Compliance Investigation and Enforcement Training Course

Participants can build an investigation plan that addresses scope, legal constraints, resources, and governance.

• Investigation plans linking allegations to elements, evidence sources, and witnesses
• Legal privilege boundaries and counsel-led workstreams under applicable law
• Data minimisation, lawful basis, and retention requirements for case records
• Jurisdiction mapping for cross-border evidence, employment law, and notifications
• RACI matrix assigning case ownership, approvals, consultation, and communications
• Milestone plans with dependencies, resource estimates, and escalation triggers
• Chain-of-custody protocol established before collecting physical or digital evidence

Participants can preserve, collect, organise, and evaluate documentary and digital evidence.

• Evidence relevance, reliability, authenticity, and admissibility tested against allegations
• Document preservation notices specifying custodians, systems, dates, and prohibited actions
• Chain-of-custody logs recording collection, transfer, storage, and access events
• Forensic imaging principles for devices, email archives, and cloud repositories
• Metadata review identifying authorship, creation dates, edits, and deletion indicators
• Evidence registers linking each item to source, issue, and status
• Secure case files separating factual records, legal advice, and work product

Participants can identify and prioritise financial evidence using structured transaction-testing methods.

• Transaction population scoping using entities, accounts, periods, and payment channels
• Benford's Law screening for unusual first-digit payment distributions
• Duplicate-payment tests matching supplier, amount, invoice, date, and bank details
• Related-party analysis using vendor master data, directors, and beneficial ownership
• Journal-entry testing focused on late postings, round amounts, and manual overrides
• Link analysis mapping people, companies, accounts, communications, and transactions
• Exception prioritisation combining financial value, control bypasses, and corroboration

Participants can plan and conduct structured interviews while protecting fairness and evidence quality.

• PEACE model stages: plan, engage, account, closure, and evaluation
• Interview sequence determined by evidence risk, role, and contamination concerns
• Rapport techniques maintaining professionalism without promises, threats, or leading questions
• Funnel questioning moving from free recall to focused challenge
• Documents introduced progressively to test accounts and preserve disclosure control
• Contemporaneous notes, recordings, and interview memoranda meeting policy requirements
• Credibility assessment separating consistency, plausibility, corroboration, and demeanour

Participants can evaluate evidence, reach reasoned findings, and identify underlying control failures.

• Allegation matrices linking elements, evidence, witnesses, gaps, and conclusions
• Standard of proof selected under policy, employment process, or criminal referral
• Alternative hypotheses tested against contradictory evidence before reaching factual findings
• Loss calculations distinguishing actual loss, avoided loss, and recovery prospects
• Root-cause analysis using five whys, control mapping, and management interviews
• Findings classifications separating substantiated, unsubstantiated, inconclusive, and out-of-scope allegations
• Quality assurance review checking evidence sufficiency, fairness, and logical reasoning

Participants can prepare clear, evidence-based reports and brief decision-makers on investigation outcomes.

• Investigation reports separating mandate, methodology, facts, analysis, and recommendations
• Fact statements cited to evidence identifiers, interview records, and data extracts
• Clear findings language calibrated to the applicable standard of proof
• Executive summaries presenting exposure, decision points, and immediate actions
• Privilege review and confidentiality markings before report circulation
• Oral briefing techniques for boards, audit committees, and senior management
• Report annexes organising chronologies, evidence indexes, and financial analyses

Participants can support proportionate enforcement decisions and manage escalation to external authorities.

• Disciplinary options assessed against policy, precedent, proportionality, and local law
• Decision papers distinguishing factual findings from management's employment decisions
• Regulatory notification triggers assessed under licences, reporting rules, and agreements
• Self-reporting decisions balancing cooperation, legal duties, remediation, and timing
• Referral packages prepared for law enforcement, regulators, or external counsel
• Sanctions-screening and anti-bribery issues escalated through specialist channels
• Enforcement communications controlled to protect due process and confidentiality

Participants can translate investigation findings into monitored corrective actions and closure decisions.

• Control failures mapped to preventive, detective, and corrective control objectives
• Corrective action plans assigning owners, deadlines, evidence, and acceptance criteria
• COSO principles used to diagnose control environment and monitoring weaknesses
• ISO 37301 compliance management requirements applied to remediation governance
• Training, policy, system, and third-party actions prioritised by residual risk
• Validation testing confirms actions operate as designed before case closure
• Retaliation monitoring and reporter follow-up documented after investigation outcomes

Participants can improve case oversight through metrics, lessons learned, and practical process changes.

• Case governance dashboards showing volume, ageing, severity, and outcome trends
• Key performance indicators measuring timeliness, substantiation, remediation, and recurrence
• Lessons-learned reviews converting case patterns into fraud risk indicators
• Board reporting boundaries separating operational detail from oversight information
• Records retention schedules aligned with legal holds and policy obligations
• Personal application plan identifies priority process changes and stakeholder conversations
• Peer review criteria improve consistency across investigator files and reports