​​​​​​​
You are here: Skip breadcrumbAttorney-General's Department >> Integrity >> Counter fraud >> Fraud countermeasures >> Managerial, independent or expert oversight

 Managerial, independent or expert oversight

Prevention shield icon Previous page Next page

Summary

A manager, independent person or expert oversees actions and decisions.

Examples

Some examples of this type of countermeasure include:

  • A manager oversees staff activities, e.g. work output, timesheets and travel.
  • A probity advisor reviews and signs–off procurement milestones.
  • A contract manager oversees contract requirements, e.g. reporting on software development milestones.
  • A security advisor oversees physical security arrangements.

Purpose of this countermeasure

Little or no managerial, independent or expert oversight over staff actions and decisions can:

  • lead to dysfunctional and obscure processes
  • cloud the visibility of fraud and corruption risks
  • inhibit the action needed to prevent, detect and respond to fraud and corruption.

Public officials or contractors can take advantage of this environment and abuse their position of trust to act corruptly, commit fraud and avoid exposure. They can also be coerced to commit fraud for the benefit of another person or entity, e.g. coerced to provide information or pay a claim.
Abuse of public office, acting dishonestly or influencing a Commonwealth public official to commit fraud are offences under the Criminal Code Act 1995.
Ensuring multiple people are involved in processes—such as independent experts, increases transparency and reduces the opportunity for fraud.

Dependencies

This type of control is supported by:

How do I know if my countermeasures are effective?

You can apply the following methods to measure the effectiveness of these types of countermeasures:

  • Confirm the existence of processes to support transparent actions and decision-making.
  • Confirm that managerial, independent or expert oversight exists for critical actions or decisions.
  • Confirm clear reporting lines and segregation of duties exist.
  • Review a sample of decisions to confirm independent or expert advice was obtained.
  • Review workflows to ensure the involvement/oversight of a manager, independent person or expert.
  • Review the volume of actions and decisions to determine if sufficient oversight is possible.
  • Assess the level of independence of independent persons, or the expertise of experts.
  • Review reporting and reconciliation processes.
  • Undertake a staff census and include questions relevant to supervisor oversight. Commonwealth entities can review APSC Census results.

Back to top

Previous page Next page​​

​​​​Commonwealth Fraud Prevention Centre logo​​​​​