutinize most closely. Rarely does a “copy/paste” budget hold up to close scrutiny.
One major concern of relying upon historical budgets as a basis for future prediction is that a unit may be perpetuating past inefficiencies.
Relationship of Cost to Review Frequency (insert graph)
Legacy – NP in 11th and 12th position in SDN. PC Code ST. Base obligates.
DEAMS – MP in the 11th and 12th position in SDN. Planned PO. Requisition (PR) Amendment will have Purpose code “0” (zero). Original PO with Purpose code P auto obligates. Approved PR Amendments must be associated to Original PO. Do not intermix EEIC/OCs on Transportation MORDS.
See Object Classes/EEICs below to use for the HHG/NTS
See below for the acceptable Object Classes/EEICs available
OCONUS PCS Shipment, OCONUS Cargo (Freight) require both a commercial and an organic MORD
MTA/PAX Organic Accounting (G-MORD) must be sent to the DCBS.Helpdesk@us.af.mil. The subject line should include MTA/PAX MORD, CAER account #, and CIC.
Freight/CARGO (Commercial/Organic) cannot use the EEIC/Objects classes designated for Commercial HHG and NTS:
For HHG, HHG Prog Code, HC = 46200 or 220.1101, 46203 or 220.1103, 46250 or 220.1104 , 55792 or 257.2292, 55793 or 257.2293
For NTS HHG Program Code, HS = 55791 or 257.2291
All others OC/EEICs allowed will be coded Freight and the HHG program field should be blank
HHG Prog Code in TGET is the driver to the Syncada Chart of Accounts (COA) for invoicing
Commercial MP MORDS cannot use EEICs for Organic MM MORDs
Organic MM MORDS cannot use OCs that crosswalk to EEICs that begin with 462% (those are for Commercial purposes)
Please review OCs in the 253 category to select the best OC/EEIC
MM MORDS need to be manually obligated at base level. Please double check to be sure both the requisition and purchase order are approved
The Purchase Order/MORDS must be obligated for the document to flow to TGET
You must check TGET to ensure your MORD/LOA is properly loaded to TGET (this usually occurs 3-5 days after obligation):
This manual implements Air Force Policy Directive (AFPD) 65-6, Budget. Air Force Manual (AFMAN) 65-604, Appropriation Symbols and Budget Codes, provides guidance on using current (Fiscal Year [FY] Appropriations Acts) symbols and budget codes and their descriptions. This manual applies to the Regular Air Force, Air Force Reserve, and Air National Guard (ANG). The current listing of Financial Management codes (including future and historical) which are continually updated and maintained are found in the Air Force Financial Management Data Dictionary (FMDD), accessible via the Financial Management Data Quality Service (DQS). See Attachment 1 for a glossary of references, abbreviations, acronyms, and terms.
If you find we are not referencing the latest version of a regulation or memo, leave a comment or send us an email. We do our best to stay up to date and strive to ensure you have the most accurate, easily searchable information.
This instruction implements Department of the Air Force Policy Directive (DAFPD) 65-6, Budget and prescribes procedures for administering and executing the Department of the Air Force operating budget. Compliance with the attachments in this publication is mandatory. The instruction applies to all civilian employees and uniformed members of the Department of the Air Force, Air Force Reserve, and Air National Guard to include all individuals who perform financial management analysis and resource management at all levels, except where noted otherwise.
If you find we are not referencing the latest version of a regulation or memo, leave a comment or send us an email. We do our best to stay up to date and strive to ensure you have the most accurate, easily searchable information.
SAF/FM rescinded AFI 65-601, Volume 1 and replaced it with DAFMAN 65-605, Volume 1. This created confusion, because the DAFMAN essentially references the AFI beginning on page 10.
If you find I am not referencing the latest version of a regulation or memo, leave a comment or send me an email. I do my best to stay up to date and strive to ensure you have the most accurate, easily searchable information.
Great article from War on the Rocks about America’s budget crisis and a new paradigm on the way to view it. I’m not sure I totally agree with it, but it’s important to open my mind and see the world through a different lens.
Our Debt-to-GDP ratio has skyrocketed from 6% in 2000 to 109% in 2020 and yet interest rates have gone from 4.3% to -0.1%. Robert Levinson author argues that traditional debt views aren’t relevant in the new low (or negative) interest rate environment we find ourselves in. I’m still dubious, but it’s a worthwhile read.