Categories
31 Days to More Effective Compliance Programs

One Month to a More Effective Compliance Program for 3rd Parties-Business Justification

The 2023 Evaluation of Corporate Compliance Programs stated, “Prosecutors should also assess whether the company knows the business rationale for needing the third party in the transaction, and the risks posed by third-party partners, including the third-party partners’ reputations and relationships, if any, with foreign officials.” This standard articulates one of the most basic tools to operationalize your compliance program and should form the basis of your third-party risk management process. Indeed, this is viewed as an internal control with the 2023 ECCP going on to pose the following question, “How does the company ensure there is an appropriate business rationale for the use of third parties?”

What should go into your business justification? At the most basic level, you should craft a document, which works for both you as the compliance practitioner and the business folks in your company, that details some basic concepts which includes the following: 1) The name and contact information for both the Relationship Manager and the proposed third party; 2) How the Relationship Manager came to know about the third party because it is a red flag if a customer or government representative points you towards a specific third party; 3) What services the third party will perform for your company, the length of time and compensation rate for the third party; and 4) An explanation of why this specific third party should be used as opposed to an existing or other third party, if such were considered. All this information should be documented and then signed by the Relationship Manager.

Remember, the purpose of the business rationale is to document the satisfactoriness of the business case to retain a third party. The business rationale should be included in the compliance review file assembled on every third party at the time of initial certification and again if the third-party relationship is renewed. This means “Document, Document, and Document.”

 Three key takeaways:

1. You should always have a business reason for using a third party which is articulated by the business folks, not compliance.

2. A Relationship Manager is the key going forward in operationalizing your compliance program through the life of the third-party relationship with your company.

3. Always remember to “Document, Document, and Document”.

Categories
FCPA Compliance Report

Ryan Patrick on the Role of a US Attorney Under the Monaco Memo, CEP & ECCP

Welcome to the award-winning FCPA Compliance Report, the longest running podcast in compliance. Looking for a podcast that will give you insights into the Department of Justice’s corporate enforcement policy and the implications for corporations facing investigations? Look no further than FCPA Compliance Report! In this episode, Tom Fox sits down with Ryan Patrick, a former US district attorney for the southern district of Texas. They discuss the importance of staying up-to-date with DOJ memos and speeches, the difficulty for corporations in deciding whether or not to self-disclose, and the implications of outside counsel being deputized. Ryan emphasizes the importance for companies to work with lawyers who know judges and have pre-existing relationships with local prosecutors, including US attorneys and line prosecutors. They discuss the Southern District of Texas and its role in border-related issues, as well as the Patrick’s time as a US Attorney for the Southern District of Texas. This podcast is a must-listen for anyone looking to gain a better understanding of corporate enforcement and compliance policies. Don’t miss out on the conversation between Tom Fox and Ryan Patrick!

 Key Highlights

·      Discussing U.S District Attorney’s work challenges

·      Evolution of Corporate Enforcement Policy by DOJ

·      Challenges in Communication with Corporations for Attorneys

·      Challenges of Self-Disclosure for Businesses

·      Navigating Legal Issues with Local Counsel

·      Challenges to Attorney-Client Privilege in Corporate Cases

·      Border Security and Cryptography Cases in Texas

·      US Attorney General Advisory Committee in Presidential Administration

·      Role of Southern District of Texas in law enforcement and corporate enforcement

·      Inside a Federal Prosecutor’s Role

 Notable Quotes

·      “It seems to me that this broaden beyond simply anti-corruption in FCPA and whether it be fraud, whether it be antitrust, whether it be environmental, whether it be a wide variety of other types of issues that an AUSA and a local district attorney US district attorney’s office would prosecute.”

·      “Asking the US attorney’s offices now to step into this space where really thinking from the idea of self-disclosure and from monitoring or audio auditing, so to speak, someone’s compliance program.”

·      “One of the not perhaps most difficult, but hardest conversations a corporation has is whether or not to self-disclose under the FCPA.”

·      “Bring it to me. I will consider it because it’s not 1 size fits all.

Resources

Ryan Patrick on LinkedIn

Ryan Patrick on Haynes and Boone

Tom

Instagram

Facebook

YouTube

Twitter

LinkedIn

Categories
From the Editor's Desk

March and April 2023 in Compliance Week

Welcome to From the Editor’s Desk, a podcast where co-hosts Tom Fox and Kyle Brasseur, EIC at Compliance Week, unpack some of the top stories which have appeared in Compliance Week over the past month, look at top compliance stories upcoming for the next month, talk some sports and generally try to solve the world’s problems.

 From the Editor’s Desk, hosted by Tom Fox and Kyle Brasseur, is the perfect podcast to stay informed on the dynamic events of March 2023. They discuss the Department of Justice’s changes in the ECCP and the CCO compliance officer as well as look into the SEC and banking regulator’s roles during the SVP Bank failure. Kyle previews the upcoming long-form Compliance Week case study, which will take a deep dive into ESG in one company and conclude with a look into sports by reviewing the madness of 2023 March Madness, the issues surrounding Ja Morant, and Kyle’s deep appreciation for the World Baseball Classic, noting its ability to add diversity to the game and its positive impact on the baseball community as a whole.

 Highlights Include:

·      The Role of the Chief Compliance Officer in 2021: Navigating Changing Regulations and Increased Pressure.

·      Financial Regulatory Oversight In the Wake of the Dodd-Frank Act

·      The Role of the Chief Risk Officer in Risk Management

·      The Practical Uses of ESG Disclosures in Real Life

·      The Ups and Downs of March Madness: Unprecedented Success for Small Schools.

·      Reporting on Personal Hardships in Sports: The Case of Ja Morant and Josh Hamilton

·      The Power of Unity in Baseball: A Discussion on the Global Impact of the World Baseball Classic

·      The Appeal of the World Baseball Classic

 Kyle relates some of the upcoming Compliance Week 2023 Conference highlights from May 15-17 in Washington, DC. Listeners of this podcast will receive a discount of $200 by using code TF200 on the link below.

Resources

Compliance Week 2023 information and registration here

Kyle Brasseur on LinkedIn

Compliance Week

Categories
Blog

The Week That Was in Compliance – The ECCP: Part 1 – Incentives

In addition to the speeches presented at the ABA’s 38th Annual National Institute on White Collar Crime, by Deputy Attorney General Lisa Monaco (2023 Monaco Speech) and Assistant Attorney General Kenneth A. Polite (Polite Speech); there was the release of the 2023 U.S. Department of Justice Criminal Division Evaluation of Corporate Compliance Programs (ECCP). Today we will begin a multi-part review of this document by considering financial incentives.

This section begins with a new introduction which makes clear the seriousness in which the Department of Justice (DOJ) views incentives, both financial and other types of incentives. The ECCP states, “The design and implementation of compensation schemes play an important role in fostering a compliance culture. Prosecutors may consider whether a company has incentivized compliance by designing compensation systems that defer or escrow certain compensation tied to conduct consistent with company values and policies. Some companies have also enforced contract provisions that permit the company to recoup previously awarded compensation if the recipient of such compensation is found to have engaged in or to be otherwise responsible for corporate wrongdoing. Finally, prosecutors may consider whether provisions for recoupment or reduction of compensation due to compliance violations or misconduct are maintained and enforced in accordance with company policy and applicable laws. Compensation structures that clearly and effectively impose financial penalties for misconduct can deter risky behavior and foster a culture of compliance.”

However, the DOJ reiterated that “providing positive incentives, such as promotions, rewards, and bonuses for improving and developing a compliance program or demonstrating ethical leadership, can drive compliance. Prosecutors should examine whether a company has made working on compliance a means of career advancement, offered opportunities for managers and employees to serve as a compliance “champion”, or made compliance a significant metric for management bonuses. In evaluating whether the compensation and consequence management schemes are indicative of a positive compliance culture.”

Neither of these concepts for incentives are new. Financial incentives were a part of the original 10 Hallmarks of an Effective Compliance Program, as delineated in the 2012 edition of the FCPA Resource Guide. It was brought forward in the 2020 2nd edition. Promotions, rewards and bonuses were also discussed in both of those documents as well as other DOJ pronouncements and formulations over the years. However, this is the first time the DOJ has specifically spelled out the role of the ‘compliance champion’ as both an indicia of a best practices compliance program as well as a mechanism to demonstrate a ‘positive compliance culture.’

The ECCP also added a new section on financial incentives which directs prosecutors to specifically evaluate how a company designs and applies financial incentives. It states:

Incentive System – Has the company considered the implications of its incentives and rewards on compliance? How does the company incentivize compliance and ethical behavior? Have there been specific examples of actions taken (e.g., promotions or awards denied) as a result of compliance and ethicsconsiderations? Who determines the compensation, including bonuses, as well as discipline and promotion of compliance personnel?

Rephrasing these questions, a compliance professional might consider them in the following manner:

  1. How does the company incentivize compliance and ethical behavior?
  2. Has the company considered the implications of its incentives and rewards on compliance?
  3. Who determines the compensation, including bonuses, as well as discipline and promotion of compliance personnel?
  4. Have there been specific examples of actions taken (g., promotions or awards denied) as a result ofcompliance and ethics considerations?

These four questions basically breakdown into the following continuum: (1) Assessment, (2) Analysis, (3) Implementation; and (4) Monitoring.

Incentive program assessment. Here you need to review your corporate incentive program for all employees, most particularly the discretionary bonus program but also your non-financial incentives such as promotion. Is your bonus program only related to individual sales, division sales or other similar metric or overall company performance? You can begin with some questions suggested by the ECCP: What role does the compliance function have in designing and awarding financial incentives at senior levels of the organization? Has the company evaluated whether commercial targets are achievable if the business operates within a compliant and ethical manner?

If you do not have any component for doing business ethically and in compliance, your entire compliance program is probably falling short at this point. You should also see if this is a query for promotion and not simply does an employee.

Incentive program analysis. Here you need to see what perverse incentives may exist in your organization. Obviously if meeting your target numbers is the sole criteria, your program is once again falling short. On the promotion front, you need to analyze patterns of promotion to (1) see if any employees with ethical or compliance program violations have been promoted; and (2) also determine if employees are promoted simply for NOT have any ethical violations. This would lead to a review of whether or not promoted employees have been actively participated in improving or maintaining a culture of compliance. How does the company incentivize compliance and ethical behavior? What percentage of executive compensation is structured to encourage enduring ethical business objectives?

Incentive program implementation. After implementation of the incentive program, it must be monitored. The ECCP suggests an inquiry into the following area: Has the company considered the impact of its financial rewards and other incentives on compliance? Additionally, what role, if any, did the corporate compliance function have in advising on the bonus program or participating in setting the bonus and promotion structures?

Incentive program monitoring. Here there needs to be ongoing monitoring of the incentive program, including has the company ensured effective management of the incentive program? The ECCP suggests a review of how much compensation has in fact been impacted (either positively or negatively) on account of compliance-related activities?

Join me tomorrow where I take a deep dive into discipline or the new formulation, “consequence management.”

Categories
Compliance Into the Weeds

Updated DOJ Mandate on Clawbacks

The award-winning, Compliance into the Weeds is the only weekly podcast that takes a deep dive into a compliance-related topic, literally going into the weeds to explore a subject. In this episode, Matt and I dive into the hot topic of clawbacks, focusing on Deputy Attorney General Lisa Monaco’s new pilot program and Kenneth Polite’s take on prosecutorial discretion for organizations. Our hosts explore the opportunities for corporate compliance and HR personnel for clawback solutions and the use of the Federation Corrupt Practices Act (FCPA). They also discuss the need for a thorough documentation of personnel involved with and/or accused of illegal conduct and the potential costs to shareholders. Bottom line: Tom Fox and Matt Kelly are here to take you on a deep dive into the complexities of clawbacks and help organizations get compliant and stay compliant.

Key Highlights:

Prosecutorial Discretion and Credit [00:05:24]

Implications of the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act on Corporate Compliance and HR [00:09:41]

The Mathematics of Corporate Policy Development and Management [00:13:59]

Corporate Compliance and the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act [00:17:47]

Balancing Compliance and Risk in Business Practices [00:21:49]

 Notable Quotes:

1.     “It is part of the department’s larger effort to hold individuals more accountable and to have companies be participants in that project and to have companies embrace the culture of compliance; how would you hold individuals accountable if you’re the company, you’d have that clawback clause over their head, and then you would now have more incentive to use it, which is not necessarily an easy thing.”

2.     “What we expect companies that use programs to address not only employees who engaged and wrongdoing a connection with conduct under investigation, but also those who had supervisory authority over the employees or business area engaged in in the misconduct and knew of or were willfully blind to the misconduct.”

3.     “You must have the clawback policies in place at the time of resolution, then get a reserve credit for those clawback compensation moneys that you must successively claw back within the term of the resolution.”

4.     “If you try to recoup the compensation and fail, you’ll still be eligible for up to 25 percent of whatever you were trying to recoup.”

 Resources

Matt in Radical Compliance

Tom in FCPA Compliance and Ethics Blog