8.13: Difference between revisions
No edit summary |
|||
| (3 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown) | |||
| Line 7: | Line 7: | ||
'''>>>Navigational Buttons<<<''' | '''>>>Navigational Buttons<<<''' | ||
* '''[[Index of Attributes]]''' | * '''[[Index of Attributes]]''' | ||
* '''Previous Attribute - | * '''Previous Attribute - [[8.12]]''' | ||
* '''Next Attribute - | * '''Next Attribute - [[8.14]]''' | ||
__FORCETOC__ | __FORCETOC__ | ||
=== ' | === Jamie's Story === | ||
No examples are available to illustrate governance gaps for this attribute. | |||
=== Election Anomalies === | |||
The Green Book's Principle 8 addresses Assess Fraud, Improper Payment, and Information Security Risk. Obviously, improper payments is not a concern during the Assessment of Election Anomalies. However, improper payments by MC county may exist, but would require a separate assessment. | |||
The Green Book's emphasis on fraud and information security as separate risk assessment activity is intentional. MC may be able to defer to the Arizona Secretary of State's Election Procedure Manual as general steps taken to ensure the integrity of election results. Fraud occurs when loopholes are identified and exploited by the fraudsters. The implementers of election services (i.e., Arizona Counties) are better positioned to detect fraud and assess the risk of fraud because they are handling the data, not the state. Hence, governance gaps may be identified from patterns of poor assessment and response to risk with respect to election fraud and information security. | |||
Latest revision as of 09:12, 25 August 2026
Risk Assessment
Principle 8 - Assess Fraud, Improper Payment, and Information Security Risk
Attribute 8.13 - Management considers existing improper payment estimates, if available, when determining the significance of risks and the effectiveness of the internal control system in responding to improper payment risks. These estimates may come from management's annual improper payment estimates as part of its monitoring activities, which may be mandated by law. Management may also develop estimates more frequently than mandated by law, such as for programs that are new, substantially changed, or rapidly implemented to facilitate a timely risk assessment.
>>>Navigational Buttons<<<
- Index of Attributes
- Previous Attribute - 8.12
- Next Attribute - 8.14
Jamie's Story
No examples are available to illustrate governance gaps for this attribute.
Election Anomalies
The Green Book's Principle 8 addresses Assess Fraud, Improper Payment, and Information Security Risk. Obviously, improper payments is not a concern during the Assessment of Election Anomalies. However, improper payments by MC county may exist, but would require a separate assessment.
The Green Book's emphasis on fraud and information security as separate risk assessment activity is intentional. MC may be able to defer to the Arizona Secretary of State's Election Procedure Manual as general steps taken to ensure the integrity of election results. Fraud occurs when loopholes are identified and exploited by the fraudsters. The implementers of election services (i.e., Arizona Counties) are better positioned to detect fraud and assess the risk of fraud because they are handling the data, not the state. Hence, governance gaps may be identified from patterns of poor assessment and response to risk with respect to election fraud and information security.
