Figure 1: Occupational Frauds by Category Frequency

Similar documents
Figure 1: Breakdown of Cases by Country

REPORT TO THE NATIONS ON OCCUPATIONAL FRAUD AND ABUSE 2016 SOUTHERN ASIA EDITION

REPORT TO THE NATIONS 2018 GLOBAL STUDY ON OCCUPATIONAL FRAUD AND ABUSE

REPORT TO THE NATIONS 2018 GLOBAL STUDY ON OCCUPATIONAL FRAUD AND ABUSE

Figure 1: Geographical Location of Victim Organizations

REPORT TO THE NATIONS 2018 GLOBAL STUDY ON OCCUPATIONAL FRAUD AND ABUSE

Table 1: Historical Summary of Revenue Lost to Fraud. Estimate of Revenue Lost to Fraud

Analyzing a Potpourri of Fraud in Higher Education. Calvin Wendelboe, CPA, CIA, CFE

Mitigating Fraud. June 22, Sept. 21, 2014

REPORT TO THE NATIONS 2018 GLOBAL STUDY ON OCCUPATIONAL FRAUD AND ABUSE

REPORT TO THE NATIONS ON OCCUPATIONAL FRAUD AND ABUSE GLObAL FrAUD STUDy

1/3/2013. Months. Other $75,000. Government $81,000. Non-Profit $100,000. Dollars. Public Company $127,000. Private Company $200,000

AGA Risk and Fraud Webinar

Fraud in Government. Mike Nolan, CPA, CFE, CGMA. CCACC & CCA&RMC Conference Monterey, CA September 2014

FRAUD AWARENESS & PREVENTION

Red Flags of Fraud. What we will cover. Solutions Conference. Sarah L. Jennings, CPA, CFE Principal Maner Costerisan. The Problem Defined

IIA Fraud Conference. Case studies from recent investigations. 8 April 2015

OAPT June 9, Deterring Fraud and the Latest Fraud Schemes in Public Entities TAKE AWAY #1

FRAUD: A Web Of Deceit

Internal Controls over Expenditures

A c f e. Report to. the Nation. on Occupational Fraud & Abuse

Have you dealt with fraud in the past?

Fraud in the Government Realm. Introduction. What is Fraud? My career began with a local government fraud in 1993

REPORT TO THE NATIONS ON OCCUPATIONAL FRAUD AND ABUSE 2016 GLOBAL FRAUD STUDY

MMAAA Annual Meeting. Conducting an Investigative Audit June 13, Presented by: John J. Sullivan, CFE Melanson Heath

Capital Area SBO. Accounting/Auditing Update. May 24, Kevin B. Stouffer, CPA. Audit Manager

Reference Point May 2015

Fraud Prevention & Detection. Eric Conforti, CPA, CFE April 17, 2018

T H E A S S O C I A T I O N

Managing Reputational Risk for Nonprofit Organizations. Best Practices for Fraud Prevention. July 14, Christopher W. Truman, CPA, Manager

HOW TO SPOT AND MITIGATE FRAUDULENT ACTIVITIES

The State of the Art of Fraud. Glenn L. Helms, Ph.D., CPA, CIA, CITP, CISA, CFF

Presented by Duncan Will CPA/ABV/CFF, CFE

Types of Fraud, Detection and Mitigation Presentation by: Isaac Mutembei Murugu CIA, CISA 23 rd November Uphold public interest

The Secure Choice Retirement Savings Program. Compiled by the Office of the Illinois State Treasurer Treasurer Michael W. Frerichs

Chapter 2 Skimming 1

SOUTH DAKOTA KIDS COUNT BEACOM SCHOOL OF BUSINESS UNIVERSITY OF SOUTH DAKOTA 414 E. CLARK STREET VERMILLION, SD

Fraud Risk Assessment

Describe Fraud in the Context of Financial

Fraud & Forensic Accounting Update for CPAs

VOLUME 3 NUMBER 3 MARCH HEADNOTE: HOW TO DEAL WITH WHISTLEBLOWERS PROVISIONS Steven A. Meyerowitz 193

What do they investigate

OCCUPATIONAL FRAUD 9/20/2018

FRAUD EXAMINERS MANUAL INTERNATIONAL EDITION

NABCA 23 rd Annual Administrators Conference The Forensics of Fraud: Conducting Financial Investigations

Non-Renewing Member Report

In-House Fraud Investigation Teams: 2017 Benchmarking Report

Fraud: How to Get Your District Free Publicity

Fraud Awareness & Prevention for Higher Education. Neil Cohen Deputy Director Audit, Oversight & Investigations

Everything You Didn t Want To Know About Employee Crime

Average persons in household. Top three industries Post-secondary education (25 64 years) 7.1% Unemployment rate

Fraud Prevention for Nonprofits

Reduce Your Risk: Understanding Internal Controls and Fraud Risks and Prevention

Demystifying Forensic Accounting

1/24/14. Fraud Detec/on and Preven/on. Agenda. Fraud Cases in Minnesota - Schools

City of Edmonton Population Change by Age,

FRAUD EXAMINERS MANUAL (INTERNATIONAL EDITION)

Demystifying Forensic Accounting

Its Not About If, Its About When! Learning how to protect your organization.

SELECTED ECONOMIC CHARACTERISTICS American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates

Sunera Canada ULC. Effective Fraud Risk Assessment Annual Fraud Program. October 21, 2016

Chapter 2 Skimming. 2. To a fraudster, the principle advantage of skimming is the difficulty with which the scheme is detected. a. True b.

US Economic Indicators: GDP By Industry

Spotting Financial Distortions: A Primer for Attorneys

5200 Ocean Blvd, Siesta Key, FL 34242

August 2015 Aboriginal Population Off-Reserve Package

October 2016 Aboriginal Population Off-Reserve Package

April 2017 Alberta Indigenous People Living Off-Reserve Package

November 2017 Alberta Indigenous People Living Off-Reserve Package

December 2017 Alberta Indigenous People Living Off-Reserve Package

January 2018 Alberta Indigenous People Living Off-Reserve Package

2014 Annual Report to. The Governor s Workers Compensation Advisory Council. On The Workers Compensation System. October 5, 2015

PREVENTING FRAUD IN THE HOSPITALITY INDUSTRY

American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates

An Expensive Problem. Fraud in Government A Growing Problem

Tell us what you think. Provide feedback to help make American Community Survey data more useful for you.

global economic crime survey 2005

ALBERTA LABOUR FORCE PROFILES Aboriginal People in the Labour Force Alberta Labour Force Profiles

4575 Bay Rd, Saginaw, MI 48603

American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates

American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates

American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates

American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates

American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates

American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates

American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates

American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates

American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates

American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates

American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates

American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates

American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates

American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates

American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates

American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates

American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates

American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates

American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates

American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates

American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates

Transcription:

Figure 1: Occupational Frauds by Category Frequency TYPE OF FRAUD Asset Misappropriation Corruption Financial Statement Fraud 12.8% 26.7% 89.5% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

Figure 2: Occupational Frauds by Category Median Loss TYPE OF FRAUD Asset Misappropriation Corruption Financial Statement Fraud $173,000 $250,000 $500,000 $0 $200,000 $400,000 $600,000 MEDIAN LOSS

Figure 3: Frequency of Fraud Schemes Billing 29.1% Corruption 26.7% Expense Reimbursements Non-Cash 16.3% 17.4% SCHEME TYPE Financial Statement Fraud Cash on Hand Check Tampering Skimming Cash Larceny Payroll 12.8% 11.6% 11.6% 11.6% 10.5% 10.5% Register Disbursements 5.8% 0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35%

Figure 4: Initial Detection of Occupational Frauds Tip 32.6% Management Review 20.9% Internal Audit 16.3% DETECTION METHOD Other By Accident Account Reconciliation Document Examination External Audit 3.5% 3.5% 2.3% 7.0% 9.3% Notified by Law Enforcement 2.3% IT Controls 1.2% Confession 1.2% 0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35%

Figure 5: Impact of Hotlines on the Top Six Detection Methods Tip 13.2% 50.0% DETECTION METHOD Internal Audit Management Review By Accident Other 14.3% 14.3% 7.1% 5.3% 7.1% 10.5% 21.1% 31.6% Organizations With Hotlines Document Examination 4.8% 2.6% Organizations Without Hotlines 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60%

Figure 6: Type of Victim Organization Frequency and Median Loss $350,000 37.2% 40% $300,000 $300,000 35% MEDIAN LOSS $250,000 $200,000 $150,000 $100,000 $50,000 25.6% $148,000 24.4% $125,000 7.0% 5.8% 30% 25% 20% 15% 10% 5% $0 Private Company Government Public Company Not-for-Profit* Other* 0% TYPE OF VICTIM ORGANIZATION Median Loss Percent of Cases *Not-for-Profit and Other categories had insufficient responses for median loss calculation.

Figure 7: Size of Victim Organization Frequency and Median Loss $350,000 35% MEDIAN LOSS $300,000 $250,000 $200,000 $150,000 $100,000 $300,000 30.1% $180,000 15.7% $86,000 28.9% 25.3% $110,000 30% 25% 20% 15% 10% $50,000 5% $0 <100 100 999 1,000 9,999 10,000+ 0% NUMBER OF EMPLOYEES Median Loss Percent of Cases

Figure 8: Industry of Victim Organization INDUSTRY Banking and Financial Services Government and Public Administration Health Care Construction Retail Manufacturing Insurance Transportation and Warehousing Education Oil and Gas Mining Wholesale Trade Telecommunications Technology Services (Other) Real Estate Other Arts, Entertainment, and Recreation Agriculture, Forestry, Fishing, and Hunting Utilities 1.2% 15.1% 14.0% 9.3% 7.0% 5.8% 5.8% 5.8% 4.7% 4.7% 3.5% 3.5% 2.3% 2.3% 2.3% 2.3% 2.3% 2.3% 2.3% 2.3% Services (Professional) 1.2% 0% 2% 4% 6% 8% 10% 12% 14% 16%

Figure 9: Frequency of Anti-Fraud Controls ANTI-FRAUD CONTROL External Audit of F/S 83.3% Management Certification of F/S 79.7% Code of Conduct 79.2% Employee Support Programs 77.0% External Audit of ICOFR 65.8% Internal Audit Department 64.7% Management Review 61.5% Independent Audit Committee 59.2% Hotline 52.5% Anti-Fraud Policy 39.0% Dedicated Fraud Department, Function, or Team 38.6% Fraud Training for Employees 38.0% Proactive Data Monitoring/Analysis 37.2% Formal Fraud Risk Assessments 35.5% Fraud Training for Managers/Executives 35.4% Surprise Audits 31.1% Job Rotation/Mandatory Vacation 16.2% Rewards for Whistleblowers 8.0% 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% Key: External Audit of F/S = Independent External Audits of the Organization s Financial Statements Management Certification of F/S = Management Certification of the Organization s Financial Statements External Audit of ICOFR = Independent External Audits of the Organization s Internal Controls Over Financial Reporting

Figure 10: Median Loss Based on Presence of Anti-Fraud Controls* Control Percent of Cases Control in Place Control Not in Place Percent Reduction Job Rotation/Mandatory Vacation 16.2% $16,000 $250,000 93.6% External Audit of Financial Statements 83.3% $135,000 $750,000 82.0% Internal Audit Department 64.7% $112,000 $396,000 71.7% Surprise Audits 31.1% $80,000 $250,000 68.0% Formal Fraud Risk Assessments 35.5% $80,000 $250,000 68.0% Employee Support Programs 77.0% $125,000 $350,000 64.3% Anti-Fraud Policy 39.0% $98,000 $250,000 60.8% Hotline 52.5% $111,000 $250,000 55.6% External Audit of Internal Controls over Financial Reporting 65.8% $111,000 $250,000 55.6% Dedicated Fraud Department, Function, or Team 38.6% $118,000 $250,000 52.8% Independent Audit Committee 59.2% $125,000 $250,000 50.0% Management Review 61.5% $138,000 $250,000 44.8% Proactive Data Monitoring/Analysis 37.2% $112,000 $200,000 44.0% Fraud Training for Employees 38.0% $118,000 $200,000 41.0% Fraud Training for Managers/Executives 35.4% $128,000 $175,000 26.9% Code of Conduct 79.2% $150,000 $188,000 20.2% Management Certification of Financial Statements 79.7% $150,000 $175,000 14.3% *Rewards for Whistleblowers was omitted from this table due to insufficient responses for median loss calculation.

Figure 11: Median Duration of Fraud Based on Presence of Anti-Fraud Controls* Control Percent of Cases Control in Place Control Not in Place Percent Reduction Employee Support Programs 77.0% 13 months 42 months 69.0% Dedicated Fraud Department, Function, or Team 38.6% 12 months 36 months 66.7% Internal Audit Department 64.7% 12 months 36 months 66.7% Independent Audit Committee 59.2% 13 months 36 months 63.9% External Audit of Internal Controls over Financial Reporting 65.8% 12 months 33 months 63.6% Hotline 52.5% 12 months 30 months 60.0% Management Review 61.5% 12 months 24 months 50.0% Surprise Audits 31.1% 12 months 24 months 50.0% Formal Fraud Risk Assessments 35.5% 12 months 24 months 50.0% Fraud Training for Managers/Executives 35.4% 12 months 24 months 50.0% Anti-Fraud Policy 39.0% 12 months 24 months 50.0% Fraud Training for Employees 38.0% 12 months 24 months 50.0% Job Rotation/Mandatory Vacation 16.2% 15 months 24 months 37.5% Proactive Data Monitoring/Analysis 37.2% 15 months 24 months 37.5% Management Certification of Financial Statements 79.7% 18 months 24 months 25.0% Code of Conduct 79.2% 24 months 24 months 0.0% External Audit of Financial Statements 83.3% 24 months 24 months 0.0% *Rewards for Whistleblowers was omitted from this table due to insufficient responses for median duration calculation.

Figure 12: Primary Internal Control Weakness Observed by CFE Lack of Independent Checks/Audits 3.6% Other 3.6% Lack of Competent Personnel in Oversight Roles 6.0% Lack of Internal Controls 31.0% Poor Tone at the Top 13.1% Override of Existing Internal Controls 25.0% 6.6% 2.9% Lack of Management Review 17.9%

Figure 13: Position of Perpetrator Frequency and Median Loss $900,000 50% $800,000 45.1% $835,000 45% $700,000 40% MEDIAN LOSS $600,000 $500,000 $400,000 $300,000 30.1% 30.5% 15.7% 19.5% 35% 30% 25% 20% 15% $200,000 $175,000 10% $100,000 $110,000 4.9% 5% $0 Employee Manager Owner/Executive Other* 0% POSITION OF PERPETRATOR *Other category had insufficient responses for median loss calculation. Median Loss Percent of Cases

Figure 14: Department of Perpetrator Frequency Sales 20.7% Operations Accounting 14.6% 15.9% DEPARTMENT OF PERPETRATOR Executive/Upper Management 11.0% Customer Service 11.0% Purchasing 4.9% Warehousing/Inventory 3.7% Legal 3.7% Finance 3.7% Other 2.4% Marketing/Public Relations 2.4% Manufacturing and Production 2.4% Internal Audit 1.2% Information Technology 1.2% Human Resources 1.2% 0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25%

Figure 15: Gender of Perpetrator Frequency Male 64.6% Female 35.4%

Figure 16: Gender of Perpetrator Median Loss GENDER OF PERPETRATOR Male $180,000 Female $85,000 $0 $50,000 $100,000 $150,000 $200,000 MEDIAN LOSS

Figure 17: Criminal Background of Perpetrator Other 4.1% Charged but Not Convicted 4.1% Had Prior Convictions 4.1% Never Charged or Convicted 89.8%

Figure 18: Employment Background of Perpetrator Other 10.5% Previously Terminated 7.9% Never Punished or Terminated 78.9% Previously Punished 7.9% 6.6% 2.9%

Figure 19: Cases Resulting in Referral to Law Enforcement or Civil Suit LEGAL ACTION TAKEN Referral to Law Enforcement Civil Suit 34.3% 58.7% 41.3% 65.7% Yes No 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

Figure 20: Recovery of Victim Organization s Losses PERCENT OF LOSS RECOVERED No Recovery 1 25% 26 50% 51 75% 76 99% 100% 7.9% 9.5% 7.9% 6.3% 7.9% 60.3% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70%

Figure 21: Action Taken Against Perpetrator ACTION TAKEN AGAINST PERPETRATOR Termination Other No Punishment Settlement Agreement Perpetrator Was No Longer With Organization Probation or Suspension Permitted or Required Resignation 8.6% 7.4% 6.2% 4.9% 3.7% 18.5% 70.4% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80%