Narrative:

Aircraft X enroute from the southeast. Shortly after check-in; the pilot requested direct to a waypoint direct eko; which [was] about 10 miles east of eko. I cleared him as requested; and confirmed that the pilot wanted to conduct a visual approach. A few minutes later; I cleared the pilot to descend to 14;000 ft; which the pilot read back. Soon after; I gave the pilot the airport's position and advised to 'report in sight for a visual approach.' the pilot did not read it back correctly. I still do not know exactly what he said; but it sounded wrong; so I repeated myself to the aircraft; 'just want to confirm; report airport in sight for a visual approach.' this time; the pilot responded 'wilco.' at this point the aircraft was still well above the mia (minimum IFR altitude); at around 16;000 ft; if I remember right. I went back to my scan; checking up on the rest of the sector. A short time later; aircraft X came up on the radio asking to confirm that I cleared him for a visual approach but wanted him to report the airport in sight. At that moment his altitude indicated 13;400 ft; which [matched] the mia where the plane was positioned. I immediately responded 'negative; maintain one three thousand four hundred; report the airport in sight.' the next update to the aircraft's datablock showed 13;100 ft.; three hundred ft. Below the mia. The only thing I feel I could have done differently would have been to re-clear the aircraft to 14;000 ft after the bad readback.

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: Salt Lake City Center Controller trainee and their instructor reported they did not notice an aircraft leave its assigned altitude and descend below the Minimum IFR Altitude.

Narrative: Aircraft X enroute from the southeast. Shortly after check-in; the pilot requested direct to a waypoint direct EKO; which [was] about 10 miles east of EKO. I cleared him as requested; and confirmed that the pilot wanted to conduct a visual approach. A few minutes later; I cleared the pilot to descend to 14;000 ft; which the pilot read back. Soon after; I gave the pilot the airport's position and advised to 'report in sight for a visual approach.' The pilot did not read it back correctly. I still do not know exactly what he said; but it sounded wrong; so I repeated myself to the aircraft; 'Just want to confirm; report airport in sight for a visual approach.' This time; the pilot responded 'wilco.' At this point the aircraft was still well above the MIA (Minimum IFR Altitude); at around 16;000 ft; if I remember right. I went back to my scan; checking up on the rest of the sector. A short time later; Aircraft X came up on the radio asking to confirm that I cleared him for a visual approach but wanted him to report the airport in sight. At that moment his altitude indicated 13;400 ft; which [matched] the MIA where the plane was positioned. I immediately responded 'Negative; maintain one three thousand four hundred; report the airport in sight.' The next update to the aircraft's datablock showed 13;100 ft.; three hundred ft. below the MIA. The only thing I feel I could have done differently would have been to re-clear the aircraft to 14;000 ft after the bad readback.

Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site and automatically converted to unabbreviated mixed upper/lowercase text. This report is for informational purposes with no guarantee of accuracy. See NASA's ASRS site for official report.