Companies that conduct shoddy investigations may find themselves paying a high price for negligence

AVOID PENALTIES & FINES

Demonstrate Compliance

Enforcement actions against US companies for bribery and corruption are rising, with the US in the top spot with 74.1 per cent of the enforcement activity, according to the latest TRACE Report.

The US Supreme Court has established that employers may escape liability for the improprieties of their employees by responding promptly to complaints of misconduct with an investigation followed by swift corrective action, according to the American Bar Association. On the other hand, penalties and fines imposed on companies that don’t conduct thorough and well documented investigations can be crippling.

Request an i-Sight Demo

Complete the form to request a free i-Sight Demo

Request a Demo
Questions
1-800-465-6089 | info@i-sight.com
i-Sight Fact

The US Sentencing Guidelines provide for reduced fines for cooperation in an investigation

FREE Investigation Report Template

Prepare thorough, consistent investigation reports with our free report template.

Download Template

Avoid Penalties & Fines


In 2014 Hewlett-Packard agreed to pay $108 million to settle SEC charges for FCPA violations and a parallel criminal case. Alcoa’s FCPA violations cost it $384 million. In 2013, the EEOC filed 139 merits lawsuits and resolved 209 merits lawsuits for a total monetary recovery of $39 million. During that year the CFPB collected $49.5 million in civil penalties. And that’s just the tip of the iceberg when it comes to regulatory enforcement actions that could have been avoided.

i-Sight’s investigative case management solution helps companies to conduct timely and well documented investigations, resulting in fewer penalties and fines assessed by regulatory agencies for compliance breakdowns. Well documented case files go a long way to prove that a company has a proactive compliance program, backed by well documented and timely investigations into complaints of corruption and misconduct.

Example


The ABC Company is under investigation by the Department of Justice for alleged FCPA violations. One of the company’s business development managers has been paying bribes to a government official in Brazil to secure licenses and locations for subsidiaries of ABC in that country. The good news is that the ABC company had already caught wind of the situation months earlier and immediately launched an investigation into the allegations, using i-Sight. The DOJ investigation is the result of self-disclosure following a comprehensive internal investigation by the company.

Had the ABC Company brushed the allegations under the rug, or conducted a cursory investigation into the situation without adequate follow-up and reporting, it could be facing millions of dollars in fines.

But the DOJ considers a company’s behavior in the face of corruption allegations, and credits companies that conduct thorough, documented investigations and self-disclose their findings, sometimes with deferred prosecution agreements (DPA) and sometimes with non-prosecution agreements (NPA). In some cases, the company is assessed a reduced fine and ordered to engage a corporate monitor.

The ABC Company’s ability to demonstrate that it conducted an immediate and thorough investigation and back it up with a full investigation report from i-Sight, showing every activity in the investigation and the date and time it occurred, saves the company millions of dollars in fines.


“The reporting tools within i-Sight will make it easier for staff to analyze data and detect patterns of fraud that might otherwise have gone unnoticed.”

Workers Compensation Commission

Solutions by Industry

Learn about solutions we’ve deployed in your industry.

Solutions by Role

Learn how i-Sight can make your job easier.