Plain and simple: another agency is sending you money.
If you remember nothing else from this page, remember this: a MIPR is the document another DoD agency uses to send you money for contracting support. The Air Force is on the receiving end of MIPRs from the Army, the Navy, the Marines, and DoD agencies all the time. We send them too. The form is DD 448 from the sender. Your acceptance is DD 448-2. That is most of what you will see in a deployed environment.
In my experience, squadrons can make MIPRs much more complicated than they need to be. Approval chains, multiple signatures, layers of routing. My suggestion: let the executing CCO accept the MIPR, or their flight chief if local procedure asks for it. Do not overcomplicate it. A MIPR is just another funding document. It is no different than any other document that pushes money into your office. The acceptance is a contracting action, not a bureaucratic event.
Where it does get interesting is in how you execute the buy on the back end. That is what most of this page is about.
Quick: what's the Economy Act?
You'll see "Economy Act" referenced on MIPR routing notes and acceptance files. Plain version: it's the law (31 U.S.C. 1535) that lets one federal agency order goods or services from another federal agency and pay for them. It's the underlying authority for most interagency MIPRs you'll see, unless a more specific authority applies. When somebody asks "is this Economy Act?" they're asking what statutory basis the cross-agency money movement is riding on. That's it. Nothing exotic.
Acceptance is where your office takes it on.
A deployed MIPR is a deliberate local buy. It arrives with another unit's money, another unit's mission pressure, and your office's name on the award once you sign acceptance.
Whose desk is this?
You are the receiving office. Your job is to decide whether your shop can contract for the work cleanly.
Can the package stand?
Read the requirement, funds, period, category, and authority before your signature gets near the acceptance.
Accept only what fits.
Full acceptance, partial acceptance, qualified acceptance, or rejection are all real answers.
Close the loop.
The file needs the DD 448, the DD 448-2, award evidence, administration trail, and closeout support.
When the funding story gets complicated
End-of-year O&M, a period of performance that starts in the next fiscal year, a mixed-appropriation package, or a missing Economy Act support file are all situations that should slow your acceptance down. They are not show-stoppers. They are signs that the package needs a closer read, a conversation with finance, and probably a qualified or partial acceptance with the facts written into the DD 448-2 remarks. The rule is simple: do not sign a full acceptance for something the funding cannot defend.
Read the inbound package before you read the customer.
The customer may be standing in your doorway, but the first pass is document discipline. This is the scan I want before anyone promises award timing.
Requirement
Is the performance work statement, statement of work, or statement of objectives attached, signed, and contractible?
Estimate
Is the independent government cost estimate present and sane enough to plan the acquisition?
Funds
Do the appropriation, amount, accounting line, and period of availability match the requirement?
Timing
Does the period of performance fit the funds, the need date, and any severability logic?
Category
Is the sender asking for reimbursement or direct citation, and can your office support that category?
POCs
Can you reach the requiring activity, fund holder, technical lead, and receiving official fast?
BFN
Does the fiscal-year story make sense, especially if the work crosses 30 September?
Flags
Look for GFP, missing security terms, host-nation constraints, and category confusion.
What the DD 448 gives you to work with.
A MIPR is a formal way for one Department of Defense component or activity to send a requirement and funds to another activity for support. In deployed work, it often shows up when a joint partner needs your contracting capacity, your system access, or your theater support lane.
DD 448
The requesting activity creates it. It should state what is needed, who is asking, how much money is available, which appropriation is cited, what period applies, and what special instructions ride with the work.
DD 448-2
Your side completes it. It documents acceptance, qualified acceptance, partial acceptance, or rejection and sends the sender a record of what your office agreed to provide.
Procedure plus fiscal authority
DFARS 208.7005 points to PGI 253.208-1 and 253.208-2 for the forms. The Economy Act, 31 U.S.C. 1535, often sits underneath interagency support when no more specific authority applies.
Why you see them forward
You will see inbound requests from Army or Navy tenants at the same base, a unit without a warranted CO, a unit whose CO cannot reach the contract writing system or DoDAAC, specialized support through Defense Logistics Agency lanes, working capital fund buys, and lead-service contracting arrangements under OCS.
Direct citation vs reimbursable, and which one you actually want.
There are two flavors of MIPR acceptance. The current DD 448-2 labels them Category I (reimbursement) and Category II (direct citation of funds). The labels are easy to mix up, so the rule is: check the box that matches what your office can actually execute. If a local guide says the reverse of what the form says, follow the form and verify before signing.
Plain language on what each one does. Direct cite means the contract you write cites the sending agency's funds directly. Their money, your contract. Useful when you have a contract writing system. The reason this gets complicated for deployed work: the Army does not use the Air Force's funding systems (DEAMS, for example), so their money does not flow into our contract writing system the way an internal Air Force funding doc would. The way that gets handled is you accept the MIPR with the DD 448-2, write the contract, and then send the other agency a copy of the contract so they can upload it on their side and attach the funding for billing. That is how direct cite actually plays out across services.
Reimbursable is what you want when you do not have a contract writing system, or when you are buying with cash or a GPC. The other agency sends the money to your finance shop. Finance accepts it and moves the money digitally in the background, into the right "pot" for your office to use. Then you spend it as cash or GPC, and finance handles the digital reconciliation back to the sender. If I am deployed and I want to put it on contract, I advocate for direct cite. If I am using cash or a GPC, I want reimbursable and I want finance heavily involved, because ultimately your finance shop tells you whether the funding is available in the cash account or in the GPC pot to actually execute.
Direct Citation (Category II)
My deployed playbook on which one to pick
Off-topic-ish to the form, but worth saying: I have found it actually easier to execute my own agency's contracts via a written contract, and then strictly execute the agency I am supporting with cash and a reimbursable MIPR. It just tends to work out better that way. It is not always the case (construction is one place that gets weird), but for most deployed support it holds up.
Real example. The Marines showed up on a deployment once, pretty unexpectedly. They did not need much, so cash purchases were fast. We exclusively used cash and reimbursable MIPRs for their stuff, while we still wrote full contracts and ran GPC purchases for my own agency. Nothing mandatory about that approach. I have just taken my licks trying different methods and that is the one that worked out best. It was a joint decision with my team and with finance, which is the only way that kind of call should ever get made.
The thing to avoid: picking a category because one sounds administratively easier today. Pick the category your office can execute without breaking the funding story in November. Severable services, expiring O&M, RDT&E, OPN, and a late-year MIPR all deserve a funds conversation before signature.
Direct-cite transition note
DoD issued FPM25-05 for direct-cite orders. By 31 July 2026, Components must use the PRDS lane for direct-cite purchase requests and discontinue MIPR acceptance by DD 448/DD 448-2 for that lane. If your system or Component has already moved, treat this form walkthrough as transition training and follow the current PRDS process.
The DD 448-2 is your response file.
The form does not make a bad package good. It records what your receiving activity is accepting, qualifying, splitting, or rejecting. Build it like someone will use it six months later to explain the obligation trail.
Blocks 1 to 5, match the inbound file
Do not let a wrong MIPR number, stale amendment, or mismatched amount carry into your acceptance.
Block 6, say what kind of support you are accepting
Check reimbursement, direct citation, both, or qualified reimbursement. This is where category confusion becomes a file problem if you miss it.
Blocks 7 to 9, split the work cleanly
If only part of the request fits, reject or leave out the part that does not. Partial acceptance beats a sloppy full acceptance.
Blocks 10 to 13, write the fiscal story
Anticipated obligation date, funds data, rejected items, and remarks should explain what your contract can cite and why.
Blocks 14 to 17, make the acceptance accountable
The accepting activity and authorized official should match local delegation and office procedure. A deployed CCO still signs as a real CO.
The problems that make clean support turn ugly.
Most bad MIPR files do not fail because someone forgot what the acronym means. They fail because the acceptance outpaced the funding, timing, or administration trail.
Fiscal-year boundary
Expiring O&M with a next-year start date needs a hard look at BFN, severability, and the 10 U.S.C. 3133 12-month rule for DoD severable services.
Wrong category
If the sender says direct cite but the package behaves like reimbursement, pause the acceptance and fix the category before award routing.
No billing path
For MIPR-Cat-I, your office needs the mechanics to bill and reconcile. A good requirement does not solve a broken reimbursable setup.
Partial acceptance
Accept the line that fits and reject the one that does not. Block 7 and Block 13 exist for that reason.
Administration handoff
Name who handles receiving, surveillance, invoices, and closeout. If a COR is required, line that up before award.
Other support authorities
If the right lane is ACSA, MILSTRIP, stock system support, or another statutory authority, do not force the requirement through a contract just because a MIPR arrived.
When to reject or qualify
Reject or qualify when the requirement is not contractible, the funds cannot be verified, the period of performance does not fit the appropriation, the sender has not provided the Economy Act or other authority support your procedure requires, or the acceptance would put your office outside warrant, local policy, or theater business rules. Document the call on the DD 448-2 and move on.
The loop is not closed at award.
Once you accept the MIPR, your office owes the sender a trail they can use to defend their funds and close their books.
Contract file
Keep the inbound DD 448, signed DD 448-2, acquisition plan or route sheet, price support, award, mods, and acceptance correspondence.
Systems trail
Upload the award and modifications to EDA where required, make sure WAWF routes to the right accepting and paying offices, and confirm the DoDAAC path works.
People trail
Identify the requiring activity, FM, receiving official, COR, PCO, and ACO roles early enough that invoices do not drift.
From the desk
The cleanest deployed MIPR files are boring. The acceptance says exactly what the office took on, the contract cites the right money, and nobody has to reconstruct the story after rotation. If your relief reads the file and asks no questions, you did it right. The whole game on a MIPR is: keep it simple, do not let the receiving paperwork outrun what your office can actually execute, and stay close to finance from the first phone call through the final reconciliation.
Current-source posture before publishing.
This page uses official sources for the form structure, category labels, Economy Act footing, severable-service cite, and DoD reimbursable-policy references. Treat the links as checked on 20 May 2026 and confirm current before live publication.
DFARS and PGI forms procedure
DFARS 208.7005 points to PGI 253.208-1 and 253.208-2 for DD 448 and DD 448-2. Verified 2026-05-20; confirm current.
Official form structure
DD 448 is listed as Military Interdepartmental Purchase Request, edition 06/01/1972. DD 448-2 is listed as Acceptance of MIPR, edition 07/01/1971. Public PDFs reviewed 2026-05-20; confirm current.
Economy Act and RFO check
31 U.S.C. 1535 remains the Economy Act agency-agreement cite. RFO Part 17 model text retains Subpart 17.5 interagency acquisitions and Economy Act framing. Verified 2026-05-20; agency adoption can vary.
Severable service timing
10 U.S.C. 3133 is the current post-recodification DoD severable-services cross-fiscal-year cite. Verified 2026-05-20; confirm current.
DoD FMR reimbursable policy
DoD FMR Volume 11A lists Chapter 1, General Reimbursement Policy, Chapter 3, Economy Act Orders, and Chapter 18, Non-Economy Act Orders. Verified 2026-05-20; confirm current.
Direct-cite transition
FPM25-05, New Procedures for Direct Cite Orders, requires DoD Components to use PRDS for direct-cite purchase requests by 31 July 2026 and discontinue MIPR/DD 448-2 acceptance for that direct-cite lane. Verified 2026-05-20; local implementation timing may vary before the deadline.
Fiscal obligation trail
DoD FMR Volume 3, Chapter 8 covers reimbursable orders, bona fide need, downward adjustment, and ULO cleanup for MIPR-related Economy Act and non-Economy Act orders. Verified 2026-05-20; confirm current.
DPCAP/DARS deviation check
Current class deviations and DFARS RFO deviations were checked for MIPR-relevant updates. Part 208 RFO deviation material exists, but the page should still be treated as date-sensitive. Verified 2026-05-20; confirm current.
Publication verification list
- Confirm official DD 448 and DD 448-2 edition dates and public PDF availability.
- Confirm Category I remains reimbursement and Category II remains direct citation on the current DD 448-2.
- Confirm DFARS 208.7005 and PGI 253.208-1 and 253.208-2 have not been replaced or materially revised.
- Confirm FPM25-05, PRDS, and local Component implementation before using DD 448-2 for any DoD direct-cite order.
- Confirm RFO Part 17, DoD RFO/DFARS Part 208 deviation, and local agency adoption posture before publishing.
- Confirm local office policy for FM verification, legal review, and accepting official authority.
- Confirm sample fund cite and dates remain plainly fictional and cannot be confused with live acquisition data.
Acronym bench
This page uses hover definitions for MIPR, DD 448, DD 448-2, PR, PRDS, CCO, CO, PCO, ACO, COR, JTF, CONS, FM, FAR, DFARS, PGI, OCS, MILSTRIP, O&M, RDT&E, OPN, BFN, SAT, MPT, ULO, GFP, ACSA, DoDAAC, EDA, WAWF, MIPR-Cat-I, and MIPR-Cat-II.