Who typically has the authority to ratify an unauthorized commitment?

The head of contracting authority or a designated official typically has the authority to ratify an unauthorized commitment because they possess the necessary oversight and management responsibilities within the contracting process. This authority is critical, as unauthorized commitments occur when a government official enters into an agreement exceeding their delegated authority, often without proper contract authorization.

In situations where an unauthorized commitment has been made, it is essential for a senior official to evaluate the circumstances that led to the commitment, including the necessity of the services or goods rendered and the availability of funds. The head of contracting authority is trusted to ensure that the commitment aligns with the agency's mission and regulations while safeguarding public resources.

The contracting officer who made the commitment lacks the authority to ratify their own actions because they are inherently part of the situation that gave rise to the unauthorized commitment. Similarly, a member of the military staff may not have the legal authority to ratify agreements as that responsibility is reserved for appointed contracting officials. Lastly, a contractor involved in the agreement does not have the authority to validate or ratify commitments made by government officials, as contracts are intended to represent the government entity's obligations rather than those of the contractor.