Determining Appropriate System Settings

C

The evaluation of system settings in an automated surveillance system is a crucial task in ensuring that the system is effective in detecting and reporting potential money laundering activities. The scenario presented in this question highlights the issue of a high volume of alerts generated by the system, which may indicate that the current settings need to be reviewed to improve the system's efficiency and effectiveness.

To address this issue, the organization needs to evaluate the system settings to ensure that they are appropriate and aligned with the latest risk assessment. The following actions should be considered in the evaluation of system settings:

A. Compare settings to organizations within its peer group: Comparing the system settings to those of peer organizations can provide insight into whether the settings are appropriate and effective. This can be achieved by benchmarking the organization's performance against that of its peers and identifying any gaps that may exist. This approach can help the organization to identify best practices and improve its performance.

B. Flag filters with no history of generating an alert for removal: This action involves reviewing the filters used in the system to identify those that have not generated any alerts over a certain period. These filters may not be effective in detecting potential money laundering activities, and they may be removed from the system. By removing these filters, the organization can reduce the volume of alerts generated and focus on the filters that are more effective.

C. Review parameter settings based on the latest risk assessment: This action involves reviewing the system's parameter settings to ensure that they are aligned with the latest risk assessment. The risk assessment should identify the most significant money laundering risks faced by the organization, and the system parameters should be set accordingly to detect and report potential suspicious activities. By aligning the system settings with the risk assessment, the organization can improve the system's effectiveness in detecting and reporting potential money laundering activities.

D. Calibrate parameters based on staffing capabilities to clear alerts: This action involves reviewing the staffing capabilities of the organization and calibrating the system parameters accordingly. If the organization has a limited number of compliance staff, the system parameters should be adjusted to reduce the volume of alerts generated to a level that can be effectively managed by the staff. This can help ensure that the organization is able to clear the alerts within a reasonable timeframe.

In conclusion, when evaluating the system settings of an automated surveillance system that generates a large volume of anti-money laundering alerts, the organization should consider comparing the settings to peer organizations, flagging filters with no history of generating an alert for removal, reviewing parameter settings based on the latest risk assessment, and calibrating parameters based on staffing capabilities to clear alerts. By taking these actions, the organization can improve the effectiveness and efficiency of the system in detecting and reporting potential money laundering activities.