Federal departments and agencies receive funding through regular annual appropriations acts. However, in the years covered in this study, all appropriations acts were not enacted before the beginning of the new fiscal year. If one or more of the regular appropriations acts are not enacted, a funding gap may result and agencies may lack sufficient funding to continue operations. The last such occurrence was in fiscal year 1996 during which unusually difficult budget negotiations led to two funding gaps with a widespread shutdown of government operations and the furlough of an estimated 800,000 federal government employees. To prevent similar results, Congress enacts CRs to maintain a level of service in government operations and programs until Congress and the President reach agreement on regular appropriations. CRs are temporary appropriations acts. Once the regular appropriation act is enacted it supersedes the CR. CRs generally do not specify an amount for programs and activities but permit agencies to continue operations at a certain “rate for operations.” They typically incorporate by reference the conditions and restrictions contained in prior years’ appropriations acts or the appropriations bills currently under consideration. The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) is responsible for apportioning executive branch appropriations, including amounts made available under CRs. An apportionment divides appropriations by specific time periods (usually quarters), projects, activities, objects, or combinations thereof, in part to ensure agencies have resources throughout the fiscal year. OMB automatically apportions amounts made available under a CR. The duration of CRs varied during the period covered in this study, fiscal years 1999-2009. Figure 1 shows that the duration of individual CRs enacted from 1999 to 2009 ranged from 1 to 157 days and the number of CRs enacted in each year ranged from 2 to 21. The average length of the CR period was about 3 months and in several years—fiscal years 2002- 2004, 2007, and 2009—agencies’ regular appropriations were not enacted until the second quarter of the fiscal year. This figure also shows that the duration of initial CRs was less than 1 month from 1999-2003, but since then the duration has been about 1 month or more. Between fiscal year 1999 and 2009, most agencies operated under a CR at the beginning of the fiscal year, uncertain if there would be subsequent CRs and if so, how many and how long before receiving regular appropriations. In fiscal year 2001, for example, there were 20 extensions of the initial CR, each ranging from 1 to 21 days, and the total period when one or more agencies operated under a CR was 83 days. There is no discernable pattern for the duration or number of extensions and not all federal agencies are under CRs for the entire duration. As shown in figure 2, agencies covered by the Defense, Military Construction, and Homeland Security Appropriations Subcommittees operated under CRs for about 1 month on average during fiscal years 1999-2009, whereas other agencies operated under CRs for at least 2 months on average. During the period studied, fiscal years 1999-2009, every agency operated under a CR for some period of time. For most, this meant temporarily operating under a conservative rate of spending and limitations on certain activities, as required by the standard provisions. However, in some circumstances, Congress increased amounts available to some programs and activities, extended authorities, or provided greater direction than what was provided by the standard provisions, especially in longer CRs. These specific provisions—called legislative anomalies—may alleviate some challenges during the CR period. We identified 11 standard provisions applicable to the funding of most agencies and programs under a CR. These provisions provide direction regarding the availability of funding and demonstrate the temporary nature of the legislation. For example, one standard provision provides for an amount to be available to continue operations at a designated rate for operations. Since fiscal year 1999, different formulas have been enacted for determining the rate for operations during the CR period. The amount often is based on the prior fiscal year’s funding level or the “current rate” but may also be based on a bill that has passed either the House or Senate. Depending on the language of the CR, different agencies operate under different rates. The amount is available until a specified date or until the agency’s regular appropriations act is enacted, whichever is sooner. In general, CRs prohibit new activities and projects for which appropriations, funds, or other authority were not available in the prior fiscal year. Also, so the agency action does not impinge upon final funding prerogatives, agencies are directed to take only the most limited funding actions and CRs limit the ability of an agency to obligate all, or a large share, of its available appropriation. Congress added two new standard provisions since 1999. At the beginning of fiscal year 2004, Congress standardized a provision that makes funding available under CRs to allow for entitlements and mandatory payments funded through the regular appropriations acts to be paid at the current fiscal year level. In 2007, Congress enacted the furlough provision in the CR for the first time. This provision permits OMB and other authorized government officials to apportion up to the full amount of the rate for operations to avoid a furlough of civilian employees. This authority may not be used until after an agency has taken all necessary action to defer or reduce nonpersonnel-related administrative expenses. The problem of covering salary and personnel expenses with limited funding may be exacerbated when a CR crosses the calendar year and a mandatory salary increase becomes effective. For example, in fiscal year 2009, the CR enacted a 3.9 percent pay increase for certain civilian employees to begin on the first full pay period of the calendar year. However, the CR did not provide additional funding beyond the enacted rates for operations. Accordingly, most agencies were expected to cover the salary increase and related personnel costs at fiscal year 2008 funding levels. In addition to the standard provisions, CRs contained legislative anomalies that provided funding and authorities that were different from the standard provisions. We identified approximately 280 anomalies enacted in CRs since fiscal year 1999. The number of anomalies generally increased as the duration of initial CRs increased in recent years (see fig. 3). Despite the growing number, legislative anomalies covered a small share of the agencies, programs, and activities covered by the CR in each year. Most agencies operated under the more conservative funding levels and limitations provided by the standard provisions for the duration of the CR. Over two-thirds of the anomalies enacted since 1999 fell into two categories: a different amount than that provided by the standard rate for operations, extensions of expiring program authority. Over one-third of the legislative anomalies enacted since 1999 provided an agency, program, or activity an amount different from that provided in the standard provisions. Programs that received a specific or additional amount or a different rate for operations under a CR include the decennial census, wildfire management, disaster relief, veterans healthcare and benefits, and presidential transition activities. An anomaly in the 2009 CR provided BOP with funding equal to the amount requested to cover costs for the current services level in the President’s fiscal year 2009 budget request. The previous year, BOP had received more than $296 million in supplemental appropriations and amounts made available from other DOJ appropriation accounts that were not included in the standard rate for operations in the 2009 CR. According to BOP officials, the anomaly in the 2009 CR helped ensure BOP could continue to pay salaries and expenses of the existing staff and costs of the growing inmate population. In any one of the years we studied prior to 2009, CRs only included up to 18 provisions that provided a different amount than what was provided in the standard provisions. However, in 2009 over 30 such provisions were included in the 157-day CR. In some cases, CRs provided full-year appropriations for a program or activity. Under these circumstances, agencies have funding certainty during the CR period. For example, in fiscal year 2009, the CR appropriated an amount to cover the entire year for Low Income Home Energy Assistance Program (LIHEAP) payments. LIHEAP provides assistance for low-income families in meeting their home energy needs and typically 90 percent of LIHEAP funding is obligated in the first quarter to cover winter heating costs. For several years prior to 2009, OMB provided LIHEAP a seasonal apportionment allowing the program to operate at a higher rate than would have been allowed under OMB’s automatic apportionment. However, by receiving a full-year appropriation in the CR, the LIHEAP program could operate with certainty about its final funding level making an exception apportionment unnecessary. However, these circumstances are rare; most federal programs and activities faced uncertainty during the CR period about when and how much funding would be provided in their regular appropriations. Another large share of legislative anomalies enacted since fiscal year 1999 extended expiring authorities through the specified termination date of the CR. The types of programs extended during the years of our review are diverse, including the National Flood Insurance Program, affordable housing, free lunch, and food service programs. CRs also have extended the authority to collect and obligate fees, such as for mining, or to collect certain copayments from veterans for medications. The fiscal year 2008 CR, for example, included an extension of VA’s authority to collect certain amounts from veterans and third parties, including insurance providers. If the authorization had not been extended, VA would have had to operate with less funding. In some cases, Congress lifted or added restrictions on the authorized purpose for which funds could be used during the CR period or amended other laws. Also, there have been a few legislative anomalies for activities not funded in the prior year, such as a presidential transition. In sum, the number and range of anomalies demonstrate that while CRs are temporary measures, Congress has chosen to include provisions to address specific issues. All six case study agencies reported that the most common inefficiencies were delays to certain activities, such as hiring, and repetitive work, including having to enter into several short-term contracts or issuing multiple grants to the same recipient.