Investigative Project Design: This Aspect Of The Three Part

Investigative Project Designthis Aspect Of The Three Part Assignment

This aspect of the three-part assignment will relate to the case you described. Assume you are a fraud examiner available for hire. Provide a discussion of the approach you, as an investigator, would use to look into a lead received about the possible fraud. The discussion should include several steps, and indicate what documents you anticipate will be available and important during your investigation, whether interviews of individuals will be involved, who those individuals might be, and how you might analyze the collected information. Assume you have received a general lead, but not all of the facts you laid out in your case presentation.

Think through what type of actions may have occurred or might be taking place during your investigation. What records might be a good source to investigate the situation? Oral evidence through interview of individuals can be helpful, but documents are necessary to confirm oral evidence. How can you relate oral evidence to documents you expect to find? This investigative design can be provided in prose or narrative writing, or as a clearly defined numbered list.

For those with audit background, this list would be much like an audit program--a sequential list showing a supervisor the expected path you anticipate the investigation to take. The Investigative Design can be posted as a separate document to the Investigative Project Design assignment folder in LEO, or as a single document below your Case Presentation paragraphs. If you follow the latter approach, you will be able to view both the case description and your proposed investigative approach on the same document. This might be one-half to one page of narrative. Although not limited, a step-by-step list would probably include no more than ten steps for most cases.

When the submitted Investigative Design documents are reviewed, if posted with the case design, only the section about the investigation will be reviewed and graded. Deterrence Measure Design: Considering the case you presented, and the investigative design you offered, what deterrence measures would you suggest to the enterprise you described in your case presentation? Your suggestions will be considered in the context of being both realistic and responsive to the specific presentation you provided. This review of deterrence measures should be written in narrative form. For most cases, the deterrence measures will probably require no more than one full page of text.

Post a document with your Case Presentation, Investigative Project Design, and Deterrence Measure Design, to the Assignments folder identified for the Deterrence Measure Design. You will be able to see the sequence in a single document as you developed and offered a description of a fraud based on your readings and understanding of that type of case. You will see your own plan how to approach the fraud you outlined, including what complexities might be involved. Then, you will have offered suggestions for how the described fraud could be deterred with systematic changes in policies and procedures within the organization you described. Review of the deterrence measure design aspect of the assignment will be limited to that aspect of the posted document.

PowerPoint Presentation: Develop a slide show providing general information to your colleagues about the general outline of the fraud case you offered, highlights of the investigative design proposed, and the system changes you suggested. The slide show is not necessarily limited in length, but an appropriate slide show would probably include no less than four slides and is not likely to include more than ten. The ability to develop a slide show is often very important in one’s career growth. This assignment provides an opportunity for students new to this activity a chance to practice. This balance between providing a full explanation in a paper or narrative writing and using a slide show to highlight key issues is essential.

As we have all encountered in some venue, items referenced in a slide show are often discussed by an oral presenter in front of a group. Most successful slide shows include bullet lists with key points that would be discussed if you presented your case before the class or a live audience. Slide shows are not a place for a copy and paste of the words from your narrative papers. Also, most of us have been to a presentation and heard the presenter refer to one of the slides as “sort of like an eye chart,” because the text is too small to see and read. Summarize on your slides, rather than including long text.

If some content in the slides is based on a published source, a citation and reference list using APA formatting would be appropriate. That includes a reference list on the last slide(s) and small citations by the content supported by a reference. For example, you might refer to the Fraud Triangle or an aspect of the COSO Framework in supporting your system enhancements. A reference to those would be appropriate.

Paper For Above instruction

Introduction

In investigating potential fraud within an organization, a structured and systematic approach is essential to uncover the truth, identify responsible parties, and recommend preventive measures. The process involves multiple steps, including initial lead assessment, collection and analysis of documents, interviews with relevant individuals, and correlating oral testimonies with documentary evidence. This paper outlines a comprehensive investigative approach, from inception to conclusion, tailored to a generic fraud scenario, utilizing common investigative tools and techniques.

Step 1: Initial Lead Evaluation

The investigation begins with evaluating the nature and credibility of the initial lead. This involves assessing the source of the tip, its specificity, and the potential scope of the suspected fraud. At this stage, preliminary discussions with the tipster (if known) or reviewing initial reports is crucial. This helps refine the investigation's focus and determines which departments or personnel might be involved. An example source could be an anonymous complaint, an internal audit report, or a suspicious transaction alert from a financial system.

Step 2: Planning and Developing the Investigation Scope

Based on the initial lead, the investigative plan is formulated. This includes defining the objectives, identifying key areas for documentation review, and outlining potential interviews. During planning, the assessor anticipates documents such as financial records, transaction logs, emails, internal memos, and access logs. Recognizing the potential involvement of employees, vendors, or management is integral to the plan. The scope must remain flexible, adapting as new evidence emerges.

Step 3: Collection of Documents and Records

The core of the investigation involves gathering relevant documents. Financial statements, bank statements, invoices, payroll records, and audit trails are scrutinized for irregularities. Computer-assisted audit techniques (CAATs) may be employed to analyze large datasets rapidly for anomalies. Operational documents like approval workflows, audit reports, and internal controls are also collected. These documents serve to confirm or refute oral testimonies and provide concrete evidence of fraudulent activity.

Step 4: Conducting Interviews

Simultaneously, interviews with individuals involved or potentially impacted by the suspected fraud are conducted. Primary interviewees could include employees in finance or accounting departments, supervisors, or internal auditors. Questions are tailored to clarify the transactions underlying suspicious activities. The goal is to obtain oral evidence that either corroborates or contradicts documentary findings. Interviews are recorded and documented carefully, noting any inconsistencies or admissions.

Step 5: Relating Oral Evidence to Documents

After initial interviews and document analysis, the investigator compares testimonial statements with documentary evidence. Discrepancies are flagged for further examination. For instance, if an employee claims a transaction was authorized, but documentation shows approval was not obtained, this contradiction highlights potential misconduct. Cross-referencing access logs with transaction times enhances understanding of access and authorization patterns.

Step 6: Further Analysis and Collateral Checks

Further investigative steps include collateral checks, such as reviewing surveillance footage, external vendor records, or third-party confirmations. Forensic accounting techniques can trace funds or detect pattern anomalies suggestive of money laundering or asset misappropriation. Additionally, the investigator may review prior audit reports or internal control deficiencies that facilitated the fraudulent activity.

Step 7: Formulating Findings and Preliminary Reports

Throughout the investigation, findings are documented systematically. Summaries of key evidence, discrepancies, and corroborative or contradictory statements build the foundation for draft reports. An interim report may be prepared to discuss preliminary findings with stakeholders, ensuring the investigation remains on track and objectives are met.

Step 8: Finalizing Evidence and Report Compilation

The compilation of evidence culminates in a comprehensive report that includes a detailed narrative of the investigative steps, evidence presented, and conclusions. Recommendations for disciplinary action or procedural changes are included. Supporting documents are appended as evidence, with appropriate citations and references.

Step 9: Presentation and Recommendations

The final step involves presenting findings to management or a designated committee. The presentation highlights key evidence, demonstrates how oral testimonies support documentary findings, and suggests systemic changes to deter future frauds.

Conclusion

Effective fraud investigations rely on a methodical process that includes evaluating the initial lead, meticulous document review, targeted interviews, and analytical methods to relate oral evidence to documentary findings. Implementing systematic steps ensures thoroughness, minimizes oversight, and supports the development of robust deterrence measures to prevent recurrence.

References

1. Albrecht, W. S., Albrecht, C. C., Albrecht, C. O., & Zimbelman, M. F. (2020). Fraud Examination. Cengage Learning.
2. Singleton, T. W., & Singleton, A. J. (2010). Fraud Auditing and Forensic Accounting. John Wiley & Sons.
3. Swan, B. (2019). Forensic Accounting and Fraud Examination. Routledge.
4. Coso Framework. (2017). Enterprise Risk Management — Integrating with Strategy and Performance. Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission.
5. Wells, J. T. (2014). Principles of Fraud Examination. Wiley.
6. Wordingham, T. (2018). Investigation and Interview Techniques. Routledge.
7. Rezaee, Z. (2018). Forensic Accounting and Fraud Examination. CRC Press.
8. Lamb, G. (2017). Computer Forensics: Investigating Cyber Crime. Jones & Bartlett Learning.
9. Wells, J. T. (2022). Forensic and Investigative Accounting. Wiley.
10. Myers, S. J. (2020). Forensic Accounting and Fraud Examination. South-Western College Publishing.