Page 426 - ACFE Fraud Reports 2009_2020

Impact of Hotlines
The presence of a reporting hotline had a substantial impact on the initial fraud detection method in the cases
we analyzed. Tips were the most common detection method for organizations with and without hotlines, but the
benefit was much more pronounced in organizations with them (see Figure 14).
For organizations without hotlines, the reduced detection through tips resulted in other forms of detection being
more prominent. As seen in Figure 12, several detection methods tend to be associated with higher median losses
and increased median duration. Some of these less-effective means of detection — by accident, notification by law
enforcement and external audit — were more than twice as common in organizations without hotlines.

Figure 14: Impact of Hotlines

Tip 33.3% 51.0%
Internal Audit 15.2%
13.2%
Management Review 14.6% 17.7%
5.1%
Account Reconciliation 4.2% 7.9%
DETECTION METHOD Surveillance/Monitoring 1.7% 2.9% 6.4% 9.5%
By Accident

2.0%
Document Examination
External Audit
1.3%
Notified by Law Enforcement 1.3% 2.7% 5.2% Organizations
1.3%
IT Controls 0.9% With Hotlines
Confession 0.6% Organizations
0.9%
Other 0.3% Without
0.7%
Hotlines
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60%
PERCENT OF CASES

22 REPORT TO THE NATIONS ON OCCUPATIONAL FRAUD AND ABUSE