2024-018. USU Extension Extra Services Compensation Program Non-Compliance with Uniform Guidance (Finding Type: Significant Deficiency, Reportable Noncompliance) Federal Agency: Various Assistance Listing Number and Title: Various Federal Award Number: Various Questioned Costs: Undetermined Pass-through Entity: Various Prior Year Single Audit Report Finding Number: N/A Utah State University’s (University) Internal Audit performed a review of the University’s Extension Service (Extension) within the College of Agriculture and Applied Science. The review determined that Extension’s Extra Service Compensation (ESC) program violates Uniform Guidance requirements and University policy, bypasses critical internal controls, and provides employees with additional compensation for extra-service work related to their primary job duties without sponsor approval. Extension’s mission, under the University’s land grant mission, provides research-based programs and resources to Utah’s population using a mix of local, state, federal and sponsored funding. To incentivize its personnel to apply for grants, Extension created an ESC program that allowed personnel to replace a portion of their primary position institution-funded salary with grant-funded salary. Personnel could then request up to 20 percent of their primary position salary through an ESC secondary position funded with the replaced institution-funded salary. However, Extension’s justified purpose for the ESC secondary position was “caused by and associated with the grant.” In doing so, Extension made it possible to bypass the University’s policy and internal controls for extra-service pay by obscuring the work duties and funding source for the secondary position. Below is an illustrative example from the USU Internal Audit Report of an ESC professor with an institutional base salary of $50,000: Payment to Employee Before Receiving Award (Source: USU Internal Audit Report IAS-23-53) Uniform Guidance maintains strict requirements with regard to the allowability of compensation, including special consideration for substantial increases, particularly with: • federal award ratios (2 CFR 200.430(e)), • institutional base salary charges, including federal award proportionate shares (2 CFR 200.430(h)(2)), • prior approvals by federal awarding agencies for incidental activities with supplemental compensation (2 CFR 200.430(h)(1)), • intra-institution consulting within higher education (2 CFR 200.430(h)(3)), • institutional policy definitions to conclusively determine work resulting in extra service pay (2 CFR 200.430(h)(4), and • relevant internal controls (2 CFR 200.302(b)(4). Internal Audit cites that the ESC program does not comply with Uniform Guidance, as well as University policy (Extra-Service Compensation Policy 376), which formalizes the University’s approach to compliance with Uniform Guidance for these activities. Internal Audit identified that University personnel did not follow or were unfamiliar with established policies in addition to procedural changes that did not require sufficient level of documentation for proper approvals. Detailed fieldwork by Internal Audit identified instances of questioned costs for funding (both federal and non-federal) in excess of $25,000. Fieldwork covered the period between January 1, 2020 and June 14, 2023, but also identified evidence of noncompliance as far back as 2009 to 2018. After Internal Audit issued its report in September 2024, the University took action to begin determining the potential financial impact of noncompliance through an external third-party. A report by this external third-party has not been completed as of the date of this finding; therefore, the amount of questioned costs related to federal programs cannot be determined. The University has also taken steps to immediately address policy and control deficiencies across the institution. Recommendations: We recommend the University do the following relative to University-wide procedures: 1. Determine the potential financial impact of noncompliance with grant sponsors. 2. Evaluate and improve its policies and required documentation for extra-service compensation. 3. Evaluate and improve its internal controls for sponsored program compensation. 4. Provide adequate training to University personnel regarding sponsored programs compensation compliance. USU’s Response: Utah State University (“USU”) generally agrees with Finding One. As detailed in USU internal audit IAS-23-53, USU Extension established a program to incentivize and reward its personnel to apply for grants (referred to by Extension and within USU internal audit IAS-23-53 as the “incentive program”). While the Uniform Guidance permits incentive programs (see CFR 200.430(f)) and such programs are readily used by universities, the USU Extension incentive program was established and carried out in manner that violated USU’s policy governing extra service compensation (“ESC”) and in a manner that bypassed critical internal controls. Notably, USU Internal Audit IAS-23-53 tested compliance with USU’s extra-service compensation policy but did not review actual costs charged to federal sponsors as this was outside the scope of the audit. Consistent with the recommendations to determine the potential impact of noncompliance, USU worked with an outside consultant to review payment of ESC to all employees working on federal grants. This work identified (1) limited instances when salaries directly charged to sponsored projects included extra service compensation in the base salary and (2) limited instances when extra service compensation was charged to federal sponsors without sponsor approval. The majority of ESC payments made pursuant the USU Extension incentive program was not charged to grant sponsor or included in the institutional base salary charged to the grant. Accordingly, noncompliance with the Uniform Guidance clauses related to compensation costs was limited to a small subset of payments made under the USU Extension incentive program. Based on these findings, USU agrees with the corrective actions recommended and, as outlined in the corrective action plan summary below, has already completed and/or initiated these actions.
2024-018. USU Extension Extra Services Compensation Program Non-Compliance with Uniform Guidance (Finding Type: Significant Deficiency, Reportable Noncompliance) Federal Agency: Various Assistance Listing Number and Title: Various Federal Award Number: Various Questioned Costs: Undetermined Pass-through Entity: Various Prior Year Single Audit Report Finding Number: N/A Utah State University’s (University) Internal Audit performed a review of the University’s Extension Service (Extension) within the College of Agriculture and Applied Science. The review determined that Extension’s Extra Service Compensation (ESC) program violates Uniform Guidance requirements and University policy, bypasses critical internal controls, and provides employees with additional compensation for extra-service work related to their primary job duties without sponsor approval. Extension’s mission, under the University’s land grant mission, provides research-based programs and resources to Utah’s population using a mix of local, state, federal and sponsored funding. To incentivize its personnel to apply for grants, Extension created an ESC program that allowed personnel to replace a portion of their primary position institution-funded salary with grant-funded salary. Personnel could then request up to 20 percent of their primary position salary through an ESC secondary position funded with the replaced institution-funded salary. However, Extension’s justified purpose for the ESC secondary position was “caused by and associated with the grant.” In doing so, Extension made it possible to bypass the University’s policy and internal controls for extra-service pay by obscuring the work duties and funding source for the secondary position. Below is an illustrative example from the USU Internal Audit Report of an ESC professor with an institutional base salary of $50,000: Payment to Employee Before Receiving Award (Source: USU Internal Audit Report IAS-23-53) Uniform Guidance maintains strict requirements with regard to the allowability of compensation, including special consideration for substantial increases, particularly with: • federal award ratios (2 CFR 200.430(e)), • institutional base salary charges, including federal award proportionate shares (2 CFR 200.430(h)(2)), • prior approvals by federal awarding agencies for incidental activities with supplemental compensation (2 CFR 200.430(h)(1)), • intra-institution consulting within higher education (2 CFR 200.430(h)(3)), • institutional policy definitions to conclusively determine work resulting in extra service pay (2 CFR 200.430(h)(4), and • relevant internal controls (2 CFR 200.302(b)(4). Internal Audit cites that the ESC program does not comply with Uniform Guidance, as well as University policy (Extra-Service Compensation Policy 376), which formalizes the University’s approach to compliance with Uniform Guidance for these activities. Internal Audit identified that University personnel did not follow or were unfamiliar with established policies in addition to procedural changes that did not require sufficient level of documentation for proper approvals. Detailed fieldwork by Internal Audit identified instances of questioned costs for funding (both federal and non-federal) in excess of $25,000. Fieldwork covered the period between January 1, 2020 and June 14, 2023, but also identified evidence of noncompliance as far back as 2009 to 2018. After Internal Audit issued its report in September 2024, the University took action to begin determining the potential financial impact of noncompliance through an external third-party. A report by this external third-party has not been completed as of the date of this finding; therefore, the amount of questioned costs related to federal programs cannot be determined. The University has also taken steps to immediately address policy and control deficiencies across the institution. Recommendations: We recommend the University do the following relative to University-wide procedures: 1. Determine the potential financial impact of noncompliance with grant sponsors. 2. Evaluate and improve its policies and required documentation for extra-service compensation. 3. Evaluate and improve its internal controls for sponsored program compensation. 4. Provide adequate training to University personnel regarding sponsored programs compensation compliance. USU’s Response: Utah State University (“USU”) generally agrees with Finding One. As detailed in USU internal audit IAS-23-53, USU Extension established a program to incentivize and reward its personnel to apply for grants (referred to by Extension and within USU internal audit IAS-23-53 as the “incentive program”). While the Uniform Guidance permits incentive programs (see CFR 200.430(f)) and such programs are readily used by universities, the USU Extension incentive program was established and carried out in manner that violated USU’s policy governing extra service compensation (“ESC”) and in a manner that bypassed critical internal controls. Notably, USU Internal Audit IAS-23-53 tested compliance with USU’s extra-service compensation policy but did not review actual costs charged to federal sponsors as this was outside the scope of the audit. Consistent with the recommendations to determine the potential impact of noncompliance, USU worked with an outside consultant to review payment of ESC to all employees working on federal grants. This work identified (1) limited instances when salaries directly charged to sponsored projects included extra service compensation in the base salary and (2) limited instances when extra service compensation was charged to federal sponsors without sponsor approval. The majority of ESC payments made pursuant the USU Extension incentive program was not charged to grant sponsor or included in the institutional base salary charged to the grant. Accordingly, noncompliance with the Uniform Guidance clauses related to compensation costs was limited to a small subset of payments made under the USU Extension incentive program. Based on these findings, USU agrees with the corrective actions recommended and, as outlined in the corrective action plan summary below, has already completed and/or initiated these actions.
2024-018. USU Extension Extra Services Compensation Program Non-Compliance with Uniform Guidance (Finding Type: Significant Deficiency, Reportable Noncompliance) Federal Agency: Various Assistance Listing Number and Title: Various Federal Award Number: Various Questioned Costs: Undetermined Pass-through Entity: Various Prior Year Single Audit Report Finding Number: N/A Utah State University’s (University) Internal Audit performed a review of the University’s Extension Service (Extension) within the College of Agriculture and Applied Science. The review determined that Extension’s Extra Service Compensation (ESC) program violates Uniform Guidance requirements and University policy, bypasses critical internal controls, and provides employees with additional compensation for extra-service work related to their primary job duties without sponsor approval. Extension’s mission, under the University’s land grant mission, provides research-based programs and resources to Utah’s population using a mix of local, state, federal and sponsored funding. To incentivize its personnel to apply for grants, Extension created an ESC program that allowed personnel to replace a portion of their primary position institution-funded salary with grant-funded salary. Personnel could then request up to 20 percent of their primary position salary through an ESC secondary position funded with the replaced institution-funded salary. However, Extension’s justified purpose for the ESC secondary position was “caused by and associated with the grant.” In doing so, Extension made it possible to bypass the University’s policy and internal controls for extra-service pay by obscuring the work duties and funding source for the secondary position. Below is an illustrative example from the USU Internal Audit Report of an ESC professor with an institutional base salary of $50,000: Payment to Employee Before Receiving Award (Source: USU Internal Audit Report IAS-23-53) Uniform Guidance maintains strict requirements with regard to the allowability of compensation, including special consideration for substantial increases, particularly with: • federal award ratios (2 CFR 200.430(e)), • institutional base salary charges, including federal award proportionate shares (2 CFR 200.430(h)(2)), • prior approvals by federal awarding agencies for incidental activities with supplemental compensation (2 CFR 200.430(h)(1)), • intra-institution consulting within higher education (2 CFR 200.430(h)(3)), • institutional policy definitions to conclusively determine work resulting in extra service pay (2 CFR 200.430(h)(4), and • relevant internal controls (2 CFR 200.302(b)(4). Internal Audit cites that the ESC program does not comply with Uniform Guidance, as well as University policy (Extra-Service Compensation Policy 376), which formalizes the University’s approach to compliance with Uniform Guidance for these activities. Internal Audit identified that University personnel did not follow or were unfamiliar with established policies in addition to procedural changes that did not require sufficient level of documentation for proper approvals. Detailed fieldwork by Internal Audit identified instances of questioned costs for funding (both federal and non-federal) in excess of $25,000. Fieldwork covered the period between January 1, 2020 and June 14, 2023, but also identified evidence of noncompliance as far back as 2009 to 2018. After Internal Audit issued its report in September 2024, the University took action to begin determining the potential financial impact of noncompliance through an external third-party. A report by this external third-party has not been completed as of the date of this finding; therefore, the amount of questioned costs related to federal programs cannot be determined. The University has also taken steps to immediately address policy and control deficiencies across the institution. Recommendations: We recommend the University do the following relative to University-wide procedures: 1. Determine the potential financial impact of noncompliance with grant sponsors. 2. Evaluate and improve its policies and required documentation for extra-service compensation. 3. Evaluate and improve its internal controls for sponsored program compensation. 4. Provide adequate training to University personnel regarding sponsored programs compensation compliance. USU’s Response: Utah State University (“USU”) generally agrees with Finding One. As detailed in USU internal audit IAS-23-53, USU Extension established a program to incentivize and reward its personnel to apply for grants (referred to by Extension and within USU internal audit IAS-23-53 as the “incentive program”). While the Uniform Guidance permits incentive programs (see CFR 200.430(f)) and such programs are readily used by universities, the USU Extension incentive program was established and carried out in manner that violated USU’s policy governing extra service compensation (“ESC”) and in a manner that bypassed critical internal controls. Notably, USU Internal Audit IAS-23-53 tested compliance with USU’s extra-service compensation policy but did not review actual costs charged to federal sponsors as this was outside the scope of the audit. Consistent with the recommendations to determine the potential impact of noncompliance, USU worked with an outside consultant to review payment of ESC to all employees working on federal grants. This work identified (1) limited instances when salaries directly charged to sponsored projects included extra service compensation in the base salary and (2) limited instances when extra service compensation was charged to federal sponsors without sponsor approval. The majority of ESC payments made pursuant the USU Extension incentive program was not charged to grant sponsor or included in the institutional base salary charged to the grant. Accordingly, noncompliance with the Uniform Guidance clauses related to compensation costs was limited to a small subset of payments made under the USU Extension incentive program. Based on these findings, USU agrees with the corrective actions recommended and, as outlined in the corrective action plan summary below, has already completed and/or initiated these actions.
2024-018. USU Extension Extra Services Compensation Program Non-Compliance with Uniform Guidance (Finding Type: Significant Deficiency, Reportable Noncompliance) Federal Agency: Various Assistance Listing Number and Title: Various Federal Award Number: Various Questioned Costs: Undetermined Pass-through Entity: Various Prior Year Single Audit Report Finding Number: N/A Utah State University’s (University) Internal Audit performed a review of the University’s Extension Service (Extension) within the College of Agriculture and Applied Science. The review determined that Extension’s Extra Service Compensation (ESC) program violates Uniform Guidance requirements and University policy, bypasses critical internal controls, and provides employees with additional compensation for extra-service work related to their primary job duties without sponsor approval. Extension’s mission, under the University’s land grant mission, provides research-based programs and resources to Utah’s population using a mix of local, state, federal and sponsored funding. To incentivize its personnel to apply for grants, Extension created an ESC program that allowed personnel to replace a portion of their primary position institution-funded salary with grant-funded salary. Personnel could then request up to 20 percent of their primary position salary through an ESC secondary position funded with the replaced institution-funded salary. However, Extension’s justified purpose for the ESC secondary position was “caused by and associated with the grant.” In doing so, Extension made it possible to bypass the University’s policy and internal controls for extra-service pay by obscuring the work duties and funding source for the secondary position. Below is an illustrative example from the USU Internal Audit Report of an ESC professor with an institutional base salary of $50,000: Payment to Employee Before Receiving Award (Source: USU Internal Audit Report IAS-23-53) Uniform Guidance maintains strict requirements with regard to the allowability of compensation, including special consideration for substantial increases, particularly with: • federal award ratios (2 CFR 200.430(e)), • institutional base salary charges, including federal award proportionate shares (2 CFR 200.430(h)(2)), • prior approvals by federal awarding agencies for incidental activities with supplemental compensation (2 CFR 200.430(h)(1)), • intra-institution consulting within higher education (2 CFR 200.430(h)(3)), • institutional policy definitions to conclusively determine work resulting in extra service pay (2 CFR 200.430(h)(4), and • relevant internal controls (2 CFR 200.302(b)(4). Internal Audit cites that the ESC program does not comply with Uniform Guidance, as well as University policy (Extra-Service Compensation Policy 376), which formalizes the University’s approach to compliance with Uniform Guidance for these activities. Internal Audit identified that University personnel did not follow or were unfamiliar with established policies in addition to procedural changes that did not require sufficient level of documentation for proper approvals. Detailed fieldwork by Internal Audit identified instances of questioned costs for funding (both federal and non-federal) in excess of $25,000. Fieldwork covered the period between January 1, 2020 and June 14, 2023, but also identified evidence of noncompliance as far back as 2009 to 2018. After Internal Audit issued its report in September 2024, the University took action to begin determining the potential financial impact of noncompliance through an external third-party. A report by this external third-party has not been completed as of the date of this finding; therefore, the amount of questioned costs related to federal programs cannot be determined. The University has also taken steps to immediately address policy and control deficiencies across the institution. Recommendations: We recommend the University do the following relative to University-wide procedures: 1. Determine the potential financial impact of noncompliance with grant sponsors. 2. Evaluate and improve its policies and required documentation for extra-service compensation. 3. Evaluate and improve its internal controls for sponsored program compensation. 4. Provide adequate training to University personnel regarding sponsored programs compensation compliance. USU’s Response: Utah State University (“USU”) generally agrees with Finding One. As detailed in USU internal audit IAS-23-53, USU Extension established a program to incentivize and reward its personnel to apply for grants (referred to by Extension and within USU internal audit IAS-23-53 as the “incentive program”). While the Uniform Guidance permits incentive programs (see CFR 200.430(f)) and such programs are readily used by universities, the USU Extension incentive program was established and carried out in manner that violated USU’s policy governing extra service compensation (“ESC”) and in a manner that bypassed critical internal controls. Notably, USU Internal Audit IAS-23-53 tested compliance with USU’s extra-service compensation policy but did not review actual costs charged to federal sponsors as this was outside the scope of the audit. Consistent with the recommendations to determine the potential impact of noncompliance, USU worked with an outside consultant to review payment of ESC to all employees working on federal grants. This work identified (1) limited instances when salaries directly charged to sponsored projects included extra service compensation in the base salary and (2) limited instances when extra service compensation was charged to federal sponsors without sponsor approval. The majority of ESC payments made pursuant the USU Extension incentive program was not charged to grant sponsor or included in the institutional base salary charged to the grant. Accordingly, noncompliance with the Uniform Guidance clauses related to compensation costs was limited to a small subset of payments made under the USU Extension incentive program. Based on these findings, USU agrees with the corrective actions recommended and, as outlined in the corrective action plan summary below, has already completed and/or initiated these actions.
2024-018. USU Extension Extra Services Compensation Program Non-Compliance with Uniform Guidance (Finding Type: Significant Deficiency, Reportable Noncompliance) Federal Agency: Various Assistance Listing Number and Title: Various Federal Award Number: Various Questioned Costs: Undetermined Pass-through Entity: Various Prior Year Single Audit Report Finding Number: N/A Utah State University’s (University) Internal Audit performed a review of the University’s Extension Service (Extension) within the College of Agriculture and Applied Science. The review determined that Extension’s Extra Service Compensation (ESC) program violates Uniform Guidance requirements and University policy, bypasses critical internal controls, and provides employees with additional compensation for extra-service work related to their primary job duties without sponsor approval. Extension’s mission, under the University’s land grant mission, provides research-based programs and resources to Utah’s population using a mix of local, state, federal and sponsored funding. To incentivize its personnel to apply for grants, Extension created an ESC program that allowed personnel to replace a portion of their primary position institution-funded salary with grant-funded salary. Personnel could then request up to 20 percent of their primary position salary through an ESC secondary position funded with the replaced institution-funded salary. However, Extension’s justified purpose for the ESC secondary position was “caused by and associated with the grant.” In doing so, Extension made it possible to bypass the University’s policy and internal controls for extra-service pay by obscuring the work duties and funding source for the secondary position. Below is an illustrative example from the USU Internal Audit Report of an ESC professor with an institutional base salary of $50,000: Payment to Employee Before Receiving Award (Source: USU Internal Audit Report IAS-23-53) Uniform Guidance maintains strict requirements with regard to the allowability of compensation, including special consideration for substantial increases, particularly with: • federal award ratios (2 CFR 200.430(e)), • institutional base salary charges, including federal award proportionate shares (2 CFR 200.430(h)(2)), • prior approvals by federal awarding agencies for incidental activities with supplemental compensation (2 CFR 200.430(h)(1)), • intra-institution consulting within higher education (2 CFR 200.430(h)(3)), • institutional policy definitions to conclusively determine work resulting in extra service pay (2 CFR 200.430(h)(4), and • relevant internal controls (2 CFR 200.302(b)(4). Internal Audit cites that the ESC program does not comply with Uniform Guidance, as well as University policy (Extra-Service Compensation Policy 376), which formalizes the University’s approach to compliance with Uniform Guidance for these activities. Internal Audit identified that University personnel did not follow or were unfamiliar with established policies in addition to procedural changes that did not require sufficient level of documentation for proper approvals. Detailed fieldwork by Internal Audit identified instances of questioned costs for funding (both federal and non-federal) in excess of $25,000. Fieldwork covered the period between January 1, 2020 and June 14, 2023, but also identified evidence of noncompliance as far back as 2009 to 2018. After Internal Audit issued its report in September 2024, the University took action to begin determining the potential financial impact of noncompliance through an external third-party. A report by this external third-party has not been completed as of the date of this finding; therefore, the amount of questioned costs related to federal programs cannot be determined. The University has also taken steps to immediately address policy and control deficiencies across the institution. Recommendations: We recommend the University do the following relative to University-wide procedures: 1. Determine the potential financial impact of noncompliance with grant sponsors. 2. Evaluate and improve its policies and required documentation for extra-service compensation. 3. Evaluate and improve its internal controls for sponsored program compensation. 4. Provide adequate training to University personnel regarding sponsored programs compensation compliance. USU’s Response: Utah State University (“USU”) generally agrees with Finding One. As detailed in USU internal audit IAS-23-53, USU Extension established a program to incentivize and reward its personnel to apply for grants (referred to by Extension and within USU internal audit IAS-23-53 as the “incentive program”). While the Uniform Guidance permits incentive programs (see CFR 200.430(f)) and such programs are readily used by universities, the USU Extension incentive program was established and carried out in manner that violated USU’s policy governing extra service compensation (“ESC”) and in a manner that bypassed critical internal controls. Notably, USU Internal Audit IAS-23-53 tested compliance with USU’s extra-service compensation policy but did not review actual costs charged to federal sponsors as this was outside the scope of the audit. Consistent with the recommendations to determine the potential impact of noncompliance, USU worked with an outside consultant to review payment of ESC to all employees working on federal grants. This work identified (1) limited instances when salaries directly charged to sponsored projects included extra service compensation in the base salary and (2) limited instances when extra service compensation was charged to federal sponsors without sponsor approval. The majority of ESC payments made pursuant the USU Extension incentive program was not charged to grant sponsor or included in the institutional base salary charged to the grant. Accordingly, noncompliance with the Uniform Guidance clauses related to compensation costs was limited to a small subset of payments made under the USU Extension incentive program. Based on these findings, USU agrees with the corrective actions recommended and, as outlined in the corrective action plan summary below, has already completed and/or initiated these actions.
2024-018. USU Extension Extra Services Compensation Program Non-Compliance with Uniform Guidance (Finding Type: Significant Deficiency, Reportable Noncompliance) Federal Agency: Various Assistance Listing Number and Title: Various Federal Award Number: Various Questioned Costs: Undetermined Pass-through Entity: Various Prior Year Single Audit Report Finding Number: N/A Utah State University’s (University) Internal Audit performed a review of the University’s Extension Service (Extension) within the College of Agriculture and Applied Science. The review determined that Extension’s Extra Service Compensation (ESC) program violates Uniform Guidance requirements and University policy, bypasses critical internal controls, and provides employees with additional compensation for extra-service work related to their primary job duties without sponsor approval. Extension’s mission, under the University’s land grant mission, provides research-based programs and resources to Utah’s population using a mix of local, state, federal and sponsored funding. To incentivize its personnel to apply for grants, Extension created an ESC program that allowed personnel to replace a portion of their primary position institution-funded salary with grant-funded salary. Personnel could then request up to 20 percent of their primary position salary through an ESC secondary position funded with the replaced institution-funded salary. However, Extension’s justified purpose for the ESC secondary position was “caused by and associated with the grant.” In doing so, Extension made it possible to bypass the University’s policy and internal controls for extra-service pay by obscuring the work duties and funding source for the secondary position. Below is an illustrative example from the USU Internal Audit Report of an ESC professor with an institutional base salary of $50,000: Payment to Employee Before Receiving Award (Source: USU Internal Audit Report IAS-23-53) Uniform Guidance maintains strict requirements with regard to the allowability of compensation, including special consideration for substantial increases, particularly with: • federal award ratios (2 CFR 200.430(e)), • institutional base salary charges, including federal award proportionate shares (2 CFR 200.430(h)(2)), • prior approvals by federal awarding agencies for incidental activities with supplemental compensation (2 CFR 200.430(h)(1)), • intra-institution consulting within higher education (2 CFR 200.430(h)(3)), • institutional policy definitions to conclusively determine work resulting in extra service pay (2 CFR 200.430(h)(4), and • relevant internal controls (2 CFR 200.302(b)(4). Internal Audit cites that the ESC program does not comply with Uniform Guidance, as well as University policy (Extra-Service Compensation Policy 376), which formalizes the University’s approach to compliance with Uniform Guidance for these activities. Internal Audit identified that University personnel did not follow or were unfamiliar with established policies in addition to procedural changes that did not require sufficient level of documentation for proper approvals. Detailed fieldwork by Internal Audit identified instances of questioned costs for funding (both federal and non-federal) in excess of $25,000. Fieldwork covered the period between January 1, 2020 and June 14, 2023, but also identified evidence of noncompliance as far back as 2009 to 2018. After Internal Audit issued its report in September 2024, the University took action to begin determining the potential financial impact of noncompliance through an external third-party. A report by this external third-party has not been completed as of the date of this finding; therefore, the amount of questioned costs related to federal programs cannot be determined. The University has also taken steps to immediately address policy and control deficiencies across the institution. Recommendations: We recommend the University do the following relative to University-wide procedures: 1. Determine the potential financial impact of noncompliance with grant sponsors. 2. Evaluate and improve its policies and required documentation for extra-service compensation. 3. Evaluate and improve its internal controls for sponsored program compensation. 4. Provide adequate training to University personnel regarding sponsored programs compensation compliance. USU’s Response: Utah State University (“USU”) generally agrees with Finding One. As detailed in USU internal audit IAS-23-53, USU Extension established a program to incentivize and reward its personnel to apply for grants (referred to by Extension and within USU internal audit IAS-23-53 as the “incentive program”). While the Uniform Guidance permits incentive programs (see CFR 200.430(f)) and such programs are readily used by universities, the USU Extension incentive program was established and carried out in manner that violated USU’s policy governing extra service compensation (“ESC”) and in a manner that bypassed critical internal controls. Notably, USU Internal Audit IAS-23-53 tested compliance with USU’s extra-service compensation policy but did not review actual costs charged to federal sponsors as this was outside the scope of the audit. Consistent with the recommendations to determine the potential impact of noncompliance, USU worked with an outside consultant to review payment of ESC to all employees working on federal grants. This work identified (1) limited instances when salaries directly charged to sponsored projects included extra service compensation in the base salary and (2) limited instances when extra service compensation was charged to federal sponsors without sponsor approval. The majority of ESC payments made pursuant the USU Extension incentive program was not charged to grant sponsor or included in the institutional base salary charged to the grant. Accordingly, noncompliance with the Uniform Guidance clauses related to compensation costs was limited to a small subset of payments made under the USU Extension incentive program. Based on these findings, USU agrees with the corrective actions recommended and, as outlined in the corrective action plan summary below, has already completed and/or initiated these actions.
2024-018. USU Extension Extra Services Compensation Program Non-Compliance with Uniform Guidance (Finding Type: Significant Deficiency, Reportable Noncompliance) Federal Agency: Various Assistance Listing Number and Title: Various Federal Award Number: Various Questioned Costs: Undetermined Pass-through Entity: Various Prior Year Single Audit Report Finding Number: N/A Utah State University’s (University) Internal Audit performed a review of the University’s Extension Service (Extension) within the College of Agriculture and Applied Science. The review determined that Extension’s Extra Service Compensation (ESC) program violates Uniform Guidance requirements and University policy, bypasses critical internal controls, and provides employees with additional compensation for extra-service work related to their primary job duties without sponsor approval. Extension’s mission, under the University’s land grant mission, provides research-based programs and resources to Utah’s population using a mix of local, state, federal and sponsored funding. To incentivize its personnel to apply for grants, Extension created an ESC program that allowed personnel to replace a portion of their primary position institution-funded salary with grant-funded salary. Personnel could then request up to 20 percent of their primary position salary through an ESC secondary position funded with the replaced institution-funded salary. However, Extension’s justified purpose for the ESC secondary position was “caused by and associated with the grant.” In doing so, Extension made it possible to bypass the University’s policy and internal controls for extra-service pay by obscuring the work duties and funding source for the secondary position. Below is an illustrative example from the USU Internal Audit Report of an ESC professor with an institutional base salary of $50,000: Payment to Employee Before Receiving Award (Source: USU Internal Audit Report IAS-23-53) Uniform Guidance maintains strict requirements with regard to the allowability of compensation, including special consideration for substantial increases, particularly with: • federal award ratios (2 CFR 200.430(e)), • institutional base salary charges, including federal award proportionate shares (2 CFR 200.430(h)(2)), • prior approvals by federal awarding agencies for incidental activities with supplemental compensation (2 CFR 200.430(h)(1)), • intra-institution consulting within higher education (2 CFR 200.430(h)(3)), • institutional policy definitions to conclusively determine work resulting in extra service pay (2 CFR 200.430(h)(4), and • relevant internal controls (2 CFR 200.302(b)(4). Internal Audit cites that the ESC program does not comply with Uniform Guidance, as well as University policy (Extra-Service Compensation Policy 376), which formalizes the University’s approach to compliance with Uniform Guidance for these activities. Internal Audit identified that University personnel did not follow or were unfamiliar with established policies in addition to procedural changes that did not require sufficient level of documentation for proper approvals. Detailed fieldwork by Internal Audit identified instances of questioned costs for funding (both federal and non-federal) in excess of $25,000. Fieldwork covered the period between January 1, 2020 and June 14, 2023, but also identified evidence of noncompliance as far back as 2009 to 2018. After Internal Audit issued its report in September 2024, the University took action to begin determining the potential financial impact of noncompliance through an external third-party. A report by this external third-party has not been completed as of the date of this finding; therefore, the amount of questioned costs related to federal programs cannot be determined. The University has also taken steps to immediately address policy and control deficiencies across the institution. Recommendations: We recommend the University do the following relative to University-wide procedures: 1. Determine the potential financial impact of noncompliance with grant sponsors. 2. Evaluate and improve its policies and required documentation for extra-service compensation. 3. Evaluate and improve its internal controls for sponsored program compensation. 4. Provide adequate training to University personnel regarding sponsored programs compensation compliance. USU’s Response: Utah State University (“USU”) generally agrees with Finding One. As detailed in USU internal audit IAS-23-53, USU Extension established a program to incentivize and reward its personnel to apply for grants (referred to by Extension and within USU internal audit IAS-23-53 as the “incentive program”). While the Uniform Guidance permits incentive programs (see CFR 200.430(f)) and such programs are readily used by universities, the USU Extension incentive program was established and carried out in manner that violated USU’s policy governing extra service compensation (“ESC”) and in a manner that bypassed critical internal controls. Notably, USU Internal Audit IAS-23-53 tested compliance with USU’s extra-service compensation policy but did not review actual costs charged to federal sponsors as this was outside the scope of the audit. Consistent with the recommendations to determine the potential impact of noncompliance, USU worked with an outside consultant to review payment of ESC to all employees working on federal grants. This work identified (1) limited instances when salaries directly charged to sponsored projects included extra service compensation in the base salary and (2) limited instances when extra service compensation was charged to federal sponsors without sponsor approval. The majority of ESC payments made pursuant the USU Extension incentive program was not charged to grant sponsor or included in the institutional base salary charged to the grant. Accordingly, noncompliance with the Uniform Guidance clauses related to compensation costs was limited to a small subset of payments made under the USU Extension incentive program. Based on these findings, USU agrees with the corrective actions recommended and, as outlined in the corrective action plan summary below, has already completed and/or initiated these actions.
2024-018. USU Extension Extra Services Compensation Program Non-Compliance with Uniform Guidance (Finding Type: Significant Deficiency, Reportable Noncompliance) Federal Agency: Various Assistance Listing Number and Title: Various Federal Award Number: Various Questioned Costs: Undetermined Pass-through Entity: Various Prior Year Single Audit Report Finding Number: N/A Utah State University’s (University) Internal Audit performed a review of the University’s Extension Service (Extension) within the College of Agriculture and Applied Science. The review determined that Extension’s Extra Service Compensation (ESC) program violates Uniform Guidance requirements and University policy, bypasses critical internal controls, and provides employees with additional compensation for extra-service work related to their primary job duties without sponsor approval. Extension’s mission, under the University’s land grant mission, provides research-based programs and resources to Utah’s population using a mix of local, state, federal and sponsored funding. To incentivize its personnel to apply for grants, Extension created an ESC program that allowed personnel to replace a portion of their primary position institution-funded salary with grant-funded salary. Personnel could then request up to 20 percent of their primary position salary through an ESC secondary position funded with the replaced institution-funded salary. However, Extension’s justified purpose for the ESC secondary position was “caused by and associated with the grant.” In doing so, Extension made it possible to bypass the University’s policy and internal controls for extra-service pay by obscuring the work duties and funding source for the secondary position. Below is an illustrative example from the USU Internal Audit Report of an ESC professor with an institutional base salary of $50,000: Payment to Employee Before Receiving Award (Source: USU Internal Audit Report IAS-23-53) Uniform Guidance maintains strict requirements with regard to the allowability of compensation, including special consideration for substantial increases, particularly with: • federal award ratios (2 CFR 200.430(e)), • institutional base salary charges, including federal award proportionate shares (2 CFR 200.430(h)(2)), • prior approvals by federal awarding agencies for incidental activities with supplemental compensation (2 CFR 200.430(h)(1)), • intra-institution consulting within higher education (2 CFR 200.430(h)(3)), • institutional policy definitions to conclusively determine work resulting in extra service pay (2 CFR 200.430(h)(4), and • relevant internal controls (2 CFR 200.302(b)(4). Internal Audit cites that the ESC program does not comply with Uniform Guidance, as well as University policy (Extra-Service Compensation Policy 376), which formalizes the University’s approach to compliance with Uniform Guidance for these activities. Internal Audit identified that University personnel did not follow or were unfamiliar with established policies in addition to procedural changes that did not require sufficient level of documentation for proper approvals. Detailed fieldwork by Internal Audit identified instances of questioned costs for funding (both federal and non-federal) in excess of $25,000. Fieldwork covered the period between January 1, 2020 and June 14, 2023, but also identified evidence of noncompliance as far back as 2009 to 2018. After Internal Audit issued its report in September 2024, the University took action to begin determining the potential financial impact of noncompliance through an external third-party. A report by this external third-party has not been completed as of the date of this finding; therefore, the amount of questioned costs related to federal programs cannot be determined. The University has also taken steps to immediately address policy and control deficiencies across the institution. Recommendations: We recommend the University do the following relative to University-wide procedures: 1. Determine the potential financial impact of noncompliance with grant sponsors. 2. Evaluate and improve its policies and required documentation for extra-service compensation. 3. Evaluate and improve its internal controls for sponsored program compensation. 4. Provide adequate training to University personnel regarding sponsored programs compensation compliance. USU’s Response: Utah State University (“USU”) generally agrees with Finding One. As detailed in USU internal audit IAS-23-53, USU Extension established a program to incentivize and reward its personnel to apply for grants (referred to by Extension and within USU internal audit IAS-23-53 as the “incentive program”). While the Uniform Guidance permits incentive programs (see CFR 200.430(f)) and such programs are readily used by universities, the USU Extension incentive program was established and carried out in manner that violated USU’s policy governing extra service compensation (“ESC”) and in a manner that bypassed critical internal controls. Notably, USU Internal Audit IAS-23-53 tested compliance with USU’s extra-service compensation policy but did not review actual costs charged to federal sponsors as this was outside the scope of the audit. Consistent with the recommendations to determine the potential impact of noncompliance, USU worked with an outside consultant to review payment of ESC to all employees working on federal grants. This work identified (1) limited instances when salaries directly charged to sponsored projects included extra service compensation in the base salary and (2) limited instances when extra service compensation was charged to federal sponsors without sponsor approval. The majority of ESC payments made pursuant the USU Extension incentive program was not charged to grant sponsor or included in the institutional base salary charged to the grant. Accordingly, noncompliance with the Uniform Guidance clauses related to compensation costs was limited to a small subset of payments made under the USU Extension incentive program. Based on these findings, USU agrees with the corrective actions recommended and, as outlined in the corrective action plan summary below, has already completed and/or initiated these actions.
2024-018. USU Extension Extra Services Compensation Program Non-Compliance with Uniform Guidance (Finding Type: Significant Deficiency, Reportable Noncompliance) Federal Agency: Various Assistance Listing Number and Title: Various Federal Award Number: Various Questioned Costs: Undetermined Pass-through Entity: Various Prior Year Single Audit Report Finding Number: N/A Utah State University’s (University) Internal Audit performed a review of the University’s Extension Service (Extension) within the College of Agriculture and Applied Science. The review determined that Extension’s Extra Service Compensation (ESC) program violates Uniform Guidance requirements and University policy, bypasses critical internal controls, and provides employees with additional compensation for extra-service work related to their primary job duties without sponsor approval. Extension’s mission, under the University’s land grant mission, provides research-based programs and resources to Utah’s population using a mix of local, state, federal and sponsored funding. To incentivize its personnel to apply for grants, Extension created an ESC program that allowed personnel to replace a portion of their primary position institution-funded salary with grant-funded salary. Personnel could then request up to 20 percent of their primary position salary through an ESC secondary position funded with the replaced institution-funded salary. However, Extension’s justified purpose for the ESC secondary position was “caused by and associated with the grant.” In doing so, Extension made it possible to bypass the University’s policy and internal controls for extra-service pay by obscuring the work duties and funding source for the secondary position. Below is an illustrative example from the USU Internal Audit Report of an ESC professor with an institutional base salary of $50,000: Payment to Employee Before Receiving Award (Source: USU Internal Audit Report IAS-23-53) Uniform Guidance maintains strict requirements with regard to the allowability of compensation, including special consideration for substantial increases, particularly with: • federal award ratios (2 CFR 200.430(e)), • institutional base salary charges, including federal award proportionate shares (2 CFR 200.430(h)(2)), • prior approvals by federal awarding agencies for incidental activities with supplemental compensation (2 CFR 200.430(h)(1)), • intra-institution consulting within higher education (2 CFR 200.430(h)(3)), • institutional policy definitions to conclusively determine work resulting in extra service pay (2 CFR 200.430(h)(4), and • relevant internal controls (2 CFR 200.302(b)(4). Internal Audit cites that the ESC program does not comply with Uniform Guidance, as well as University policy (Extra-Service Compensation Policy 376), which formalizes the University’s approach to compliance with Uniform Guidance for these activities. Internal Audit identified that University personnel did not follow or were unfamiliar with established policies in addition to procedural changes that did not require sufficient level of documentation for proper approvals. Detailed fieldwork by Internal Audit identified instances of questioned costs for funding (both federal and non-federal) in excess of $25,000. Fieldwork covered the period between January 1, 2020 and June 14, 2023, but also identified evidence of noncompliance as far back as 2009 to 2018. After Internal Audit issued its report in September 2024, the University took action to begin determining the potential financial impact of noncompliance through an external third-party. A report by this external third-party has not been completed as of the date of this finding; therefore, the amount of questioned costs related to federal programs cannot be determined. The University has also taken steps to immediately address policy and control deficiencies across the institution. Recommendations: We recommend the University do the following relative to University-wide procedures: 1. Determine the potential financial impact of noncompliance with grant sponsors. 2. Evaluate and improve its policies and required documentation for extra-service compensation. 3. Evaluate and improve its internal controls for sponsored program compensation. 4. Provide adequate training to University personnel regarding sponsored programs compensation compliance. USU’s Response: Utah State University (“USU”) generally agrees with Finding One. As detailed in USU internal audit IAS-23-53, USU Extension established a program to incentivize and reward its personnel to apply for grants (referred to by Extension and within USU internal audit IAS-23-53 as the “incentive program”). While the Uniform Guidance permits incentive programs (see CFR 200.430(f)) and such programs are readily used by universities, the USU Extension incentive program was established and carried out in manner that violated USU’s policy governing extra service compensation (“ESC”) and in a manner that bypassed critical internal controls. Notably, USU Internal Audit IAS-23-53 tested compliance with USU’s extra-service compensation policy but did not review actual costs charged to federal sponsors as this was outside the scope of the audit. Consistent with the recommendations to determine the potential impact of noncompliance, USU worked with an outside consultant to review payment of ESC to all employees working on federal grants. This work identified (1) limited instances when salaries directly charged to sponsored projects included extra service compensation in the base salary and (2) limited instances when extra service compensation was charged to federal sponsors without sponsor approval. The majority of ESC payments made pursuant the USU Extension incentive program was not charged to grant sponsor or included in the institutional base salary charged to the grant. Accordingly, noncompliance with the Uniform Guidance clauses related to compensation costs was limited to a small subset of payments made under the USU Extension incentive program. Based on these findings, USU agrees with the corrective actions recommended and, as outlined in the corrective action plan summary below, has already completed and/or initiated these actions.
2024-018. USU Extension Extra Services Compensation Program Non-Compliance with Uniform Guidance (Finding Type: Significant Deficiency, Reportable Noncompliance) Federal Agency: Various Assistance Listing Number and Title: Various Federal Award Number: Various Questioned Costs: Undetermined Pass-through Entity: Various Prior Year Single Audit Report Finding Number: N/A Utah State University’s (University) Internal Audit performed a review of the University’s Extension Service (Extension) within the College of Agriculture and Applied Science. The review determined that Extension’s Extra Service Compensation (ESC) program violates Uniform Guidance requirements and University policy, bypasses critical internal controls, and provides employees with additional compensation for extra-service work related to their primary job duties without sponsor approval. Extension’s mission, under the University’s land grant mission, provides research-based programs and resources to Utah’s population using a mix of local, state, federal and sponsored funding. To incentivize its personnel to apply for grants, Extension created an ESC program that allowed personnel to replace a portion of their primary position institution-funded salary with grant-funded salary. Personnel could then request up to 20 percent of their primary position salary through an ESC secondary position funded with the replaced institution-funded salary. However, Extension’s justified purpose for the ESC secondary position was “caused by and associated with the grant.” In doing so, Extension made it possible to bypass the University’s policy and internal controls for extra-service pay by obscuring the work duties and funding source for the secondary position. Below is an illustrative example from the USU Internal Audit Report of an ESC professor with an institutional base salary of $50,000: Payment to Employee Before Receiving Award (Source: USU Internal Audit Report IAS-23-53) Uniform Guidance maintains strict requirements with regard to the allowability of compensation, including special consideration for substantial increases, particularly with: • federal award ratios (2 CFR 200.430(e)), • institutional base salary charges, including federal award proportionate shares (2 CFR 200.430(h)(2)), • prior approvals by federal awarding agencies for incidental activities with supplemental compensation (2 CFR 200.430(h)(1)), • intra-institution consulting within higher education (2 CFR 200.430(h)(3)), • institutional policy definitions to conclusively determine work resulting in extra service pay (2 CFR 200.430(h)(4), and • relevant internal controls (2 CFR 200.302(b)(4). Internal Audit cites that the ESC program does not comply with Uniform Guidance, as well as University policy (Extra-Service Compensation Policy 376), which formalizes the University’s approach to compliance with Uniform Guidance for these activities. Internal Audit identified that University personnel did not follow or were unfamiliar with established policies in addition to procedural changes that did not require sufficient level of documentation for proper approvals. Detailed fieldwork by Internal Audit identified instances of questioned costs for funding (both federal and non-federal) in excess of $25,000. Fieldwork covered the period between January 1, 2020 and June 14, 2023, but also identified evidence of noncompliance as far back as 2009 to 2018. After Internal Audit issued its report in September 2024, the University took action to begin determining the potential financial impact of noncompliance through an external third-party. A report by this external third-party has not been completed as of the date of this finding; therefore, the amount of questioned costs related to federal programs cannot be determined. The University has also taken steps to immediately address policy and control deficiencies across the institution. Recommendations: We recommend the University do the following relative to University-wide procedures: 1. Determine the potential financial impact of noncompliance with grant sponsors. 2. Evaluate and improve its policies and required documentation for extra-service compensation. 3. Evaluate and improve its internal controls for sponsored program compensation. 4. Provide adequate training to University personnel regarding sponsored programs compensation compliance. USU’s Response: Utah State University (“USU”) generally agrees with Finding One. As detailed in USU internal audit IAS-23-53, USU Extension established a program to incentivize and reward its personnel to apply for grants (referred to by Extension and within USU internal audit IAS-23-53 as the “incentive program”). While the Uniform Guidance permits incentive programs (see CFR 200.430(f)) and such programs are readily used by universities, the USU Extension incentive program was established and carried out in manner that violated USU’s policy governing extra service compensation (“ESC”) and in a manner that bypassed critical internal controls. Notably, USU Internal Audit IAS-23-53 tested compliance with USU’s extra-service compensation policy but did not review actual costs charged to federal sponsors as this was outside the scope of the audit. Consistent with the recommendations to determine the potential impact of noncompliance, USU worked with an outside consultant to review payment of ESC to all employees working on federal grants. This work identified (1) limited instances when salaries directly charged to sponsored projects included extra service compensation in the base salary and (2) limited instances when extra service compensation was charged to federal sponsors without sponsor approval. The majority of ESC payments made pursuant the USU Extension incentive program was not charged to grant sponsor or included in the institutional base salary charged to the grant. Accordingly, noncompliance with the Uniform Guidance clauses related to compensation costs was limited to a small subset of payments made under the USU Extension incentive program. Based on these findings, USU agrees with the corrective actions recommended and, as outlined in the corrective action plan summary below, has already completed and/or initiated these actions.
2024-018. USU Extension Extra Services Compensation Program Non-Compliance with Uniform Guidance (Finding Type: Significant Deficiency, Reportable Noncompliance) Federal Agency: Various Assistance Listing Number and Title: Various Federal Award Number: Various Questioned Costs: Undetermined Pass-through Entity: Various Prior Year Single Audit Report Finding Number: N/A Utah State University’s (University) Internal Audit performed a review of the University’s Extension Service (Extension) within the College of Agriculture and Applied Science. The review determined that Extension’s Extra Service Compensation (ESC) program violates Uniform Guidance requirements and University policy, bypasses critical internal controls, and provides employees with additional compensation for extra-service work related to their primary job duties without sponsor approval. Extension’s mission, under the University’s land grant mission, provides research-based programs and resources to Utah’s population using a mix of local, state, federal and sponsored funding. To incentivize its personnel to apply for grants, Extension created an ESC program that allowed personnel to replace a portion of their primary position institution-funded salary with grant-funded salary. Personnel could then request up to 20 percent of their primary position salary through an ESC secondary position funded with the replaced institution-funded salary. However, Extension’s justified purpose for the ESC secondary position was “caused by and associated with the grant.” In doing so, Extension made it possible to bypass the University’s policy and internal controls for extra-service pay by obscuring the work duties and funding source for the secondary position. Below is an illustrative example from the USU Internal Audit Report of an ESC professor with an institutional base salary of $50,000: Payment to Employee Before Receiving Award (Source: USU Internal Audit Report IAS-23-53) Uniform Guidance maintains strict requirements with regard to the allowability of compensation, including special consideration for substantial increases, particularly with: • federal award ratios (2 CFR 200.430(e)), • institutional base salary charges, including federal award proportionate shares (2 CFR 200.430(h)(2)), • prior approvals by federal awarding agencies for incidental activities with supplemental compensation (2 CFR 200.430(h)(1)), • intra-institution consulting within higher education (2 CFR 200.430(h)(3)), • institutional policy definitions to conclusively determine work resulting in extra service pay (2 CFR 200.430(h)(4), and • relevant internal controls (2 CFR 200.302(b)(4). Internal Audit cites that the ESC program does not comply with Uniform Guidance, as well as University policy (Extra-Service Compensation Policy 376), which formalizes the University’s approach to compliance with Uniform Guidance for these activities. Internal Audit identified that University personnel did not follow or were unfamiliar with established policies in addition to procedural changes that did not require sufficient level of documentation for proper approvals. Detailed fieldwork by Internal Audit identified instances of questioned costs for funding (both federal and non-federal) in excess of $25,000. Fieldwork covered the period between January 1, 2020 and June 14, 2023, but also identified evidence of noncompliance as far back as 2009 to 2018. After Internal Audit issued its report in September 2024, the University took action to begin determining the potential financial impact of noncompliance through an external third-party. A report by this external third-party has not been completed as of the date of this finding; therefore, the amount of questioned costs related to federal programs cannot be determined. The University has also taken steps to immediately address policy and control deficiencies across the institution. Recommendations: We recommend the University do the following relative to University-wide procedures: 1. Determine the potential financial impact of noncompliance with grant sponsors. 2. Evaluate and improve its policies and required documentation for extra-service compensation. 3. Evaluate and improve its internal controls for sponsored program compensation. 4. Provide adequate training to University personnel regarding sponsored programs compensation compliance. USU’s Response: Utah State University (“USU”) generally agrees with Finding One. As detailed in USU internal audit IAS-23-53, USU Extension established a program to incentivize and reward its personnel to apply for grants (referred to by Extension and within USU internal audit IAS-23-53 as the “incentive program”). While the Uniform Guidance permits incentive programs (see CFR 200.430(f)) and such programs are readily used by universities, the USU Extension incentive program was established and carried out in manner that violated USU’s policy governing extra service compensation (“ESC”) and in a manner that bypassed critical internal controls. Notably, USU Internal Audit IAS-23-53 tested compliance with USU’s extra-service compensation policy but did not review actual costs charged to federal sponsors as this was outside the scope of the audit. Consistent with the recommendations to determine the potential impact of noncompliance, USU worked with an outside consultant to review payment of ESC to all employees working on federal grants. This work identified (1) limited instances when salaries directly charged to sponsored projects included extra service compensation in the base salary and (2) limited instances when extra service compensation was charged to federal sponsors without sponsor approval. The majority of ESC payments made pursuant the USU Extension incentive program was not charged to grant sponsor or included in the institutional base salary charged to the grant. Accordingly, noncompliance with the Uniform Guidance clauses related to compensation costs was limited to a small subset of payments made under the USU Extension incentive program. Based on these findings, USU agrees with the corrective actions recommended and, as outlined in the corrective action plan summary below, has already completed and/or initiated these actions.
2024-018. USU Extension Extra Services Compensation Program Non-Compliance with Uniform Guidance (Finding Type: Significant Deficiency, Reportable Noncompliance) Federal Agency: Various Assistance Listing Number and Title: Various Federal Award Number: Various Questioned Costs: Undetermined Pass-through Entity: Various Prior Year Single Audit Report Finding Number: N/A Utah State University’s (University) Internal Audit performed a review of the University’s Extension Service (Extension) within the College of Agriculture and Applied Science. The review determined that Extension’s Extra Service Compensation (ESC) program violates Uniform Guidance requirements and University policy, bypasses critical internal controls, and provides employees with additional compensation for extra-service work related to their primary job duties without sponsor approval. Extension’s mission, under the University’s land grant mission, provides research-based programs and resources to Utah’s population using a mix of local, state, federal and sponsored funding. To incentivize its personnel to apply for grants, Extension created an ESC program that allowed personnel to replace a portion of their primary position institution-funded salary with grant-funded salary. Personnel could then request up to 20 percent of their primary position salary through an ESC secondary position funded with the replaced institution-funded salary. However, Extension’s justified purpose for the ESC secondary position was “caused by and associated with the grant.” In doing so, Extension made it possible to bypass the University’s policy and internal controls for extra-service pay by obscuring the work duties and funding source for the secondary position. Below is an illustrative example from the USU Internal Audit Report of an ESC professor with an institutional base salary of $50,000: Payment to Employee Before Receiving Award (Source: USU Internal Audit Report IAS-23-53) Uniform Guidance maintains strict requirements with regard to the allowability of compensation, including special consideration for substantial increases, particularly with: • federal award ratios (2 CFR 200.430(e)), • institutional base salary charges, including federal award proportionate shares (2 CFR 200.430(h)(2)), • prior approvals by federal awarding agencies for incidental activities with supplemental compensation (2 CFR 200.430(h)(1)), • intra-institution consulting within higher education (2 CFR 200.430(h)(3)), • institutional policy definitions to conclusively determine work resulting in extra service pay (2 CFR 200.430(h)(4), and • relevant internal controls (2 CFR 200.302(b)(4). Internal Audit cites that the ESC program does not comply with Uniform Guidance, as well as University policy (Extra-Service Compensation Policy 376), which formalizes the University’s approach to compliance with Uniform Guidance for these activities. Internal Audit identified that University personnel did not follow or were unfamiliar with established policies in addition to procedural changes that did not require sufficient level of documentation for proper approvals. Detailed fieldwork by Internal Audit identified instances of questioned costs for funding (both federal and non-federal) in excess of $25,000. Fieldwork covered the period between January 1, 2020 and June 14, 2023, but also identified evidence of noncompliance as far back as 2009 to 2018. After Internal Audit issued its report in September 2024, the University took action to begin determining the potential financial impact of noncompliance through an external third-party. A report by this external third-party has not been completed as of the date of this finding; therefore, the amount of questioned costs related to federal programs cannot be determined. The University has also taken steps to immediately address policy and control deficiencies across the institution. Recommendations: We recommend the University do the following relative to University-wide procedures: 1. Determine the potential financial impact of noncompliance with grant sponsors. 2. Evaluate and improve its policies and required documentation for extra-service compensation. 3. Evaluate and improve its internal controls for sponsored program compensation. 4. Provide adequate training to University personnel regarding sponsored programs compensation compliance. USU’s Response: Utah State University (“USU”) generally agrees with Finding One. As detailed in USU internal audit IAS-23-53, USU Extension established a program to incentivize and reward its personnel to apply for grants (referred to by Extension and within USU internal audit IAS-23-53 as the “incentive program”). While the Uniform Guidance permits incentive programs (see CFR 200.430(f)) and such programs are readily used by universities, the USU Extension incentive program was established and carried out in manner that violated USU’s policy governing extra service compensation (“ESC”) and in a manner that bypassed critical internal controls. Notably, USU Internal Audit IAS-23-53 tested compliance with USU’s extra-service compensation policy but did not review actual costs charged to federal sponsors as this was outside the scope of the audit. Consistent with the recommendations to determine the potential impact of noncompliance, USU worked with an outside consultant to review payment of ESC to all employees working on federal grants. This work identified (1) limited instances when salaries directly charged to sponsored projects included extra service compensation in the base salary and (2) limited instances when extra service compensation was charged to federal sponsors without sponsor approval. The majority of ESC payments made pursuant the USU Extension incentive program was not charged to grant sponsor or included in the institutional base salary charged to the grant. Accordingly, noncompliance with the Uniform Guidance clauses related to compensation costs was limited to a small subset of payments made under the USU Extension incentive program. Based on these findings, USU agrees with the corrective actions recommended and, as outlined in the corrective action plan summary below, has already completed and/or initiated these actions.
2024-018. USU Extension Extra Services Compensation Program Non-Compliance with Uniform Guidance (Finding Type: Significant Deficiency, Reportable Noncompliance) Federal Agency: Various Assistance Listing Number and Title: Various Federal Award Number: Various Questioned Costs: Undetermined Pass-through Entity: Various Prior Year Single Audit Report Finding Number: N/A Utah State University’s (University) Internal Audit performed a review of the University’s Extension Service (Extension) within the College of Agriculture and Applied Science. The review determined that Extension’s Extra Service Compensation (ESC) program violates Uniform Guidance requirements and University policy, bypasses critical internal controls, and provides employees with additional compensation for extra-service work related to their primary job duties without sponsor approval. Extension’s mission, under the University’s land grant mission, provides research-based programs and resources to Utah’s population using a mix of local, state, federal and sponsored funding. To incentivize its personnel to apply for grants, Extension created an ESC program that allowed personnel to replace a portion of their primary position institution-funded salary with grant-funded salary. Personnel could then request up to 20 percent of their primary position salary through an ESC secondary position funded with the replaced institution-funded salary. However, Extension’s justified purpose for the ESC secondary position was “caused by and associated with the grant.” In doing so, Extension made it possible to bypass the University’s policy and internal controls for extra-service pay by obscuring the work duties and funding source for the secondary position. Below is an illustrative example from the USU Internal Audit Report of an ESC professor with an institutional base salary of $50,000: Payment to Employee Before Receiving Award (Source: USU Internal Audit Report IAS-23-53) Uniform Guidance maintains strict requirements with regard to the allowability of compensation, including special consideration for substantial increases, particularly with: • federal award ratios (2 CFR 200.430(e)), • institutional base salary charges, including federal award proportionate shares (2 CFR 200.430(h)(2)), • prior approvals by federal awarding agencies for incidental activities with supplemental compensation (2 CFR 200.430(h)(1)), • intra-institution consulting within higher education (2 CFR 200.430(h)(3)), • institutional policy definitions to conclusively determine work resulting in extra service pay (2 CFR 200.430(h)(4), and • relevant internal controls (2 CFR 200.302(b)(4). Internal Audit cites that the ESC program does not comply with Uniform Guidance, as well as University policy (Extra-Service Compensation Policy 376), which formalizes the University’s approach to compliance with Uniform Guidance for these activities. Internal Audit identified that University personnel did not follow or were unfamiliar with established policies in addition to procedural changes that did not require sufficient level of documentation for proper approvals. Detailed fieldwork by Internal Audit identified instances of questioned costs for funding (both federal and non-federal) in excess of $25,000. Fieldwork covered the period between January 1, 2020 and June 14, 2023, but also identified evidence of noncompliance as far back as 2009 to 2018. After Internal Audit issued its report in September 2024, the University took action to begin determining the potential financial impact of noncompliance through an external third-party. A report by this external third-party has not been completed as of the date of this finding; therefore, the amount of questioned costs related to federal programs cannot be determined. The University has also taken steps to immediately address policy and control deficiencies across the institution. Recommendations: We recommend the University do the following relative to University-wide procedures: 1. Determine the potential financial impact of noncompliance with grant sponsors. 2. Evaluate and improve its policies and required documentation for extra-service compensation. 3. Evaluate and improve its internal controls for sponsored program compensation. 4. Provide adequate training to University personnel regarding sponsored programs compensation compliance. USU’s Response: Utah State University (“USU”) generally agrees with Finding One. As detailed in USU internal audit IAS-23-53, USU Extension established a program to incentivize and reward its personnel to apply for grants (referred to by Extension and within USU internal audit IAS-23-53 as the “incentive program”). While the Uniform Guidance permits incentive programs (see CFR 200.430(f)) and such programs are readily used by universities, the USU Extension incentive program was established and carried out in manner that violated USU’s policy governing extra service compensation (“ESC”) and in a manner that bypassed critical internal controls. Notably, USU Internal Audit IAS-23-53 tested compliance with USU’s extra-service compensation policy but did not review actual costs charged to federal sponsors as this was outside the scope of the audit. Consistent with the recommendations to determine the potential impact of noncompliance, USU worked with an outside consultant to review payment of ESC to all employees working on federal grants. This work identified (1) limited instances when salaries directly charged to sponsored projects included extra service compensation in the base salary and (2) limited instances when extra service compensation was charged to federal sponsors without sponsor approval. The majority of ESC payments made pursuant the USU Extension incentive program was not charged to grant sponsor or included in the institutional base salary charged to the grant. Accordingly, noncompliance with the Uniform Guidance clauses related to compensation costs was limited to a small subset of payments made under the USU Extension incentive program. Based on these findings, USU agrees with the corrective actions recommended and, as outlined in the corrective action plan summary below, has already completed and/or initiated these actions.
2024-018. USU Extension Extra Services Compensation Program Non-Compliance with Uniform Guidance (Finding Type: Significant Deficiency, Reportable Noncompliance) Federal Agency: Various Assistance Listing Number and Title: Various Federal Award Number: Various Questioned Costs: Undetermined Pass-through Entity: Various Prior Year Single Audit Report Finding Number: N/A Utah State University’s (University) Internal Audit performed a review of the University’s Extension Service (Extension) within the College of Agriculture and Applied Science. The review determined that Extension’s Extra Service Compensation (ESC) program violates Uniform Guidance requirements and University policy, bypasses critical internal controls, and provides employees with additional compensation for extra-service work related to their primary job duties without sponsor approval. Extension’s mission, under the University’s land grant mission, provides research-based programs and resources to Utah’s population using a mix of local, state, federal and sponsored funding. To incentivize its personnel to apply for grants, Extension created an ESC program that allowed personnel to replace a portion of their primary position institution-funded salary with grant-funded salary. Personnel could then request up to 20 percent of their primary position salary through an ESC secondary position funded with the replaced institution-funded salary. However, Extension’s justified purpose for the ESC secondary position was “caused by and associated with the grant.” In doing so, Extension made it possible to bypass the University’s policy and internal controls for extra-service pay by obscuring the work duties and funding source for the secondary position. Below is an illustrative example from the USU Internal Audit Report of an ESC professor with an institutional base salary of $50,000: Payment to Employee Before Receiving Award (Source: USU Internal Audit Report IAS-23-53) Uniform Guidance maintains strict requirements with regard to the allowability of compensation, including special consideration for substantial increases, particularly with: • federal award ratios (2 CFR 200.430(e)), • institutional base salary charges, including federal award proportionate shares (2 CFR 200.430(h)(2)), • prior approvals by federal awarding agencies for incidental activities with supplemental compensation (2 CFR 200.430(h)(1)), • intra-institution consulting within higher education (2 CFR 200.430(h)(3)), • institutional policy definitions to conclusively determine work resulting in extra service pay (2 CFR 200.430(h)(4), and • relevant internal controls (2 CFR 200.302(b)(4). Internal Audit cites that the ESC program does not comply with Uniform Guidance, as well as University policy (Extra-Service Compensation Policy 376), which formalizes the University’s approach to compliance with Uniform Guidance for these activities. Internal Audit identified that University personnel did not follow or were unfamiliar with established policies in addition to procedural changes that did not require sufficient level of documentation for proper approvals. Detailed fieldwork by Internal Audit identified instances of questioned costs for funding (both federal and non-federal) in excess of $25,000. Fieldwork covered the period between January 1, 2020 and June 14, 2023, but also identified evidence of noncompliance as far back as 2009 to 2018. After Internal Audit issued its report in September 2024, the University took action to begin determining the potential financial impact of noncompliance through an external third-party. A report by this external third-party has not been completed as of the date of this finding; therefore, the amount of questioned costs related to federal programs cannot be determined. The University has also taken steps to immediately address policy and control deficiencies across the institution. Recommendations: We recommend the University do the following relative to University-wide procedures: 1. Determine the potential financial impact of noncompliance with grant sponsors. 2. Evaluate and improve its policies and required documentation for extra-service compensation. 3. Evaluate and improve its internal controls for sponsored program compensation. 4. Provide adequate training to University personnel regarding sponsored programs compensation compliance. USU’s Response: Utah State University (“USU”) generally agrees with Finding One. As detailed in USU internal audit IAS-23-53, USU Extension established a program to incentivize and reward its personnel to apply for grants (referred to by Extension and within USU internal audit IAS-23-53 as the “incentive program”). While the Uniform Guidance permits incentive programs (see CFR 200.430(f)) and such programs are readily used by universities, the USU Extension incentive program was established and carried out in manner that violated USU’s policy governing extra service compensation (“ESC”) and in a manner that bypassed critical internal controls. Notably, USU Internal Audit IAS-23-53 tested compliance with USU’s extra-service compensation policy but did not review actual costs charged to federal sponsors as this was outside the scope of the audit. Consistent with the recommendations to determine the potential impact of noncompliance, USU worked with an outside consultant to review payment of ESC to all employees working on federal grants. This work identified (1) limited instances when salaries directly charged to sponsored projects included extra service compensation in the base salary and (2) limited instances when extra service compensation was charged to federal sponsors without sponsor approval. The majority of ESC payments made pursuant the USU Extension incentive program was not charged to grant sponsor or included in the institutional base salary charged to the grant. Accordingly, noncompliance with the Uniform Guidance clauses related to compensation costs was limited to a small subset of payments made under the USU Extension incentive program. Based on these findings, USU agrees with the corrective actions recommended and, as outlined in the corrective action plan summary below, has already completed and/or initiated these actions.
2024-018. USU Extension Extra Services Compensation Program Non-Compliance with Uniform Guidance (Finding Type: Significant Deficiency, Reportable Noncompliance) Federal Agency: Various Assistance Listing Number and Title: Various Federal Award Number: Various Questioned Costs: Undetermined Pass-through Entity: Various Prior Year Single Audit Report Finding Number: N/A Utah State University’s (University) Internal Audit performed a review of the University’s Extension Service (Extension) within the College of Agriculture and Applied Science. The review determined that Extension’s Extra Service Compensation (ESC) program violates Uniform Guidance requirements and University policy, bypasses critical internal controls, and provides employees with additional compensation for extra-service work related to their primary job duties without sponsor approval. Extension’s mission, under the University’s land grant mission, provides research-based programs and resources to Utah’s population using a mix of local, state, federal and sponsored funding. To incentivize its personnel to apply for grants, Extension created an ESC program that allowed personnel to replace a portion of their primary position institution-funded salary with grant-funded salary. Personnel could then request up to 20 percent of their primary position salary through an ESC secondary position funded with the replaced institution-funded salary. However, Extension’s justified purpose for the ESC secondary position was “caused by and associated with the grant.” In doing so, Extension made it possible to bypass the University’s policy and internal controls for extra-service pay by obscuring the work duties and funding source for the secondary position. Below is an illustrative example from the USU Internal Audit Report of an ESC professor with an institutional base salary of $50,000: Payment to Employee Before Receiving Award (Source: USU Internal Audit Report IAS-23-53) Uniform Guidance maintains strict requirements with regard to the allowability of compensation, including special consideration for substantial increases, particularly with: • federal award ratios (2 CFR 200.430(e)), • institutional base salary charges, including federal award proportionate shares (2 CFR 200.430(h)(2)), • prior approvals by federal awarding agencies for incidental activities with supplemental compensation (2 CFR 200.430(h)(1)), • intra-institution consulting within higher education (2 CFR 200.430(h)(3)), • institutional policy definitions to conclusively determine work resulting in extra service pay (2 CFR 200.430(h)(4), and • relevant internal controls (2 CFR 200.302(b)(4). Internal Audit cites that the ESC program does not comply with Uniform Guidance, as well as University policy (Extra-Service Compensation Policy 376), which formalizes the University’s approach to compliance with Uniform Guidance for these activities. Internal Audit identified that University personnel did not follow or were unfamiliar with established policies in addition to procedural changes that did not require sufficient level of documentation for proper approvals. Detailed fieldwork by Internal Audit identified instances of questioned costs for funding (both federal and non-federal) in excess of $25,000. Fieldwork covered the period between January 1, 2020 and June 14, 2023, but also identified evidence of noncompliance as far back as 2009 to 2018. After Internal Audit issued its report in September 2024, the University took action to begin determining the potential financial impact of noncompliance through an external third-party. A report by this external third-party has not been completed as of the date of this finding; therefore, the amount of questioned costs related to federal programs cannot be determined. The University has also taken steps to immediately address policy and control deficiencies across the institution. Recommendations: We recommend the University do the following relative to University-wide procedures: 1. Determine the potential financial impact of noncompliance with grant sponsors. 2. Evaluate and improve its policies and required documentation for extra-service compensation. 3. Evaluate and improve its internal controls for sponsored program compensation. 4. Provide adequate training to University personnel regarding sponsored programs compensation compliance. USU’s Response: Utah State University (“USU”) generally agrees with Finding One. As detailed in USU internal audit IAS-23-53, USU Extension established a program to incentivize and reward its personnel to apply for grants (referred to by Extension and within USU internal audit IAS-23-53 as the “incentive program”). While the Uniform Guidance permits incentive programs (see CFR 200.430(f)) and such programs are readily used by universities, the USU Extension incentive program was established and carried out in manner that violated USU’s policy governing extra service compensation (“ESC”) and in a manner that bypassed critical internal controls. Notably, USU Internal Audit IAS-23-53 tested compliance with USU’s extra-service compensation policy but did not review actual costs charged to federal sponsors as this was outside the scope of the audit. Consistent with the recommendations to determine the potential impact of noncompliance, USU worked with an outside consultant to review payment of ESC to all employees working on federal grants. This work identified (1) limited instances when salaries directly charged to sponsored projects included extra service compensation in the base salary and (2) limited instances when extra service compensation was charged to federal sponsors without sponsor approval. The majority of ESC payments made pursuant the USU Extension incentive program was not charged to grant sponsor or included in the institutional base salary charged to the grant. Accordingly, noncompliance with the Uniform Guidance clauses related to compensation costs was limited to a small subset of payments made under the USU Extension incentive program. Based on these findings, USU agrees with the corrective actions recommended and, as outlined in the corrective action plan summary below, has already completed and/or initiated these actions.
2024-018. USU Extension Extra Services Compensation Program Non-Compliance with Uniform Guidance (Finding Type: Significant Deficiency, Reportable Noncompliance) Federal Agency: Various Assistance Listing Number and Title: Various Federal Award Number: Various Questioned Costs: Undetermined Pass-through Entity: Various Prior Year Single Audit Report Finding Number: N/A Utah State University’s (University) Internal Audit performed a review of the University’s Extension Service (Extension) within the College of Agriculture and Applied Science. The review determined that Extension’s Extra Service Compensation (ESC) program violates Uniform Guidance requirements and University policy, bypasses critical internal controls, and provides employees with additional compensation for extra-service work related to their primary job duties without sponsor approval. Extension’s mission, under the University’s land grant mission, provides research-based programs and resources to Utah’s population using a mix of local, state, federal and sponsored funding. To incentivize its personnel to apply for grants, Extension created an ESC program that allowed personnel to replace a portion of their primary position institution-funded salary with grant-funded salary. Personnel could then request up to 20 percent of their primary position salary through an ESC secondary position funded with the replaced institution-funded salary. However, Extension’s justified purpose for the ESC secondary position was “caused by and associated with the grant.” In doing so, Extension made it possible to bypass the University’s policy and internal controls for extra-service pay by obscuring the work duties and funding source for the secondary position. Below is an illustrative example from the USU Internal Audit Report of an ESC professor with an institutional base salary of $50,000: Payment to Employee Before Receiving Award (Source: USU Internal Audit Report IAS-23-53) Uniform Guidance maintains strict requirements with regard to the allowability of compensation, including special consideration for substantial increases, particularly with: • federal award ratios (2 CFR 200.430(e)), • institutional base salary charges, including federal award proportionate shares (2 CFR 200.430(h)(2)), • prior approvals by federal awarding agencies for incidental activities with supplemental compensation (2 CFR 200.430(h)(1)), • intra-institution consulting within higher education (2 CFR 200.430(h)(3)), • institutional policy definitions to conclusively determine work resulting in extra service pay (2 CFR 200.430(h)(4), and • relevant internal controls (2 CFR 200.302(b)(4). Internal Audit cites that the ESC program does not comply with Uniform Guidance, as well as University policy (Extra-Service Compensation Policy 376), which formalizes the University’s approach to compliance with Uniform Guidance for these activities. Internal Audit identified that University personnel did not follow or were unfamiliar with established policies in addition to procedural changes that did not require sufficient level of documentation for proper approvals. Detailed fieldwork by Internal Audit identified instances of questioned costs for funding (both federal and non-federal) in excess of $25,000. Fieldwork covered the period between January 1, 2020 and June 14, 2023, but also identified evidence of noncompliance as far back as 2009 to 2018. After Internal Audit issued its report in September 2024, the University took action to begin determining the potential financial impact of noncompliance through an external third-party. A report by this external third-party has not been completed as of the date of this finding; therefore, the amount of questioned costs related to federal programs cannot be determined. The University has also taken steps to immediately address policy and control deficiencies across the institution. Recommendations: We recommend the University do the following relative to University-wide procedures: 1. Determine the potential financial impact of noncompliance with grant sponsors. 2. Evaluate and improve its policies and required documentation for extra-service compensation. 3. Evaluate and improve its internal controls for sponsored program compensation. 4. Provide adequate training to University personnel regarding sponsored programs compensation compliance. USU’s Response: Utah State University (“USU”) generally agrees with Finding One. As detailed in USU internal audit IAS-23-53, USU Extension established a program to incentivize and reward its personnel to apply for grants (referred to by Extension and within USU internal audit IAS-23-53 as the “incentive program”). While the Uniform Guidance permits incentive programs (see CFR 200.430(f)) and such programs are readily used by universities, the USU Extension incentive program was established and carried out in manner that violated USU’s policy governing extra service compensation (“ESC”) and in a manner that bypassed critical internal controls. Notably, USU Internal Audit IAS-23-53 tested compliance with USU’s extra-service compensation policy but did not review actual costs charged to federal sponsors as this was outside the scope of the audit. Consistent with the recommendations to determine the potential impact of noncompliance, USU worked with an outside consultant to review payment of ESC to all employees working on federal grants. This work identified (1) limited instances when salaries directly charged to sponsored projects included extra service compensation in the base salary and (2) limited instances when extra service compensation was charged to federal sponsors without sponsor approval. The majority of ESC payments made pursuant the USU Extension incentive program was not charged to grant sponsor or included in the institutional base salary charged to the grant. Accordingly, noncompliance with the Uniform Guidance clauses related to compensation costs was limited to a small subset of payments made under the USU Extension incentive program. Based on these findings, USU agrees with the corrective actions recommended and, as outlined in the corrective action plan summary below, has already completed and/or initiated these actions.
2024-018. USU Extension Extra Services Compensation Program Non-Compliance with Uniform Guidance (Finding Type: Significant Deficiency, Reportable Noncompliance) Federal Agency: Various Assistance Listing Number and Title: Various Federal Award Number: Various Questioned Costs: Undetermined Pass-through Entity: Various Prior Year Single Audit Report Finding Number: N/A Utah State University’s (University) Internal Audit performed a review of the University’s Extension Service (Extension) within the College of Agriculture and Applied Science. The review determined that Extension’s Extra Service Compensation (ESC) program violates Uniform Guidance requirements and University policy, bypasses critical internal controls, and provides employees with additional compensation for extra-service work related to their primary job duties without sponsor approval. Extension’s mission, under the University’s land grant mission, provides research-based programs and resources to Utah’s population using a mix of local, state, federal and sponsored funding. To incentivize its personnel to apply for grants, Extension created an ESC program that allowed personnel to replace a portion of their primary position institution-funded salary with grant-funded salary. Personnel could then request up to 20 percent of their primary position salary through an ESC secondary position funded with the replaced institution-funded salary. However, Extension’s justified purpose for the ESC secondary position was “caused by and associated with the grant.” In doing so, Extension made it possible to bypass the University’s policy and internal controls for extra-service pay by obscuring the work duties and funding source for the secondary position. Below is an illustrative example from the USU Internal Audit Report of an ESC professor with an institutional base salary of $50,000: Payment to Employee Before Receiving Award (Source: USU Internal Audit Report IAS-23-53) Uniform Guidance maintains strict requirements with regard to the allowability of compensation, including special consideration for substantial increases, particularly with: • federal award ratios (2 CFR 200.430(e)), • institutional base salary charges, including federal award proportionate shares (2 CFR 200.430(h)(2)), • prior approvals by federal awarding agencies for incidental activities with supplemental compensation (2 CFR 200.430(h)(1)), • intra-institution consulting within higher education (2 CFR 200.430(h)(3)), • institutional policy definitions to conclusively determine work resulting in extra service pay (2 CFR 200.430(h)(4), and • relevant internal controls (2 CFR 200.302(b)(4). Internal Audit cites that the ESC program does not comply with Uniform Guidance, as well as University policy (Extra-Service Compensation Policy 376), which formalizes the University’s approach to compliance with Uniform Guidance for these activities. Internal Audit identified that University personnel did not follow or were unfamiliar with established policies in addition to procedural changes that did not require sufficient level of documentation for proper approvals. Detailed fieldwork by Internal Audit identified instances of questioned costs for funding (both federal and non-federal) in excess of $25,000. Fieldwork covered the period between January 1, 2020 and June 14, 2023, but also identified evidence of noncompliance as far back as 2009 to 2018. After Internal Audit issued its report in September 2024, the University took action to begin determining the potential financial impact of noncompliance through an external third-party. A report by this external third-party has not been completed as of the date of this finding; therefore, the amount of questioned costs related to federal programs cannot be determined. The University has also taken steps to immediately address policy and control deficiencies across the institution. Recommendations: We recommend the University do the following relative to University-wide procedures: 1. Determine the potential financial impact of noncompliance with grant sponsors. 2. Evaluate and improve its policies and required documentation for extra-service compensation. 3. Evaluate and improve its internal controls for sponsored program compensation. 4. Provide adequate training to University personnel regarding sponsored programs compensation compliance. USU’s Response: Utah State University (“USU”) generally agrees with Finding One. As detailed in USU internal audit IAS-23-53, USU Extension established a program to incentivize and reward its personnel to apply for grants (referred to by Extension and within USU internal audit IAS-23-53 as the “incentive program”). While the Uniform Guidance permits incentive programs (see CFR 200.430(f)) and such programs are readily used by universities, the USU Extension incentive program was established and carried out in manner that violated USU’s policy governing extra service compensation (“ESC”) and in a manner that bypassed critical internal controls. Notably, USU Internal Audit IAS-23-53 tested compliance with USU’s extra-service compensation policy but did not review actual costs charged to federal sponsors as this was outside the scope of the audit. Consistent with the recommendations to determine the potential impact of noncompliance, USU worked with an outside consultant to review payment of ESC to all employees working on federal grants. This work identified (1) limited instances when salaries directly charged to sponsored projects included extra service compensation in the base salary and (2) limited instances when extra service compensation was charged to federal sponsors without sponsor approval. The majority of ESC payments made pursuant the USU Extension incentive program was not charged to grant sponsor or included in the institutional base salary charged to the grant. Accordingly, noncompliance with the Uniform Guidance clauses related to compensation costs was limited to a small subset of payments made under the USU Extension incentive program. Based on these findings, USU agrees with the corrective actions recommended and, as outlined in the corrective action plan summary below, has already completed and/or initiated these actions.
2024-018. USU Extension Extra Services Compensation Program Non-Compliance with Uniform Guidance (Finding Type: Significant Deficiency, Reportable Noncompliance) Federal Agency: Various Assistance Listing Number and Title: Various Federal Award Number: Various Questioned Costs: Undetermined Pass-through Entity: Various Prior Year Single Audit Report Finding Number: N/A Utah State University’s (University) Internal Audit performed a review of the University’s Extension Service (Extension) within the College of Agriculture and Applied Science. The review determined that Extension’s Extra Service Compensation (ESC) program violates Uniform Guidance requirements and University policy, bypasses critical internal controls, and provides employees with additional compensation for extra-service work related to their primary job duties without sponsor approval. Extension’s mission, under the University’s land grant mission, provides research-based programs and resources to Utah’s population using a mix of local, state, federal and sponsored funding. To incentivize its personnel to apply for grants, Extension created an ESC program that allowed personnel to replace a portion of their primary position institution-funded salary with grant-funded salary. Personnel could then request up to 20 percent of their primary position salary through an ESC secondary position funded with the replaced institution-funded salary. However, Extension’s justified purpose for the ESC secondary position was “caused by and associated with the grant.” In doing so, Extension made it possible to bypass the University’s policy and internal controls for extra-service pay by obscuring the work duties and funding source for the secondary position. Below is an illustrative example from the USU Internal Audit Report of an ESC professor with an institutional base salary of $50,000: Payment to Employee Before Receiving Award (Source: USU Internal Audit Report IAS-23-53) Uniform Guidance maintains strict requirements with regard to the allowability of compensation, including special consideration for substantial increases, particularly with: • federal award ratios (2 CFR 200.430(e)), • institutional base salary charges, including federal award proportionate shares (2 CFR 200.430(h)(2)), • prior approvals by federal awarding agencies for incidental activities with supplemental compensation (2 CFR 200.430(h)(1)), • intra-institution consulting within higher education (2 CFR 200.430(h)(3)), • institutional policy definitions to conclusively determine work resulting in extra service pay (2 CFR 200.430(h)(4), and • relevant internal controls (2 CFR 200.302(b)(4). Internal Audit cites that the ESC program does not comply with Uniform Guidance, as well as University policy (Extra-Service Compensation Policy 376), which formalizes the University’s approach to compliance with Uniform Guidance for these activities. Internal Audit identified that University personnel did not follow or were unfamiliar with established policies in addition to procedural changes that did not require sufficient level of documentation for proper approvals. Detailed fieldwork by Internal Audit identified instances of questioned costs for funding (both federal and non-federal) in excess of $25,000. Fieldwork covered the period between January 1, 2020 and June 14, 2023, but also identified evidence of noncompliance as far back as 2009 to 2018. After Internal Audit issued its report in September 2024, the University took action to begin determining the potential financial impact of noncompliance through an external third-party. A report by this external third-party has not been completed as of the date of this finding; therefore, the amount of questioned costs related to federal programs cannot be determined. The University has also taken steps to immediately address policy and control deficiencies across the institution. Recommendations: We recommend the University do the following relative to University-wide procedures: 1. Determine the potential financial impact of noncompliance with grant sponsors. 2. Evaluate and improve its policies and required documentation for extra-service compensation. 3. Evaluate and improve its internal controls for sponsored program compensation. 4. Provide adequate training to University personnel regarding sponsored programs compensation compliance. USU’s Response: Utah State University (“USU”) generally agrees with Finding One. As detailed in USU internal audit IAS-23-53, USU Extension established a program to incentivize and reward its personnel to apply for grants (referred to by Extension and within USU internal audit IAS-23-53 as the “incentive program”). While the Uniform Guidance permits incentive programs (see CFR 200.430(f)) and such programs are readily used by universities, the USU Extension incentive program was established and carried out in manner that violated USU’s policy governing extra service compensation (“ESC”) and in a manner that bypassed critical internal controls. Notably, USU Internal Audit IAS-23-53 tested compliance with USU’s extra-service compensation policy but did not review actual costs charged to federal sponsors as this was outside the scope of the audit. Consistent with the recommendations to determine the potential impact of noncompliance, USU worked with an outside consultant to review payment of ESC to all employees working on federal grants. This work identified (1) limited instances when salaries directly charged to sponsored projects included extra service compensation in the base salary and (2) limited instances when extra service compensation was charged to federal sponsors without sponsor approval. The majority of ESC payments made pursuant the USU Extension incentive program was not charged to grant sponsor or included in the institutional base salary charged to the grant. Accordingly, noncompliance with the Uniform Guidance clauses related to compensation costs was limited to a small subset of payments made under the USU Extension incentive program. Based on these findings, USU agrees with the corrective actions recommended and, as outlined in the corrective action plan summary below, has already completed and/or initiated these actions.
2024-018. USU Extension Extra Services Compensation Program Non-Compliance with Uniform Guidance (Finding Type: Significant Deficiency, Reportable Noncompliance) Federal Agency: Various Assistance Listing Number and Title: Various Federal Award Number: Various Questioned Costs: Undetermined Pass-through Entity: Various Prior Year Single Audit Report Finding Number: N/A Utah State University’s (University) Internal Audit performed a review of the University’s Extension Service (Extension) within the College of Agriculture and Applied Science. The review determined that Extension’s Extra Service Compensation (ESC) program violates Uniform Guidance requirements and University policy, bypasses critical internal controls, and provides employees with additional compensation for extra-service work related to their primary job duties without sponsor approval. Extension’s mission, under the University’s land grant mission, provides research-based programs and resources to Utah’s population using a mix of local, state, federal and sponsored funding. To incentivize its personnel to apply for grants, Extension created an ESC program that allowed personnel to replace a portion of their primary position institution-funded salary with grant-funded salary. Personnel could then request up to 20 percent of their primary position salary through an ESC secondary position funded with the replaced institution-funded salary. However, Extension’s justified purpose for the ESC secondary position was “caused by and associated with the grant.” In doing so, Extension made it possible to bypass the University’s policy and internal controls for extra-service pay by obscuring the work duties and funding source for the secondary position. Below is an illustrative example from the USU Internal Audit Report of an ESC professor with an institutional base salary of $50,000: Payment to Employee Before Receiving Award (Source: USU Internal Audit Report IAS-23-53) Uniform Guidance maintains strict requirements with regard to the allowability of compensation, including special consideration for substantial increases, particularly with: • federal award ratios (2 CFR 200.430(e)), • institutional base salary charges, including federal award proportionate shares (2 CFR 200.430(h)(2)), • prior approvals by federal awarding agencies for incidental activities with supplemental compensation (2 CFR 200.430(h)(1)), • intra-institution consulting within higher education (2 CFR 200.430(h)(3)), • institutional policy definitions to conclusively determine work resulting in extra service pay (2 CFR 200.430(h)(4), and • relevant internal controls (2 CFR 200.302(b)(4). Internal Audit cites that the ESC program does not comply with Uniform Guidance, as well as University policy (Extra-Service Compensation Policy 376), which formalizes the University’s approach to compliance with Uniform Guidance for these activities. Internal Audit identified that University personnel did not follow or were unfamiliar with established policies in addition to procedural changes that did not require sufficient level of documentation for proper approvals. Detailed fieldwork by Internal Audit identified instances of questioned costs for funding (both federal and non-federal) in excess of $25,000. Fieldwork covered the period between January 1, 2020 and June 14, 2023, but also identified evidence of noncompliance as far back as 2009 to 2018. After Internal Audit issued its report in September 2024, the University took action to begin determining the potential financial impact of noncompliance through an external third-party. A report by this external third-party has not been completed as of the date of this finding; therefore, the amount of questioned costs related to federal programs cannot be determined. The University has also taken steps to immediately address policy and control deficiencies across the institution. Recommendations: We recommend the University do the following relative to University-wide procedures: 1. Determine the potential financial impact of noncompliance with grant sponsors. 2. Evaluate and improve its policies and required documentation for extra-service compensation. 3. Evaluate and improve its internal controls for sponsored program compensation. 4. Provide adequate training to University personnel regarding sponsored programs compensation compliance. USU’s Response: Utah State University (“USU”) generally agrees with Finding One. As detailed in USU internal audit IAS-23-53, USU Extension established a program to incentivize and reward its personnel to apply for grants (referred to by Extension and within USU internal audit IAS-23-53 as the “incentive program”). While the Uniform Guidance permits incentive programs (see CFR 200.430(f)) and such programs are readily used by universities, the USU Extension incentive program was established and carried out in manner that violated USU’s policy governing extra service compensation (“ESC”) and in a manner that bypassed critical internal controls. Notably, USU Internal Audit IAS-23-53 tested compliance with USU’s extra-service compensation policy but did not review actual costs charged to federal sponsors as this was outside the scope of the audit. Consistent with the recommendations to determine the potential impact of noncompliance, USU worked with an outside consultant to review payment of ESC to all employees working on federal grants. This work identified (1) limited instances when salaries directly charged to sponsored projects included extra service compensation in the base salary and (2) limited instances when extra service compensation was charged to federal sponsors without sponsor approval. The majority of ESC payments made pursuant the USU Extension incentive program was not charged to grant sponsor or included in the institutional base salary charged to the grant. Accordingly, noncompliance with the Uniform Guidance clauses related to compensation costs was limited to a small subset of payments made under the USU Extension incentive program. Based on these findings, USU agrees with the corrective actions recommended and, as outlined in the corrective action plan summary below, has already completed and/or initiated these actions.
2024-018. USU Extension Extra Services Compensation Program Non-Compliance with Uniform Guidance (Finding Type: Significant Deficiency, Reportable Noncompliance) Federal Agency: Various Assistance Listing Number and Title: Various Federal Award Number: Various Questioned Costs: Undetermined Pass-through Entity: Various Prior Year Single Audit Report Finding Number: N/A Utah State University’s (University) Internal Audit performed a review of the University’s Extension Service (Extension) within the College of Agriculture and Applied Science. The review determined that Extension’s Extra Service Compensation (ESC) program violates Uniform Guidance requirements and University policy, bypasses critical internal controls, and provides employees with additional compensation for extra-service work related to their primary job duties without sponsor approval. Extension’s mission, under the University’s land grant mission, provides research-based programs and resources to Utah’s population using a mix of local, state, federal and sponsored funding. To incentivize its personnel to apply for grants, Extension created an ESC program that allowed personnel to replace a portion of their primary position institution-funded salary with grant-funded salary. Personnel could then request up to 20 percent of their primary position salary through an ESC secondary position funded with the replaced institution-funded salary. However, Extension’s justified purpose for the ESC secondary position was “caused by and associated with the grant.” In doing so, Extension made it possible to bypass the University’s policy and internal controls for extra-service pay by obscuring the work duties and funding source for the secondary position. Below is an illustrative example from the USU Internal Audit Report of an ESC professor with an institutional base salary of $50,000: Payment to Employee Before Receiving Award (Source: USU Internal Audit Report IAS-23-53) Uniform Guidance maintains strict requirements with regard to the allowability of compensation, including special consideration for substantial increases, particularly with: • federal award ratios (2 CFR 200.430(e)), • institutional base salary charges, including federal award proportionate shares (2 CFR 200.430(h)(2)), • prior approvals by federal awarding agencies for incidental activities with supplemental compensation (2 CFR 200.430(h)(1)), • intra-institution consulting within higher education (2 CFR 200.430(h)(3)), • institutional policy definitions to conclusively determine work resulting in extra service pay (2 CFR 200.430(h)(4), and • relevant internal controls (2 CFR 200.302(b)(4). Internal Audit cites that the ESC program does not comply with Uniform Guidance, as well as University policy (Extra-Service Compensation Policy 376), which formalizes the University’s approach to compliance with Uniform Guidance for these activities. Internal Audit identified that University personnel did not follow or were unfamiliar with established policies in addition to procedural changes that did not require sufficient level of documentation for proper approvals. Detailed fieldwork by Internal Audit identified instances of questioned costs for funding (both federal and non-federal) in excess of $25,000. Fieldwork covered the period between January 1, 2020 and June 14, 2023, but also identified evidence of noncompliance as far back as 2009 to 2018. After Internal Audit issued its report in September 2024, the University took action to begin determining the potential financial impact of noncompliance through an external third-party. A report by this external third-party has not been completed as of the date of this finding; therefore, the amount of questioned costs related to federal programs cannot be determined. The University has also taken steps to immediately address policy and control deficiencies across the institution. Recommendations: We recommend the University do the following relative to University-wide procedures: 1. Determine the potential financial impact of noncompliance with grant sponsors. 2. Evaluate and improve its policies and required documentation for extra-service compensation. 3. Evaluate and improve its internal controls for sponsored program compensation. 4. Provide adequate training to University personnel regarding sponsored programs compensation compliance. USU’s Response: Utah State University (“USU”) generally agrees with Finding One. As detailed in USU internal audit IAS-23-53, USU Extension established a program to incentivize and reward its personnel to apply for grants (referred to by Extension and within USU internal audit IAS-23-53 as the “incentive program”). While the Uniform Guidance permits incentive programs (see CFR 200.430(f)) and such programs are readily used by universities, the USU Extension incentive program was established and carried out in manner that violated USU’s policy governing extra service compensation (“ESC”) and in a manner that bypassed critical internal controls. Notably, USU Internal Audit IAS-23-53 tested compliance with USU’s extra-service compensation policy but did not review actual costs charged to federal sponsors as this was outside the scope of the audit. Consistent with the recommendations to determine the potential impact of noncompliance, USU worked with an outside consultant to review payment of ESC to all employees working on federal grants. This work identified (1) limited instances when salaries directly charged to sponsored projects included extra service compensation in the base salary and (2) limited instances when extra service compensation was charged to federal sponsors without sponsor approval. The majority of ESC payments made pursuant the USU Extension incentive program was not charged to grant sponsor or included in the institutional base salary charged to the grant. Accordingly, noncompliance with the Uniform Guidance clauses related to compensation costs was limited to a small subset of payments made under the USU Extension incentive program. Based on these findings, USU agrees with the corrective actions recommended and, as outlined in the corrective action plan summary below, has already completed and/or initiated these actions.
2024-018. USU Extension Extra Services Compensation Program Non-Compliance with Uniform Guidance (Finding Type: Significant Deficiency, Reportable Noncompliance) Federal Agency: Various Assistance Listing Number and Title: Various Federal Award Number: Various Questioned Costs: Undetermined Pass-through Entity: Various Prior Year Single Audit Report Finding Number: N/A Utah State University’s (University) Internal Audit performed a review of the University’s Extension Service (Extension) within the College of Agriculture and Applied Science. The review determined that Extension’s Extra Service Compensation (ESC) program violates Uniform Guidance requirements and University policy, bypasses critical internal controls, and provides employees with additional compensation for extra-service work related to their primary job duties without sponsor approval. Extension’s mission, under the University’s land grant mission, provides research-based programs and resources to Utah’s population using a mix of local, state, federal and sponsored funding. To incentivize its personnel to apply for grants, Extension created an ESC program that allowed personnel to replace a portion of their primary position institution-funded salary with grant-funded salary. Personnel could then request up to 20 percent of their primary position salary through an ESC secondary position funded with the replaced institution-funded salary. However, Extension’s justified purpose for the ESC secondary position was “caused by and associated with the grant.” In doing so, Extension made it possible to bypass the University’s policy and internal controls for extra-service pay by obscuring the work duties and funding source for the secondary position. Below is an illustrative example from the USU Internal Audit Report of an ESC professor with an institutional base salary of $50,000: Payment to Employee Before Receiving Award (Source: USU Internal Audit Report IAS-23-53) Uniform Guidance maintains strict requirements with regard to the allowability of compensation, including special consideration for substantial increases, particularly with: • federal award ratios (2 CFR 200.430(e)), • institutional base salary charges, including federal award proportionate shares (2 CFR 200.430(h)(2)), • prior approvals by federal awarding agencies for incidental activities with supplemental compensation (2 CFR 200.430(h)(1)), • intra-institution consulting within higher education (2 CFR 200.430(h)(3)), • institutional policy definitions to conclusively determine work resulting in extra service pay (2 CFR 200.430(h)(4), and • relevant internal controls (2 CFR 200.302(b)(4). Internal Audit cites that the ESC program does not comply with Uniform Guidance, as well as University policy (Extra-Service Compensation Policy 376), which formalizes the University’s approach to compliance with Uniform Guidance for these activities. Internal Audit identified that University personnel did not follow or were unfamiliar with established policies in addition to procedural changes that did not require sufficient level of documentation for proper approvals. Detailed fieldwork by Internal Audit identified instances of questioned costs for funding (both federal and non-federal) in excess of $25,000. Fieldwork covered the period between January 1, 2020 and June 14, 2023, but also identified evidence of noncompliance as far back as 2009 to 2018. After Internal Audit issued its report in September 2024, the University took action to begin determining the potential financial impact of noncompliance through an external third-party. A report by this external third-party has not been completed as of the date of this finding; therefore, the amount of questioned costs related to federal programs cannot be determined. The University has also taken steps to immediately address policy and control deficiencies across the institution. Recommendations: We recommend the University do the following relative to University-wide procedures: 1. Determine the potential financial impact of noncompliance with grant sponsors. 2. Evaluate and improve its policies and required documentation for extra-service compensation. 3. Evaluate and improve its internal controls for sponsored program compensation. 4. Provide adequate training to University personnel regarding sponsored programs compensation compliance. USU’s Response: Utah State University (“USU”) generally agrees with Finding One. As detailed in USU internal audit IAS-23-53, USU Extension established a program to incentivize and reward its personnel to apply for grants (referred to by Extension and within USU internal audit IAS-23-53 as the “incentive program”). While the Uniform Guidance permits incentive programs (see CFR 200.430(f)) and such programs are readily used by universities, the USU Extension incentive program was established and carried out in manner that violated USU’s policy governing extra service compensation (“ESC”) and in a manner that bypassed critical internal controls. Notably, USU Internal Audit IAS-23-53 tested compliance with USU’s extra-service compensation policy but did not review actual costs charged to federal sponsors as this was outside the scope of the audit. Consistent with the recommendations to determine the potential impact of noncompliance, USU worked with an outside consultant to review payment of ESC to all employees working on federal grants. This work identified (1) limited instances when salaries directly charged to sponsored projects included extra service compensation in the base salary and (2) limited instances when extra service compensation was charged to federal sponsors without sponsor approval. The majority of ESC payments made pursuant the USU Extension incentive program was not charged to grant sponsor or included in the institutional base salary charged to the grant. Accordingly, noncompliance with the Uniform Guidance clauses related to compensation costs was limited to a small subset of payments made under the USU Extension incentive program. Based on these findings, USU agrees with the corrective actions recommended and, as outlined in the corrective action plan summary below, has already completed and/or initiated these actions.
2024-018. USU Extension Extra Services Compensation Program Non-Compliance with Uniform Guidance (Finding Type: Significant Deficiency, Reportable Noncompliance) Federal Agency: Various Assistance Listing Number and Title: Various Federal Award Number: Various Questioned Costs: Undetermined Pass-through Entity: Various Prior Year Single Audit Report Finding Number: N/A Utah State University’s (University) Internal Audit performed a review of the University’s Extension Service (Extension) within the College of Agriculture and Applied Science. The review determined that Extension’s Extra Service Compensation (ESC) program violates Uniform Guidance requirements and University policy, bypasses critical internal controls, and provides employees with additional compensation for extra-service work related to their primary job duties without sponsor approval. Extension’s mission, under the University’s land grant mission, provides research-based programs and resources to Utah’s population using a mix of local, state, federal and sponsored funding. To incentivize its personnel to apply for grants, Extension created an ESC program that allowed personnel to replace a portion of their primary position institution-funded salary with grant-funded salary. Personnel could then request up to 20 percent of their primary position salary through an ESC secondary position funded with the replaced institution-funded salary. However, Extension’s justified purpose for the ESC secondary position was “caused by and associated with the grant.” In doing so, Extension made it possible to bypass the University’s policy and internal controls for extra-service pay by obscuring the work duties and funding source for the secondary position. Below is an illustrative example from the USU Internal Audit Report of an ESC professor with an institutional base salary of $50,000: Payment to Employee Before Receiving Award (Source: USU Internal Audit Report IAS-23-53) Uniform Guidance maintains strict requirements with regard to the allowability of compensation, including special consideration for substantial increases, particularly with: • federal award ratios (2 CFR 200.430(e)), • institutional base salary charges, including federal award proportionate shares (2 CFR 200.430(h)(2)), • prior approvals by federal awarding agencies for incidental activities with supplemental compensation (2 CFR 200.430(h)(1)), • intra-institution consulting within higher education (2 CFR 200.430(h)(3)), • institutional policy definitions to conclusively determine work resulting in extra service pay (2 CFR 200.430(h)(4), and • relevant internal controls (2 CFR 200.302(b)(4). Internal Audit cites that the ESC program does not comply with Uniform Guidance, as well as University policy (Extra-Service Compensation Policy 376), which formalizes the University’s approach to compliance with Uniform Guidance for these activities. Internal Audit identified that University personnel did not follow or were unfamiliar with established policies in addition to procedural changes that did not require sufficient level of documentation for proper approvals. Detailed fieldwork by Internal Audit identified instances of questioned costs for funding (both federal and non-federal) in excess of $25,000. Fieldwork covered the period between January 1, 2020 and June 14, 2023, but also identified evidence of noncompliance as far back as 2009 to 2018. After Internal Audit issued its report in September 2024, the University took action to begin determining the potential financial impact of noncompliance through an external third-party. A report by this external third-party has not been completed as of the date of this finding; therefore, the amount of questioned costs related to federal programs cannot be determined. The University has also taken steps to immediately address policy and control deficiencies across the institution. Recommendations: We recommend the University do the following relative to University-wide procedures: 1. Determine the potential financial impact of noncompliance with grant sponsors. 2. Evaluate and improve its policies and required documentation for extra-service compensation. 3. Evaluate and improve its internal controls for sponsored program compensation. 4. Provide adequate training to University personnel regarding sponsored programs compensation compliance. USU’s Response: Utah State University (“USU”) generally agrees with Finding One. As detailed in USU internal audit IAS-23-53, USU Extension established a program to incentivize and reward its personnel to apply for grants (referred to by Extension and within USU internal audit IAS-23-53 as the “incentive program”). While the Uniform Guidance permits incentive programs (see CFR 200.430(f)) and such programs are readily used by universities, the USU Extension incentive program was established and carried out in manner that violated USU’s policy governing extra service compensation (“ESC”) and in a manner that bypassed critical internal controls. Notably, USU Internal Audit IAS-23-53 tested compliance with USU’s extra-service compensation policy but did not review actual costs charged to federal sponsors as this was outside the scope of the audit. Consistent with the recommendations to determine the potential impact of noncompliance, USU worked with an outside consultant to review payment of ESC to all employees working on federal grants. This work identified (1) limited instances when salaries directly charged to sponsored projects included extra service compensation in the base salary and (2) limited instances when extra service compensation was charged to federal sponsors without sponsor approval. The majority of ESC payments made pursuant the USU Extension incentive program was not charged to grant sponsor or included in the institutional base salary charged to the grant. Accordingly, noncompliance with the Uniform Guidance clauses related to compensation costs was limited to a small subset of payments made under the USU Extension incentive program. Based on these findings, USU agrees with the corrective actions recommended and, as outlined in the corrective action plan summary below, has already completed and/or initiated these actions.
2024-018. USU Extension Extra Services Compensation Program Non-Compliance with Uniform Guidance (Finding Type: Significant Deficiency, Reportable Noncompliance) Federal Agency: Various Assistance Listing Number and Title: Various Federal Award Number: Various Questioned Costs: Undetermined Pass-through Entity: Various Prior Year Single Audit Report Finding Number: N/A Utah State University’s (University) Internal Audit performed a review of the University’s Extension Service (Extension) within the College of Agriculture and Applied Science. The review determined that Extension’s Extra Service Compensation (ESC) program violates Uniform Guidance requirements and University policy, bypasses critical internal controls, and provides employees with additional compensation for extra-service work related to their primary job duties without sponsor approval. Extension’s mission, under the University’s land grant mission, provides research-based programs and resources to Utah’s population using a mix of local, state, federal and sponsored funding. To incentivize its personnel to apply for grants, Extension created an ESC program that allowed personnel to replace a portion of their primary position institution-funded salary with grant-funded salary. Personnel could then request up to 20 percent of their primary position salary through an ESC secondary position funded with the replaced institution-funded salary. However, Extension’s justified purpose for the ESC secondary position was “caused by and associated with the grant.” In doing so, Extension made it possible to bypass the University’s policy and internal controls for extra-service pay by obscuring the work duties and funding source for the secondary position. Below is an illustrative example from the USU Internal Audit Report of an ESC professor with an institutional base salary of $50,000: Payment to Employee Before Receiving Award (Source: USU Internal Audit Report IAS-23-53) Uniform Guidance maintains strict requirements with regard to the allowability of compensation, including special consideration for substantial increases, particularly with: • federal award ratios (2 CFR 200.430(e)), • institutional base salary charges, including federal award proportionate shares (2 CFR 200.430(h)(2)), • prior approvals by federal awarding agencies for incidental activities with supplemental compensation (2 CFR 200.430(h)(1)), • intra-institution consulting within higher education (2 CFR 200.430(h)(3)), • institutional policy definitions to conclusively determine work resulting in extra service pay (2 CFR 200.430(h)(4), and • relevant internal controls (2 CFR 200.302(b)(4). Internal Audit cites that the ESC program does not comply with Uniform Guidance, as well as University policy (Extra-Service Compensation Policy 376), which formalizes the University’s approach to compliance with Uniform Guidance for these activities. Internal Audit identified that University personnel did not follow or were unfamiliar with established policies in addition to procedural changes that did not require sufficient level of documentation for proper approvals. Detailed fieldwork by Internal Audit identified instances of questioned costs for funding (both federal and non-federal) in excess of $25,000. Fieldwork covered the period between January 1, 2020 and June 14, 2023, but also identified evidence of noncompliance as far back as 2009 to 2018. After Internal Audit issued its report in September 2024, the University took action to begin determining the potential financial impact of noncompliance through an external third-party. A report by this external third-party has not been completed as of the date of this finding; therefore, the amount of questioned costs related to federal programs cannot be determined. The University has also taken steps to immediately address policy and control deficiencies across the institution. Recommendations: We recommend the University do the following relative to University-wide procedures: 1. Determine the potential financial impact of noncompliance with grant sponsors. 2. Evaluate and improve its policies and required documentation for extra-service compensation. 3. Evaluate and improve its internal controls for sponsored program compensation. 4. Provide adequate training to University personnel regarding sponsored programs compensation compliance. USU’s Response: Utah State University (“USU”) generally agrees with Finding One. As detailed in USU internal audit IAS-23-53, USU Extension established a program to incentivize and reward its personnel to apply for grants (referred to by Extension and within USU internal audit IAS-23-53 as the “incentive program”). While the Uniform Guidance permits incentive programs (see CFR 200.430(f)) and such programs are readily used by universities, the USU Extension incentive program was established and carried out in manner that violated USU’s policy governing extra service compensation (“ESC”) and in a manner that bypassed critical internal controls. Notably, USU Internal Audit IAS-23-53 tested compliance with USU’s extra-service compensation policy but did not review actual costs charged to federal sponsors as this was outside the scope of the audit. Consistent with the recommendations to determine the potential impact of noncompliance, USU worked with an outside consultant to review payment of ESC to all employees working on federal grants. This work identified (1) limited instances when salaries directly charged to sponsored projects included extra service compensation in the base salary and (2) limited instances when extra service compensation was charged to federal sponsors without sponsor approval. The majority of ESC payments made pursuant the USU Extension incentive program was not charged to grant sponsor or included in the institutional base salary charged to the grant. Accordingly, noncompliance with the Uniform Guidance clauses related to compensation costs was limited to a small subset of payments made under the USU Extension incentive program. Based on these findings, USU agrees with the corrective actions recommended and, as outlined in the corrective action plan summary below, has already completed and/or initiated these actions.
2024-018. USU Extension Extra Services Compensation Program Non-Compliance with Uniform Guidance (Finding Type: Significant Deficiency, Reportable Noncompliance) Federal Agency: Various Assistance Listing Number and Title: Various Federal Award Number: Various Questioned Costs: Undetermined Pass-through Entity: Various Prior Year Single Audit Report Finding Number: N/A Utah State University’s (University) Internal Audit performed a review of the University’s Extension Service (Extension) within the College of Agriculture and Applied Science. The review determined that Extension’s Extra Service Compensation (ESC) program violates Uniform Guidance requirements and University policy, bypasses critical internal controls, and provides employees with additional compensation for extra-service work related to their primary job duties without sponsor approval. Extension’s mission, under the University’s land grant mission, provides research-based programs and resources to Utah’s population using a mix of local, state, federal and sponsored funding. To incentivize its personnel to apply for grants, Extension created an ESC program that allowed personnel to replace a portion of their primary position institution-funded salary with grant-funded salary. Personnel could then request up to 20 percent of their primary position salary through an ESC secondary position funded with the replaced institution-funded salary. However, Extension’s justified purpose for the ESC secondary position was “caused by and associated with the grant.” In doing so, Extension made it possible to bypass the University’s policy and internal controls for extra-service pay by obscuring the work duties and funding source for the secondary position. Below is an illustrative example from the USU Internal Audit Report of an ESC professor with an institutional base salary of $50,000: Payment to Employee Before Receiving Award (Source: USU Internal Audit Report IAS-23-53) Uniform Guidance maintains strict requirements with regard to the allowability of compensation, including special consideration for substantial increases, particularly with: • federal award ratios (2 CFR 200.430(e)), • institutional base salary charges, including federal award proportionate shares (2 CFR 200.430(h)(2)), • prior approvals by federal awarding agencies for incidental activities with supplemental compensation (2 CFR 200.430(h)(1)), • intra-institution consulting within higher education (2 CFR 200.430(h)(3)), • institutional policy definitions to conclusively determine work resulting in extra service pay (2 CFR 200.430(h)(4), and • relevant internal controls (2 CFR 200.302(b)(4). Internal Audit cites that the ESC program does not comply with Uniform Guidance, as well as University policy (Extra-Service Compensation Policy 376), which formalizes the University’s approach to compliance with Uniform Guidance for these activities. Internal Audit identified that University personnel did not follow or were unfamiliar with established policies in addition to procedural changes that did not require sufficient level of documentation for proper approvals. Detailed fieldwork by Internal Audit identified instances of questioned costs for funding (both federal and non-federal) in excess of $25,000. Fieldwork covered the period between January 1, 2020 and June 14, 2023, but also identified evidence of noncompliance as far back as 2009 to 2018. After Internal Audit issued its report in September 2024, the University took action to begin determining the potential financial impact of noncompliance through an external third-party. A report by this external third-party has not been completed as of the date of this finding; therefore, the amount of questioned costs related to federal programs cannot be determined. The University has also taken steps to immediately address policy and control deficiencies across the institution. Recommendations: We recommend the University do the following relative to University-wide procedures: 1. Determine the potential financial impact of noncompliance with grant sponsors. 2. Evaluate and improve its policies and required documentation for extra-service compensation. 3. Evaluate and improve its internal controls for sponsored program compensation. 4. Provide adequate training to University personnel regarding sponsored programs compensation compliance. USU’s Response: Utah State University (“USU”) generally agrees with Finding One. As detailed in USU internal audit IAS-23-53, USU Extension established a program to incentivize and reward its personnel to apply for grants (referred to by Extension and within USU internal audit IAS-23-53 as the “incentive program”). While the Uniform Guidance permits incentive programs (see CFR 200.430(f)) and such programs are readily used by universities, the USU Extension incentive program was established and carried out in manner that violated USU’s policy governing extra service compensation (“ESC”) and in a manner that bypassed critical internal controls. Notably, USU Internal Audit IAS-23-53 tested compliance with USU’s extra-service compensation policy but did not review actual costs charged to federal sponsors as this was outside the scope of the audit. Consistent with the recommendations to determine the potential impact of noncompliance, USU worked with an outside consultant to review payment of ESC to all employees working on federal grants. This work identified (1) limited instances when salaries directly charged to sponsored projects included extra service compensation in the base salary and (2) limited instances when extra service compensation was charged to federal sponsors without sponsor approval. The majority of ESC payments made pursuant the USU Extension incentive program was not charged to grant sponsor or included in the institutional base salary charged to the grant. Accordingly, noncompliance with the Uniform Guidance clauses related to compensation costs was limited to a small subset of payments made under the USU Extension incentive program. Based on these findings, USU agrees with the corrective actions recommended and, as outlined in the corrective action plan summary below, has already completed and/or initiated these actions.
2024-018. USU Extension Extra Services Compensation Program Non-Compliance with Uniform Guidance (Finding Type: Significant Deficiency, Reportable Noncompliance) Federal Agency: Various Assistance Listing Number and Title: Various Federal Award Number: Various Questioned Costs: Undetermined Pass-through Entity: Various Prior Year Single Audit Report Finding Number: N/A Utah State University’s (University) Internal Audit performed a review of the University’s Extension Service (Extension) within the College of Agriculture and Applied Science. The review determined that Extension’s Extra Service Compensation (ESC) program violates Uniform Guidance requirements and University policy, bypasses critical internal controls, and provides employees with additional compensation for extra-service work related to their primary job duties without sponsor approval. Extension’s mission, under the University’s land grant mission, provides research-based programs and resources to Utah’s population using a mix of local, state, federal and sponsored funding. To incentivize its personnel to apply for grants, Extension created an ESC program that allowed personnel to replace a portion of their primary position institution-funded salary with grant-funded salary. Personnel could then request up to 20 percent of their primary position salary through an ESC secondary position funded with the replaced institution-funded salary. However, Extension’s justified purpose for the ESC secondary position was “caused by and associated with the grant.” In doing so, Extension made it possible to bypass the University’s policy and internal controls for extra-service pay by obscuring the work duties and funding source for the secondary position. Below is an illustrative example from the USU Internal Audit Report of an ESC professor with an institutional base salary of $50,000: Payment to Employee Before Receiving Award (Source: USU Internal Audit Report IAS-23-53) Uniform Guidance maintains strict requirements with regard to the allowability of compensation, including special consideration for substantial increases, particularly with: • federal award ratios (2 CFR 200.430(e)), • institutional base salary charges, including federal award proportionate shares (2 CFR 200.430(h)(2)), • prior approvals by federal awarding agencies for incidental activities with supplemental compensation (2 CFR 200.430(h)(1)), • intra-institution consulting within higher education (2 CFR 200.430(h)(3)), • institutional policy definitions to conclusively determine work resulting in extra service pay (2 CFR 200.430(h)(4), and • relevant internal controls (2 CFR 200.302(b)(4). Internal Audit cites that the ESC program does not comply with Uniform Guidance, as well as University policy (Extra-Service Compensation Policy 376), which formalizes the University’s approach to compliance with Uniform Guidance for these activities. Internal Audit identified that University personnel did not follow or were unfamiliar with established policies in addition to procedural changes that did not require sufficient level of documentation for proper approvals. Detailed fieldwork by Internal Audit identified instances of questioned costs for funding (both federal and non-federal) in excess of $25,000. Fieldwork covered the period between January 1, 2020 and June 14, 2023, but also identified evidence of noncompliance as far back as 2009 to 2018. After Internal Audit issued its report in September 2024, the University took action to begin determining the potential financial impact of noncompliance through an external third-party. A report by this external third-party has not been completed as of the date of this finding; therefore, the amount of questioned costs related to federal programs cannot be determined. The University has also taken steps to immediately address policy and control deficiencies across the institution. Recommendations: We recommend the University do the following relative to University-wide procedures: 1. Determine the potential financial impact of noncompliance with grant sponsors. 2. Evaluate and improve its policies and required documentation for extra-service compensation. 3. Evaluate and improve its internal controls for sponsored program compensation. 4. Provide adequate training to University personnel regarding sponsored programs compensation compliance. USU’s Response: Utah State University (“USU”) generally agrees with Finding One. As detailed in USU internal audit IAS-23-53, USU Extension established a program to incentivize and reward its personnel to apply for grants (referred to by Extension and within USU internal audit IAS-23-53 as the “incentive program”). While the Uniform Guidance permits incentive programs (see CFR 200.430(f)) and such programs are readily used by universities, the USU Extension incentive program was established and carried out in manner that violated USU’s policy governing extra service compensation (“ESC”) and in a manner that bypassed critical internal controls. Notably, USU Internal Audit IAS-23-53 tested compliance with USU’s extra-service compensation policy but did not review actual costs charged to federal sponsors as this was outside the scope of the audit. Consistent with the recommendations to determine the potential impact of noncompliance, USU worked with an outside consultant to review payment of ESC to all employees working on federal grants. This work identified (1) limited instances when salaries directly charged to sponsored projects included extra service compensation in the base salary and (2) limited instances when extra service compensation was charged to federal sponsors without sponsor approval. The majority of ESC payments made pursuant the USU Extension incentive program was not charged to grant sponsor or included in the institutional base salary charged to the grant. Accordingly, noncompliance with the Uniform Guidance clauses related to compensation costs was limited to a small subset of payments made under the USU Extension incentive program. Based on these findings, USU agrees with the corrective actions recommended and, as outlined in the corrective action plan summary below, has already completed and/or initiated these actions.
2024-018. USU Extension Extra Services Compensation Program Non-Compliance with Uniform Guidance (Finding Type: Significant Deficiency, Reportable Noncompliance) Federal Agency: Various Assistance Listing Number and Title: Various Federal Award Number: Various Questioned Costs: Undetermined Pass-through Entity: Various Prior Year Single Audit Report Finding Number: N/A Utah State University’s (University) Internal Audit performed a review of the University’s Extension Service (Extension) within the College of Agriculture and Applied Science. The review determined that Extension’s Extra Service Compensation (ESC) program violates Uniform Guidance requirements and University policy, bypasses critical internal controls, and provides employees with additional compensation for extra-service work related to their primary job duties without sponsor approval. Extension’s mission, under the University’s land grant mission, provides research-based programs and resources to Utah’s population using a mix of local, state, federal and sponsored funding. To incentivize its personnel to apply for grants, Extension created an ESC program that allowed personnel to replace a portion of their primary position institution-funded salary with grant-funded salary. Personnel could then request up to 20 percent of their primary position salary through an ESC secondary position funded with the replaced institution-funded salary. However, Extension’s justified purpose for the ESC secondary position was “caused by and associated with the grant.” In doing so, Extension made it possible to bypass the University’s policy and internal controls for extra-service pay by obscuring the work duties and funding source for the secondary position. Below is an illustrative example from the USU Internal Audit Report of an ESC professor with an institutional base salary of $50,000: Payment to Employee Before Receiving Award (Source: USU Internal Audit Report IAS-23-53) Uniform Guidance maintains strict requirements with regard to the allowability of compensation, including special consideration for substantial increases, particularly with: • federal award ratios (2 CFR 200.430(e)), • institutional base salary charges, including federal award proportionate shares (2 CFR 200.430(h)(2)), • prior approvals by federal awarding agencies for incidental activities with supplemental compensation (2 CFR 200.430(h)(1)), • intra-institution consulting within higher education (2 CFR 200.430(h)(3)), • institutional policy definitions to conclusively determine work resulting in extra service pay (2 CFR 200.430(h)(4), and • relevant internal controls (2 CFR 200.302(b)(4). Internal Audit cites that the ESC program does not comply with Uniform Guidance, as well as University policy (Extra-Service Compensation Policy 376), which formalizes the University’s approach to compliance with Uniform Guidance for these activities. Internal Audit identified that University personnel did not follow or were unfamiliar with established policies in addition to procedural changes that did not require sufficient level of documentation for proper approvals. Detailed fieldwork by Internal Audit identified instances of questioned costs for funding (both federal and non-federal) in excess of $25,000. Fieldwork covered the period between January 1, 2020 and June 14, 2023, but also identified evidence of noncompliance as far back as 2009 to 2018. After Internal Audit issued its report in September 2024, the University took action to begin determining the potential financial impact of noncompliance through an external third-party. A report by this external third-party has not been completed as of the date of this finding; therefore, the amount of questioned costs related to federal programs cannot be determined. The University has also taken steps to immediately address policy and control deficiencies across the institution. Recommendations: We recommend the University do the following relative to University-wide procedures: 1. Determine the potential financial impact of noncompliance with grant sponsors. 2. Evaluate and improve its policies and required documentation for extra-service compensation. 3. Evaluate and improve its internal controls for sponsored program compensation. 4. Provide adequate training to University personnel regarding sponsored programs compensation compliance. USU’s Response: Utah State University (“USU”) generally agrees with Finding One. As detailed in USU internal audit IAS-23-53, USU Extension established a program to incentivize and reward its personnel to apply for grants (referred to by Extension and within USU internal audit IAS-23-53 as the “incentive program”). While the Uniform Guidance permits incentive programs (see CFR 200.430(f)) and such programs are readily used by universities, the USU Extension incentive program was established and carried out in manner that violated USU’s policy governing extra service compensation (“ESC”) and in a manner that bypassed critical internal controls. Notably, USU Internal Audit IAS-23-53 tested compliance with USU’s extra-service compensation policy but did not review actual costs charged to federal sponsors as this was outside the scope of the audit. Consistent with the recommendations to determine the potential impact of noncompliance, USU worked with an outside consultant to review payment of ESC to all employees working on federal grants. This work identified (1) limited instances when salaries directly charged to sponsored projects included extra service compensation in the base salary and (2) limited instances when extra service compensation was charged to federal sponsors without sponsor approval. The majority of ESC payments made pursuant the USU Extension incentive program was not charged to grant sponsor or included in the institutional base salary charged to the grant. Accordingly, noncompliance with the Uniform Guidance clauses related to compensation costs was limited to a small subset of payments made under the USU Extension incentive program. Based on these findings, USU agrees with the corrective actions recommended and, as outlined in the corrective action plan summary below, has already completed and/or initiated these actions.
2024-018. USU Extension Extra Services Compensation Program Non-Compliance with Uniform Guidance (Finding Type: Significant Deficiency, Reportable Noncompliance) Federal Agency: Various Assistance Listing Number and Title: Various Federal Award Number: Various Questioned Costs: Undetermined Pass-through Entity: Various Prior Year Single Audit Report Finding Number: N/A Utah State University’s (University) Internal Audit performed a review of the University’s Extension Service (Extension) within the College of Agriculture and Applied Science. The review determined that Extension’s Extra Service Compensation (ESC) program violates Uniform Guidance requirements and University policy, bypasses critical internal controls, and provides employees with additional compensation for extra-service work related to their primary job duties without sponsor approval. Extension’s mission, under the University’s land grant mission, provides research-based programs and resources to Utah’s population using a mix of local, state, federal and sponsored funding. To incentivize its personnel to apply for grants, Extension created an ESC program that allowed personnel to replace a portion of their primary position institution-funded salary with grant-funded salary. Personnel could then request up to 20 percent of their primary position salary through an ESC secondary position funded with the replaced institution-funded salary. However, Extension’s justified purpose for the ESC secondary position was “caused by and associated with the grant.” In doing so, Extension made it possible to bypass the University’s policy and internal controls for extra-service pay by obscuring the work duties and funding source for the secondary position. Below is an illustrative example from the USU Internal Audit Report of an ESC professor with an institutional base salary of $50,000: Payment to Employee Before Receiving Award (Source: USU Internal Audit Report IAS-23-53) Uniform Guidance maintains strict requirements with regard to the allowability of compensation, including special consideration for substantial increases, particularly with: • federal award ratios (2 CFR 200.430(e)), • institutional base salary charges, including federal award proportionate shares (2 CFR 200.430(h)(2)), • prior approvals by federal awarding agencies for incidental activities with supplemental compensation (2 CFR 200.430(h)(1)), • intra-institution consulting within higher education (2 CFR 200.430(h)(3)), • institutional policy definitions to conclusively determine work resulting in extra service pay (2 CFR 200.430(h)(4), and • relevant internal controls (2 CFR 200.302(b)(4). Internal Audit cites that the ESC program does not comply with Uniform Guidance, as well as University policy (Extra-Service Compensation Policy 376), which formalizes the University’s approach to compliance with Uniform Guidance for these activities. Internal Audit identified that University personnel did not follow or were unfamiliar with established policies in addition to procedural changes that did not require sufficient level of documentation for proper approvals. Detailed fieldwork by Internal Audit identified instances of questioned costs for funding (both federal and non-federal) in excess of $25,000. Fieldwork covered the period between January 1, 2020 and June 14, 2023, but also identified evidence of noncompliance as far back as 2009 to 2018. After Internal Audit issued its report in September 2024, the University took action to begin determining the potential financial impact of noncompliance through an external third-party. A report by this external third-party has not been completed as of the date of this finding; therefore, the amount of questioned costs related to federal programs cannot be determined. The University has also taken steps to immediately address policy and control deficiencies across the institution. Recommendations: We recommend the University do the following relative to University-wide procedures: 1. Determine the potential financial impact of noncompliance with grant sponsors. 2. Evaluate and improve its policies and required documentation for extra-service compensation. 3. Evaluate and improve its internal controls for sponsored program compensation. 4. Provide adequate training to University personnel regarding sponsored programs compensation compliance. USU’s Response: Utah State University (“USU”) generally agrees with Finding One. As detailed in USU internal audit IAS-23-53, USU Extension established a program to incentivize and reward its personnel to apply for grants (referred to by Extension and within USU internal audit IAS-23-53 as the “incentive program”). While the Uniform Guidance permits incentive programs (see CFR 200.430(f)) and such programs are readily used by universities, the USU Extension incentive program was established and carried out in manner that violated USU’s policy governing extra service compensation (“ESC”) and in a manner that bypassed critical internal controls. Notably, USU Internal Audit IAS-23-53 tested compliance with USU’s extra-service compensation policy but did not review actual costs charged to federal sponsors as this was outside the scope of the audit. Consistent with the recommendations to determine the potential impact of noncompliance, USU worked with an outside consultant to review payment of ESC to all employees working on federal grants. This work identified (1) limited instances when salaries directly charged to sponsored projects included extra service compensation in the base salary and (2) limited instances when extra service compensation was charged to federal sponsors without sponsor approval. The majority of ESC payments made pursuant the USU Extension incentive program was not charged to grant sponsor or included in the institutional base salary charged to the grant. Accordingly, noncompliance with the Uniform Guidance clauses related to compensation costs was limited to a small subset of payments made under the USU Extension incentive program. Based on these findings, USU agrees with the corrective actions recommended and, as outlined in the corrective action plan summary below, has already completed and/or initiated these actions.
2024-018. USU Extension Extra Services Compensation Program Non-Compliance with Uniform Guidance (Finding Type: Significant Deficiency, Reportable Noncompliance) Federal Agency: Various Assistance Listing Number and Title: Various Federal Award Number: Various Questioned Costs: Undetermined Pass-through Entity: Various Prior Year Single Audit Report Finding Number: N/A Utah State University’s (University) Internal Audit performed a review of the University’s Extension Service (Extension) within the College of Agriculture and Applied Science. The review determined that Extension’s Extra Service Compensation (ESC) program violates Uniform Guidance requirements and University policy, bypasses critical internal controls, and provides employees with additional compensation for extra-service work related to their primary job duties without sponsor approval. Extension’s mission, under the University’s land grant mission, provides research-based programs and resources to Utah’s population using a mix of local, state, federal and sponsored funding. To incentivize its personnel to apply for grants, Extension created an ESC program that allowed personnel to replace a portion of their primary position institution-funded salary with grant-funded salary. Personnel could then request up to 20 percent of their primary position salary through an ESC secondary position funded with the replaced institution-funded salary. However, Extension’s justified purpose for the ESC secondary position was “caused by and associated with the grant.” In doing so, Extension made it possible to bypass the University’s policy and internal controls for extra-service pay by obscuring the work duties and funding source for the secondary position. Below is an illustrative example from the USU Internal Audit Report of an ESC professor with an institutional base salary of $50,000: Payment to Employee Before Receiving Award (Source: USU Internal Audit Report IAS-23-53) Uniform Guidance maintains strict requirements with regard to the allowability of compensation, including special consideration for substantial increases, particularly with: • federal award ratios (2 CFR 200.430(e)), • institutional base salary charges, including federal award proportionate shares (2 CFR 200.430(h)(2)), • prior approvals by federal awarding agencies for incidental activities with supplemental compensation (2 CFR 200.430(h)(1)), • intra-institution consulting within higher education (2 CFR 200.430(h)(3)), • institutional policy definitions to conclusively determine work resulting in extra service pay (2 CFR 200.430(h)(4), and • relevant internal controls (2 CFR 200.302(b)(4). Internal Audit cites that the ESC program does not comply with Uniform Guidance, as well as University policy (Extra-Service Compensation Policy 376), which formalizes the University’s approach to compliance with Uniform Guidance for these activities. Internal Audit identified that University personnel did not follow or were unfamiliar with established policies in addition to procedural changes that did not require sufficient level of documentation for proper approvals. Detailed fieldwork by Internal Audit identified instances of questioned costs for funding (both federal and non-federal) in excess of $25,000. Fieldwork covered the period between January 1, 2020 and June 14, 2023, but also identified evidence of noncompliance as far back as 2009 to 2018. After Internal Audit issued its report in September 2024, the University took action to begin determining the potential financial impact of noncompliance through an external third-party. A report by this external third-party has not been completed as of the date of this finding; therefore, the amount of questioned costs related to federal programs cannot be determined. The University has also taken steps to immediately address policy and control deficiencies across the institution. Recommendations: We recommend the University do the following relative to University-wide procedures: 1. Determine the potential financial impact of noncompliance with grant sponsors. 2. Evaluate and improve its policies and required documentation for extra-service compensation. 3. Evaluate and improve its internal controls for sponsored program compensation. 4. Provide adequate training to University personnel regarding sponsored programs compensation compliance. USU’s Response: Utah State University (“USU”) generally agrees with Finding One. As detailed in USU internal audit IAS-23-53, USU Extension established a program to incentivize and reward its personnel to apply for grants (referred to by Extension and within USU internal audit IAS-23-53 as the “incentive program”). While the Uniform Guidance permits incentive programs (see CFR 200.430(f)) and such programs are readily used by universities, the USU Extension incentive program was established and carried out in manner that violated USU’s policy governing extra service compensation (“ESC”) and in a manner that bypassed critical internal controls. Notably, USU Internal Audit IAS-23-53 tested compliance with USU’s extra-service compensation policy but did not review actual costs charged to federal sponsors as this was outside the scope of the audit. Consistent with the recommendations to determine the potential impact of noncompliance, USU worked with an outside consultant to review payment of ESC to all employees working on federal grants. This work identified (1) limited instances when salaries directly charged to sponsored projects included extra service compensation in the base salary and (2) limited instances when extra service compensation was charged to federal sponsors without sponsor approval. The majority of ESC payments made pursuant the USU Extension incentive program was not charged to grant sponsor or included in the institutional base salary charged to the grant. Accordingly, noncompliance with the Uniform Guidance clauses related to compensation costs was limited to a small subset of payments made under the USU Extension incentive program. Based on these findings, USU agrees with the corrective actions recommended and, as outlined in the corrective action plan summary below, has already completed and/or initiated these actions.
2024-018. USU Extension Extra Services Compensation Program Non-Compliance with Uniform Guidance (Finding Type: Significant Deficiency, Reportable Noncompliance) Federal Agency: Various Assistance Listing Number and Title: Various Federal Award Number: Various Questioned Costs: Undetermined Pass-through Entity: Various Prior Year Single Audit Report Finding Number: N/A Utah State University’s (University) Internal Audit performed a review of the University’s Extension Service (Extension) within the College of Agriculture and Applied Science. The review determined that Extension’s Extra Service Compensation (ESC) program violates Uniform Guidance requirements and University policy, bypasses critical internal controls, and provides employees with additional compensation for extra-service work related to their primary job duties without sponsor approval. Extension’s mission, under the University’s land grant mission, provides research-based programs and resources to Utah’s population using a mix of local, state, federal and sponsored funding. To incentivize its personnel to apply for grants, Extension created an ESC program that allowed personnel to replace a portion of their primary position institution-funded salary with grant-funded salary. Personnel could then request up to 20 percent of their primary position salary through an ESC secondary position funded with the replaced institution-funded salary. However, Extension’s justified purpose for the ESC secondary position was “caused by and associated with the grant.” In doing so, Extension made it possible to bypass the University’s policy and internal controls for extra-service pay by obscuring the work duties and funding source for the secondary position. Below is an illustrative example from the USU Internal Audit Report of an ESC professor with an institutional base salary of $50,000: Payment to Employee Before Receiving Award (Source: USU Internal Audit Report IAS-23-53) Uniform Guidance maintains strict requirements with regard to the allowability of compensation, including special consideration for substantial increases, particularly with: • federal award ratios (2 CFR 200.430(e)), • institutional base salary charges, including federal award proportionate shares (2 CFR 200.430(h)(2)), • prior approvals by federal awarding agencies for incidental activities with supplemental compensation (2 CFR 200.430(h)(1)), • intra-institution consulting within higher education (2 CFR 200.430(h)(3)), • institutional policy definitions to conclusively determine work resulting in extra service pay (2 CFR 200.430(h)(4), and • relevant internal controls (2 CFR 200.302(b)(4). Internal Audit cites that the ESC program does not comply with Uniform Guidance, as well as University policy (Extra-Service Compensation Policy 376), which formalizes the University’s approach to compliance with Uniform Guidance for these activities. Internal Audit identified that University personnel did not follow or were unfamiliar with established policies in addition to procedural changes that did not require sufficient level of documentation for proper approvals. Detailed fieldwork by Internal Audit identified instances of questioned costs for funding (both federal and non-federal) in excess of $25,000. Fieldwork covered the period between January 1, 2020 and June 14, 2023, but also identified evidence of noncompliance as far back as 2009 to 2018. After Internal Audit issued its report in September 2024, the University took action to begin determining the potential financial impact of noncompliance through an external third-party. A report by this external third-party has not been completed as of the date of this finding; therefore, the amount of questioned costs related to federal programs cannot be determined. The University has also taken steps to immediately address policy and control deficiencies across the institution. Recommendations: We recommend the University do the following relative to University-wide procedures: 1. Determine the potential financial impact of noncompliance with grant sponsors. 2. Evaluate and improve its policies and required documentation for extra-service compensation. 3. Evaluate and improve its internal controls for sponsored program compensation. 4. Provide adequate training to University personnel regarding sponsored programs compensation compliance. USU’s Response: Utah State University (“USU”) generally agrees with Finding One. As detailed in USU internal audit IAS-23-53, USU Extension established a program to incentivize and reward its personnel to apply for grants (referred to by Extension and within USU internal audit IAS-23-53 as the “incentive program”). While the Uniform Guidance permits incentive programs (see CFR 200.430(f)) and such programs are readily used by universities, the USU Extension incentive program was established and carried out in manner that violated USU’s policy governing extra service compensation (“ESC”) and in a manner that bypassed critical internal controls. Notably, USU Internal Audit IAS-23-53 tested compliance with USU’s extra-service compensation policy but did not review actual costs charged to federal sponsors as this was outside the scope of the audit. Consistent with the recommendations to determine the potential impact of noncompliance, USU worked with an outside consultant to review payment of ESC to all employees working on federal grants. This work identified (1) limited instances when salaries directly charged to sponsored projects included extra service compensation in the base salary and (2) limited instances when extra service compensation was charged to federal sponsors without sponsor approval. The majority of ESC payments made pursuant the USU Extension incentive program was not charged to grant sponsor or included in the institutional base salary charged to the grant. Accordingly, noncompliance with the Uniform Guidance clauses related to compensation costs was limited to a small subset of payments made under the USU Extension incentive program. Based on these findings, USU agrees with the corrective actions recommended and, as outlined in the corrective action plan summary below, has already completed and/or initiated these actions.
2024-018. USU Extension Extra Services Compensation Program Non-Compliance with Uniform Guidance (Finding Type: Significant Deficiency, Reportable Noncompliance) Federal Agency: Various Assistance Listing Number and Title: Various Federal Award Number: Various Questioned Costs: Undetermined Pass-through Entity: Various Prior Year Single Audit Report Finding Number: N/A Utah State University’s (University) Internal Audit performed a review of the University’s Extension Service (Extension) within the College of Agriculture and Applied Science. The review determined that Extension’s Extra Service Compensation (ESC) program violates Uniform Guidance requirements and University policy, bypasses critical internal controls, and provides employees with additional compensation for extra-service work related to their primary job duties without sponsor approval. Extension’s mission, under the University’s land grant mission, provides research-based programs and resources to Utah’s population using a mix of local, state, federal and sponsored funding. To incentivize its personnel to apply for grants, Extension created an ESC program that allowed personnel to replace a portion of their primary position institution-funded salary with grant-funded salary. Personnel could then request up to 20 percent of their primary position salary through an ESC secondary position funded with the replaced institution-funded salary. However, Extension’s justified purpose for the ESC secondary position was “caused by and associated with the grant.” In doing so, Extension made it possible to bypass the University’s policy and internal controls for extra-service pay by obscuring the work duties and funding source for the secondary position. Below is an illustrative example from the USU Internal Audit Report of an ESC professor with an institutional base salary of $50,000: Payment to Employee Before Receiving Award (Source: USU Internal Audit Report IAS-23-53) Uniform Guidance maintains strict requirements with regard to the allowability of compensation, including special consideration for substantial increases, particularly with: • federal award ratios (2 CFR 200.430(e)), • institutional base salary charges, including federal award proportionate shares (2 CFR 200.430(h)(2)), • prior approvals by federal awarding agencies for incidental activities with supplemental compensation (2 CFR 200.430(h)(1)), • intra-institution consulting within higher education (2 CFR 200.430(h)(3)), • institutional policy definitions to conclusively determine work resulting in extra service pay (2 CFR 200.430(h)(4), and • relevant internal controls (2 CFR 200.302(b)(4). Internal Audit cites that the ESC program does not comply with Uniform Guidance, as well as University policy (Extra-Service Compensation Policy 376), which formalizes the University’s approach to compliance with Uniform Guidance for these activities. Internal Audit identified that University personnel did not follow or were unfamiliar with established policies in addition to procedural changes that did not require sufficient level of documentation for proper approvals. Detailed fieldwork by Internal Audit identified instances of questioned costs for funding (both federal and non-federal) in excess of $25,000. Fieldwork covered the period between January 1, 2020 and June 14, 2023, but also identified evidence of noncompliance as far back as 2009 to 2018. After Internal Audit issued its report in September 2024, the University took action to begin determining the potential financial impact of noncompliance through an external third-party. A report by this external third-party has not been completed as of the date of this finding; therefore, the amount of questioned costs related to federal programs cannot be determined. The University has also taken steps to immediately address policy and control deficiencies across the institution. Recommendations: We recommend the University do the following relative to University-wide procedures: 1. Determine the potential financial impact of noncompliance with grant sponsors. 2. Evaluate and improve its policies and required documentation for extra-service compensation. 3. Evaluate and improve its internal controls for sponsored program compensation. 4. Provide adequate training to University personnel regarding sponsored programs compensation compliance. USU’s Response: Utah State University (“USU”) generally agrees with Finding One. As detailed in USU internal audit IAS-23-53, USU Extension established a program to incentivize and reward its personnel to apply for grants (referred to by Extension and within USU internal audit IAS-23-53 as the “incentive program”). While the Uniform Guidance permits incentive programs (see CFR 200.430(f)) and such programs are readily used by universities, the USU Extension incentive program was established and carried out in manner that violated USU’s policy governing extra service compensation (“ESC”) and in a manner that bypassed critical internal controls. Notably, USU Internal Audit IAS-23-53 tested compliance with USU’s extra-service compensation policy but did not review actual costs charged to federal sponsors as this was outside the scope of the audit. Consistent with the recommendations to determine the potential impact of noncompliance, USU worked with an outside consultant to review payment of ESC to all employees working on federal grants. This work identified (1) limited instances when salaries directly charged to sponsored projects included extra service compensation in the base salary and (2) limited instances when extra service compensation was charged to federal sponsors without sponsor approval. The majority of ESC payments made pursuant the USU Extension incentive program was not charged to grant sponsor or included in the institutional base salary charged to the grant. Accordingly, noncompliance with the Uniform Guidance clauses related to compensation costs was limited to a small subset of payments made under the USU Extension incentive program. Based on these findings, USU agrees with the corrective actions recommended and, as outlined in the corrective action plan summary below, has already completed and/or initiated these actions.
2024-018. USU Extension Extra Services Compensation Program Non-Compliance with Uniform Guidance (Finding Type: Significant Deficiency, Reportable Noncompliance) Federal Agency: Various Assistance Listing Number and Title: Various Federal Award Number: Various Questioned Costs: Undetermined Pass-through Entity: Various Prior Year Single Audit Report Finding Number: N/A Utah State University’s (University) Internal Audit performed a review of the University’s Extension Service (Extension) within the College of Agriculture and Applied Science. The review determined that Extension’s Extra Service Compensation (ESC) program violates Uniform Guidance requirements and University policy, bypasses critical internal controls, and provides employees with additional compensation for extra-service work related to their primary job duties without sponsor approval. Extension’s mission, under the University’s land grant mission, provides research-based programs and resources to Utah’s population using a mix of local, state, federal and sponsored funding. To incentivize its personnel to apply for grants, Extension created an ESC program that allowed personnel to replace a portion of their primary position institution-funded salary with grant-funded salary. Personnel could then request up to 20 percent of their primary position salary through an ESC secondary position funded with the replaced institution-funded salary. However, Extension’s justified purpose for the ESC secondary position was “caused by and associated with the grant.” In doing so, Extension made it possible to bypass the University’s policy and internal controls for extra-service pay by obscuring the work duties and funding source for the secondary position. Below is an illustrative example from the USU Internal Audit Report of an ESC professor with an institutional base salary of $50,000: Payment to Employee Before Receiving Award (Source: USU Internal Audit Report IAS-23-53) Uniform Guidance maintains strict requirements with regard to the allowability of compensation, including special consideration for substantial increases, particularly with: • federal award ratios (2 CFR 200.430(e)), • institutional base salary charges, including federal award proportionate shares (2 CFR 200.430(h)(2)), • prior approvals by federal awarding agencies for incidental activities with supplemental compensation (2 CFR 200.430(h)(1)), • intra-institution consulting within higher education (2 CFR 200.430(h)(3)), • institutional policy definitions to conclusively determine work resulting in extra service pay (2 CFR 200.430(h)(4), and • relevant internal controls (2 CFR 200.302(b)(4). Internal Audit cites that the ESC program does not comply with Uniform Guidance, as well as University policy (Extra-Service Compensation Policy 376), which formalizes the University’s approach to compliance with Uniform Guidance for these activities. Internal Audit identified that University personnel did not follow or were unfamiliar with established policies in addition to procedural changes that did not require sufficient level of documentation for proper approvals. Detailed fieldwork by Internal Audit identified instances of questioned costs for funding (both federal and non-federal) in excess of $25,000. Fieldwork covered the period between January 1, 2020 and June 14, 2023, but also identified evidence of noncompliance as far back as 2009 to 2018. After Internal Audit issued its report in September 2024, the University took action to begin determining the potential financial impact of noncompliance through an external third-party. A report by this external third-party has not been completed as of the date of this finding; therefore, the amount of questioned costs related to federal programs cannot be determined. The University has also taken steps to immediately address policy and control deficiencies across the institution. Recommendations: We recommend the University do the following relative to University-wide procedures: 1. Determine the potential financial impact of noncompliance with grant sponsors. 2. Evaluate and improve its policies and required documentation for extra-service compensation. 3. Evaluate and improve its internal controls for sponsored program compensation. 4. Provide adequate training to University personnel regarding sponsored programs compensation compliance. USU’s Response: Utah State University (“USU”) generally agrees with Finding One. As detailed in USU internal audit IAS-23-53, USU Extension established a program to incentivize and reward its personnel to apply for grants (referred to by Extension and within USU internal audit IAS-23-53 as the “incentive program”). While the Uniform Guidance permits incentive programs (see CFR 200.430(f)) and such programs are readily used by universities, the USU Extension incentive program was established and carried out in manner that violated USU’s policy governing extra service compensation (“ESC”) and in a manner that bypassed critical internal controls. Notably, USU Internal Audit IAS-23-53 tested compliance with USU’s extra-service compensation policy but did not review actual costs charged to federal sponsors as this was outside the scope of the audit. Consistent with the recommendations to determine the potential impact of noncompliance, USU worked with an outside consultant to review payment of ESC to all employees working on federal grants. This work identified (1) limited instances when salaries directly charged to sponsored projects included extra service compensation in the base salary and (2) limited instances when extra service compensation was charged to federal sponsors without sponsor approval. The majority of ESC payments made pursuant the USU Extension incentive program was not charged to grant sponsor or included in the institutional base salary charged to the grant. Accordingly, noncompliance with the Uniform Guidance clauses related to compensation costs was limited to a small subset of payments made under the USU Extension incentive program. Based on these findings, USU agrees with the corrective actions recommended and, as outlined in the corrective action plan summary below, has already completed and/or initiated these actions.
2024-018. USU Extension Extra Services Compensation Program Non-Compliance with Uniform Guidance (Finding Type: Significant Deficiency, Reportable Noncompliance) Federal Agency: Various Assistance Listing Number and Title: Various Federal Award Number: Various Questioned Costs: Undetermined Pass-through Entity: Various Prior Year Single Audit Report Finding Number: N/A Utah State University’s (University) Internal Audit performed a review of the University’s Extension Service (Extension) within the College of Agriculture and Applied Science. The review determined that Extension’s Extra Service Compensation (ESC) program violates Uniform Guidance requirements and University policy, bypasses critical internal controls, and provides employees with additional compensation for extra-service work related to their primary job duties without sponsor approval. Extension’s mission, under the University’s land grant mission, provides research-based programs and resources to Utah’s population using a mix of local, state, federal and sponsored funding. To incentivize its personnel to apply for grants, Extension created an ESC program that allowed personnel to replace a portion of their primary position institution-funded salary with grant-funded salary. Personnel could then request up to 20 percent of their primary position salary through an ESC secondary position funded with the replaced institution-funded salary. However, Extension’s justified purpose for the ESC secondary position was “caused by and associated with the grant.” In doing so, Extension made it possible to bypass the University’s policy and internal controls for extra-service pay by obscuring the work duties and funding source for the secondary position. Below is an illustrative example from the USU Internal Audit Report of an ESC professor with an institutional base salary of $50,000: Payment to Employee Before Receiving Award (Source: USU Internal Audit Report IAS-23-53) Uniform Guidance maintains strict requirements with regard to the allowability of compensation, including special consideration for substantial increases, particularly with: • federal award ratios (2 CFR 200.430(e)), • institutional base salary charges, including federal award proportionate shares (2 CFR 200.430(h)(2)), • prior approvals by federal awarding agencies for incidental activities with supplemental compensation (2 CFR 200.430(h)(1)), • intra-institution consulting within higher education (2 CFR 200.430(h)(3)), • institutional policy definitions to conclusively determine work resulting in extra service pay (2 CFR 200.430(h)(4), and • relevant internal controls (2 CFR 200.302(b)(4). Internal Audit cites that the ESC program does not comply with Uniform Guidance, as well as University policy (Extra-Service Compensation Policy 376), which formalizes the University’s approach to compliance with Uniform Guidance for these activities. Internal Audit identified that University personnel did not follow or were unfamiliar with established policies in addition to procedural changes that did not require sufficient level of documentation for proper approvals. Detailed fieldwork by Internal Audit identified instances of questioned costs for funding (both federal and non-federal) in excess of $25,000. Fieldwork covered the period between January 1, 2020 and June 14, 2023, but also identified evidence of noncompliance as far back as 2009 to 2018. After Internal Audit issued its report in September 2024, the University took action to begin determining the potential financial impact of noncompliance through an external third-party. A report by this external third-party has not been completed as of the date of this finding; therefore, the amount of questioned costs related to federal programs cannot be determined. The University has also taken steps to immediately address policy and control deficiencies across the institution. Recommendations: We recommend the University do the following relative to University-wide procedures: 1. Determine the potential financial impact of noncompliance with grant sponsors. 2. Evaluate and improve its policies and required documentation for extra-service compensation. 3. Evaluate and improve its internal controls for sponsored program compensation. 4. Provide adequate training to University personnel regarding sponsored programs compensation compliance. USU’s Response: Utah State University (“USU”) generally agrees with Finding One. As detailed in USU internal audit IAS-23-53, USU Extension established a program to incentivize and reward its personnel to apply for grants (referred to by Extension and within USU internal audit IAS-23-53 as the “incentive program”). While the Uniform Guidance permits incentive programs (see CFR 200.430(f)) and such programs are readily used by universities, the USU Extension incentive program was established and carried out in manner that violated USU’s policy governing extra service compensation (“ESC”) and in a manner that bypassed critical internal controls. Notably, USU Internal Audit IAS-23-53 tested compliance with USU’s extra-service compensation policy but did not review actual costs charged to federal sponsors as this was outside the scope of the audit. Consistent with the recommendations to determine the potential impact of noncompliance, USU worked with an outside consultant to review payment of ESC to all employees working on federal grants. This work identified (1) limited instances when salaries directly charged to sponsored projects included extra service compensation in the base salary and (2) limited instances when extra service compensation was charged to federal sponsors without sponsor approval. The majority of ESC payments made pursuant the USU Extension incentive program was not charged to grant sponsor or included in the institutional base salary charged to the grant. Accordingly, noncompliance with the Uniform Guidance clauses related to compensation costs was limited to a small subset of payments made under the USU Extension incentive program. Based on these findings, USU agrees with the corrective actions recommended and, as outlined in the corrective action plan summary below, has already completed and/or initiated these actions.
2024-018. USU Extension Extra Services Compensation Program Non-Compliance with Uniform Guidance (Finding Type: Significant Deficiency, Reportable Noncompliance) Federal Agency: Various Assistance Listing Number and Title: Various Federal Award Number: Various Questioned Costs: Undetermined Pass-through Entity: Various Prior Year Single Audit Report Finding Number: N/A Utah State University’s (University) Internal Audit performed a review of the University’s Extension Service (Extension) within the College of Agriculture and Applied Science. The review determined that Extension’s Extra Service Compensation (ESC) program violates Uniform Guidance requirements and University policy, bypasses critical internal controls, and provides employees with additional compensation for extra-service work related to their primary job duties without sponsor approval. Extension’s mission, under the University’s land grant mission, provides research-based programs and resources to Utah’s population using a mix of local, state, federal and sponsored funding. To incentivize its personnel to apply for grants, Extension created an ESC program that allowed personnel to replace a portion of their primary position institution-funded salary with grant-funded salary. Personnel could then request up to 20 percent of their primary position salary through an ESC secondary position funded with the replaced institution-funded salary. However, Extension’s justified purpose for the ESC secondary position was “caused by and associated with the grant.” In doing so, Extension made it possible to bypass the University’s policy and internal controls for extra-service pay by obscuring the work duties and funding source for the secondary position. Below is an illustrative example from the USU Internal Audit Report of an ESC professor with an institutional base salary of $50,000: Payment to Employee Before Receiving Award (Source: USU Internal Audit Report IAS-23-53) Uniform Guidance maintains strict requirements with regard to the allowability of compensation, including special consideration for substantial increases, particularly with: • federal award ratios (2 CFR 200.430(e)), • institutional base salary charges, including federal award proportionate shares (2 CFR 200.430(h)(2)), • prior approvals by federal awarding agencies for incidental activities with supplemental compensation (2 CFR 200.430(h)(1)), • intra-institution consulting within higher education (2 CFR 200.430(h)(3)), • institutional policy definitions to conclusively determine work resulting in extra service pay (2 CFR 200.430(h)(4), and • relevant internal controls (2 CFR 200.302(b)(4). Internal Audit cites that the ESC program does not comply with Uniform Guidance, as well as University policy (Extra-Service Compensation Policy 376), which formalizes the University’s approach to compliance with Uniform Guidance for these activities. Internal Audit identified that University personnel did not follow or were unfamiliar with established policies in addition to procedural changes that did not require sufficient level of documentation for proper approvals. Detailed fieldwork by Internal Audit identified instances of questioned costs for funding (both federal and non-federal) in excess of $25,000. Fieldwork covered the period between January 1, 2020 and June 14, 2023, but also identified evidence of noncompliance as far back as 2009 to 2018. After Internal Audit issued its report in September 2024, the University took action to begin determining the potential financial impact of noncompliance through an external third-party. A report by this external third-party has not been completed as of the date of this finding; therefore, the amount of questioned costs related to federal programs cannot be determined. The University has also taken steps to immediately address policy and control deficiencies across the institution. Recommendations: We recommend the University do the following relative to University-wide procedures: 1. Determine the potential financial impact of noncompliance with grant sponsors. 2. Evaluate and improve its policies and required documentation for extra-service compensation. 3. Evaluate and improve its internal controls for sponsored program compensation. 4. Provide adequate training to University personnel regarding sponsored programs compensation compliance. USU’s Response: Utah State University (“USU”) generally agrees with Finding One. As detailed in USU internal audit IAS-23-53, USU Extension established a program to incentivize and reward its personnel to apply for grants (referred to by Extension and within USU internal audit IAS-23-53 as the “incentive program”). While the Uniform Guidance permits incentive programs (see CFR 200.430(f)) and such programs are readily used by universities, the USU Extension incentive program was established and carried out in manner that violated USU’s policy governing extra service compensation (“ESC”) and in a manner that bypassed critical internal controls. Notably, USU Internal Audit IAS-23-53 tested compliance with USU’s extra-service compensation policy but did not review actual costs charged to federal sponsors as this was outside the scope of the audit. Consistent with the recommendations to determine the potential impact of noncompliance, USU worked with an outside consultant to review payment of ESC to all employees working on federal grants. This work identified (1) limited instances when salaries directly charged to sponsored projects included extra service compensation in the base salary and (2) limited instances when extra service compensation was charged to federal sponsors without sponsor approval. The majority of ESC payments made pursuant the USU Extension incentive program was not charged to grant sponsor or included in the institutional base salary charged to the grant. Accordingly, noncompliance with the Uniform Guidance clauses related to compensation costs was limited to a small subset of payments made under the USU Extension incentive program. Based on these findings, USU agrees with the corrective actions recommended and, as outlined in the corrective action plan summary below, has already completed and/or initiated these actions.
2024-018. USU Extension Extra Services Compensation Program Non-Compliance with Uniform Guidance (Finding Type: Significant Deficiency, Reportable Noncompliance) Federal Agency: Various Assistance Listing Number and Title: Various Federal Award Number: Various Questioned Costs: Undetermined Pass-through Entity: Various Prior Year Single Audit Report Finding Number: N/A Utah State University’s (University) Internal Audit performed a review of the University’s Extension Service (Extension) within the College of Agriculture and Applied Science. The review determined that Extension’s Extra Service Compensation (ESC) program violates Uniform Guidance requirements and University policy, bypasses critical internal controls, and provides employees with additional compensation for extra-service work related to their primary job duties without sponsor approval. Extension’s mission, under the University’s land grant mission, provides research-based programs and resources to Utah’s population using a mix of local, state, federal and sponsored funding. To incentivize its personnel to apply for grants, Extension created an ESC program that allowed personnel to replace a portion of their primary position institution-funded salary with grant-funded salary. Personnel could then request up to 20 percent of their primary position salary through an ESC secondary position funded with the replaced institution-funded salary. However, Extension’s justified purpose for the ESC secondary position was “caused by and associated with the grant.” In doing so, Extension made it possible to bypass the University’s policy and internal controls for extra-service pay by obscuring the work duties and funding source for the secondary position. Below is an illustrative example from the USU Internal Audit Report of an ESC professor with an institutional base salary of $50,000: Payment to Employee Before Receiving Award (Source: USU Internal Audit Report IAS-23-53) Uniform Guidance maintains strict requirements with regard to the allowability of compensation, including special consideration for substantial increases, particularly with: • federal award ratios (2 CFR 200.430(e)), • institutional base salary charges, including federal award proportionate shares (2 CFR 200.430(h)(2)), • prior approvals by federal awarding agencies for incidental activities with supplemental compensation (2 CFR 200.430(h)(1)), • intra-institution consulting within higher education (2 CFR 200.430(h)(3)), • institutional policy definitions to conclusively determine work resulting in extra service pay (2 CFR 200.430(h)(4), and • relevant internal controls (2 CFR 200.302(b)(4). Internal Audit cites that the ESC program does not comply with Uniform Guidance, as well as University policy (Extra-Service Compensation Policy 376), which formalizes the University’s approach to compliance with Uniform Guidance for these activities. Internal Audit identified that University personnel did not follow or were unfamiliar with established policies in addition to procedural changes that did not require sufficient level of documentation for proper approvals. Detailed fieldwork by Internal Audit identified instances of questioned costs for funding (both federal and non-federal) in excess of $25,000. Fieldwork covered the period between January 1, 2020 and June 14, 2023, but also identified evidence of noncompliance as far back as 2009 to 2018. After Internal Audit issued its report in September 2024, the University took action to begin determining the potential financial impact of noncompliance through an external third-party. A report by this external third-party has not been completed as of the date of this finding; therefore, the amount of questioned costs related to federal programs cannot be determined. The University has also taken steps to immediately address policy and control deficiencies across the institution. Recommendations: We recommend the University do the following relative to University-wide procedures: 1. Determine the potential financial impact of noncompliance with grant sponsors. 2. Evaluate and improve its policies and required documentation for extra-service compensation. 3. Evaluate and improve its internal controls for sponsored program compensation. 4. Provide adequate training to University personnel regarding sponsored programs compensation compliance. USU’s Response: Utah State University (“USU”) generally agrees with Finding One. As detailed in USU internal audit IAS-23-53, USU Extension established a program to incentivize and reward its personnel to apply for grants (referred to by Extension and within USU internal audit IAS-23-53 as the “incentive program”). While the Uniform Guidance permits incentive programs (see CFR 200.430(f)) and such programs are readily used by universities, the USU Extension incentive program was established and carried out in manner that violated USU’s policy governing extra service compensation (“ESC”) and in a manner that bypassed critical internal controls. Notably, USU Internal Audit IAS-23-53 tested compliance with USU’s extra-service compensation policy but did not review actual costs charged to federal sponsors as this was outside the scope of the audit. Consistent with the recommendations to determine the potential impact of noncompliance, USU worked with an outside consultant to review payment of ESC to all employees working on federal grants. This work identified (1) limited instances when salaries directly charged to sponsored projects included extra service compensation in the base salary and (2) limited instances when extra service compensation was charged to federal sponsors without sponsor approval. The majority of ESC payments made pursuant the USU Extension incentive program was not charged to grant sponsor or included in the institutional base salary charged to the grant. Accordingly, noncompliance with the Uniform Guidance clauses related to compensation costs was limited to a small subset of payments made under the USU Extension incentive program. Based on these findings, USU agrees with the corrective actions recommended and, as outlined in the corrective action plan summary below, has already completed and/or initiated these actions.
2024-018. USU Extension Extra Services Compensation Program Non-Compliance with Uniform Guidance (Finding Type: Significant Deficiency, Reportable Noncompliance) Federal Agency: Various Assistance Listing Number and Title: Various Federal Award Number: Various Questioned Costs: Undetermined Pass-through Entity: Various Prior Year Single Audit Report Finding Number: N/A Utah State University’s (University) Internal Audit performed a review of the University’s Extension Service (Extension) within the College of Agriculture and Applied Science. The review determined that Extension’s Extra Service Compensation (ESC) program violates Uniform Guidance requirements and University policy, bypasses critical internal controls, and provides employees with additional compensation for extra-service work related to their primary job duties without sponsor approval. Extension’s mission, under the University’s land grant mission, provides research-based programs and resources to Utah’s population using a mix of local, state, federal and sponsored funding. To incentivize its personnel to apply for grants, Extension created an ESC program that allowed personnel to replace a portion of their primary position institution-funded salary with grant-funded salary. Personnel could then request up to 20 percent of their primary position salary through an ESC secondary position funded with the replaced institution-funded salary. However, Extension’s justified purpose for the ESC secondary position was “caused by and associated with the grant.” In doing so, Extension made it possible to bypass the University’s policy and internal controls for extra-service pay by obscuring the work duties and funding source for the secondary position. Below is an illustrative example from the USU Internal Audit Report of an ESC professor with an institutional base salary of $50,000: Payment to Employee Before Receiving Award (Source: USU Internal Audit Report IAS-23-53) Uniform Guidance maintains strict requirements with regard to the allowability of compensation, including special consideration for substantial increases, particularly with: • federal award ratios (2 CFR 200.430(e)), • institutional base salary charges, including federal award proportionate shares (2 CFR 200.430(h)(2)), • prior approvals by federal awarding agencies for incidental activities with supplemental compensation (2 CFR 200.430(h)(1)), • intra-institution consulting within higher education (2 CFR 200.430(h)(3)), • institutional policy definitions to conclusively determine work resulting in extra service pay (2 CFR 200.430(h)(4), and • relevant internal controls (2 CFR 200.302(b)(4). Internal Audit cites that the ESC program does not comply with Uniform Guidance, as well as University policy (Extra-Service Compensation Policy 376), which formalizes the University’s approach to compliance with Uniform Guidance for these activities. Internal Audit identified that University personnel did not follow or were unfamiliar with established policies in addition to procedural changes that did not require sufficient level of documentation for proper approvals. Detailed fieldwork by Internal Audit identified instances of questioned costs for funding (both federal and non-federal) in excess of $25,000. Fieldwork covered the period between January 1, 2020 and June 14, 2023, but also identified evidence of noncompliance as far back as 2009 to 2018. After Internal Audit issued its report in September 2024, the University took action to begin determining the potential financial impact of noncompliance through an external third-party. A report by this external third-party has not been completed as of the date of this finding; therefore, the amount of questioned costs related to federal programs cannot be determined. The University has also taken steps to immediately address policy and control deficiencies across the institution. Recommendations: We recommend the University do the following relative to University-wide procedures: 1. Determine the potential financial impact of noncompliance with grant sponsors. 2. Evaluate and improve its policies and required documentation for extra-service compensation. 3. Evaluate and improve its internal controls for sponsored program compensation. 4. Provide adequate training to University personnel regarding sponsored programs compensation compliance. USU’s Response: Utah State University (“USU”) generally agrees with Finding One. As detailed in USU internal audit IAS-23-53, USU Extension established a program to incentivize and reward its personnel to apply for grants (referred to by Extension and within USU internal audit IAS-23-53 as the “incentive program”). While the Uniform Guidance permits incentive programs (see CFR 200.430(f)) and such programs are readily used by universities, the USU Extension incentive program was established and carried out in manner that violated USU’s policy governing extra service compensation (“ESC”) and in a manner that bypassed critical internal controls. Notably, USU Internal Audit IAS-23-53 tested compliance with USU’s extra-service compensation policy but did not review actual costs charged to federal sponsors as this was outside the scope of the audit. Consistent with the recommendations to determine the potential impact of noncompliance, USU worked with an outside consultant to review payment of ESC to all employees working on federal grants. This work identified (1) limited instances when salaries directly charged to sponsored projects included extra service compensation in the base salary and (2) limited instances when extra service compensation was charged to federal sponsors without sponsor approval. The majority of ESC payments made pursuant the USU Extension incentive program was not charged to grant sponsor or included in the institutional base salary charged to the grant. Accordingly, noncompliance with the Uniform Guidance clauses related to compensation costs was limited to a small subset of payments made under the USU Extension incentive program. Based on these findings, USU agrees with the corrective actions recommended and, as outlined in the corrective action plan summary below, has already completed and/or initiated these actions.
2024-018. USU Extension Extra Services Compensation Program Non-Compliance with Uniform Guidance (Finding Type: Significant Deficiency, Reportable Noncompliance) Federal Agency: Various Assistance Listing Number and Title: Various Federal Award Number: Various Questioned Costs: Undetermined Pass-through Entity: Various Prior Year Single Audit Report Finding Number: N/A Utah State University’s (University) Internal Audit performed a review of the University’s Extension Service (Extension) within the College of Agriculture and Applied Science. The review determined that Extension’s Extra Service Compensation (ESC) program violates Uniform Guidance requirements and University policy, bypasses critical internal controls, and provides employees with additional compensation for extra-service work related to their primary job duties without sponsor approval. Extension’s mission, under the University’s land grant mission, provides research-based programs and resources to Utah’s population using a mix of local, state, federal and sponsored funding. To incentivize its personnel to apply for grants, Extension created an ESC program that allowed personnel to replace a portion of their primary position institution-funded salary with grant-funded salary. Personnel could then request up to 20 percent of their primary position salary through an ESC secondary position funded with the replaced institution-funded salary. However, Extension’s justified purpose for the ESC secondary position was “caused by and associated with the grant.” In doing so, Extension made it possible to bypass the University’s policy and internal controls for extra-service pay by obscuring the work duties and funding source for the secondary position. Below is an illustrative example from the USU Internal Audit Report of an ESC professor with an institutional base salary of $50,000: Payment to Employee Before Receiving Award (Source: USU Internal Audit Report IAS-23-53) Uniform Guidance maintains strict requirements with regard to the allowability of compensation, including special consideration for substantial increases, particularly with: • federal award ratios (2 CFR 200.430(e)), • institutional base salary charges, including federal award proportionate shares (2 CFR 200.430(h)(2)), • prior approvals by federal awarding agencies for incidental activities with supplemental compensation (2 CFR 200.430(h)(1)), • intra-institution consulting within higher education (2 CFR 200.430(h)(3)), • institutional policy definitions to conclusively determine work resulting in extra service pay (2 CFR 200.430(h)(4), and • relevant internal controls (2 CFR 200.302(b)(4). Internal Audit cites that the ESC program does not comply with Uniform Guidance, as well as University policy (Extra-Service Compensation Policy 376), which formalizes the University’s approach to compliance with Uniform Guidance for these activities. Internal Audit identified that University personnel did not follow or were unfamiliar with established policies in addition to procedural changes that did not require sufficient level of documentation for proper approvals. Detailed fieldwork by Internal Audit identified instances of questioned costs for funding (both federal and non-federal) in excess of $25,000. Fieldwork covered the period between January 1, 2020 and June 14, 2023, but also identified evidence of noncompliance as far back as 2009 to 2018. After Internal Audit issued its report in September 2024, the University took action to begin determining the potential financial impact of noncompliance through an external third-party. A report by this external third-party has not been completed as of the date of this finding; therefore, the amount of questioned costs related to federal programs cannot be determined. The University has also taken steps to immediately address policy and control deficiencies across the institution. Recommendations: We recommend the University do the following relative to University-wide procedures: 1. Determine the potential financial impact of noncompliance with grant sponsors. 2. Evaluate and improve its policies and required documentation for extra-service compensation. 3. Evaluate and improve its internal controls for sponsored program compensation. 4. Provide adequate training to University personnel regarding sponsored programs compensation compliance. USU’s Response: Utah State University (“USU”) generally agrees with Finding One. As detailed in USU internal audit IAS-23-53, USU Extension established a program to incentivize and reward its personnel to apply for grants (referred to by Extension and within USU internal audit IAS-23-53 as the “incentive program”). While the Uniform Guidance permits incentive programs (see CFR 200.430(f)) and such programs are readily used by universities, the USU Extension incentive program was established and carried out in manner that violated USU’s policy governing extra service compensation (“ESC”) and in a manner that bypassed critical internal controls. Notably, USU Internal Audit IAS-23-53 tested compliance with USU’s extra-service compensation policy but did not review actual costs charged to federal sponsors as this was outside the scope of the audit. Consistent with the recommendations to determine the potential impact of noncompliance, USU worked with an outside consultant to review payment of ESC to all employees working on federal grants. This work identified (1) limited instances when salaries directly charged to sponsored projects included extra service compensation in the base salary and (2) limited instances when extra service compensation was charged to federal sponsors without sponsor approval. The majority of ESC payments made pursuant the USU Extension incentive program was not charged to grant sponsor or included in the institutional base salary charged to the grant. Accordingly, noncompliance with the Uniform Guidance clauses related to compensation costs was limited to a small subset of payments made under the USU Extension incentive program. Based on these findings, USU agrees with the corrective actions recommended and, as outlined in the corrective action plan summary below, has already completed and/or initiated these actions.
2024-018. USU Extension Extra Services Compensation Program Non-Compliance with Uniform Guidance (Finding Type: Significant Deficiency, Reportable Noncompliance) Federal Agency: Various Assistance Listing Number and Title: Various Federal Award Number: Various Questioned Costs: Undetermined Pass-through Entity: Various Prior Year Single Audit Report Finding Number: N/A Utah State University’s (University) Internal Audit performed a review of the University’s Extension Service (Extension) within the College of Agriculture and Applied Science. The review determined that Extension’s Extra Service Compensation (ESC) program violates Uniform Guidance requirements and University policy, bypasses critical internal controls, and provides employees with additional compensation for extra-service work related to their primary job duties without sponsor approval. Extension’s mission, under the University’s land grant mission, provides research-based programs and resources to Utah’s population using a mix of local, state, federal and sponsored funding. To incentivize its personnel to apply for grants, Extension created an ESC program that allowed personnel to replace a portion of their primary position institution-funded salary with grant-funded salary. Personnel could then request up to 20 percent of their primary position salary through an ESC secondary position funded with the replaced institution-funded salary. However, Extension’s justified purpose for the ESC secondary position was “caused by and associated with the grant.” In doing so, Extension made it possible to bypass the University’s policy and internal controls for extra-service pay by obscuring the work duties and funding source for the secondary position. Below is an illustrative example from the USU Internal Audit Report of an ESC professor with an institutional base salary of $50,000: Payment to Employee Before Receiving Award (Source: USU Internal Audit Report IAS-23-53) Uniform Guidance maintains strict requirements with regard to the allowability of compensation, including special consideration for substantial increases, particularly with: • federal award ratios (2 CFR 200.430(e)), • institutional base salary charges, including federal award proportionate shares (2 CFR 200.430(h)(2)), • prior approvals by federal awarding agencies for incidental activities with supplemental compensation (2 CFR 200.430(h)(1)), • intra-institution consulting within higher education (2 CFR 200.430(h)(3)), • institutional policy definitions to conclusively determine work resulting in extra service pay (2 CFR 200.430(h)(4), and • relevant internal controls (2 CFR 200.302(b)(4). Internal Audit cites that the ESC program does not comply with Uniform Guidance, as well as University policy (Extra-Service Compensation Policy 376), which formalizes the University’s approach to compliance with Uniform Guidance for these activities. Internal Audit identified that University personnel did not follow or were unfamiliar with established policies in addition to procedural changes that did not require sufficient level of documentation for proper approvals. Detailed fieldwork by Internal Audit identified instances of questioned costs for funding (both federal and non-federal) in excess of $25,000. Fieldwork covered the period between January 1, 2020 and June 14, 2023, but also identified evidence of noncompliance as far back as 2009 to 2018. After Internal Audit issued its report in September 2024, the University took action to begin determining the potential financial impact of noncompliance through an external third-party. A report by this external third-party has not been completed as of the date of this finding; therefore, the amount of questioned costs related to federal programs cannot be determined. The University has also taken steps to immediately address policy and control deficiencies across the institution. Recommendations: We recommend the University do the following relative to University-wide procedures: 1. Determine the potential financial impact of noncompliance with grant sponsors. 2. Evaluate and improve its policies and required documentation for extra-service compensation. 3. Evaluate and improve its internal controls for sponsored program compensation. 4. Provide adequate training to University personnel regarding sponsored programs compensation compliance. USU’s Response: Utah State University (“USU”) generally agrees with Finding One. As detailed in USU internal audit IAS-23-53, USU Extension established a program to incentivize and reward its personnel to apply for grants (referred to by Extension and within USU internal audit IAS-23-53 as the “incentive program”). While the Uniform Guidance permits incentive programs (see CFR 200.430(f)) and such programs are readily used by universities, the USU Extension incentive program was established and carried out in manner that violated USU’s policy governing extra service compensation (“ESC”) and in a manner that bypassed critical internal controls. Notably, USU Internal Audit IAS-23-53 tested compliance with USU’s extra-service compensation policy but did not review actual costs charged to federal sponsors as this was outside the scope of the audit. Consistent with the recommendations to determine the potential impact of noncompliance, USU worked with an outside consultant to review payment of ESC to all employees working on federal grants. This work identified (1) limited instances when salaries directly charged to sponsored projects included extra service compensation in the base salary and (2) limited instances when extra service compensation was charged to federal sponsors without sponsor approval. The majority of ESC payments made pursuant the USU Extension incentive program was not charged to grant sponsor or included in the institutional base salary charged to the grant. Accordingly, noncompliance with the Uniform Guidance clauses related to compensation costs was limited to a small subset of payments made under the USU Extension incentive program. Based on these findings, USU agrees with the corrective actions recommended and, as outlined in the corrective action plan summary below, has already completed and/or initiated these actions.
2024-018. USU Extension Extra Services Compensation Program Non-Compliance with Uniform Guidance (Finding Type: Significant Deficiency, Reportable Noncompliance) Federal Agency: Various Assistance Listing Number and Title: Various Federal Award Number: Various Questioned Costs: Undetermined Pass-through Entity: Various Prior Year Single Audit Report Finding Number: N/A Utah State University’s (University) Internal Audit performed a review of the University’s Extension Service (Extension) within the College of Agriculture and Applied Science. The review determined that Extension’s Extra Service Compensation (ESC) program violates Uniform Guidance requirements and University policy, bypasses critical internal controls, and provides employees with additional compensation for extra-service work related to their primary job duties without sponsor approval. Extension’s mission, under the University’s land grant mission, provides research-based programs and resources to Utah’s population using a mix of local, state, federal and sponsored funding. To incentivize its personnel to apply for grants, Extension created an ESC program that allowed personnel to replace a portion of their primary position institution-funded salary with grant-funded salary. Personnel could then request up to 20 percent of their primary position salary through an ESC secondary position funded with the replaced institution-funded salary. However, Extension’s justified purpose for the ESC secondary position was “caused by and associated with the grant.” In doing so, Extension made it possible to bypass the University’s policy and internal controls for extra-service pay by obscuring the work duties and funding source for the secondary position. Below is an illustrative example from the USU Internal Audit Report of an ESC professor with an institutional base salary of $50,000: Payment to Employee Before Receiving Award (Source: USU Internal Audit Report IAS-23-53) Uniform Guidance maintains strict requirements with regard to the allowability of compensation, including special consideration for substantial increases, particularly with: • federal award ratios (2 CFR 200.430(e)), • institutional base salary charges, including federal award proportionate shares (2 CFR 200.430(h)(2)), • prior approvals by federal awarding agencies for incidental activities with supplemental compensation (2 CFR 200.430(h)(1)), • intra-institution consulting within higher education (2 CFR 200.430(h)(3)), • institutional policy definitions to conclusively determine work resulting in extra service pay (2 CFR 200.430(h)(4), and • relevant internal controls (2 CFR 200.302(b)(4). Internal Audit cites that the ESC program does not comply with Uniform Guidance, as well as University policy (Extra-Service Compensation Policy 376), which formalizes the University’s approach to compliance with Uniform Guidance for these activities. Internal Audit identified that University personnel did not follow or were unfamiliar with established policies in addition to procedural changes that did not require sufficient level of documentation for proper approvals. Detailed fieldwork by Internal Audit identified instances of questioned costs for funding (both federal and non-federal) in excess of $25,000. Fieldwork covered the period between January 1, 2020 and June 14, 2023, but also identified evidence of noncompliance as far back as 2009 to 2018. After Internal Audit issued its report in September 2024, the University took action to begin determining the potential financial impact of noncompliance through an external third-party. A report by this external third-party has not been completed as of the date of this finding; therefore, the amount of questioned costs related to federal programs cannot be determined. The University has also taken steps to immediately address policy and control deficiencies across the institution. Recommendations: We recommend the University do the following relative to University-wide procedures: 1. Determine the potential financial impact of noncompliance with grant sponsors. 2. Evaluate and improve its policies and required documentation for extra-service compensation. 3. Evaluate and improve its internal controls for sponsored program compensation. 4. Provide adequate training to University personnel regarding sponsored programs compensation compliance. USU’s Response: Utah State University (“USU”) generally agrees with Finding One. As detailed in USU internal audit IAS-23-53, USU Extension established a program to incentivize and reward its personnel to apply for grants (referred to by Extension and within USU internal audit IAS-23-53 as the “incentive program”). While the Uniform Guidance permits incentive programs (see CFR 200.430(f)) and such programs are readily used by universities, the USU Extension incentive program was established and carried out in manner that violated USU’s policy governing extra service compensation (“ESC”) and in a manner that bypassed critical internal controls. Notably, USU Internal Audit IAS-23-53 tested compliance with USU’s extra-service compensation policy but did not review actual costs charged to federal sponsors as this was outside the scope of the audit. Consistent with the recommendations to determine the potential impact of noncompliance, USU worked with an outside consultant to review payment of ESC to all employees working on federal grants. This work identified (1) limited instances when salaries directly charged to sponsored projects included extra service compensation in the base salary and (2) limited instances when extra service compensation was charged to federal sponsors without sponsor approval. The majority of ESC payments made pursuant the USU Extension incentive program was not charged to grant sponsor or included in the institutional base salary charged to the grant. Accordingly, noncompliance with the Uniform Guidance clauses related to compensation costs was limited to a small subset of payments made under the USU Extension incentive program. Based on these findings, USU agrees with the corrective actions recommended and, as outlined in the corrective action plan summary below, has already completed and/or initiated these actions.
2024-018. USU Extension Extra Services Compensation Program Non-Compliance with Uniform Guidance (Finding Type: Significant Deficiency, Reportable Noncompliance) Federal Agency: Various Assistance Listing Number and Title: Various Federal Award Number: Various Questioned Costs: Undetermined Pass-through Entity: Various Prior Year Single Audit Report Finding Number: N/A Utah State University’s (University) Internal Audit performed a review of the University’s Extension Service (Extension) within the College of Agriculture and Applied Science. The review determined that Extension’s Extra Service Compensation (ESC) program violates Uniform Guidance requirements and University policy, bypasses critical internal controls, and provides employees with additional compensation for extra-service work related to their primary job duties without sponsor approval. Extension’s mission, under the University’s land grant mission, provides research-based programs and resources to Utah’s population using a mix of local, state, federal and sponsored funding. To incentivize its personnel to apply for grants, Extension created an ESC program that allowed personnel to replace a portion of their primary position institution-funded salary with grant-funded salary. Personnel could then request up to 20 percent of their primary position salary through an ESC secondary position funded with the replaced institution-funded salary. However, Extension’s justified purpose for the ESC secondary position was “caused by and associated with the grant.” In doing so, Extension made it possible to bypass the University’s policy and internal controls for extra-service pay by obscuring the work duties and funding source for the secondary position. Below is an illustrative example from the USU Internal Audit Report of an ESC professor with an institutional base salary of $50,000: Payment to Employee Before Receiving Award (Source: USU Internal Audit Report IAS-23-53) Uniform Guidance maintains strict requirements with regard to the allowability of compensation, including special consideration for substantial increases, particularly with: • federal award ratios (2 CFR 200.430(e)), • institutional base salary charges, including federal award proportionate shares (2 CFR 200.430(h)(2)), • prior approvals by federal awarding agencies for incidental activities with supplemental compensation (2 CFR 200.430(h)(1)), • intra-institution consulting within higher education (2 CFR 200.430(h)(3)), • institutional policy definitions to conclusively determine work resulting in extra service pay (2 CFR 200.430(h)(4), and • relevant internal controls (2 CFR 200.302(b)(4). Internal Audit cites that the ESC program does not comply with Uniform Guidance, as well as University policy (Extra-Service Compensation Policy 376), which formalizes the University’s approach to compliance with Uniform Guidance for these activities. Internal Audit identified that University personnel did not follow or were unfamiliar with established policies in addition to procedural changes that did not require sufficient level of documentation for proper approvals. Detailed fieldwork by Internal Audit identified instances of questioned costs for funding (both federal and non-federal) in excess of $25,000. Fieldwork covered the period between January 1, 2020 and June 14, 2023, but also identified evidence of noncompliance as far back as 2009 to 2018. After Internal Audit issued its report in September 2024, the University took action to begin determining the potential financial impact of noncompliance through an external third-party. A report by this external third-party has not been completed as of the date of this finding; therefore, the amount of questioned costs related to federal programs cannot be determined. The University has also taken steps to immediately address policy and control deficiencies across the institution. Recommendations: We recommend the University do the following relative to University-wide procedures: 1. Determine the potential financial impact of noncompliance with grant sponsors. 2. Evaluate and improve its policies and required documentation for extra-service compensation. 3. Evaluate and improve its internal controls for sponsored program compensation. 4. Provide adequate training to University personnel regarding sponsored programs compensation compliance. USU’s Response: Utah State University (“USU”) generally agrees with Finding One. As detailed in USU internal audit IAS-23-53, USU Extension established a program to incentivize and reward its personnel to apply for grants (referred to by Extension and within USU internal audit IAS-23-53 as the “incentive program”). While the Uniform Guidance permits incentive programs (see CFR 200.430(f)) and such programs are readily used by universities, the USU Extension incentive program was established and carried out in manner that violated USU’s policy governing extra service compensation (“ESC”) and in a manner that bypassed critical internal controls. Notably, USU Internal Audit IAS-23-53 tested compliance with USU’s extra-service compensation policy but did not review actual costs charged to federal sponsors as this was outside the scope of the audit. Consistent with the recommendations to determine the potential impact of noncompliance, USU worked with an outside consultant to review payment of ESC to all employees working on federal grants. This work identified (1) limited instances when salaries directly charged to sponsored projects included extra service compensation in the base salary and (2) limited instances when extra service compensation was charged to federal sponsors without sponsor approval. The majority of ESC payments made pursuant the USU Extension incentive program was not charged to grant sponsor or included in the institutional base salary charged to the grant. Accordingly, noncompliance with the Uniform Guidance clauses related to compensation costs was limited to a small subset of payments made under the USU Extension incentive program. Based on these findings, USU agrees with the corrective actions recommended and, as outlined in the corrective action plan summary below, has already completed and/or initiated these actions.
2024-018. USU Extension Extra Services Compensation Program Non-Compliance with Uniform Guidance (Finding Type: Significant Deficiency, Reportable Noncompliance) Federal Agency: Various Assistance Listing Number and Title: Various Federal Award Number: Various Questioned Costs: Undetermined Pass-through Entity: Various Prior Year Single Audit Report Finding Number: N/A Utah State University’s (University) Internal Audit performed a review of the University’s Extension Service (Extension) within the College of Agriculture and Applied Science. The review determined that Extension’s Extra Service Compensation (ESC) program violates Uniform Guidance requirements and University policy, bypasses critical internal controls, and provides employees with additional compensation for extra-service work related to their primary job duties without sponsor approval. Extension’s mission, under the University’s land grant mission, provides research-based programs and resources to Utah’s population using a mix of local, state, federal and sponsored funding. To incentivize its personnel to apply for grants, Extension created an ESC program that allowed personnel to replace a portion of their primary position institution-funded salary with grant-funded salary. Personnel could then request up to 20 percent of their primary position salary through an ESC secondary position funded with the replaced institution-funded salary. However, Extension’s justified purpose for the ESC secondary position was “caused by and associated with the grant.” In doing so, Extension made it possible to bypass the University’s policy and internal controls for extra-service pay by obscuring the work duties and funding source for the secondary position. Below is an illustrative example from the USU Internal Audit Report of an ESC professor with an institutional base salary of $50,000: Payment to Employee Before Receiving Award (Source: USU Internal Audit Report IAS-23-53) Uniform Guidance maintains strict requirements with regard to the allowability of compensation, including special consideration for substantial increases, particularly with: • federal award ratios (2 CFR 200.430(e)), • institutional base salary charges, including federal award proportionate shares (2 CFR 200.430(h)(2)), • prior approvals by federal awarding agencies for incidental activities with supplemental compensation (2 CFR 200.430(h)(1)), • intra-institution consulting within higher education (2 CFR 200.430(h)(3)), • institutional policy definitions to conclusively determine work resulting in extra service pay (2 CFR 200.430(h)(4), and • relevant internal controls (2 CFR 200.302(b)(4). Internal Audit cites that the ESC program does not comply with Uniform Guidance, as well as University policy (Extra-Service Compensation Policy 376), which formalizes the University’s approach to compliance with Uniform Guidance for these activities. Internal Audit identified that University personnel did not follow or were unfamiliar with established policies in addition to procedural changes that did not require sufficient level of documentation for proper approvals. Detailed fieldwork by Internal Audit identified instances of questioned costs for funding (both federal and non-federal) in excess of $25,000. Fieldwork covered the period between January 1, 2020 and June 14, 2023, but also identified evidence of noncompliance as far back as 2009 to 2018. After Internal Audit issued its report in September 2024, the University took action to begin determining the potential financial impact of noncompliance through an external third-party. A report by this external third-party has not been completed as of the date of this finding; therefore, the amount of questioned costs related to federal programs cannot be determined. The University has also taken steps to immediately address policy and control deficiencies across the institution. Recommendations: We recommend the University do the following relative to University-wide procedures: 1. Determine the potential financial impact of noncompliance with grant sponsors. 2. Evaluate and improve its policies and required documentation for extra-service compensation. 3. Evaluate and improve its internal controls for sponsored program compensation. 4. Provide adequate training to University personnel regarding sponsored programs compensation compliance. USU’s Response: Utah State University (“USU”) generally agrees with Finding One. As detailed in USU internal audit IAS-23-53, USU Extension established a program to incentivize and reward its personnel to apply for grants (referred to by Extension and within USU internal audit IAS-23-53 as the “incentive program”). While the Uniform Guidance permits incentive programs (see CFR 200.430(f)) and such programs are readily used by universities, the USU Extension incentive program was established and carried out in manner that violated USU’s policy governing extra service compensation (“ESC”) and in a manner that bypassed critical internal controls. Notably, USU Internal Audit IAS-23-53 tested compliance with USU’s extra-service compensation policy but did not review actual costs charged to federal sponsors as this was outside the scope of the audit. Consistent with the recommendations to determine the potential impact of noncompliance, USU worked with an outside consultant to review payment of ESC to all employees working on federal grants. This work identified (1) limited instances when salaries directly charged to sponsored projects included extra service compensation in the base salary and (2) limited instances when extra service compensation was charged to federal sponsors without sponsor approval. The majority of ESC payments made pursuant the USU Extension incentive program was not charged to grant sponsor or included in the institutional base salary charged to the grant. Accordingly, noncompliance with the Uniform Guidance clauses related to compensation costs was limited to a small subset of payments made under the USU Extension incentive program. Based on these findings, USU agrees with the corrective actions recommended and, as outlined in the corrective action plan summary below, has already completed and/or initiated these actions.
2024-018. USU Extension Extra Services Compensation Program Non-Compliance with Uniform Guidance (Finding Type: Significant Deficiency, Reportable Noncompliance) Federal Agency: Various Assistance Listing Number and Title: Various Federal Award Number: Various Questioned Costs: Undetermined Pass-through Entity: Various Prior Year Single Audit Report Finding Number: N/A Utah State University’s (University) Internal Audit performed a review of the University’s Extension Service (Extension) within the College of Agriculture and Applied Science. The review determined that Extension’s Extra Service Compensation (ESC) program violates Uniform Guidance requirements and University policy, bypasses critical internal controls, and provides employees with additional compensation for extra-service work related to their primary job duties without sponsor approval. Extension’s mission, under the University’s land grant mission, provides research-based programs and resources to Utah’s population using a mix of local, state, federal and sponsored funding. To incentivize its personnel to apply for grants, Extension created an ESC program that allowed personnel to replace a portion of their primary position institution-funded salary with grant-funded salary. Personnel could then request up to 20 percent of their primary position salary through an ESC secondary position funded with the replaced institution-funded salary. However, Extension’s justified purpose for the ESC secondary position was “caused by and associated with the grant.” In doing so, Extension made it possible to bypass the University’s policy and internal controls for extra-service pay by obscuring the work duties and funding source for the secondary position. Below is an illustrative example from the USU Internal Audit Report of an ESC professor with an institutional base salary of $50,000: Payment to Employee Before Receiving Award (Source: USU Internal Audit Report IAS-23-53) Uniform Guidance maintains strict requirements with regard to the allowability of compensation, including special consideration for substantial increases, particularly with: • federal award ratios (2 CFR 200.430(e)), • institutional base salary charges, including federal award proportionate shares (2 CFR 200.430(h)(2)), • prior approvals by federal awarding agencies for incidental activities with supplemental compensation (2 CFR 200.430(h)(1)), • intra-institution consulting within higher education (2 CFR 200.430(h)(3)), • institutional policy definitions to conclusively determine work resulting in extra service pay (2 CFR 200.430(h)(4), and • relevant internal controls (2 CFR 200.302(b)(4). Internal Audit cites that the ESC program does not comply with Uniform Guidance, as well as University policy (Extra-Service Compensation Policy 376), which formalizes the University’s approach to compliance with Uniform Guidance for these activities. Internal Audit identified that University personnel did not follow or were unfamiliar with established policies in addition to procedural changes that did not require sufficient level of documentation for proper approvals. Detailed fieldwork by Internal Audit identified instances of questioned costs for funding (both federal and non-federal) in excess of $25,000. Fieldwork covered the period between January 1, 2020 and June 14, 2023, but also identified evidence of noncompliance as far back as 2009 to 2018. After Internal Audit issued its report in September 2024, the University took action to begin determining the potential financial impact of noncompliance through an external third-party. A report by this external third-party has not been completed as of the date of this finding; therefore, the amount of questioned costs related to federal programs cannot be determined. The University has also taken steps to immediately address policy and control deficiencies across the institution. Recommendations: We recommend the University do the following relative to University-wide procedures: 1. Determine the potential financial impact of noncompliance with grant sponsors. 2. Evaluate and improve its policies and required documentation for extra-service compensation. 3. Evaluate and improve its internal controls for sponsored program compensation. 4. Provide adequate training to University personnel regarding sponsored programs compensation compliance. USU’s Response: Utah State University (“USU”) generally agrees with Finding One. As detailed in USU internal audit IAS-23-53, USU Extension established a program to incentivize and reward its personnel to apply for grants (referred to by Extension and within USU internal audit IAS-23-53 as the “incentive program”). While the Uniform Guidance permits incentive programs (see CFR 200.430(f)) and such programs are readily used by universities, the USU Extension incentive program was established and carried out in manner that violated USU’s policy governing extra service compensation (“ESC”) and in a manner that bypassed critical internal controls. Notably, USU Internal Audit IAS-23-53 tested compliance with USU’s extra-service compensation policy but did not review actual costs charged to federal sponsors as this was outside the scope of the audit. Consistent with the recommendations to determine the potential impact of noncompliance, USU worked with an outside consultant to review payment of ESC to all employees working on federal grants. This work identified (1) limited instances when salaries directly charged to sponsored projects included extra service compensation in the base salary and (2) limited instances when extra service compensation was charged to federal sponsors without sponsor approval. The majority of ESC payments made pursuant the USU Extension incentive program was not charged to grant sponsor or included in the institutional base salary charged to the grant. Accordingly, noncompliance with the Uniform Guidance clauses related to compensation costs was limited to a small subset of payments made under the USU Extension incentive program. Based on these findings, USU agrees with the corrective actions recommended and, as outlined in the corrective action plan summary below, has already completed and/or initiated these actions.
2024-018. USU Extension Extra Services Compensation Program Non-Compliance with Uniform Guidance (Finding Type: Significant Deficiency, Reportable Noncompliance) Federal Agency: Various Assistance Listing Number and Title: Various Federal Award Number: Various Questioned Costs: Undetermined Pass-through Entity: Various Prior Year Single Audit Report Finding Number: N/A Utah State University’s (University) Internal Audit performed a review of the University’s Extension Service (Extension) within the College of Agriculture and Applied Science. The review determined that Extension’s Extra Service Compensation (ESC) program violates Uniform Guidance requirements and University policy, bypasses critical internal controls, and provides employees with additional compensation for extra-service work related to their primary job duties without sponsor approval. Extension’s mission, under the University’s land grant mission, provides research-based programs and resources to Utah’s population using a mix of local, state, federal and sponsored funding. To incentivize its personnel to apply for grants, Extension created an ESC program that allowed personnel to replace a portion of their primary position institution-funded salary with grant-funded salary. Personnel could then request up to 20 percent of their primary position salary through an ESC secondary position funded with the replaced institution-funded salary. However, Extension’s justified purpose for the ESC secondary position was “caused by and associated with the grant.” In doing so, Extension made it possible to bypass the University’s policy and internal controls for extra-service pay by obscuring the work duties and funding source for the secondary position. Below is an illustrative example from the USU Internal Audit Report of an ESC professor with an institutional base salary of $50,000: Payment to Employee Before Receiving Award (Source: USU Internal Audit Report IAS-23-53) Uniform Guidance maintains strict requirements with regard to the allowability of compensation, including special consideration for substantial increases, particularly with: • federal award ratios (2 CFR 200.430(e)), • institutional base salary charges, including federal award proportionate shares (2 CFR 200.430(h)(2)), • prior approvals by federal awarding agencies for incidental activities with supplemental compensation (2 CFR 200.430(h)(1)), • intra-institution consulting within higher education (2 CFR 200.430(h)(3)), • institutional policy definitions to conclusively determine work resulting in extra service pay (2 CFR 200.430(h)(4), and • relevant internal controls (2 CFR 200.302(b)(4). Internal Audit cites that the ESC program does not comply with Uniform Guidance, as well as University policy (Extra-Service Compensation Policy 376), which formalizes the University’s approach to compliance with Uniform Guidance for these activities. Internal Audit identified that University personnel did not follow or were unfamiliar with established policies in addition to procedural changes that did not require sufficient level of documentation for proper approvals. Detailed fieldwork by Internal Audit identified instances of questioned costs for funding (both federal and non-federal) in excess of $25,000. Fieldwork covered the period between January 1, 2020 and June 14, 2023, but also identified evidence of noncompliance as far back as 2009 to 2018. After Internal Audit issued its report in September 2024, the University took action to begin determining the potential financial impact of noncompliance through an external third-party. A report by this external third-party has not been completed as of the date of this finding; therefore, the amount of questioned costs related to federal programs cannot be determined. The University has also taken steps to immediately address policy and control deficiencies across the institution. Recommendations: We recommend the University do the following relative to University-wide procedures: 1. Determine the potential financial impact of noncompliance with grant sponsors. 2. Evaluate and improve its policies and required documentation for extra-service compensation. 3. Evaluate and improve its internal controls for sponsored program compensation. 4. Provide adequate training to University personnel regarding sponsored programs compensation compliance. USU’s Response: Utah State University (“USU”) generally agrees with Finding One. As detailed in USU internal audit IAS-23-53, USU Extension established a program to incentivize and reward its personnel to apply for grants (referred to by Extension and within USU internal audit IAS-23-53 as the “incentive program”). While the Uniform Guidance permits incentive programs (see CFR 200.430(f)) and such programs are readily used by universities, the USU Extension incentive program was established and carried out in manner that violated USU’s policy governing extra service compensation (“ESC”) and in a manner that bypassed critical internal controls. Notably, USU Internal Audit IAS-23-53 tested compliance with USU’s extra-service compensation policy but did not review actual costs charged to federal sponsors as this was outside the scope of the audit. Consistent with the recommendations to determine the potential impact of noncompliance, USU worked with an outside consultant to review payment of ESC to all employees working on federal grants. This work identified (1) limited instances when salaries directly charged to sponsored projects included extra service compensation in the base salary and (2) limited instances when extra service compensation was charged to federal sponsors without sponsor approval. The majority of ESC payments made pursuant the USU Extension incentive program was not charged to grant sponsor or included in the institutional base salary charged to the grant. Accordingly, noncompliance with the Uniform Guidance clauses related to compensation costs was limited to a small subset of payments made under the USU Extension incentive program. Based on these findings, USU agrees with the corrective actions recommended and, as outlined in the corrective action plan summary below, has already completed and/or initiated these actions.
2024-018. USU Extension Extra Services Compensation Program Non-Compliance with Uniform Guidance (Finding Type: Significant Deficiency, Reportable Noncompliance) Federal Agency: Various Assistance Listing Number and Title: Various Federal Award Number: Various Questioned Costs: Undetermined Pass-through Entity: Various Prior Year Single Audit Report Finding Number: N/A Utah State University’s (University) Internal Audit performed a review of the University’s Extension Service (Extension) within the College of Agriculture and Applied Science. The review determined that Extension’s Extra Service Compensation (ESC) program violates Uniform Guidance requirements and University policy, bypasses critical internal controls, and provides employees with additional compensation for extra-service work related to their primary job duties without sponsor approval. Extension’s mission, under the University’s land grant mission, provides research-based programs and resources to Utah’s population using a mix of local, state, federal and sponsored funding. To incentivize its personnel to apply for grants, Extension created an ESC program that allowed personnel to replace a portion of their primary position institution-funded salary with grant-funded salary. Personnel could then request up to 20 percent of their primary position salary through an ESC secondary position funded with the replaced institution-funded salary. However, Extension’s justified purpose for the ESC secondary position was “caused by and associated with the grant.” In doing so, Extension made it possible to bypass the University’s policy and internal controls for extra-service pay by obscuring the work duties and funding source for the secondary position. Below is an illustrative example from the USU Internal Audit Report of an ESC professor with an institutional base salary of $50,000: Payment to Employee Before Receiving Award (Source: USU Internal Audit Report IAS-23-53) Uniform Guidance maintains strict requirements with regard to the allowability of compensation, including special consideration for substantial increases, particularly with: • federal award ratios (2 CFR 200.430(e)), • institutional base salary charges, including federal award proportionate shares (2 CFR 200.430(h)(2)), • prior approvals by federal awarding agencies for incidental activities with supplemental compensation (2 CFR 200.430(h)(1)), • intra-institution consulting within higher education (2 CFR 200.430(h)(3)), • institutional policy definitions to conclusively determine work resulting in extra service pay (2 CFR 200.430(h)(4), and • relevant internal controls (2 CFR 200.302(b)(4). Internal Audit cites that the ESC program does not comply with Uniform Guidance, as well as University policy (Extra-Service Compensation Policy 376), which formalizes the University’s approach to compliance with Uniform Guidance for these activities. Internal Audit identified that University personnel did not follow or were unfamiliar with established policies in addition to procedural changes that did not require sufficient level of documentation for proper approvals. Detailed fieldwork by Internal Audit identified instances of questioned costs for funding (both federal and non-federal) in excess of $25,000. Fieldwork covered the period between January 1, 2020 and June 14, 2023, but also identified evidence of noncompliance as far back as 2009 to 2018. After Internal Audit issued its report in September 2024, the University took action to begin determining the potential financial impact of noncompliance through an external third-party. A report by this external third-party has not been completed as of the date of this finding; therefore, the amount of questioned costs related to federal programs cannot be determined. The University has also taken steps to immediately address policy and control deficiencies across the institution. Recommendations: We recommend the University do the following relative to University-wide procedures: 1. Determine the potential financial impact of noncompliance with grant sponsors. 2. Evaluate and improve its policies and required documentation for extra-service compensation. 3. Evaluate and improve its internal controls for sponsored program compensation. 4. Provide adequate training to University personnel regarding sponsored programs compensation compliance. USU’s Response: Utah State University (“USU”) generally agrees with Finding One. As detailed in USU internal audit IAS-23-53, USU Extension established a program to incentivize and reward its personnel to apply for grants (referred to by Extension and within USU internal audit IAS-23-53 as the “incentive program”). While the Uniform Guidance permits incentive programs (see CFR 200.430(f)) and such programs are readily used by universities, the USU Extension incentive program was established and carried out in manner that violated USU’s policy governing extra service compensation (“ESC”) and in a manner that bypassed critical internal controls. Notably, USU Internal Audit IAS-23-53 tested compliance with USU’s extra-service compensation policy but did not review actual costs charged to federal sponsors as this was outside the scope of the audit. Consistent with the recommendations to determine the potential impact of noncompliance, USU worked with an outside consultant to review payment of ESC to all employees working on federal grants. This work identified (1) limited instances when salaries directly charged to sponsored projects included extra service compensation in the base salary and (2) limited instances when extra service compensation was charged to federal sponsors without sponsor approval. The majority of ESC payments made pursuant the USU Extension incentive program was not charged to grant sponsor or included in the institutional base salary charged to the grant. Accordingly, noncompliance with the Uniform Guidance clauses related to compensation costs was limited to a small subset of payments made under the USU Extension incentive program. Based on these findings, USU agrees with the corrective actions recommended and, as outlined in the corrective action plan summary below, has already completed and/or initiated these actions.
2024-018. USU Extension Extra Services Compensation Program Non-Compliance with Uniform Guidance (Finding Type: Significant Deficiency, Reportable Noncompliance) Federal Agency: Various Assistance Listing Number and Title: Various Federal Award Number: Various Questioned Costs: Undetermined Pass-through Entity: Various Prior Year Single Audit Report Finding Number: N/A Utah State University’s (University) Internal Audit performed a review of the University’s Extension Service (Extension) within the College of Agriculture and Applied Science. The review determined that Extension’s Extra Service Compensation (ESC) program violates Uniform Guidance requirements and University policy, bypasses critical internal controls, and provides employees with additional compensation for extra-service work related to their primary job duties without sponsor approval. Extension’s mission, under the University’s land grant mission, provides research-based programs and resources to Utah’s population using a mix of local, state, federal and sponsored funding. To incentivize its personnel to apply for grants, Extension created an ESC program that allowed personnel to replace a portion of their primary position institution-funded salary with grant-funded salary. Personnel could then request up to 20 percent of their primary position salary through an ESC secondary position funded with the replaced institution-funded salary. However, Extension’s justified purpose for the ESC secondary position was “caused by and associated with the grant.” In doing so, Extension made it possible to bypass the University’s policy and internal controls for extra-service pay by obscuring the work duties and funding source for the secondary position. Below is an illustrative example from the USU Internal Audit Report of an ESC professor with an institutional base salary of $50,000: Payment to Employee Before Receiving Award (Source: USU Internal Audit Report IAS-23-53) Uniform Guidance maintains strict requirements with regard to the allowability of compensation, including special consideration for substantial increases, particularly with: • federal award ratios (2 CFR 200.430(e)), • institutional base salary charges, including federal award proportionate shares (2 CFR 200.430(h)(2)), • prior approvals by federal awarding agencies for incidental activities with supplemental compensation (2 CFR 200.430(h)(1)), • intra-institution consulting within higher education (2 CFR 200.430(h)(3)), • institutional policy definitions to conclusively determine work resulting in extra service pay (2 CFR 200.430(h)(4), and • relevant internal controls (2 CFR 200.302(b)(4). Internal Audit cites that the ESC program does not comply with Uniform Guidance, as well as University policy (Extra-Service Compensation Policy 376), which formalizes the University’s approach to compliance with Uniform Guidance for these activities. Internal Audit identified that University personnel did not follow or were unfamiliar with established policies in addition to procedural changes that did not require sufficient level of documentation for proper approvals. Detailed fieldwork by Internal Audit identified instances of questioned costs for funding (both federal and non-federal) in excess of $25,000. Fieldwork covered the period between January 1, 2020 and June 14, 2023, but also identified evidence of noncompliance as far back as 2009 to 2018. After Internal Audit issued its report in September 2024, the University took action to begin determining the potential financial impact of noncompliance through an external third-party. A report by this external third-party has not been completed as of the date of this finding; therefore, the amount of questioned costs related to federal programs cannot be determined. The University has also taken steps to immediately address policy and control deficiencies across the institution. Recommendations: We recommend the University do the following relative to University-wide procedures: 1. Determine the potential financial impact of noncompliance with grant sponsors. 2. Evaluate and improve its policies and required documentation for extra-service compensation. 3. Evaluate and improve its internal controls for sponsored program compensation. 4. Provide adequate training to University personnel regarding sponsored programs compensation compliance. USU’s Response: Utah State University (“USU”) generally agrees with Finding One. As detailed in USU internal audit IAS-23-53, USU Extension established a program to incentivize and reward its personnel to apply for grants (referred to by Extension and within USU internal audit IAS-23-53 as the “incentive program”). While the Uniform Guidance permits incentive programs (see CFR 200.430(f)) and such programs are readily used by universities, the USU Extension incentive program was established and carried out in manner that violated USU’s policy governing extra service compensation (“ESC”) and in a manner that bypassed critical internal controls. Notably, USU Internal Audit IAS-23-53 tested compliance with USU’s extra-service compensation policy but did not review actual costs charged to federal sponsors as this was outside the scope of the audit. Consistent with the recommendations to determine the potential impact of noncompliance, USU worked with an outside consultant to review payment of ESC to all employees working on federal grants. This work identified (1) limited instances when salaries directly charged to sponsored projects included extra service compensation in the base salary and (2) limited instances when extra service compensation was charged to federal sponsors without sponsor approval. The majority of ESC payments made pursuant the USU Extension incentive program was not charged to grant sponsor or included in the institutional base salary charged to the grant. Accordingly, noncompliance with the Uniform Guidance clauses related to compensation costs was limited to a small subset of payments made under the USU Extension incentive program. Based on these findings, USU agrees with the corrective actions recommended and, as outlined in the corrective action plan summary below, has already completed and/or initiated these actions.
2024-018. USU Extension Extra Services Compensation Program Non-Compliance with Uniform Guidance (Finding Type: Significant Deficiency, Reportable Noncompliance) Federal Agency: Various Assistance Listing Number and Title: Various Federal Award Number: Various Questioned Costs: Undetermined Pass-through Entity: Various Prior Year Single Audit Report Finding Number: N/A Utah State University’s (University) Internal Audit performed a review of the University’s Extension Service (Extension) within the College of Agriculture and Applied Science. The review determined that Extension’s Extra Service Compensation (ESC) program violates Uniform Guidance requirements and University policy, bypasses critical internal controls, and provides employees with additional compensation for extra-service work related to their primary job duties without sponsor approval. Extension’s mission, under the University’s land grant mission, provides research-based programs and resources to Utah’s population using a mix of local, state, federal and sponsored funding. To incentivize its personnel to apply for grants, Extension created an ESC program that allowed personnel to replace a portion of their primary position institution-funded salary with grant-funded salary. Personnel could then request up to 20 percent of their primary position salary through an ESC secondary position funded with the replaced institution-funded salary. However, Extension’s justified purpose for the ESC secondary position was “caused by and associated with the grant.” In doing so, Extension made it possible to bypass the University’s policy and internal controls for extra-service pay by obscuring the work duties and funding source for the secondary position. Below is an illustrative example from the USU Internal Audit Report of an ESC professor with an institutional base salary of $50,000: Payment to Employee Before Receiving Award (Source: USU Internal Audit Report IAS-23-53) Uniform Guidance maintains strict requirements with regard to the allowability of compensation, including special consideration for substantial increases, particularly with: • federal award ratios (2 CFR 200.430(e)), • institutional base salary charges, including federal award proportionate shares (2 CFR 200.430(h)(2)), • prior approvals by federal awarding agencies for incidental activities with supplemental compensation (2 CFR 200.430(h)(1)), • intra-institution consulting within higher education (2 CFR 200.430(h)(3)), • institutional policy definitions to conclusively determine work resulting in extra service pay (2 CFR 200.430(h)(4), and • relevant internal controls (2 CFR 200.302(b)(4). Internal Audit cites that the ESC program does not comply with Uniform Guidance, as well as University policy (Extra-Service Compensation Policy 376), which formalizes the University’s approach to compliance with Uniform Guidance for these activities. Internal Audit identified that University personnel did not follow or were unfamiliar with established policies in addition to procedural changes that did not require sufficient level of documentation for proper approvals. Detailed fieldwork by Internal Audit identified instances of questioned costs for funding (both federal and non-federal) in excess of $25,000. Fieldwork covered the period between January 1, 2020 and June 14, 2023, but also identified evidence of noncompliance as far back as 2009 to 2018. After Internal Audit issued its report in September 2024, the University took action to begin determining the potential financial impact of noncompliance through an external third-party. A report by this external third-party has not been completed as of the date of this finding; therefore, the amount of questioned costs related to federal programs cannot be determined. The University has also taken steps to immediately address policy and control deficiencies across the institution. Recommendations: We recommend the University do the following relative to University-wide procedures: 1. Determine the potential financial impact of noncompliance with grant sponsors. 2. Evaluate and improve its policies and required documentation for extra-service compensation. 3. Evaluate and improve its internal controls for sponsored program compensation. 4. Provide adequate training to University personnel regarding sponsored programs compensation compliance. USU’s Response: Utah State University (“USU”) generally agrees with Finding One. As detailed in USU internal audit IAS-23-53, USU Extension established a program to incentivize and reward its personnel to apply for grants (referred to by Extension and within USU internal audit IAS-23-53 as the “incentive program”). While the Uniform Guidance permits incentive programs (see CFR 200.430(f)) and such programs are readily used by universities, the USU Extension incentive program was established and carried out in manner that violated USU’s policy governing extra service compensation (“ESC”) and in a manner that bypassed critical internal controls. Notably, USU Internal Audit IAS-23-53 tested compliance with USU’s extra-service compensation policy but did not review actual costs charged to federal sponsors as this was outside the scope of the audit. Consistent with the recommendations to determine the potential impact of noncompliance, USU worked with an outside consultant to review payment of ESC to all employees working on federal grants. This work identified (1) limited instances when salaries directly charged to sponsored projects included extra service compensation in the base salary and (2) limited instances when extra service compensation was charged to federal sponsors without sponsor approval. The majority of ESC payments made pursuant the USU Extension incentive program was not charged to grant sponsor or included in the institutional base salary charged to the grant. Accordingly, noncompliance with the Uniform Guidance clauses related to compensation costs was limited to a small subset of payments made under the USU Extension incentive program. Based on these findings, USU agrees with the corrective actions recommended and, as outlined in the corrective action plan summary below, has already completed and/or initiated these actions.
2024-018. USU Extension Extra Services Compensation Program Non-Compliance with Uniform Guidance (Finding Type: Significant Deficiency, Reportable Noncompliance) Federal Agency: Various Assistance Listing Number and Title: Various Federal Award Number: Various Questioned Costs: Undetermined Pass-through Entity: Various Prior Year Single Audit Report Finding Number: N/A Utah State University’s (University) Internal Audit performed a review of the University’s Extension Service (Extension) within the College of Agriculture and Applied Science. The review determined that Extension’s Extra Service Compensation (ESC) program violates Uniform Guidance requirements and University policy, bypasses critical internal controls, and provides employees with additional compensation for extra-service work related to their primary job duties without sponsor approval. Extension’s mission, under the University’s land grant mission, provides research-based programs and resources to Utah’s population using a mix of local, state, federal and sponsored funding. To incentivize its personnel to apply for grants, Extension created an ESC program that allowed personnel to replace a portion of their primary position institution-funded salary with grant-funded salary. Personnel could then request up to 20 percent of their primary position salary through an ESC secondary position funded with the replaced institution-funded salary. However, Extension’s justified purpose for the ESC secondary position was “caused by and associated with the grant.” In doing so, Extension made it possible to bypass the University’s policy and internal controls for extra-service pay by obscuring the work duties and funding source for the secondary position. Below is an illustrative example from the USU Internal Audit Report of an ESC professor with an institutional base salary of $50,000: Payment to Employee Before Receiving Award (Source: USU Internal Audit Report IAS-23-53) Uniform Guidance maintains strict requirements with regard to the allowability of compensation, including special consideration for substantial increases, particularly with: • federal award ratios (2 CFR 200.430(e)), • institutional base salary charges, including federal award proportionate shares (2 CFR 200.430(h)(2)), • prior approvals by federal awarding agencies for incidental activities with supplemental compensation (2 CFR 200.430(h)(1)), • intra-institution consulting within higher education (2 CFR 200.430(h)(3)), • institutional policy definitions to conclusively determine work resulting in extra service pay (2 CFR 200.430(h)(4), and • relevant internal controls (2 CFR 200.302(b)(4). Internal Audit cites that the ESC program does not comply with Uniform Guidance, as well as University policy (Extra-Service Compensation Policy 376), which formalizes the University’s approach to compliance with Uniform Guidance for these activities. Internal Audit identified that University personnel did not follow or were unfamiliar with established policies in addition to procedural changes that did not require sufficient level of documentation for proper approvals. Detailed fieldwork by Internal Audit identified instances of questioned costs for funding (both federal and non-federal) in excess of $25,000. Fieldwork covered the period between January 1, 2020 and June 14, 2023, but also identified evidence of noncompliance as far back as 2009 to 2018. After Internal Audit issued its report in September 2024, the University took action to begin determining the potential financial impact of noncompliance through an external third-party. A report by this external third-party has not been completed as of the date of this finding; therefore, the amount of questioned costs related to federal programs cannot be determined. The University has also taken steps to immediately address policy and control deficiencies across the institution. Recommendations: We recommend the University do the following relative to University-wide procedures: 1. Determine the potential financial impact of noncompliance with grant sponsors. 2. Evaluate and improve its policies and required documentation for extra-service compensation. 3. Evaluate and improve its internal controls for sponsored program compensation. 4. Provide adequate training to University personnel regarding sponsored programs compensation compliance. USU’s Response: Utah State University (“USU”) generally agrees with Finding One. As detailed in USU internal audit IAS-23-53, USU Extension established a program to incentivize and reward its personnel to apply for grants (referred to by Extension and within USU internal audit IAS-23-53 as the “incentive program”). While the Uniform Guidance permits incentive programs (see CFR 200.430(f)) and such programs are readily used by universities, the USU Extension incentive program was established and carried out in manner that violated USU’s policy governing extra service compensation (“ESC”) and in a manner that bypassed critical internal controls. Notably, USU Internal Audit IAS-23-53 tested compliance with USU’s extra-service compensation policy but did not review actual costs charged to federal sponsors as this was outside the scope of the audit. Consistent with the recommendations to determine the potential impact of noncompliance, USU worked with an outside consultant to review payment of ESC to all employees working on federal grants. This work identified (1) limited instances when salaries directly charged to sponsored projects included extra service compensation in the base salary and (2) limited instances when extra service compensation was charged to federal sponsors without sponsor approval. The majority of ESC payments made pursuant the USU Extension incentive program was not charged to grant sponsor or included in the institutional base salary charged to the grant. Accordingly, noncompliance with the Uniform Guidance clauses related to compensation costs was limited to a small subset of payments made under the USU Extension incentive program. Based on these findings, USU agrees with the corrective actions recommended and, as outlined in the corrective action plan summary below, has already completed and/or initiated these actions.
2024-018. USU Extension Extra Services Compensation Program Non-Compliance with Uniform Guidance (Finding Type: Significant Deficiency, Reportable Noncompliance) Federal Agency: Various Assistance Listing Number and Title: Various Federal Award Number: Various Questioned Costs: Undetermined Pass-through Entity: Various Prior Year Single Audit Report Finding Number: N/A Utah State University’s (University) Internal Audit performed a review of the University’s Extension Service (Extension) within the College of Agriculture and Applied Science. The review determined that Extension’s Extra Service Compensation (ESC) program violates Uniform Guidance requirements and University policy, bypasses critical internal controls, and provides employees with additional compensation for extra-service work related to their primary job duties without sponsor approval. Extension’s mission, under the University’s land grant mission, provides research-based programs and resources to Utah’s population using a mix of local, state, federal and sponsored funding. To incentivize its personnel to apply for grants, Extension created an ESC program that allowed personnel to replace a portion of their primary position institution-funded salary with grant-funded salary. Personnel could then request up to 20 percent of their primary position salary through an ESC secondary position funded with the replaced institution-funded salary. However, Extension’s justified purpose for the ESC secondary position was “caused by and associated with the grant.” In doing so, Extension made it possible to bypass the University’s policy and internal controls for extra-service pay by obscuring the work duties and funding source for the secondary position. Below is an illustrative example from the USU Internal Audit Report of an ESC professor with an institutional base salary of $50,000: Payment to Employee Before Receiving Award (Source: USU Internal Audit Report IAS-23-53) Uniform Guidance maintains strict requirements with regard to the allowability of compensation, including special consideration for substantial increases, particularly with: • federal award ratios (2 CFR 200.430(e)), • institutional base salary charges, including federal award proportionate shares (2 CFR 200.430(h)(2)), • prior approvals by federal awarding agencies for incidental activities with supplemental compensation (2 CFR 200.430(h)(1)), • intra-institution consulting within higher education (2 CFR 200.430(h)(3)), • institutional policy definitions to conclusively determine work resulting in extra service pay (2 CFR 200.430(h)(4), and • relevant internal controls (2 CFR 200.302(b)(4). Internal Audit cites that the ESC program does not comply with Uniform Guidance, as well as University policy (Extra-Service Compensation Policy 376), which formalizes the University’s approach to compliance with Uniform Guidance for these activities. Internal Audit identified that University personnel did not follow or were unfamiliar with established policies in addition to procedural changes that did not require sufficient level of documentation for proper approvals. Detailed fieldwork by Internal Audit identified instances of questioned costs for funding (both federal and non-federal) in excess of $25,000. Fieldwork covered the period between January 1, 2020 and June 14, 2023, but also identified evidence of noncompliance as far back as 2009 to 2018. After Internal Audit issued its report in September 2024, the University took action to begin determining the potential financial impact of noncompliance through an external third-party. A report by this external third-party has not been completed as of the date of this finding; therefore, the amount of questioned costs related to federal programs cannot be determined. The University has also taken steps to immediately address policy and control deficiencies across the institution. Recommendations: We recommend the University do the following relative to University-wide procedures: 1. Determine the potential financial impact of noncompliance with grant sponsors. 2. Evaluate and improve its policies and required documentation for extra-service compensation. 3. Evaluate and improve its internal controls for sponsored program compensation. 4. Provide adequate training to University personnel regarding sponsored programs compensation compliance. USU’s Response: Utah State University (“USU”) generally agrees with Finding One. As detailed in USU internal audit IAS-23-53, USU Extension established a program to incentivize and reward its personnel to apply for grants (referred to by Extension and within USU internal audit IAS-23-53 as the “incentive program”). While the Uniform Guidance permits incentive programs (see CFR 200.430(f)) and such programs are readily used by universities, the USU Extension incentive program was established and carried out in manner that violated USU’s policy governing extra service compensation (“ESC”) and in a manner that bypassed critical internal controls. Notably, USU Internal Audit IAS-23-53 tested compliance with USU’s extra-service compensation policy but did not review actual costs charged to federal sponsors as this was outside the scope of the audit. Consistent with the recommendations to determine the potential impact of noncompliance, USU worked with an outside consultant to review payment of ESC to all employees working on federal grants. This work identified (1) limited instances when salaries directly charged to sponsored projects included extra service compensation in the base salary and (2) limited instances when extra service compensation was charged to federal sponsors without sponsor approval. The majority of ESC payments made pursuant the USU Extension incentive program was not charged to grant sponsor or included in the institutional base salary charged to the grant. Accordingly, noncompliance with the Uniform Guidance clauses related to compensation costs was limited to a small subset of payments made under the USU Extension incentive program. Based on these findings, USU agrees with the corrective actions recommended and, as outlined in the corrective action plan summary below, has already completed and/or initiated these actions.
2024-018. USU Extension Extra Services Compensation Program Non-Compliance with Uniform Guidance (Finding Type: Significant Deficiency, Reportable Noncompliance) Federal Agency: Various Assistance Listing Number and Title: Various Federal Award Number: Various Questioned Costs: Undetermined Pass-through Entity: Various Prior Year Single Audit Report Finding Number: N/A Utah State University’s (University) Internal Audit performed a review of the University’s Extension Service (Extension) within the College of Agriculture and Applied Science. The review determined that Extension’s Extra Service Compensation (ESC) program violates Uniform Guidance requirements and University policy, bypasses critical internal controls, and provides employees with additional compensation for extra-service work related to their primary job duties without sponsor approval. Extension’s mission, under the University’s land grant mission, provides research-based programs and resources to Utah’s population using a mix of local, state, federal and sponsored funding. To incentivize its personnel to apply for grants, Extension created an ESC program that allowed personnel to replace a portion of their primary position institution-funded salary with grant-funded salary. Personnel could then request up to 20 percent of their primary position salary through an ESC secondary position funded with the replaced institution-funded salary. However, Extension’s justified purpose for the ESC secondary position was “caused by and associated with the grant.” In doing so, Extension made it possible to bypass the University’s policy and internal controls for extra-service pay by obscuring the work duties and funding source for the secondary position. Below is an illustrative example from the USU Internal Audit Report of an ESC professor with an institutional base salary of $50,000: Payment to Employee Before Receiving Award (Source: USU Internal Audit Report IAS-23-53) Uniform Guidance maintains strict requirements with regard to the allowability of compensation, including special consideration for substantial increases, particularly with: • federal award ratios (2 CFR 200.430(e)), • institutional base salary charges, including federal award proportionate shares (2 CFR 200.430(h)(2)), • prior approvals by federal awarding agencies for incidental activities with supplemental compensation (2 CFR 200.430(h)(1)), • intra-institution consulting within higher education (2 CFR 200.430(h)(3)), • institutional policy definitions to conclusively determine work resulting in extra service pay (2 CFR 200.430(h)(4), and • relevant internal controls (2 CFR 200.302(b)(4). Internal Audit cites that the ESC program does not comply with Uniform Guidance, as well as University policy (Extra-Service Compensation Policy 376), which formalizes the University’s approach to compliance with Uniform Guidance for these activities. Internal Audit identified that University personnel did not follow or were unfamiliar with established policies in addition to procedural changes that did not require sufficient level of documentation for proper approvals. Detailed fieldwork by Internal Audit identified instances of questioned costs for funding (both federal and non-federal) in excess of $25,000. Fieldwork covered the period between January 1, 2020 and June 14, 2023, but also identified evidence of noncompliance as far back as 2009 to 2018. After Internal Audit issued its report in September 2024, the University took action to begin determining the potential financial impact of noncompliance through an external third-party. A report by this external third-party has not been completed as of the date of this finding; therefore, the amount of questioned costs related to federal programs cannot be determined. The University has also taken steps to immediately address policy and control deficiencies across the institution. Recommendations: We recommend the University do the following relative to University-wide procedures: 1. Determine the potential financial impact of noncompliance with grant sponsors. 2. Evaluate and improve its policies and required documentation for extra-service compensation. 3. Evaluate and improve its internal controls for sponsored program compensation. 4. Provide adequate training to University personnel regarding sponsored programs compensation compliance. USU’s Response: Utah State University (“USU”) generally agrees with Finding One. As detailed in USU internal audit IAS-23-53, USU Extension established a program to incentivize and reward its personnel to apply for grants (referred to by Extension and within USU internal audit IAS-23-53 as the “incentive program”). While the Uniform Guidance permits incentive programs (see CFR 200.430(f)) and such programs are readily used by universities, the USU Extension incentive program was established and carried out in manner that violated USU’s policy governing extra service compensation (“ESC”) and in a manner that bypassed critical internal controls. Notably, USU Internal Audit IAS-23-53 tested compliance with USU’s extra-service compensation policy but did not review actual costs charged to federal sponsors as this was outside the scope of the audit. Consistent with the recommendations to determine the potential impact of noncompliance, USU worked with an outside consultant to review payment of ESC to all employees working on federal grants. This work identified (1) limited instances when salaries directly charged to sponsored projects included extra service compensation in the base salary and (2) limited instances when extra service compensation was charged to federal sponsors without sponsor approval. The majority of ESC payments made pursuant the USU Extension incentive program was not charged to grant sponsor or included in the institutional base salary charged to the grant. Accordingly, noncompliance with the Uniform Guidance clauses related to compensation costs was limited to a small subset of payments made under the USU Extension incentive program. Based on these findings, USU agrees with the corrective actions recommended and, as outlined in the corrective action plan summary below, has already completed and/or initiated these actions.
2024-018. USU Extension Extra Services Compensation Program Non-Compliance with Uniform Guidance (Finding Type: Significant Deficiency, Reportable Noncompliance) Federal Agency: Various Assistance Listing Number and Title: Various Federal Award Number: Various Questioned Costs: Undetermined Pass-through Entity: Various Prior Year Single Audit Report Finding Number: N/A Utah State University’s (University) Internal Audit performed a review of the University’s Extension Service (Extension) within the College of Agriculture and Applied Science. The review determined that Extension’s Extra Service Compensation (ESC) program violates Uniform Guidance requirements and University policy, bypasses critical internal controls, and provides employees with additional compensation for extra-service work related to their primary job duties without sponsor approval. Extension’s mission, under the University’s land grant mission, provides research-based programs and resources to Utah’s population using a mix of local, state, federal and sponsored funding. To incentivize its personnel to apply for grants, Extension created an ESC program that allowed personnel to replace a portion of their primary position institution-funded salary with grant-funded salary. Personnel could then request up to 20 percent of their primary position salary through an ESC secondary position funded with the replaced institution-funded salary. However, Extension’s justified purpose for the ESC secondary position was “caused by and associated with the grant.” In doing so, Extension made it possible to bypass the University’s policy and internal controls for extra-service pay by obscuring the work duties and funding source for the secondary position. Below is an illustrative example from the USU Internal Audit Report of an ESC professor with an institutional base salary of $50,000: Payment to Employee Before Receiving Award (Source: USU Internal Audit Report IAS-23-53) Uniform Guidance maintains strict requirements with regard to the allowability of compensation, including special consideration for substantial increases, particularly with: • federal award ratios (2 CFR 200.430(e)), • institutional base salary charges, including federal award proportionate shares (2 CFR 200.430(h)(2)), • prior approvals by federal awarding agencies for incidental activities with supplemental compensation (2 CFR 200.430(h)(1)), • intra-institution consulting within higher education (2 CFR 200.430(h)(3)), • institutional policy definitions to conclusively determine work resulting in extra service pay (2 CFR 200.430(h)(4), and • relevant internal controls (2 CFR 200.302(b)(4). Internal Audit cites that the ESC program does not comply with Uniform Guidance, as well as University policy (Extra-Service Compensation Policy 376), which formalizes the University’s approach to compliance with Uniform Guidance for these activities. Internal Audit identified that University personnel did not follow or were unfamiliar with established policies in addition to procedural changes that did not require sufficient level of documentation for proper approvals. Detailed fieldwork by Internal Audit identified instances of questioned costs for funding (both federal and non-federal) in excess of $25,000. Fieldwork covered the period between January 1, 2020 and June 14, 2023, but also identified evidence of noncompliance as far back as 2009 to 2018. After Internal Audit issued its report in September 2024, the University took action to begin determining the potential financial impact of noncompliance through an external third-party. A report by this external third-party has not been completed as of the date of this finding; therefore, the amount of questioned costs related to federal programs cannot be determined. The University has also taken steps to immediately address policy and control deficiencies across the institution. Recommendations: We recommend the University do the following relative to University-wide procedures: 1. Determine the potential financial impact of noncompliance with grant sponsors. 2. Evaluate and improve its policies and required documentation for extra-service compensation. 3. Evaluate and improve its internal controls for sponsored program compensation. 4. Provide adequate training to University personnel regarding sponsored programs compensation compliance. USU’s Response: Utah State University (“USU”) generally agrees with Finding One. As detailed in USU internal audit IAS-23-53, USU Extension established a program to incentivize and reward its personnel to apply for grants (referred to by Extension and within USU internal audit IAS-23-53 as the “incentive program”). While the Uniform Guidance permits incentive programs (see CFR 200.430(f)) and such programs are readily used by universities, the USU Extension incentive program was established and carried out in manner that violated USU’s policy governing extra service compensation (“ESC”) and in a manner that bypassed critical internal controls. Notably, USU Internal Audit IAS-23-53 tested compliance with USU’s extra-service compensation policy but did not review actual costs charged to federal sponsors as this was outside the scope of the audit. Consistent with the recommendations to determine the potential impact of noncompliance, USU worked with an outside consultant to review payment of ESC to all employees working on federal grants. This work identified (1) limited instances when salaries directly charged to sponsored projects included extra service compensation in the base salary and (2) limited instances when extra service compensation was charged to federal sponsors without sponsor approval. The majority of ESC payments made pursuant the USU Extension incentive program was not charged to grant sponsor or included in the institutional base salary charged to the grant. Accordingly, noncompliance with the Uniform Guidance clauses related to compensation costs was limited to a small subset of payments made under the USU Extension incentive program. Based on these findings, USU agrees with the corrective actions recommended and, as outlined in the corrective action plan summary below, has already completed and/or initiated these actions.
2024-018. USU Extension Extra Services Compensation Program Non-Compliance with Uniform Guidance (Finding Type: Significant Deficiency, Reportable Noncompliance) Federal Agency: Various Assistance Listing Number and Title: Various Federal Award Number: Various Questioned Costs: Undetermined Pass-through Entity: Various Prior Year Single Audit Report Finding Number: N/A Utah State University’s (University) Internal Audit performed a review of the University’s Extension Service (Extension) within the College of Agriculture and Applied Science. The review determined that Extension’s Extra Service Compensation (ESC) program violates Uniform Guidance requirements and University policy, bypasses critical internal controls, and provides employees with additional compensation for extra-service work related to their primary job duties without sponsor approval. Extension’s mission, under the University’s land grant mission, provides research-based programs and resources to Utah’s population using a mix of local, state, federal and sponsored funding. To incentivize its personnel to apply for grants, Extension created an ESC program that allowed personnel to replace a portion of their primary position institution-funded salary with grant-funded salary. Personnel could then request up to 20 percent of their primary position salary through an ESC secondary position funded with the replaced institution-funded salary. However, Extension’s justified purpose for the ESC secondary position was “caused by and associated with the grant.” In doing so, Extension made it possible to bypass the University’s policy and internal controls for extra-service pay by obscuring the work duties and funding source for the secondary position. Below is an illustrative example from the USU Internal Audit Report of an ESC professor with an institutional base salary of $50,000: Payment to Employee Before Receiving Award (Source: USU Internal Audit Report IAS-23-53) Uniform Guidance maintains strict requirements with regard to the allowability of compensation, including special consideration for substantial increases, particularly with: • federal award ratios (2 CFR 200.430(e)), • institutional base salary charges, including federal award proportionate shares (2 CFR 200.430(h)(2)), • prior approvals by federal awarding agencies for incidental activities with supplemental compensation (2 CFR 200.430(h)(1)), • intra-institution consulting within higher education (2 CFR 200.430(h)(3)), • institutional policy definitions to conclusively determine work resulting in extra service pay (2 CFR 200.430(h)(4), and • relevant internal controls (2 CFR 200.302(b)(4). Internal Audit cites that the ESC program does not comply with Uniform Guidance, as well as University policy (Extra-Service Compensation Policy 376), which formalizes the University’s approach to compliance with Uniform Guidance for these activities. Internal Audit identified that University personnel did not follow or were unfamiliar with established policies in addition to procedural changes that did not require sufficient level of documentation for proper approvals. Detailed fieldwork by Internal Audit identified instances of questioned costs for funding (both federal and non-federal) in excess of $25,000. Fieldwork covered the period between January 1, 2020 and June 14, 2023, but also identified evidence of noncompliance as far back as 2009 to 2018. After Internal Audit issued its report in September 2024, the University took action to begin determining the potential financial impact of noncompliance through an external third-party. A report by this external third-party has not been completed as of the date of this finding; therefore, the amount of questioned costs related to federal programs cannot be determined. The University has also taken steps to immediately address policy and control deficiencies across the institution. Recommendations: We recommend the University do the following relative to University-wide procedures: 1. Determine the potential financial impact of noncompliance with grant sponsors. 2. Evaluate and improve its policies and required documentation for extra-service compensation. 3. Evaluate and improve its internal controls for sponsored program compensation. 4. Provide adequate training to University personnel regarding sponsored programs compensation compliance. USU’s Response: Utah State University (“USU”) generally agrees with Finding One. As detailed in USU internal audit IAS-23-53, USU Extension established a program to incentivize and reward its personnel to apply for grants (referred to by Extension and within USU internal audit IAS-23-53 as the “incentive program”). While the Uniform Guidance permits incentive programs (see CFR 200.430(f)) and such programs are readily used by universities, the USU Extension incentive program was established and carried out in manner that violated USU’s policy governing extra service compensation (“ESC”) and in a manner that bypassed critical internal controls. Notably, USU Internal Audit IAS-23-53 tested compliance with USU’s extra-service compensation policy but did not review actual costs charged to federal sponsors as this was outside the scope of the audit. Consistent with the recommendations to determine the potential impact of noncompliance, USU worked with an outside consultant to review payment of ESC to all employees working on federal grants. This work identified (1) limited instances when salaries directly charged to sponsored projects included extra service compensation in the base salary and (2) limited instances when extra service compensation was charged to federal sponsors without sponsor approval. The majority of ESC payments made pursuant the USU Extension incentive program was not charged to grant sponsor or included in the institutional base salary charged to the grant. Accordingly, noncompliance with the Uniform Guidance clauses related to compensation costs was limited to a small subset of payments made under the USU Extension incentive program. Based on these findings, USU agrees with the corrective actions recommended and, as outlined in the corrective action plan summary below, has already completed and/or initiated these actions.