Active Fraud Detection

According to the latest Association of Certified Fraud Examiners (ACFE) Report to the Nations: 2018 Global Study on Occupational Fraud and Abuse, when it comes to reducing fraud loss and duration, active fraud detection methods (such as surprise audits or data monitoring) are far more effective than passive methods (such as confessions or notification by police).  In spite of the effectiveness of the active methods, many companies fail to use them to their full potential.

Active vs. passive detection

The ACFE study found that frauds detected using passive methods tend to last longer and produce larger losses than those detected by such active methods as:

  • IT controls,
  • Data monitoring and analysis,
  • Account reconciliation,
  • Internal audit,
  • Surprise audits,
  • Management review, and
  • Document examination.

These active methods of detection can significantly lower fraud durations and losses. For example, frauds detected by IT controls had a median duration of five months and a median loss of $39,000. By comparison, fraud detected through notification by police had a median duration of 24 months and a median loss of $935,000.

Surprise audits and proactive data monitoring and analysis can be especially effective ways to fight fraud. On average, victim-organizations without these antifraud controls in place reported more than double the fraud losses and their frauds lasted more than twice as long as victim-organizations with these controls in place. Yet only 37% of the organizations in the ACFE study had implemented surprise audits or data monitoring and analysis, however.

Close-up on tips

The ACFE categorized tips — the leading fraud detection method — as “potentially active or passive,” because they may or may not involve proactive efforts designed to identify fraud. Organizations that use hotlines for reporting misconduct detected fraud by tips more often (46% of cases) than those without hotlines (30% of cases).

More than half of tips came from employees, but nearly one-third came from outside parties, such as customers and vendors. To ensure that tips are used as an active detection method, an organization should set up a hotline and promote its use among employees, supply chain partners and others. If possible, users should be able to make anonymous reports.

Don’t wait for fraud to find you

Occupational fraud poses a significant threat to organizations of every type and size. Waiting to react until fraud rears its head can result in serious financial losses. Instead, adopt active detection methods that can be deployed continually. Contact Andrea Addo, CPA, MBA, CFE, CITP or Adam Hennen, CPA, CFE, CITP, to discuss methods for fighting fraud.

 

How can we help?

DISCLAIMER: This blog is provided for informational purposes only and is not a substitute for obtaining accounting, tax, or financial advice from a professional accountant. Presentation of the information in this article does not create nor constitute an accountant-client relationship. While we use reasonable efforts to furnish accurate and up-to-date information, the evolving landscape surrounding these topics is supported by regulations or guidance that are subject to change.

We Value Your Privacy

This site may use cookies to store information on your computer. Some are essential to make our site work and others to improve the user experience. By using this site, you consent to the placement of these cookies and accept our privacy policy.