Summary of Significant Accounting Policies (Policies)

9 Months Ended

Sep. 30, 2015

Organization, Consolidation and Presentation of Financial Statements [Abstract]

Recent Accounting Pronouncements

Recent Accounting Pronouncements

In May 2014, the Financial Accounting Standards Board (“FASB”) issued Accounting Standards Update No. 2014-09, “Revenue from Contracts with Customers (Topic 606)” (“ASU 2014-09”). The core principle of the standard is when an entity transfers goods or services to customers, it will recognize revenue in an amount that reflects the consideration the entity expects to be entitled to for those goods or services. The update outlines a five-step model and related application guidance, which replaces most existing revenue recognition guidance. ASU 2014-09 is expected to be effective for annual periods beginning after December 15, 2017, and for interim periods within that year, and allows for both retrospective and prospective methods of adoption. We are currently evaluating the impact of implementing this guidance on our consolidated financial statements, as well as which transition method we intend to use.

In August 2014, the FASB issued Accounting Standards Update No. 2014-15, “Presentation of Financial Statements - Going Concern (Subtopic 205-40): Disclosure of Uncertainties about an Entity’s Ability to Continue as a Going Concern” (“ASU 2014-15”), which requires management to evaluate, at each annual and interim reporting period, whether there are conditions or events that raise substantial doubt about the entity’s ability to continue as a going concern within one year after the date the financial statements are issued and provide related disclosures.  ASU 2014-15 is effective for annual periods beginning after December 15, 2016, and interim periods thereafter.  Early adoption is permitted.  We do not anticipate that this guidance will materially impact our consolidated financial statements.

In January 2015, the FASB issued ASU No. 2015-01, “Income Statement - Extraordinary and Unusual Items (Subtopic 225-20): Simplifying Income Statement Presentation by Eliminating the Concept of Extraordinary Items” (“ASU 2015-01”). This ASU eliminates from U.S. GAAP the concept of extraordinary items. ASU 2015-01 is effective for fiscal years, and interim periods within those fiscal years, beginning after December 15, 2015. A reporting entity may apply the amendments prospectively. We do not anticipate that this guidance will materially impact our consolidated financial statements.

In February 2015, the FASB issued ASU No. 2015-02, “Consolidation (Topic 810): Amendments to the Consolidation Analysis” (“ASU 2015-02”).  ASU 2015-02 changes the analysis that a reporting entity must perform to determine whether it should consolidate certain types of legal entities. Specifically, ASU 2015-02 modifies the evaluation of whether limited partnerships and similar legal entities are VIEs or voting interest entities, eliminates the presumption that a general partner should consolidate a limited partnership, and affects the evaluation of fee arrangements in the primary beneficiary determination.  ASU 2015-02 is effective for public business entities for fiscal years, and for interim periods within those fiscal years, beginning after December 15, 2015. Early adoption is permitted, including adoption in an interim period. We do not anticipate that this guidance will materially impact our consolidated financial statements.

In April 2015, the FASB issued ASU No. 2015-03, “Interest - Imputation of Interest (Subtopic 835-30): Simplifying the Presentation of Debt Issuance Costs” (“ASU 2015-03”), which requires that debt issuance costs related to a recognized debt liability be presented in the balance sheet as a direct deduction from the carrying amount of that debt liability, consistent with debt discounts.  ASU 2015-03 is effective for annual periods beginning after December 15, 2015, and interim periods within those fiscal years.  ASU 2015-03 was further clarified in August 2015 to include the presentation and subsequent measurement of debt issuance costs associated with line-of-credit arrangements. We do not anticipate that this guidance will materially impact our consolidated financial statements.

In April 2015, the FASB issued ASU No. 2015-05, “Intangibles-Goodwill and Other-Internal-Use Software (Subtopic 350-4)” which is meant to help entities evaluate the accounting for fees paid by a customer in a cloud computing arrangement by providing guidance as to whether an arrangement includes the sale or license of software. This update is effective for interim and annual periods beginning after December 15, 2015. We are currently evaluating the impact of implementing this guidance on our consolidated financial statements.

Fair Value

Fair Value

Authoritative guidance defines fair value as the exit price, or the amount that would be received to sell an asset or paid to transfer a liability in an orderly transaction between market participants as of the measurement date. Authoritative guidance also establishes a fair value hierarchy that is intended to increase consistency and comparability in fair value measurements and related disclosures. The fair value hierarchy is based on inputs to valuation techniques that are used to measure fair value that are either observable or unobservable. Observable inputs reflect assumptions market participants would use in pricing an asset or liability based on market data obtained from independent sources while unobservable inputs reflect a reporting entity's pricing based upon its own market assumptions.

The fair value hierarchy consists of the following three levels:

•Level 1 – Inputs are quoted prices in active markets for identical assets or liabilities.

•Level 2 – Inputs are quoted prices for similar assets or liabilities in an active market, quoted prices for identical or similar assets or liabilities in markets that are not active, inputs other than quoted prices that are observable and market-corroborated inputs which are derived principally from or corroborated by observable market data.

•Level 3 – Inputs are derived from valuation techniques in which one or more significant inputs or value drivers are unobservable.

The Company estimates the fair value of each foreign exchange forward contract by using a present value of expected cash flows model. This model calculates the difference between the current market forward price and the contracted forward price for each foreign exchange contract and applies the difference in the rates to each outstanding contract. Valuations for all derivatives fall within Level 2 of the GAAP valuation hierarchy.

Derivatives may give rise to credit risks from the possible non-performance by counterparties. Credit risk is generally limited to the fair value of those contracts that are favorable to us. The Company has limited its credit risk by entering into derivative transactions only with highly-rated global financial institutions, limiting the amount of credit exposure with any one financial institution and conducting ongoing evaluation of the creditworthiness of the financial institutions with which the Company does business.

The carrying value of the outstanding borrowings under the ABL Facility, as defined in Note 4, approximates its fair value as (1) it is based on a variable rate that changes based on market conditions and (2) the margin applied to the variable rate is based on Ciber's credit risk, which has not changed since entering into the facility in May 2012. If Ciber's credit risk were to change, we would estimate the fair value of our borrowings using a discounted cash flow analysis based on current rates expected to be available from the lender for similar types of debt. The inputs used to establish the fair value of the ABL Facility are considered to be Level 2 of the GAAP Valuation hierarchy.