One of the things that I learned from the television series M*A*S*H was the need for triage. In the hospital setting, triage is the process of determining the priority of patients’ treatments based on the severity of their condition. In the 2012 FCPA Guidance, there is a short but succinct statement, “once an allegation is made, companies should have in place an efficient, reliable, and properly funded process for investigating the allegation and documenting the company’s response, including any disciplinary or remediation measures taken.” This is considered in more expansive language in the 2020 Update to the Evaluation of Corporate Compliance Programs. Under Part 1, Section D. Confidential Reporting Structure and Investigation Process, it stated in part, Properly Scoped Investigation by Qualified Personnel – How does the company determine which complaints or red flags merit further investigation?
Appropriate triage of allegations has several different impacts for any matter which comes to the attention of compliance. Obviously, it will help you to initially determine the seriousness of the matter. From there you can allocate an appropriate level of resources. It will also aid in your discussion with the DOJ if you must go that route. Finally, in the situation where facts come in, it provides the required documented evidence that a process was followed that you can show the government that a claim was properly scoped, as required under the Evaluation. But the key is to be prepared, not only in terms of having your investigation and notification protocols in place before an allegation comes in but also doing the proper triage so that you have an initial understanding of what you may be facing.
Three key takeaways:
- Compliance can learn from M*A*S*H about the need for triage.
- Initial triage allows you to separate the wheat of serious allegations from the chaff of more inconsequential allegations.
- A robust triage process allows for greater credibility with government regulators.
