CHAPTER ONE

INTRODUCTION

1.1 Background of the Study

Every organization faces some risk of fraud from within. According to the international standards on auditing (ISA) 240, fraud is an intentional act by one or more individuals among management, those charged with governance, employees, or third parties, involving the use of deception to obtain an unjust or illegal advantage. This distinguishes fraud from error. Meanwhile fraud is an intentional act, error is unintentional and can be a misstatement or an omission. However, there are no clear-cut definitions of fraud and error in the sense that the dividing line where error crosses into fraud is based on the psychological construct of intent. And, fraud is a legal term which applies when intent can be proven in a court of law.

The COBAC 2002 text relating to the exercise of microfinance activities defines microfinance as: An activity carried out by registered entities which do not have the status of banks or financial institution as defined in the appendix to the Convention of 17th January 1992 to harmonize and regulate the banking activities in the Central African States, and which carry out, on a regular basis, loans operations and/or savings collection and offer special financial services to populations who mainly operate outside to traditional banking channel. In this light, MFIs are entities which exercise Microfinance activities in the Economic and Monetary Community for Central Africa (CEMAC). MFIs in Cameroon are classified into three main categories (COBAC, 2002):

Category One: This includes institutions which are made up of members who buy shares. They collect deposits from their members and use such deposits to give loans exclusively to those members. Therefore they are not allowed to deal with non-members. Credit unions, associations and cooperatives all fall in this category. There is no minimum capital or donation fixed as start-up capital.

Category Two: This category includes those institutions which serve both members and non-members. Thus they collect deposits from and grant loans to the public. This category groups limited liability companies that function more like mini banks. The minimum capital required for start-up is 50 million FCFA.

Category Three: Those classified under this category do not deal with members and they do not collect deposits. Rather they provide funding to their customers; they are credit-only institutions. The number of such institutions is few, and they include micro credit and project finance institutions. The minimum capital required for start-up for these institutions other than projects, is 50 million FCFA.

BACKGROUND TO THE STUDY

Risk management is a systematic approach to identifying, measuring, monitoring and managing business risks in an institution (Campion, 2000). Every financial intermediation activitycarries an element of risk to it and one of the key challenges that financial institutions face is to identify and mitigate them. These risks vary in nature and severity for different organizations even when they operate within the same business environment. Therefore, every Microfinance Institution is faced with its own unique set of strategic and operational risk which must be identified and managed in order for it to sustain operations (Khan, 2010). In this regard, risk management is a continual process of asking the right questions and reviewing key information to adjust your risk management tools to provide managers and directors with the best information and keep them alert. Risk management is an ongoing process carried out by all stakeholders of an organization. Hence, effective risk management encompasses a “feedback loop” from the branch to senior managers and then to the board of directors, and back again to the branch, to make sure that policies and strategies are appropriate and that the risk levels are within the risk parameters set by the institution.

Risk management has only recently become a topic of interest among financial institutions. Historically, regulation and supervision have focused on past performance and current financial condition as predictors of future financial safety and soundness. While an increasing number of MFIs are subject to external regulation and supervision, the strength of the MFI’s internal control and risk management is far more likely to predict its long-term viability (Microfinance Network, 2000). Thus successful MFIs are those who are able to see risk management as a necessity and go ahead to institute reliable and cost effective internal controls.

Campion (2000) supported this view by affirming that as MFIs play an increasingly important role in local financial economies and compete for customers and resources, the rewards of good performance and costs of poor performance are rising. Those MFIs that manage risk effectively – creating the systematic approach that applies across product lines and activities and considers the aggregate impact or probability of risks – are less likely to be surprised by unexpected losses (down-side risk) and more likely to build market credibility and capitalize on new opportunities (up-side risk). The core of risk management is making educated decisions about how much risk to tolerate, how to mitigate those that cannot be tolerated, and how to manage the real risks that are part of the business.

Several definitions exist for the terms risk and risk management. The microfinance network (2000), defines risk as the possibility of an adverse event occurring and its potential for negative implications to the MFI. They went further to define risk management as the process of managing the probability or the severity of the adverse event to an acceptable range or within the limits set by the MFI. According to the IIA, risk management is a process to identify, assess, manage, and control potential events or situations to provide reasonable assurance regarding the achievement of the organisation’s objectives. Therefore once risks which are likely to obstruct the achievement of an organisation’s objectives have been identified, measures need to be set up and built into the operational procedures of the organisation in order to reduce the organisation’s vulnerability to the identified risks and mitigate the consequences of their occurrence.

One of such measures highly recognised are internal controls, which are put in place to keep the company on course towards profitability goals and achievement of its mission, and to minimize surprises along the way. They enable management to deal with rapidly changing economic and competitive environments, shifting customer demands and priorities, and restructuring for future growth. More so, internal controls promote efficiency, reduce risk of asset loss, and help ensure the reliability of financial statements and compliance with laws and regulations. In this light, an effective internal control system is likely to reduce the company’s susceptibility to the occurrence of fraud.

Traditionally, internal control systems have focused primarily on detecting and then resolving problems. However, a risk management approach to the development of internal controls instead emphasizes problem identification and prevention before a loss occurs. Also, in the past, many MFIs have viewed internal control as a peripheral function, separate from operations, whereas, an effective system of internal control links risk identification at the branch level back to the board and management. Therefore, for internal control to play a role in mitigating risk, MFIs must institutionalize risk management into their organizational culture and at all levels of their operation

Consequently the risk management process is continuous requiring effective monitoring and evaluation of present measures and techniques. In this regard, internal control comprises the institution’s mechanisms to monitor risks before and after operations. Nonetheless, practitioners often confuse internal control with internal audit, which is an integral part of internal control. The IIA defines internal auditing as an independent, objective assurance and consulting activity designed to add value and improve an organization’s operations.  It helps an organization accomplish its objectives by bringing a systematic, disciplined approach to evaluate and improve the effectiveness of risk management, control, and governance processes. While internal audit focuses solely on evaluating risk management “expost” (after operations), internal control comprises both the “ex-ante” and “ex-post” (before and after operations) measures to control risks. In other words, internal audit is just one component of the internal control process (Campion, 2000). The relationship between risk management, internal control and internal audit is represented diagrammatically by figure 1 below. Thus internal control and internal audit play vital roles in the risk management process. Once the MFI has identified its key risk exposures and determined its overall risk management strategies, it can begin to develop internal controls that will mitigate those risks.

Problem Statement

The occurrence of fraud in society is increasing, especially in financial institutions. This act is driven by greed and the desire to have more and accumulate wealth even at the expense of society James Skeen (2004). The fact that many people live below the poverty line has weighed on their morals and they give up on their culture, ethical values and norms in an attempt to achieve personal targets before meeting organizational goals (Microfinance Network 2000). This surely has led to the designing and implementation of Internal Control Systems in most organizations. They are to be an integral part of any organization since their task is to prevent risks from occurring, minimize their impact should they occur and prevent/detect fraud in an organization. For this purpose organizations give much importance to the Internal Control function which is generally a feature of large companies. It is a function provided either by employees of the entity or sought from an external organization to assist management in another organization to achieve its objectives. It becomes imperative therefore to investigate the effect of internal control systems on fraud reduction and financial management in micro finance institutions in cameroon:case of buea. The questions below will guide me through the study; how does the control environment influence fraud mitigation in MFIs? How do control activities influence fraud mitigation in MFIs?

Research Questions:

What internal control mechanisms are implemented by microfinance institutions in the Effect of internal control systems on fraud mitigation in microfinance institution in limbe Municipality to prevent and detect fraudulent activities?

How effective are these internal control systems in reducing the incidence and impact of fraud within microfinance institutions in Effect of internal control systems on fraud mitigation in microfinance institution in limbe?

What are the key challenges and barriers faced by microfinance institutions in Effect of internal control systems on fraud mitigation in microfinance institution in limbe in implementing and maintaining effective internal control systems for fraud prevention and detection?

Research Objectives:

To identify and assess the effect of internal control systems on fraud reduction and financial management in micro finance institutions in cameroon:case of Effect of internal control systems on fraud mitigation in microfinance institution in limbe

To evaluate the effectiveness of these internal control systems in reducing the incidence and impact of fraud within MFIs operating in Effect of internal control systems on fraud mitigation in microfinance institution in limbe.

To explore the challenges and barriers faced by MFIs in Buea in implementing and maintaining effective internal control systems for fraud prevention and detection.

Hypotheses:

H₀: There is no significant relationship between the implementation of internal control systems and the reduction of fraud a H₁: Microfinance institutions that have robust internal control systems experience lower levels of fraud incidence compared to those with weaker control mechanisms.

H₀: The effectiveness of internal control systems does not vary based on the size or operational characteristics of microfinance institutions

. H₁: Microfinance institutions with larger asset sizes and more complex operations experience greater effectiveness of internal control systems in reducing fraud incidence.

H₀: Microfinance institutions in Buea face similar challenges in implementing internal control systems for fraud prevention and detection. H₁: There are significant differences in the challenges encountered by microfinance institutions, depending on factors such as regulatory environment, technological infrastructure, and organizational culture, in implementing effective internal control systems for fraud prevention and detection.