Bear Traps and Treasure Maps Developing Consistency in Discipline Processes

1. Bear Traps and Treasure MapsDeveloping Consistency in Discipline Processes Elizabeth Cowie Institute of Chartered Accountants of Ontario

2. CONSISTENCY … • Levels The Playing Field • Provides A Fair and Foreseeable System • Increases The Efficiency Of The System • Reduces Costs • Ensures Autonomy CLEAR 2008 Annual Conference Anchorage, Alaska

3. WHERE IS CONSISTENCY NECESSARY? • Within A Single Organization, Single Jurisdiction • Within A Single Organization, Multiple Jurisdictions • Within Multiple Organizations, Either Single Or Multiple Jurisdictions CLEAR 2008 Annual Conference Anchorage, Alaska

4. CONSISISTENCY … = Predictability ≠ Inflexibility Increases Public Trust Decreases Government Intervention Enhances Reputation Of Members/ Organization Lessens Impact Of “Bad Apples” CLEAR 2008 Annual Conference Anchorage, Alaska

5. RECOGNIZING INCONSISTENCY • System Focuses On One Element Or Principle • Member • Conduct • Public Effect • Rehabilitation • Denunciation • Deterrence CLEAR 2008 Annual Conference Anchorage, Alaska

6. MORE CLUES • Every Case Re-invents The Wheel • Similar Matters Treated Dissimilarly • Lack Of Transparency • Aura Of Unfairness CLEAR 2008 Annual Conference Anchorage, Alaska

7. NOBODY’S HAPPY • Complainant • Member Disciplined • Other Members • Public • Other Organizations • Government CLEAR 2008 Annual Conference Anchorage, Alaska

8. WHAT CAUSES INCONSISTENCY? NO Principled Approach Policy/ Guidelines Balance Planning Scrutinized Processes Resources Checks & Balances CLEAR 2008 Annual Conference Anchorage, Alaska

9. AND … Distrust Of Change Belief It Can’t Happen Pressure From Stakeholders Complacency CLEAR 2008 Annual Conference Anchorage, Alaska

10. IF YOU BUILD IT PRINCIPLES SYSTEM PROCESSES CLEAR 2008 Annual Conference Anchorage, Alaska

11. BUILT ON Solid Principles Supported By Processes Followed Consistently And Reviewed Continuously CLEAR 2008 Annual Conference Anchorage, Alaska

12. BUILDING A BETTER MOUSETRAP THINK OUTSIDE THE BOX BRAINSTORM CRADLE TO GRAVE Goal? How Does Each Step Achieve The Goal? Could It Be Done Better? Consistency In Each Step, Not Just Outcome CLEAR 2008 Annual Conference Anchorage, Alaska

13. BARRIERS TO CONSISTENCY • Stakeholders • Governing Documents • Resources • Misapprehension of Risk CLEAR 2008 Annual Conference Anchorage, Alaska

14. DON’T BE AFRAID • To Question What You Do • To Stop Doing What You’ve Always Done • To Try What Hasn’t Been Tried Before • To Change • To Steal Ideas, Processes, Documents • To Fail CLEAR 2008 Annual Conference Anchorage, Alaska

15. THE CA EXPERIENCE CLEAR 2008 Annual Conference Anchorage, Alaska

16. THE CHALLENGE Design a consistent and best practices discipline system for 13 different autonomous jurisdictions with differing: numbers of members; resources; governing documents; degrees of sophistication; and priorities. CLEAR 2008 Annual Conference Anchorage, Alaska

17. GUIDING PRINCIPLE THE CORE PURPOSE OF AN INSTITUTE IS TO REGULATE THE PROFESSION IN THE PUBLIC INTEREST CLEAR 2008 Annual Conference Anchorage, Alaska

18. STAGES OF THE PROCESS Intake Investigation Determination Hearing Sanction Appeal CLEAR 2008 Annual Conference Anchorage, Alaska

19. INTAKE - COMPLAINTS REACTIVE In writing? Must act. Protection for complainants? PROACTIVE Media, gossip, third parties May, not must, act. CLEAR 2008 Annual Conference Anchorage, Alaska

20. Notify Complainant &Member Complaint Close File Received With ADR YES Jurisdiction? Any YES YES Possible ON Gather Misconduct? Information NO Notify & Documents Complainant Notify And Close Complainant File & Member Close File INTAKE SCHEMATIC CLEAR 2008 Annual Conference Anchorage, Alaska

21. INVESTIGATION • WHO investigates? • WHAT is being investigated? • HOW long will the investigation take? • WILL the investigator be paid? • HOW to ensure the independence and competence of the investigator. • WHO oversees the investigation? CLEAR 2008 Annual Conference Anchorage, Alaska

22. DECISION IS THERE ANY EVIDENCE WHICH, IF BELIEVED, COULD RESULT IN A FINDING OF PROFESSIONAL MISCONDUCT? CLEAR 2008 Annual Conference Anchorage, Alaska

23. NO POSSIBLE MISCONDUCT MISCONDUCT GROUNDS CLOSE FILE ACCEPT EXIST AND NOTIFY ADR TO LAY COMPLAINANT CHARGES & MEMBER CLEAR 2008 Annual Conference Anchorage, Alaska

24. HEARING PROCESS Parties And Participants Pleas Prosecutor Counsel Hearing Tribunal Evidence Standard Of Proof Findings CLEAR 2008 Annual Conference Anchorage, Alaska

25. REHABILITATIVE Practice supervision Practice restriction Courses Training Counseling Treatment Publicity RETRIBUTIVE Reprimand Fine Suspension Revocation of FCA Publicity Resignation Expulsion SANCTIONS CLEAR 2008 Annual Conference Anchorage, Alaska

26. APPEAL OR REVIEW • Who? • What? • When? • Where? • Effect? • Result? CLEAR 2008 Annual Conference Anchorage, Alaska

27. RESOURCING CLEAR 2008 Annual Conference Anchorage, Alaska

28. COST RECOVERY • Investigation • Hearing • Publication • Experts • Appeals • Compliance with orders • Enforcement of orders CLEAR 2008 Annual Conference Anchorage, Alaska

29. STAFFING & SAVINGS • Prosecutor • Location of Hearing • Recording Hearing • Counsel to Tribunal • Settlements/Agreed Facts • Agreed Sanction/ Range • Having member pay for materials and copies • Size of tribunal CLEAR 2008 Annual Conference Anchorage, Alaska

30. REGIONALIZATION AND LIFELINES CLEAR 2008 Annual Conference Anchorage, Alaska

31. OUTCOMES FRONT LOADING WORKS It Costs More To Do It Wrong Than To Do It Right In Money In Reputation In Effective Regulation In People CLEAR 2008 Annual Conference Anchorage, Alaska

32. NEXT STEPS IMPLEMENTATION IMPROVEMENT VIGILANCE CLEAR 2008 Annual Conference Anchorage, Alaska

33. Speaker Contact Information Elizabeth Cowie Director, Legal and Regulatory Affairs Institute of Chartered Accountants of Ontario 69 Bloor Street East Toronto, Ontario M4W 1B3 (416) 969 4292 ecowie@icao.on.ca www.icao.on.ca CLEAR 2008 Annual Conference Anchorage, Alaska