Figure 4-14.-Cost data for administration program–Continued.
throughout the armed forces submit budg-
etary input, which moves through the various
levels of command before the budget is finally
submitted to Congress. This input usually occurs
some 24 months before the affected fiscal
year begins, and planning usually begins 3
years before that. For example, in FY 86
commanders are thinking about future budgets,
including the FY 91 budget.
Budgeting is one of the most misunder-
stood and misused terms in the management
vocabulary. Some managers tend to think of
a budget as an assignment of money from
“upstairs” that is totally inadequate to fi-
nance operations. However, managers must
demonstrate inability to get the most mileage
out of available resources. Unapproved budget
is not an “allotment check” for them to
spend as they like—CRP managers have an
obligation to avoid waste and formulate a
spending plan that ensures wise disbursement of
appropriated funds.
PROGRAMMING
In the budgeting process for the Command
Religious Program, programming is a constant
and necessary ingredient for success. CRP needs
are translated into programming requirements
(figs. 4-1 through 4-20). These requirements are
inserted as line items within the various programs
making up the Command Religious Program, as
depicted in figures 4-5 through 4-20.
BUDGETING ON THE MARGIN
Provisions for scheduled worship services, the
administration of rites and sacraments, and
command-directed activities are programs that are
basic to the needs of any Command Religious
Program, regardless of its scope. The bare
essentials of the CRP are as follows:
. Scheduled worship services
l Pastoral counseling functions
4-13
