Report Highlights

The Oregon Public Utility Commission (PUC) has designed controls to ensure administrative and program support costs at Energy Trust of Oregon are reasonable. Energy Trust is a nonprofit organization and is not subject to state administrative cost requirements. However, PUC could strengthen its oversight of Energy Trust administrative costs by more clearly defining what constitutes reasonable costs, revising key performance metrics, and clarifying financial reporting requirements.


Energy Trust is a nonprofit organization funded by a grant agreement with PUC to develop and administer energy efficiency and renewable energy programs in certain utility service territories in Oregon. The grant funding comes from three separate charges on bills of customers of electric and natural gas utilities regulated by PUC.


The purpose of the audit was to determine whether Energy Trust administrative costs are reasonable and whether PUC has reasonable controls in place to oversee Energy Trust’s administrative costs.

Key Findings

  1. Energy Trust complies with PUC’s administrative cost control requirements. We found these controls to be reasonable, and Energy Trust has consistently spent below the established administrative cost cap of 8% of revenue per year. However, Energy Trust’s administrative costs increased from $1.6 million to $10.1 million between 2002 and 2017, as its annual revenues increased from $30.6 million to $194.2 million during the same period. Improved oversight could help PUC better ensure that Energy Trust makes reasonable administrative spending decisions.
  2. We determined Energy Trust’s administrative costs are generally reasonable. However, we identified a small percentage of questionable administrative costs that do not align with state agency standards or the grant guidelines that govern Energy Trust operations. PUC could improve its oversight by providing guidance for acceptable administrative costs.
  3. Increased clarity and detail in financial reporting would improve transparency and stakeholder oversight. PUC monitors Energy Trust’s administrative costs through an enforced spending cap and public budget and reporting processes. Revised reporting methodologies would increase the transparency of Energy Trust’s administrative costs and spending trends.


Our report includes recommendations to PUC regarding the clarity of its grant agreement with Energy Trust, revision of performance metrics, and reporting of administrative costs.

PUC generally agreed with our recommendations. The agency’s response can be found at the end of the report.

Read the full report here.