Internal Controls & Risk Assessments
Internal controls play a critical role in public and private companies because they establish safeguards to an organization’s assets and minimize the opportunities to commit fraud and allow errors to go undetected. The ability to identify, assess, and test the effectiveness of critical internal controls is an integral part of assessing the overall compliance program. Internal controls are foundational to reliable financial reporting, and deficient controls can lay the groundwork or create the opportunity for future misstatement or misconduct.
Regulatory Investigations
When regulators identify control deficiencies or initiate an inquiry, organizations need a response that is thorough, well-documented, and credible. Gemean's forensic consultants provide the controls assessment and investigative support that helps organizations respond effectively and demonstrate a genuine commitment to remediation.
Independent Monitorships
Gemean serves as an independent monitor where a court or regulator requires neutral third-party oversight. We conduct the required reviews, assess whether compliance commitments are being met, and report findings with the objectivity that makes the process credible to all parties involved.
Process Improvement and Remediation
Identifying a control gap is only part of the work. Gemean's forensic accounting consultants work alongside organizations to design and implement the process improvements and corrective controls that address root causes, not just surface findings. The goal is a compliance program that functions as intended in practice.
Information Governance
Poorly governed information creates risk across legal, regulatory, and operational dimensions. We assess an organization's information governance framework, identify weaknesses, and provide recommendations that bring structure, accountability, and defensibility to how information is managed and retained.
Periodic Testing of Controls Through Transaction Testing
Controls that are never tested are controls that cannot be relied upon. Our forensic accounting audit and investigation team conducts detailed transaction testing to evaluate whether key controls are operating as designed, surfacing deficiencies before they become material issues or regulatory findings.
Design of Automated Red Flag Routines
Moving from periodic manual testing to real-time automated monitoring is one of the most impactful improvements an organization can make. Gemean designs automated red flag routines custom-built to your processes, data environment, and risk profile, so anomalies are identified as they occur rather than months later during an audit.
TESTIMONIAL
Gemean understood the legal context as well as the forensic one. They knew what the regulators would focus on, what outside counsel needed, and how to structure the findings to serve both. That combination is not easy to find.
Why Clients Choose Us
Evidence-Based Assessments
Practical Remediation
Regulatory Credibility
Continuous Monitoring Design
Don't wait for a finding to understand
where your controls stand
What are internal controls and why do they matter?
Internal controls are the policies, procedures, and mechanisms an organization uses to safeguard assets, ensure the accuracy of financial reporting, and promote compliance with laws and regulations. When controls are well-designed and consistently applied, they make fraud and misconduct significantly harder to commit and easier to detect. When they are absent or ineffective, they create the conditions for material misstatement and regulatory exposure.
What is the difference between a design deficiency and an operating deficiency?
A design deficiency means the control was never structured to prevent or detect a particular risk, regardless of how well it is followed. An operating deficiency means the control is properly designed but is not being executed as intended. The distinction matters because each requires a different response. Gemean’s forensic accounting consultants assess both and provide recommendations tailored to the nature of the deficiency.
How does Gemean conduct a controls assessment?
We begin by identifying the highest-risk processes, transactions, and business units relevant to the organization’s risk profile. From there, our forensic consultants perform walkthroughs, design evaluations, and detailed transaction testing across the in-scope control environment. Findings are ranked by severity and practical impact, with clear remediation recommendations tied to each.
What is an independent monitorship and when is one required?
An independent monitor is appointed by a court or regulator, typically as part of a settlement or consent decree, to provide neutral oversight of an organization’s compliance with required changes. Gemean takes on monitor roles across a range of enforcement contexts, conducting required reviews, verifying implementation of corrective measures, and reporting findings to the relevant authority.
What is information governance and why is it relevant to internal controls?
Information governance refers to the framework an organization uses to manage, retain, and dispose of information in a way that is consistent with legal, regulatory, and operational requirements. Weak information governance creates risk in litigation, regulatory inquiries, and audits. As part of a controls assessment, Gemean evaluates whether an organization’s information governance practices are adequate and defensible.
What are automated red flag routines and how do they work?
Automated red flag routines are monitoring rules built into an organization’s financial or operational systems that trigger alerts when transactions or activities fall outside defined parameters. Rather than relying on periodic manual review, they provide continuous visibility into anomalies as they occur. Gemean designs these routines based on an organization’s specific processes, data environment, and risk profile, ensuring they are both sensitive enough to catch real issues and specific enough to avoid alert fatigue.
How does a proactive controls assessment differ from one conducted in response to a regulatory finding?
A proactive assessment is conducted on the organization’s own timeline and terms, with the goal of identifying and addressing gaps before they attract regulatory attention. A reactive assessment typically occurs under greater time pressure and scrutiny, with findings subject to regulatory review. Both require the same rigor, but a proactive approach gives the organization significantly more control over how issues are identified, prioritized, and resolved.