The Editorial Board
The CFA is led by a collective of career federal auditors, former agency CISOs, and administrative law experts. We do not just read the regulations; we spent decades enforcing them.
The "Yellow Book" Standard
In the federal government, truth is defined by the Generally Accepted Government Auditing Standards (GAGAS), commonly known as the "Yellow Book."
Our leadership team applies these same rigorous standards to our independent reporting. We do not deal in speculation. We require "Sufficient and Appropriate Evidence" (GAGAS 3.69) before we issue a finding. If we cannot prove a violation against the text of the statute, we do not publish it.
Fiscal & Acquisition Law
We audit the "Power of the Purse" against the Anti-Deficiency Act (31 U.S.C. § 1341) and the Purpose Statute. Our experts scrutinize contract vehicles for violations of FAR Part 6 (Competition Requirements).
Cybersecurity Governance
Led by former Authorizing Officials (AOs). We audit beyond the dashboard, checking compliance with FISMA 2014 and OMB Circular A-130. We validate if systems meet NIST SP 800-53 Rev 5 controls.
Privacy & Admin Law
We enforce the "Fair Information Practice Principles" codified in the Privacy Act of 1974 (5 U.S.C. § 552a). Our researchers are experts in the E-Government Act of 2002 (requiring PIAs) and the Administrative Procedure Act (APA).
Our Verification Protocol
To maintain our credibility as a "News Media" entity under 5 U.S.C. § 552(a)(4)(A)(ii), we adhere to a strict editorial process:
- Primary Source Mandate: We do not rely on press reports. We rely on signed artifacts (e.g., SF-30 Contract Mods, ATO Decision Letters).
- Adversarial "Red Teaming": Before publication, a specialized "Devil's Advocate" reviews the finding to ensure we haven't missed a valid exception.
- Retraction Policy: If an agency can produce a verifiable record that contradicts our finding, we correct the record immediately.