Blended vs. Discrete Presentation
Why This Matters
Once you’ve decided an organization is a component unit, in FM5.2, this is the next decision, how should it actually show up in the statements. Getting this wrong misrepresents how independent the organization really is.
What’s Actually Going On
Blended presentation is appropriate when the component unit’s governing body is substantively the same as the primary government’s, or when the component unit exclusively or almost exclusively serves the primary government. In those cases, it’s presented as if it were just another fund of the primary government.
Discrete presentation is the default for everything else, a separate column, clearly showing it’s legally distinct even though it’s part of the reporting entity.
Decide it yourself: blended or discrete?
Scenario: A district’s Educational Facilities Authority from FM5.2, the district appoints a majority of its board, has its own separate five-member board that meets independently, and while it primarily serves the district, it also occasionally leases facilities to a neighboring district.
Work through it yourself first: Is the governing body substantively the same as the district’s board? Does it serve the district exclusively?
Reasoning: The board is separate, not substantively the same body as the district’s own board. And it doesn’t serve the district exclusively, it occasionally serves a neighbor too.
Conclusion: discrete presentation. It’s still a component unit, from FM5.2’s test, but it gets its own column rather than being folded into the district’s own figures.
How This Applies
When you’re deciding presentation, check both conditions independently, governing body overlap and exclusivity of service. Meeting neither, or only one weakly, generally points to discrete, which is why it’s the more common outcome in practice.