EL PASO, Texas (KTSM) — The Texas State Auditor’s Office conducted an audit report on the University of Texas at El Paso (UTEP) and is saying that the university is not properly managing purchased orders and payments associated with its “contracts,” as the university describes its transactions.
According to the audit, the university “cannot reliably identify its total expenditures for each
contract and lacks adequate processes to prevent contracts from exceeding their maximum values.”
The scope of UTEP’s audit included contracts active between Sept. 1, 2022, and March 31, 2024.
The review said contracts were reviewed in three steps: internal components related to vendor payment, total payments made on the contracts, and the contract management process.
“As a result, the University cannot always determine how much it has paid on a contract or if the total payments made have exceeded the maximum contract value. In addition, the University did not always amend or extend contracts as needed. Generally, the University complied with vendor selection, contract formation, and contract monitoring requirements,” according to the audit.
According to the audit, UTEP creates contracts that are identified by contract numbers. When the vendor is making its payment, the University requires a unique purchase order number that is not associated with the contract numbers.
Payments made to the university are referenced to the purchase order number only.
“The University relies on individual departments to monitor contract payments and total contract amounts. However, the University does not have any processes to monitor and verify that the departments are effectively performing that duty,” according to the audit.
The audit reviewed nine sample contracts that totaled $53,705,237 of 236 contacts that totaled $112,175,771.
Auditors found that one contract tested exceeded its max contract value by at least $34,000. Many times, the final overall amount may be higher for vendors due to additional payments being made out to the university but were not associated with their specific contract.
In addition, the university did appropriately report all 2,104 eligible contracts but did not report contract information to the Legislative Budget Board following their requirements. The contracts were reported through purchase orders.
“Generally, the University complied with vendor selection, contract formation, and contract monitoring requirements. However, it should strengthen other contracting processes and ensure that users have appropriate rights in its contracting system,” according to the audit.
Read: Read More