PSPFRAU504B - Conduct fraud risk assessmentsPSPFRAU504BConduct fraud risk assessments

Release

TP Version

Comments

3

PSP12V1

Unit descriptor edited.

2

PSP04V4.2

Layout adjusted. No changes to content.

1

PSP04V4.1

Primary release.

Elements are the essential outcomes of the unit of competency.

Together, performance criteria specify the requirements for competent performance. Text in bold italics is explained in the Range Statement following.

The Evidence Guide specifies the evidence required to demonstrate achievement in the unit of competency as a whole. It must be read in conjunction with the Unit descriptor, Performance Criteria, the Range Statement and the Assessment Guidelines for the Public Sector Training Package.

Units to be assessed together

Pre-requisite units that must be achieved prior to this unit:Nil

Co-requisite units that must be assessed with this unit:Nil

Co-assessed units that may be assessed with this unit to increase the efficiency and realism of the assessment process include, but are not limited to:

PSPETHC501B Promote the values and ethos of public service

PSPFRAU502B Anticipate and detect possible fraud activity

PSPFRAU505B Develop fraud control plans

PSPGOV502B Develop client services

PSPGOV504B Undertake research and analysis

PSPGOV517A Coordinate risk management

PSPLEGN501B Promote compliance with legislation in the public sector

Overview of evidence requirements

In addition to integrated demonstration of the elements and their related performance criteria, look for evidence that confirms:

the knowledge requirements of this unit

the skill requirements of this unit

application of the Employability Skills as they relate to this unit (see Employability Summaries in Qualifications Framework)

fraud and corruption risk assessment conducted in a range of (3 or more) contexts (or occasions, over time)

Resources required to carry out assessment

These resources include:

legislation, policy and procedures relating to fraud and corruption control

fraud and corruption risk assessment methodology and review processes

Australian and New Zealand standards - AS/NZS 4360:1999 or as revised

fraud and corruption control guidelines and standards

public sector values and codes of conduct

case studies and workplace scenarios to capture the range of fraud and corruption risk assessment situations likely to be encountered

Where and how to assess evidence

Valid assessment of this unit requires:

a workplace environment or one that closely resembles normal work practice and replicates the range of conditions likely to be encountered when conducting fraud and corruption risk assessment, including coping with difficulties, irregularities and breakdowns in routine

fraud and corruption risk assessment conducted in a range of (3 or more) contexts (or occasions, over time)

Assessment methods should reflect workplace demands, such as literacy, and the needs of particular groups, such as:

people with disabilities

people from culturally and linguistically diverse backgrounds

Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people

women

young people

older people

people in rural and remote locations

Assessment methods suitable for valid and reliable assessment of this competency may include, but are not limited to, a combination of 2 or more of:

case studies

portfolios

projects

questioning

scenarios

simulation or role plays

authenticated evidence from the workplace and/or training courses

For consistency of assessment

Evidence must be gathered over time in a range of contexts to ensure the person can achieve the unit outcome and apply the competency in different situations or environments

The Range Statement provides information about the context in which the unit of competency is carried out. The variables cater for differences between States and Territories and the Commonwealth, and between organisations and workplaces. They allow for different work requirements, work practices and knowledge. The Range Statement also provides a focus for assessment. It relates to the unit as a whole. Text in bold italics in the Performance Criteria is explained here.

Risk assessment may include:

fraud and corruption risks identified in isolation or as part of a broader risk management strategy

a risk assessment methodology developed in-house, its development outsourced or adopted from a standards-setting organisation's guidelines (such as Australian and New Zealand standards - AS/NZS 4360:1999 or as revised)

a risk assessment undertaken in-house or outsourced

a risk assessment conducted across the agency as a whole, and may include recent changes to the structure or nature of service delivered by the agency

a fraud and corruption risk assessment undertaken in a number of ways including a single process covering all functions and areas of an agency, using a sample of areas, or in a rolling program

Change may include:

the introduction of outsourcing

policy changes

community concerns

statutory changes affecting the area of operation

introduction of quality management systems

change in structure or nature of service delivery

other changes that impact on internal controls

Risk management standardsrefers to:

Australian and New Zealand standards - AS/NZS 4360:1999 or as revised

Advice may relate to:

need to alert key people when problems arise

fraud and corruption risk controls and compliance measures

areas in which controls may be excessive

Stakeholders may include:

agency staff and senior management

contractors and consultants

standards-setting organisations

Effectiveness of fraud and corruption control strategy may be affected by:

management support

building positive relationships with other staff