Transaction-monitoring dashboards on the wall of an AML operations room.
Home/ Practice areas/AML & sanctions
05 / 08 · Led by Patricio
Practice area · 05/08

AML & sanctions.

Program reviews, look-backs, and tuning for transaction monitoring systems. Calibrated for the regulator who will read your next exam.

01

The practice

An AML program that defends itself in an examination.

The model your examiner just flagged was built in 2017.

Most AML transaction monitoring systems are calibrated once — at implementation — and then run for years on the same thresholds, the same rule sets, and the same typologies. Risk evolves; the system does not. When the examiner finally asks for a tuning study, the institution discovers it cannot produce one without an outside hand.

Our practice covers four phases of work: independent program reviews (the periodic 'is the program designed for the institution's risk profile' assessment), look-backs (transactions reanalyzed for a regulator-defined window), tuning studies (threshold and rule optimization with statistical evidence), and ongoing model validation under SR 11-7 for the institutions that have moved to ML-based detection.

We have written the report the examiner asked you to produce. The vocabulary, the structure of findings, the evidentiary standard — that is muscle memory.

02

What we do

The work in this practice, named.

01 · 06 Independent program reviews

Risk assessment, governance, controls, training, and reporting against BSA/AML expectations.

02 · 06 Look-backs

Reprocessing transactions for a defined window — typically driven by an MRA or consent order.

03 · 06 TM tuning & threshold studies

Below-the-line testing, above-the-line testing, alert-to-SAR conversion analysis.

04 · 06 Sanctions screening

List management, name/transaction screening calibration, false-positive analysis.

05 · 06 Rule set & typology refresh

New typologies (crypto on-ramps, layering through fintech rails), retired typologies, calibration.

06 · 06 CDD / EDD program design

Risk rating models, periodic refresh cadences, high-risk customer governance.

03

A typical engagement

A typical tuning engagement.

01
Weeks 1–2 Data & scope

Transaction data pulled, alert history reviewed, scope of tuning agreed.

02
Weeks 3–6 Statistical study

Below-the-line and above-the-line testing; threshold sensitivity analysis.

03
Weeks 7–8 Recommendations

New thresholds, retired rules, new typologies, governance changes.

04
Weeks 9–10 Documentation

Tuning report, methodology memo, executive briefing for the BSA officer and the committee.

04

Who leads it

The partner whose career is in this practice.

Patricio Perez
Practice lead · AML & sanctions

Patricio Perez

Enterprise Risk · Board Advisory

Patricio has built and overseen BSA/AML and sanctions programs as a senior risk and audit executive in financial services, carrying them through examination by every regulator that examines for BSA. Member of The National Executive Roundtable.

What this practice is not

We do not file Suspicious Activity Reports on behalf of our clients, and we do not act as a BSA Officer of record. That role belongs inside the institution.

05

Related practice areas

What often runs alongside this.

Start an engagement

Bring the partners to the table.