Summary of Significant Accounting Policies	3 Months Ended
Mar. 31, 2016
Organization, Consolidation and Presentation of Financial Statements [Abstract]
Summary of Significant Accounting Policies	Summary of Significant Accounting Policies Basis of Presentation The accompanying unaudited Consolidated Financial Statements include the accounts of Ciber, Inc. and its wholly-owned subsidiaries (together, “Ciber,” “the Company,” “we,” “our,” or “us”) and have been prepared in accordance with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States (“GAAP”) for interim financial information. Consistent with these requirements, this Form 10-Q does not include all the information required by GAAP for complete financial statements. As a result, this Form 10-Q should be read in conjunction with the Consolidated Financial Statements and accompanying Notes in our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2015. Management believes the accompanying unaudited Consolidated Financial Statements reflect all adjustments, including normal recurring items and restructuring and other items, considered necessary for a fair statement of results for the interim periods presented. The results of operations for the three months ended March 31, 2016 are not necessarily indicative of the results of operation for the full fiscal year. As fully explained in Note 4, due to the balance available for borrowing under our Asset Based Lending Facility (“ABL Facility”) falling below $15 million during the three months ended March 31, 2016, we became subject to certain covenants including a Fixed Charge Coverage Ratio. We were not in compliance with the Fixed Charge Coverage Ratio covenant at March 31, 2016 and subsequently. Because this non-compliance would allow our lender to accelerate the indebtedness making it due and payable immediately, the amount due under the ABL Facility is classified as a current liability in our balance sheet at March 31, 2016. Our lender has not requested full payment of the facility, but if such action occurred, the Company believes it would be difficult to immediately pay the amount due upon request. Further, due to the default, the Company’s ability to draw additional amounts from the ABL Facility could be limited. Management is currently seeking a covenant waiver and implementing actions to be in compliance with the ABL Facility covenants. Management evaluated its working capital, cash flows and operating forecasts and currently believes, based on this evaluation, the Company can continue to operate for the foreseeable future and will be able to cure the covenant defaults, although this cannot be assured. Additionally, as a normal course of business or as a result the debt being called, we may take further actions that include, but are not limited to, obtaining a covenant waiver or modification, restructuring, divesting certain assets and business units, cost reductions, refinancing, and obtaining new debt or equity financing. The financial statements are prepared on a basis that the Company will continue as a going concern. Recent Accounting Pronouncements In May 2014, the Financial Accounting Standards Board (“FASB”) issued Accounting Standards Update ("ASU") 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 ASU 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 February 2016, the FASB issued ASU No. 2016-02, "Leases (Topic 842)" ("ASU 2016-02") which is intended to increase transparency and comparability among organizations by recognizing all lease transactions with terms in excess of 12 months on the balance sheet as a lease liability and a right-of-use asset. ASU 2016-02 is effective for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2018, including interim periods within those fiscal years, with earlier application permitted. This standard is to be applied with a modified retrospective approach at the beginning of the earliest comparative period presented in the financial statements. We are currently evaluating the impact of implementing this guidance on our consolidated financial statements. In March 2016, the FASB issued ASU No. 2016-08, "Revenue from Contracts with Customers (Topic 606): Principal versus Agent Considerations" ("ASU 2016-08"). The amendments are intended to improve the operability and understandability of the implementation guidance on principal versus agent considerations. The effective date for this ASU is the same effective date for ASU 2014-09. We are currently evaluating the impact of implementing this guidance on our consolidated financial statements. Adopted Accounting Pronouncements 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 and we have elected to adopt the guidance prospectively. The adoption of this guidance did not have an impact on our consolidated financial statements. In March 2016, the FASB issued ASU No. 2016-09, "Compensation-Stock Compensation- Improvements to Employee Share-Based Payment Accounting" ("ASU 2016-09"), which involves accounting for share-based payment transactions, including the income tax consequences, classification of awards as either equity or liabilities, and classification on the statement of cash flows. The adoption of this guidance did not have an impact on our consolidated financial statements. PRSU Grant On January 26, 2015, June 24, 2015, July 1, 2015 and August 10, 2015, we granted 79,761, 69,558, 47,550 and 5,000 Performance Based Restricted Share Units ("PRSUs"), respectively, to our executives. On January 1, 2016, we granted 201,868 PRSUs to our executives. The performance conditions include both an internal performance condition and an external market-based condition. We have valued the external market-based condition using a Monte Carlo approach. Probability of reaching the internal performance condition is assessed quarterly and the associated expense is adjusted based on the target expected to be achieved. There is the potential for 590,605 shares of common stock to vest under these grants if maximum performance targets are achieved. There were no shares that vested and 5,000 shares forfeited during 2016. 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 Company's 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.

Summary of Significant Accounting Policies

Basis of Presentation

The accompanying unaudited Consolidated Financial Statements include the accounts of Ciber, Inc. and its wholly-owned subsidiaries (together, “Ciber,” “the Company,” “we,” “our,” or “us”) and have been prepared in accordance with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States (“GAAP”) for interim financial information. Consistent with these requirements, this Form 10-Q does not include all the information required by GAAP for complete financial statements. As a result, this Form 10-Q should be read in conjunction with the Consolidated Financial Statements and accompanying Notes in our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2015.

Management believes the accompanying unaudited Consolidated Financial Statements reflect all adjustments, including normal recurring items and restructuring and other items, considered necessary for a fair statement of results for the interim periods presented. The results of operations for the three months ended March 31, 2016 are not necessarily indicative of the results of operation for the full fiscal year.

As fully explained in Note 4, due to the balance available for borrowing under our Asset Based Lending Facility (“ABL Facility”) falling below $15 million during the three months ended March 31, 2016, we became subject to certain covenants including a Fixed Charge Coverage Ratio. We were not in compliance with the Fixed Charge Coverage Ratio covenant at March 31, 2016 and subsequently. Because this non-compliance would allow our lender to accelerate the indebtedness making it due and payable immediately, the amount due under the ABL Facility is classified as a current liability in our balance sheet at March 31, 2016. Our lender has not requested full payment of the facility, but if such action occurred, the Company believes it would be difficult to immediately pay the amount due upon request. Further, due to the default, the Company’s ability to draw additional amounts from the ABL Facility could be limited. Management is currently seeking a covenant waiver and implementing actions to be in compliance with the ABL Facility covenants. Management evaluated its working capital, cash flows and operating forecasts and currently believes, based on this evaluation, the Company can continue to operate for the foreseeable future and will be able to cure the covenant defaults, although this cannot be assured. Additionally, as a normal course of business or as a result the debt being called, we may take further actions that include, but are not limited to, obtaining a covenant waiver or modification, restructuring, divesting certain assets and business units, cost reductions, refinancing, and obtaining new debt or equity financing. The financial statements are prepared on a basis that the Company will continue as a going concern.

Recent Accounting Pronouncements

In May 2014, the Financial Accounting Standards Board (“FASB”) issued Accounting Standards Update ("ASU") 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 ASU 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 February 2016, the FASB issued ASU No. 2016-02, "Leases (Topic 842)" ("ASU 2016-02") which is intended to increase transparency and comparability among organizations by recognizing all lease transactions with terms in excess of 12 months on the balance sheet as a lease liability and a right-of-use asset. ASU 2016-02 is effective for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2018, including interim periods within those fiscal years, with earlier application permitted. This standard is to be applied with a modified retrospective approach at the beginning of the earliest comparative period presented in the financial statements. We are currently evaluating the impact of implementing this guidance on our consolidated financial statements.

In March 2016, the FASB issued ASU No. 2016-08, "Revenue from Contracts with Customers (Topic 606): Principal versus Agent Considerations" ("ASU 2016-08"). The amendments are intended to improve the operability and understandability of the implementation guidance on principal versus agent considerations. The effective date for this ASU is the same effective date for ASU 2014-09. We are currently evaluating the impact of implementing this guidance on our consolidated financial statements.

Adopted Accounting Pronouncements

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 and we have elected to adopt the guidance prospectively. The adoption of this guidance did not have an impact on our consolidated financial statements.

In March 2016, the FASB issued ASU No. 2016-09, "Compensation-Stock Compensation- Improvements to Employee Share-Based Payment Accounting" ("ASU 2016-09"), which involves accounting for share-based payment transactions, including the income tax consequences, classification of awards as either equity or liabilities, and classification on the statement of cash flows. The adoption of this guidance did not have an impact on our consolidated financial statements.

PRSU Grant

On January 26, 2015, June 24, 2015, July 1, 2015 and August 10, 2015, we granted 79,761, 69,558, 47,550 and 5,000 Performance Based Restricted Share Units ("PRSUs"), respectively, to our executives. On January 1, 2016, we granted 201,868 PRSUs to our executives. The performance conditions include both an internal performance condition and an external market-based condition. We have valued the external market-based condition using a Monte Carlo approach. Probability of reaching the internal performance condition is assessed quarterly and the associated expense is adjusted based on the target expected to be achieved. There is the potential for 590,605 shares of common stock to vest under these grants if maximum performance targets are achieved. There were no shares that vested and 5,000 shares forfeited during 2016.

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 Company's 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.