Skip to main content

Train and support staff to identify and report fraud and corruption

Type of countermeasure

This is a detection countermeasure. Detection countermeasures can help to identify when fraud has occurred. They can help disrupt additional fraud and reduce the consequences.


Train and support staff to identify red flags to detect fraud, know what to do if they suspect fraud and know how to report it. Fraudsters can take advantage if staff and contractors are not aware of what constitutes fraud and corruption.

Why this countermeasure matters

A lack of trained staff to identify and report fraud and corruption may lead to:

  • a dysfunctional workplace culture
  • fraud or corrupt activity going unnoticed or unchallenged
  • fraudsters feeling more confident their actions will not be identified and reported
  • less action and accountability to prevent, detect and respond to fraud and corruption
  • unknown and unaddressed systemic fraud or corruption.

How to put this countermeasure in place

Some ways to implement this countermeasure include training and supporting staff by:

  • requiring them to complete fraud awareness training as part of their induction
  • requiring them to complete fraud awareness training every 12 months
  • running fraud awareness campaigns, clinics and workshops
  • sending strong and consistent messages from leadership about ethics and fraud awareness to staff
  • making clear and accessible fraud awareness content available on the staff intranet
  • educating providers or grant recipients on what fraud is
  • implementing and promoting integrity networks and processes to raise staff awareness about how to report potential fraud.

How to measure this countermeasure's effectiveness

Measure the effectiveness of this type of countermeasure using the following methods:

  • Review the training materials to determine if messages are clear and relevant to staff.
  • Review training to make sure it aligns to national guidelines and frameworks.
  • Determine how often training or reinforcement messages should happen.
  • Conduct interviews, workshops or surveys with staff to measure their understanding of fraud control policies.
  • Analyse training data, including the percentage of staff who have undertaken the training and measure results against Key Performance Indicators.
  • Identify case studies where relevant staff have reported fraud or proactively fixed control vulnerabilities.
  • Check that staff can easily access training materials and other support materials.
  • Undertake a staff census and particularly ask questions relevant to fraud risk and corruption.
  • Review APSC Census Results if you are Commonwealth entity.

Related countermeasures

This type of countermeasure is supported by:

A positive workplace culture can encourage ethical and supportive behaviours while discouraging fraudulent or corrupt activities. Staff will be less able to rationalise fraudulent or corrupt activities where a positive workplace culture exists. A culture built on honesty, transparency and integrity is a key organisational strength that can serve to reduce the risk of fraud. If weak countermeasures are the fuel, a bad culture can be the spark that ignites fraud and corruption.

Establish governance, accountability and oversight of processes by using delegations and requiring committees and project boards to oversee critical decisions and risk. Good governance, accountability and oversight increases transparency and reduces the opportunity for fraud.

Collaborate with strategic partners such as other government entities, committees, working groups and taskforces. This allows you to share capability, information and intelligence and to prevent and disrupt fraud.

Provide help and support to customers, staff and third parties to help them follow correct processes and encourage them to comply with rules and processes and meet expectations.

Internal or external audits or reviews evaluate the process, purpose and outcome of activities. Clients, public officials or contractors can take advantage of weaknesses in government programs and systems to commit fraud, act corruptly, and avoid exposure.

Coordinate disruption activities across multiple programs or entities to strengthen processes and identify serious and organised criminals targeting multiple programs. It can also include referrals to law enforcement agencies for those groups that reach the threshold for complex criminal investigations.

Related Fraudster Personas

Was this page helpful?