IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/pra/mprapa/41557.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Audits and logistic regression, deciding what really matters in service processes: a case study of a government funding agency for research grants

Author

Listed:
  • Samohyl, Robert

Abstract

Governmental agencies, the back office of private firms and nongovernmental organizations experience bureaucratic processes that are often repetitive and out-of-date. These imperfections cause resource misuse and support activities that diminish to the value of the process. An important element of these bureaucratic processes is checking whether certain projects approved by the office have actually been successful in their proposed objectives. Banks and credit card companies must evaluate whether creditors have fulfilled their supposed financial worthiness, tax authorities need to classify sectors of the economy and types of tax payers for probable defaults, and research grants approved by government funding agencies should verify the use of public funds by grant recipients. In this study, logistic regression is used to estimate the probability of conformity of research grants to the financial obligations of the researcher analyzing the correlation between certain characteristics of the grant and the grant´s final status as approved or not. The logistic equation uncovers those characteristics that are most important in judging status, and supports the analysis of results as false positives and false negatives. A ROC curve is constructed which reveals not only an optimal cutoff separating conformity from nonconformity, but also discloses weak links in the chain of activities that could be easily corrected and consequently public resources preserved.

Suggested Citation

  • Samohyl, Robert, 2012. "Audits and logistic regression, deciding what really matters in service processes: a case study of a government funding agency for research grants," MPRA Paper 41557, University Library of Munich, Germany.
  • Handle: RePEc:pra:mprapa:41557
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://mpra.ub.uni-muenchen.de/41557/1/MPRA_paper_41557.pdf
    File Function: original version
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Georges Dionne & Florence Giuliano & Pierre Picard, 2009. "Optimal Auditing with Scoring: Theory and Application to Insurance Fraud," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 55(1), pages 58-70, January.
    2. Eva Regnier, 2008. "Public Evacuation Decisions and Hurricane Track Uncertainty," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 54(1), pages 16-28, January.
    3. Cohen, Jacqueline & Garman, Samuel & Gorr, Wilpen, 2009. "Empirical calibration of time series monitoring methods using receiver operating characteristic curves," International Journal of Forecasting, Elsevier, vol. 25(3), pages 484-497, July.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Jean-Marc Bourgeon & Pierre Picard, 2014. "Fraudulent Claims and Nitpicky Insurers," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 104(9), pages 2900-2917, September.
    2. Corene Matyas & Sivaramakrishnan Srinivasan & Ignatius Cahyanto & Brijesh Thapa & Lori Pennington-Gray & Jorge Villegas, 2011. "Risk perception and evacuation decisions of Florida tourists under hurricane threats: a stated preference analysis," Natural Hazards: Journal of the International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, Springer;International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, vol. 59(2), pages 871-890, November.
    3. John Bone & Dominic Spengler, 2014. "Does Reporting Decrease Corruption?," Journal of Interdisciplinary Economics, , vol. 26(1-2), pages 161-186, January.
    4. Dionne, Georges & Wang, Kili, 2011. "Does opportunistic fraud in automobile theft insurance fluctuate with the business cycle?," Working Papers 11-4, HEC Montreal, Canada Research Chair in Risk Management.
    5. Appelgren, Leif, 2020. "A survey of models for determining optimal audit strategies," Advances in accounting, Elsevier, vol. 48(C).
    6. John E. Murray, 2011. "Asymmetric Information and Countermeasures in Early Twentieth‐Century American Short‐Term Disability Microinsurance," Journal of Risk & Insurance, The American Risk and Insurance Association, vol. 78(1), pages 117-138, March.
    7. Jing Ai & Patrick L. Brockett & Linda L. Golden & Montserrat Guillén, 2013. "A Robust Unsupervised Method for Fraud Rate Estimation," Journal of Risk & Insurance, The American Risk and Insurance Association, vol. 80(1), pages 121-143, March.
    8. Nicola Gennaioli & Rafael La Porta & Florencio Lopez-de-Silanes & Andrei Shleifer, 2022. "Trust and Insurance Contracts," The Review of Financial Studies, Society for Financial Studies, vol. 35(12), pages 5287-5333.
    9. Michael Ludkovski & Virginia R. Young, 2010. "Ex Post Moral Hazard and Bayesian Learning in Insurance," Journal of Risk & Insurance, The American Risk and Insurance Association, vol. 77(4), pages 829-856, December.
    10. Abe Dunn & Joshua D. Gottlieb & Adam Shapiro & Daniel J. Sonnenstuhl & Pietro Tebaldi, 2021. "A Denial a Day Keeps the Doctor Away," NBER Working Papers 29010, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    11. Andrew B. Martinez, 2020. "Forecast Accuracy Matters for Hurricane Damage," Econometrics, MDPI, vol. 8(2), pages 1-24, May.
    12. Chamal Gomes & Zhuo Jin & Hailiang Yang, 2021. "Insurance fraud detection with unsupervised deep learning," Journal of Risk & Insurance, The American Risk and Insurance Association, vol. 88(3), pages 591-624, September.
    13. Pierre Picard, 2012. "Economic Analysis of Insurance Fraud," Working Papers hal-00725561, HAL.
    14. Yankol-Schalck, Meryem, 2022. "The value of cross-data set analysis for automobile insurance fraud detection," Research in International Business and Finance, Elsevier, vol. 63(C).
    15. Katja Müller & Hato Schmeiser & Joël Wagner, 2016. "The impact of auditing strategies on insurers’ profitability," Journal of Risk Finance, Emerald Group Publishing, vol. 17(1), pages 46-79, January.
    16. Zhujun Liu & Jiuping Xu & Bernard Han, 2013. "Small- and medium-sized enterprise post-disaster reconstruction management patterns and application," Natural Hazards: Journal of the International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, Springer;International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, vol. 68(2), pages 809-835, September.
    17. Ord, J. Keith & Koehler, Anne B. & Snyder, Ralph D. & Hyndman, Rob J., 2009. "Monitoring processes with changing variances," International Journal of Forecasting, Elsevier, vol. 25(3), pages 518-525, July.
    18. Lang, Matthias & Wambach, Achim, 2013. "The fog of fraud – Mitigating fraud by strategic ambiguity," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 81(C), pages 255-275.
    19. Drehmann, Mathias & Juselius, Mikael, 2014. "Evaluating early warning indicators of banking crises: Satisfying policy requirements," International Journal of Forecasting, Elsevier, vol. 30(3), pages 759-780.
    20. Crowther, Kenneth G., 2010. "Risk-informed assessment of regional preparedness: A case study of emergency potable water for hurricane response in Southeast Virginia," International Journal of Critical Infrastructure Protection, Elsevier, vol. 3(2), pages 83-98.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Logistic regression; ROC curve; probability; audits; government; research grants;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • C12 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Econometric and Statistical Methods and Methodology: General - - - Hypothesis Testing: General
    • M42 - Business Administration and Business Economics; Marketing; Accounting; Personnel Economics - - Accounting - - - Auditing
    • C25 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Single Equation Models; Single Variables - - - Discrete Regression and Qualitative Choice Models; Discrete Regressors; Proportions; Probabilities

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:pra:mprapa:41557. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Joachim Winter (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/vfmunde.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.