Categories
The Compliance Life

Audrey Harris-Move to Affiliated Monitors


The Compliance Life details the journey to and in the role of a Chief Compliance Officer. How does one come to sit in the CCO chair? What are some of the skills a CCO needs to success navigate the compliance waters in any company? What are some of the top challenges CCOs have faced and how did they meet them? These questions and many others will be explored in this new podcast series. Over four episodes each month on The Compliance Life, I visit with one current or former CCO to explore their journey to the CCO chair. This month, my guest is Audrey Harris, who handled FCPA cases prior the explosion of FCPA enforcement actions in the early 2000’s, sat in the CCO Chair, led compliance program work back in private practice and now is Managing Director for Global Anti-corruption, Compliance, Ethics & Non-Financial Risk at Affiliated Monitors Inc.

In this concluding episode, Audrey reflects on a key lesson which led her to join AMI. It is that an external monitor can be  a Value-Add proposition for all-sides, Company Business, Company Compliance, External Counsel, Enforcement/Regulators and other Stakeholders. It is not a second investigation, nor should it be seen as a “gotcha”. Rather a monitor can present  a path that can protect stakeholder and grow business, especially in this time of heightened awareness to social license and reputational risk. Audrey concludes that she loves the concept of turning a challenge into an opportunity and working at AMI on a monitorship team provides that opportunity.

Resources

 Audrey Harris on LinkedIn

Audrey Harris on Affiliated Monitors, Inc.

Categories
FCPA Compliance Report

Mikhail Reider-Gordon on Conflicts of Interest

In this episode of the FCPA Compliance Report, I am joined by Mikhail Reider-Gordon, Managing Director at Affiliated Monitors, Inc. We discuss conflicts of interest with some very high-profile examples torn literally from the headlines. Highlights include:

·      What exactly is a Conflict of Interest and how does it differ from self-dealing, nepotism?

·      Is a COI purely an ethical problem or are there are situations where COIs are illegal?

·      COIs in the news of late and in some surprising places?

·      Have there been other examples across industries?

·      The Courts, the Fed, SCOTUS?

·      Do you ever come across COIs in your work?

        Resources

Original Posting on podcast on Integrity Through Compliance

Mikhail Reider-Gordon at AMI

Categories
Blog

Continuous Improvement of Internal Controls

Cristina Revelo is the Deputy Director, Corporate Monitoring at Affiliated Monitors, Inc (AMI). Her academic background is in Master of Science and Bachelor of Science in Accountancy from the University of Illinois. Her professional background is in forensic accounting and internal controls. I visited with her about internal controls in practice inside a corporation.
Revelo said that internal controls are essentially any process that someone has to execute in order for the company to meet their objectives, whatever those objectives might be. In a corporate compliance department, the process procedure protocols you have in place that someone has to execute, can be an internal control. It could be an individual who inputs data into a system, or it could be automated or an individual who has to physically do something in order for you to meet your goal within your overall process.
We moved to a couple of terms which often cause confusion around internal controls. The first is compensating controls and the second is control override. Revelo explained that a compensating control is “essentially an alternative control. You set in place a manual control versus an automated. If your control system breaks down, you are compensating for your control in a different way.” However, she emphasized the key is that you are still following your normal process of executing your controls.
Next was control override. A control override is an override of a compliance internal control, a negative from an accounting perspective or even violation of the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act (FCPA). She explained that a control override should be the exception and not the rule for any corporate compliance or finance function. There must be a business reason and it must be documented, Revelo stated, “We definitely don’t advertise having to override controls, but we understand that there are emergency instances where you need to override a control that should be properly documented.”
However, what happens when controls are continually overridden? Does that necessarily mean that companies are engaging in activities which violate the FCPA or some other law such as Sarbanes-Oxley (SOX). Revelo said she would start out with some basic questions such as “How often would something be manually approved? How often are controls skipped, what are the level of approvals that you have and what is your document? What are the reasons, and are you documenting how often a certain department is requiring those overrides?” While it could indicate a company lacks a culture of compliance or everything is an emergency, it might mean something else. It might mean that your internal controls need to be evaluated and then recalibrated. The Department of Justice (DOJ) calls this continuous monitoring leading to continuous improvement. Joe Oringel, co-founder of Visual Risk IQ, calls it continuous controls monitoring.
However, many compliance professionals, and particularly lawyers think once a control is in place, it’s set in stone, and it’s there forever. This derives from the unfortunate fact that once again many compliance professionals and most lawyers do not understand internal controls. Yet, internal controls, much like the rest of a compliance program can and should be continually monitored and continually improved based upon the information about such things as the number of overrides. Such a review can be evidence of a management problem or a culture of non-compliance at the organization. However, it could be that perhaps the controls need to be adjusted.
We then turned to how to assess and then update or enhance your internal controls. Companies should also think about updating and reviewing their controls at least annually. In this manner, they can identify any violations of their internal controls. It also allows a deep dive into any specific areas of control failures. Another approach would be more robust through greater monitoring of your controls, for example, you could review them quarterly to allow you to spot any trends that are moving in the wrong direction. You can even start out by having your compliance function perform a self-review of its controls and  test exemplar transactions. This is not a full-blown audit but simply desktop testing to make sure controls were properly followed. Once again simply because there is a control override or excessive use of a compensating control does not mean something is illegal. It may mean that the control is not working as it was designed.
Revelo said it could be an instance of “too short of an approval time period and they need a little bit longer because depending on their industry or how business works. This also helps to both  identify frustrations from employees where there is a control, but every time I need to execute, it is impossible for me to do, or it’s impossible for me to comply with it a hundred percent. These are the reasons.” These quarterly reviews can then be collated into an annual report for review and assessment and the report can form the basis of an annual report to the Compliance Committee of the Board of Directors or even the full Board.
The key is to have a process for monitoring the controls, taking input, literally from each line of defense. If a control is overridden too often, you need to change it. If a control is ineffective, you can use that information to craft a new internal control. Internal controls are not static, but dynamic and, with proper oversight, you can set up internal controls and literally improve them with appropriate documentation. (Hint” Document, Document, and Document)
Revelo emphasized it is not simply identifying the issues “because that actually might look worse if you identify a lot of issues, but do not fix them. You are better off by remediating everything you are identifying.” From there you can conduct a root cause in that analysis as to why there was failure in a control or violation of a compliance procedure. Revelo concluded, “you need to really do that in depth and then remediate it.”
Interestingly, Revelo noted that a Board of Directors has a significant role to play with internal controls. It is because all compliance literally starts with the very top of an organization and this is true when it comes to internal controls. She said, “probably the most important aspect of establishing a really great foundation for great execution of internal controls is with the Board. It all starts with the Board; with the way they advise the company with their priorities of the year and objectives for the year.” The importance of a corporate compliance program should be communicated throughout their organization and highlight the company’s commitment to compliance.
When I talk about internal controls to lawyers, I still see about half of them roll their eyes up inside their heads. However, that is a huge improvement from 10 years ago when all the lawyers had the same reaction. By using some of the strategies Revelo recommends for continuous monitoring and continuous improvement of internal controls, you have not only robust internal controls but more importantly effective internal controls.

Categories
This Week in FCPA

Episode 284 – The Holmes Found Guilty Edition


Jay returns from a lengthy holiday assignment to join Tom to look at some of the week’s top compliance and ethics stories this week in the Holmes Found Guilty edition.
Stories

  1. Elizabeth Holmes was found guilty. The Verdict (WSJ), What does it mean for Silicon Valley? (NYT), What about the victims? (Bloomberg), Will Holmes serve any time? (Fortune)
  2. 2022 to be a critical year in ESG reportingMike Munro and Guido Van Druen in a CCI.
  3. Top D&O stories from 2021. Kevin LaCroix in D&O Diary
  4. Airbnb spanked over Cuba. Mengqi Sun in WSJ Risk & Compliance Journal.   
  5. MorganStanley fined $60MM over a data breach? Aaron Nicodemus in Compliance Week (sub req’d).
  6. China’s new ABC guidelines. Andrew Reeves and Rongxin Huang in the FCPA Blog.  
  7. The ‘G’ in ESG. Lawrence Heim in PracticalESG.
  8. Key areas for BOD oversight in 2022. Holly Gregory in Harvard Law School Forum on Corporate Governance
  9. Audrey Harris joins AMI.
  10. Broadcat sold. Broadcat Press Release.

Podcasts 

  1. Want some fun? Join Tom and One Stone Creative co-founder Megan Dougherty to explore the full MCU. In their most recent posting, check out Episode 3, Iron Man.  
  2. In January on The Compliance Life, I visited Valerie Charles, a partner at StoneTurn. Val has one of the most interesting journeys in compliance. In Part 1, she discusses her academic background and early professional career. 
  3. The Compliance Podcast Network welcomes Professor Karen Woody and her new podcast, Classroom Insider. Karen interviews some of her students to tell insider trading history in this unique pod. Check out Episode 1, where they discuss the history of insider trading. In  Episode 2, the disclosure or abstain rule. Episode 3 will take up narrowing the scope of the disclose or abstain rule. 
  4. Mikhail Reider-Gordon returns in Lies, Spies & Corporate Crimes: The Wirecard Saga, with Season 2, Episode 2 The Vagabond Rapping At Your Door.
  5. Check out 31 Days to a More Effective Compliance Program returns, which runs from January 1 to January 31. Available on the Compliance Podcast NetworkMegaphoneiTunes, and other top podcast platforms. 

Tom Fox is the Voice of Compliance and can be reached at tfox@tfoxlaw.com. Jay Rosen is Mr. Monitor and can be reached at jrosen@affiliatedmonitors.com.  

Categories
Innovation in Compliance

Not Your Father’s Monitor-Part 5: Vin DiCianni on Where Monitors are Going in 2022 and Beyond


In October, Deputy Attorney General (DAG) Lisa O. Monaco gave a Keynote Address at ABA’s 36th National Institute on White Collar Crime (Monaco Speech). Monaco’s remarks should be studied by every compliance professional as they portend a very large change in the way the DOJ will utilize monitors going forward. Over this podcast series, sponsored by AMI we will consider why DAG Monaco’s remarks herald a new era for monitorships.
Over this podcast series we have considered Monaco’s remarks from a variety of perspectives. Bethany Hengsbach considered this change in monitorships from the white-collar enforcement and defense perspective. Mikhail Reider Gordon looked at global aspects of the new DOJ monitor’s focus. Cristina Revelo discussed how E&C assessments help drive more compliant companies. Jesse Caplan brought his views on the intersection of the twin topics of antitrust and healthcare compliance. In this Episode 5, we conclude our series with AMI founder Vin DiCianni who looks at where monitors currently are and where monitorships are going in 2022 and beyond.
Highlights of this podcast include

  1. Why monitorships are an appropriate tool for both the DOJ and companies to utilize.
  2. Why now is the right time for the DOJ to refocus on the usefulness of monitors and monitorships.
  3. Why both monitor selection, and a monitor road map are critical to the success of a monitorship.

Resources
Vin DiCianni
Affiliated Monitors Inc.

Categories
Blog

Not Your Father’s Monitor – Vin DiCianni on Monitorships in 2022

In October, Deputy Attorney General (DAG) Lisa O. Monaco gave a Keynote Address at ABA’s 36th National Institute on White Collar Crime (Monaco Speech). Her remarks reframed a discussion about the uses of, reasons for and perceptions on independent monitors and monitorships. I asked Affiliated Monitors Inc. (AMI) founder Vin DiCianni for his thoughts around the remarks on monitors. He said, “For Affiliated Monitors this refreshed approach by DAG Monaco highlights the seriousness which businesses must place on the investment in their programs and in addressing what has for some been a negative experience with a monitor. For those who might be the subject of a monitorship, DAG Monaco recognized that the negativity that has sometimes surrounded monitorships as being punitive, should be seen in a different light bringing value, pointing a way forward and as a solution which has had great success in resolving matters.”
Monaco’s remarks should be studied by every compliance professional as they portend a very large change in the way the Department of Justice (DOJ) will utilize monitors going forward. Over this podcast series, sponsored by AMI, we have considered why DAG Monaco’s remarks herald a new era for monitorships from a variety of perspectives. Bethany Hengsbach discussed this change in monitorships from the white-collar enforcement and defense perspective. Mikhail Reider-Gordon looked at global aspects of the new DOJ monitor’s focus. Cristina Revelo discussed how ethics and compliance (E&C) assessments help drive more compliant companies. Jesse Caplan, Managing Director of Corporate Oversight, brought his views on the twin topics of antitrust and healthcare compliance. We conclude the series in Part 5, with AMI founder Vin DiCianni who takes a look down the road where monitorships are going in 2022 and beyond.
DiCianni heard a couple of different things in the Monaco Speech as they related to monitors. First, monitoring now has been around for quite some time. The DOJ used it historically with much greater frequency under prior administrations. DiCianni believes, “It works, so why not go back to a sanction that can help companies improve? And when you think about it, that’s what a monitorship is. It’s allowing the entity to stay in business, you know, to remain viable through, an independent monitor.” The Monaco Speech simply recognized the use of monitorships is a very good tool for DOJ to use.
Second, the Monaco Speech recognized companies are “perhaps becoming a little bit more lax about compliance, notwithstanding the DOJ guidance that has come out over the years.” DiCianni believes the Monaco Speech reinvigorated the point that companies need to go back and look at their compliance programs. Yet the reality is that it is sometimes hard for a company to make that type of dispassionate analysis. An independent monitor can assist in that process by looking at, for instance, your E&C program and controls around compliance.
Another key insight from the Monaco Speech was that going forward monitors would not be viewed as punitive, and they would not act as prosecutors. Here DiCianni noted, “I think the evolution of monitoring, and it’s an evolution and it’s continuing to evolve, has included consideration that the monitor is not simply an arm of the government.” He believes that the government saying to the monitor, “be a mentor, tell them how to fix them. You’ve seen it, compare it to other companies.” Once the settlement agreement is in place, “the whole notion is let’s fix this. I think that that’s crucial to this whole notion of how monitorships have evolved, because it’s no longer just, you know, a check the box. Are they doing this, doing that now it’s make recommendations on improvement and let’s see if the company make those changes.”
We considered the types of monitors and the types of skills a monitorship needs. It all begins with the settlement agreement, whether it is a Deferred Prosecution Agreement (DPA) or other form of resolution. A monitor must have the necessary skills to be able to look at things like business development, so they can understand how a company is going after business? Another growing area is in data analytics, as sometimes the monitorship is driven by data. This could require the monitor to have a data analytics team that can analyze test and look at data in various ways. Sometimes you do need forensic accounting. Sometimes you need an expert in healthcare when the monitorship is dealing with issues such as coding and billing. The AMI approach is to “shape each monitorship to make sure that we have a team that has the various perspectives, what would the government be looking for, but equally importantly how can this be helpful to the entity? Those are the most successful monitorships that we have engaged in. I think that having that broader perspective as you approach a monitorship is crucial.”
I concluded by asking DiCianni where he saw monitors going down the road. DiCianni believes that the use of monitors will increase, in many different areas such as different non-governmental groups and agencies, federal government agencies, state, and municipal agencies. For instance, AMI works with attorney inspector generals, the World Bank and other organizations. They will continue to be used as a tool, as more agencies that have never used them before are starting to recognize the benefits of them. He stated, “I think monitorships are going to continue to grow. The fear that I have is the bad monitoring, where the monitor that does not understand what they are doing and does not know what type of issues to look at or the kinds of things that they should be looking at. This will give everybody a bad name in terms of monitoring.” He concluded, “if you’re going to put a monitor in place to make sure that the selection of the monitor is appropriate. But I think it’s going to be a growing opportunity for both regulators and businesses.”
Affiliated Monitors
Vin DiCianni

Categories
Innovation in Compliance

Not Your Father’s Monitor-Part 4: Jesse Caplan on the Intersection of Antitrust and Healthcare Monitors


In October, Deputy Attorney General (DAG) Lisa O. Monaco gave a Keynote Address at ABA’s 36th National Institute on White Collar Crime (Monaco Speech). Monaco’s remarks should be studied by every compliance professional as they portend a very large change in the way the DOJ will utilize monitors going forward. Over this podcast series, sponsored by AMI we will consider why DAG Monaco’s remarks herald a new era for monitorships.
Over this podcast series we have considered Monaco’s remarks from a variety of perspectives. Bethany Hengsbach considered this change in monitorships from the white-collar enforcement and defense perspective. Mikhail Reider Gordon looked at global aspects of the new DOJ monitor’s focus. Cristina Revelo discussed how E&C assessments help drive more compliant companies. Vin DiCianni looks at where monitors and monitorships are going in 2022 and beyond. In this Episode 4, Jesse Caplan brought his views on the intersection of the twin topics of antitrust and healthcare compliance.
Highlights of this podcast include

  1. What is the intersection of healthcare and antitrust compliance?
  2. Why compliance and ethical culture have become so important from a regulatory perspective, a commercial perspective and a talent acquisition and maintenance perspective?
  3. How and why are States’ Attorney Generals using monitorships with greater frequency and focus.

Resources
Jesse Caplan
Affiliated Monitors Inc.

Categories
Blog

Not Your Father’s Monitor – Jesse Caplan on Antitrust and Healthcare Compliance

In October, Deputy Attorney General (DAG) Lisa O. Monaco gave a Keynote Address at ABA’s 36th National Institute on White Collar Crime (Monaco Speech). Her remarks reframed a discussion about the uses of, reasons for and perceptions on independent monitors and monitorships. I asked Affiliated Monitors Inc. (AMI) founder Vin DiCianni for his thoughts around the remarks on monitors. He said, “For Affiliated Monitors this refreshed approach by DAG Monaco highlights the seriousness which businesses must place on the investment in their programs and in addressing what has for some been a negative experience with a monitor. For those who might be the subject of a monitorship, DAG Monaco recognized that the negativity that has sometimes surrounded monitorships as being punitive, should be seen in a different light bringing value, pointing a way forward and as a solution which has had great success in resolving matters.”
Monaco’s remarks should be studied by every compliance professional as they portend a very large change in the way the Department of Justice (DOJ) will utilize monitors going forward. Over this podcast series, sponsored by AMI, we will consider why DAG Monaco’s remarks herald a new era for monitorships. We will consider Monaco’s remarks from a variety of perspectives. Bethany Hengsbach discussed this change in monitorships from the white-collar enforcement and defense perspective. Mikhail Reider-Gordon looked at global aspects of the new DOJ monitor’s focus. Cristina Revelo discussed how ethics and compliance (E&C) assessments help drive more compliant companies. We will conclude the series with Vin DiCianni who will look at where monitorships are going in 2022 and beyond. In Part 4, Jesse Caplan, Managing Director of Corporate Oversight, brings his views on the twin topics of antitrust and healthcare compliance.
Both antitrust and healthcare have significant needs for monitorships. Antitrust concerns raised by the government can be handled through a monitorship of specific issues so that a merger can often go through and satisfy the regulators. This is a prime example of the DOJ or Federal Trade Commission (FTC) extending their reach so that anti-competitive issues do not arise or are properly remediated. Healthcare regulators are most interested in the continued delivery of healthcare services, particularly on the state and local level. It is not in anyone’s interest to stop the delivery of healthcare services which puts a hospital, healthcare practice group or doctor out of business, absent grievous circumstances. By using a monitor, a state regulator can help assure an appropriate level of compliance from a healthcare provider.
There were three key components from the Monaco Speech around monitors. Number one, that monitors are not viewed by the DOJ as punitive and should not be viewed as such by the compliance community or wider corporate community. Here Caplan observed, it is not the job of a monitor “to be punitive, but rather to facilitate a successful compliance program and a successful settlement agreement, works with both the government and for the company.” Number two is a monitor can act as an early tripwire to prevent companies from sliding into a recidivous situation. Number three, monitors bring a level of skill and talent around compliance programs and corporate culture that can help companies create a best practices program so the monitor actually works with the companies under an enforcement action to help them create a program that will be sustainable far down the road. Caplan said, a monitor can bring an “appreciation for what government enforcers are looking for, what the goals of government regulators are, as well as some of the challenges and goals of companies, who want to be successful and to do so in a compliant and fair manner.”
We then turned to the evolution of thinking of state regulators around monitors. Caplan noted, “some of these state Attorney General’s (AG) offices have realized for a long-time monitors can really be a resource extend for government agencies and particularly enforcement agencies.” He pointed to the example of the “Massachusetts Attorney General’s office, particularly with their Medicaid fraud control.” He went on to say, “more and more state AGs are using monitors when they enter in settlement agreement with conditions.” Using an independent allows an extension of their resources, to “verify that the company is compliant with those settlement conditions.”
Perhaps most powerfully, independent monitors can be seen as “an honest broker, bridging between the company and the regulator. Moreover, monitors can actually facilitate, a successful transition and then termination of a monitorship.” Caplan said, “we can do that because we can have candid conversations with both the company and then separately with the government, so that we can better understand where there might be disconnect between the two, and then we can help connect compliance up so that there’s not misunderstandings. There may be different expectations that end up sometimes torpedoing a settlement agreement and by having those conversations, by serving as that bridge, we can help prevent problems address so that ultimately the monitorship is successful.”
Affiliated Monitors
Jesse Caplan

Categories
Innovation in Compliance

Not Your Father’s Monitor-Part 3: Cristina Revelo on E&C Assessment and Internal Controls

In October, Deputy Attorney General (DAG) Lisa O. Monaco gave a Keynote Address at ABA’s 36th National Institute on White Collar Crime (Monaco Speech). Monaco’s remarks should be studied by every compliance professional as they portend a very large change in the way the DOJ will utilize monitors going forward.

Over this podcast series, sponsored by AMI we will consider why DAG Monaco’s remarks herald a new era for monitorships. We will consider Monaco’s remarks from a variety of perspectives. Bethany Hengsbach will consider this change in monitorships from the white-collar enforcement and defense perspective. Mikhail Reider Gordon will look at global aspects of the new DOJ monitor’s focus. Cristina Revelo will discuss how E&C assessments help drive More compliant companies. Jesse Caplan brings his views on the twin topics of antitrust and healthcare compliance. We will conclude our series with AMI founder Vin DiCianni who will look at where monitors monitorships are going in 2022 and beyond. In this Episode 3, Cristina Revelo brings her internal control expertise to analyze for E&C assessments, particularly with monitors and monitorships.

Highlights of this podcast include:

  1. Monitoring skills will be in demand as we see the rise of proactive monitorships / assessments
  2. Compliance and ethical culture are important considerations to review.
  3. E&C Assessments help companies get ahead of what is coming, mitigate risk, ensure compliance and address any gaps that might exist before a regulator comes knocking on their door.

Resources

Cristina Revelo

Affiliated Monitors Inc.

Categories
Blog

Not Your Father’s Monitor – Cristina Revelo, Using Assessments to Drive Compliance

In October, Deputy Attorney General (DAG) Lisa O. Monaco gave a Keynote Address at ABA’s 36th National Institute on White Collar Crime (Monaco Speech). Her remarks reframed a discussion about the uses of, reasons for and perceptions on independent monitors and monitorships. I asked Affiliated Monitors Inc. (AMI) founder Vin DiCianni for his thoughts around the remarks on monitors. He said, “For Affiliated Monitors this refreshed approach by DAG Monaco highlights the seriousness which businesses must place on the investment in their programs and in addressing what has for some been a negative experience with a monitor. For those who might be the subject of a monitorship, DAG Monaco recognized that the negativity that has sometimes surrounded monitorships as being punitive, should be seen in a different light bringing value, pointing a way forward and as a solution which has had great success in resolving matters.”
Monaco’s remarks should be studied by every compliance professional as they portend a very large change in the way the Department of Justice (DOJ) will utilize monitors going forward. Over this podcast series, sponsored by AMI, we will consider why DAG Monaco’s remarks herald a new era for monitorships. We will consider Monaco’s remarks from a variety of perspectives. Bethany Hengsbach will consider this change in monitorships from the white-collar enforcement and defense perspective. Mikhail Reider-Gordon will look at global aspects of the new DOJ monitor’s focus. Jesse Caplan brings his views on the twin topics of antitrust and healthcare compliance. We will conclude the series with Vin DiCianni who will look at where monitorships are going in 2022 and beyond. In Part 3, Cristina Revelo, Deputy Director, Corporate Monitoring and Compliance Services at AMI, discusses how ethics and compliance (E&C) assessments help drive more compliant companies.
Revelo has a different professional background than many compliance professionals, having earned both her Master of Science and Bachelor of Science in Accountancy. We began by exploring why a proactive monitorship can be such a valuable tool in a best practices compliance program. With this an independent monitor can help companies review their ethics and compliance programs. AMI’s vast experience in monitorships under different regulators and requirements gives them insights into what the regulators are looking for in this type of project. With this knowledge from prior monitorships AMI can facilitate a very practical assessment. It can highlight to a company what are some gaps within, for example, their anti-corruption program, ethics program, internal controls, or for their entire E&C program.
This type of approach allows AMI to provide recommendations based on what we think the regulars might be looking for. Revelo noted, “These are great because it helps companies get ahead of potential regulators coming, knocking on their door.” It also allows a company to demonstrate they have been proactively working on their E&C program and that they are seeking to close those gaps and enhance their programs.
We then turned to Revelo’s academic and professional background which gives a different perspective from a legally trained compliance professional. As more individuals with different backgrounds, especially with the auditing and forensic background, Revelo feels it really does help in these proactive assessments because she’s looking to “follow the gaps, follow the issues,  use the five whys, digging a little bit deeper as opposed to potentially just checking that there is a law and that we have complied with the law.” A forensic type will inevitably dig a little bit deeper to understand a company’s internal controls, how they implement their controls, whether those internal controls are manual or automated, where there could be a failure, essentially to walk through the entire process.
Revelo emphasized, “conducting a walkthrough of your entire internal controls process, sitting with different individuals, having interviews, really understanding, whoever is implementing that process. This allows you to really pick apart and identify the different failures that could come up throughout the different controls in the process.” It is really looking at things through a different lens. From there you can move to enhance or remediate as needed. These are the types of skills and analysis an accountant or forensic auditor could bring to a proactive E&C assessment.
Turning to a more commercial reason for proactive assessments, Revelo concluded with an observation about culture. In the ever-increasing race for talent acquisition and talent retention, culture has become one of the most critical factors for millennials as they make up most of the workforce now and will be above 50% of the workforce in a few years. Millennials want to have pride in a place they work, they want to be happy, and money is not the driving factors in their equation. Revelo noted, “they want to work for companies that are ethical, that are socially responsible, that are behind the right things that they care about.” As these areas fall directly within the area of E&C, Revelo said, “I think it’s really important for companies in order to attract the right talent and retain that talent because sometimes also you see millennials moving jobs very often. Those employees a company might want to retain are going to care about what you are behind, how ethical you are, how you treat your employees, and all of this has to do with a company culture and the ethical culture.”
Affiliated Monitors
Cristina Revelo