dc.description.abstract |
County governments are operating without systematic fraud prevention programs or
fail to review their programs on a regular basis, despite the high prevalence of
reported cases of county governments’ fraud. Therefore, the general objective of this
study was to examine the moderating role of internal control mechanisms on the
relationship between forensic accounting practices and fraud detection. The specific
objectives were to establish the effect of forensic accounting practices (investigative
practice, prevention practice, examination practice and litigation practice) on fraud
detection and the moderating effect of internal control mechanisms on the relationship
between forensic accounting practices and fraud detection. The main theories
underpinning the study were the fraud triangle and the internal control theory. An
explanatory research design was used in this study. The target population comprises
accountants, forensic accountants, and auditor’s North and South Rift to 336. The
researcher obtained a sample size of 179 respondents. The study used proportionate
stratified sampling to select respondents. The study collected primary data using a
questionnaire. Descriptive statistics were used in data analysis to describe the basic
features of the respondents and data collected, while inferential statistics were
correlation and multiple regressions. The study results showed that investigative
practice has a positive and significant effect on fraud detection (β 1 =0.262, p<0.05).
The preventive practice has a positive and significant effect on fraud detection
(β 2 =0.173, p<0.05). Examination practice has a positive and significant effect on
fraud detection (β 3 =.238, p<0.05). Litigation practice has a positive and significant
effect on fraud detection (β 4 =0.170, p<0.05). The R 2 is 0.652, which is statistically
significant at p<0.001. This means that 65.2% of the variation in fraud detection is
explained by the four independent variables (litigation, prevention, examination, and
investigative). The R 2 change of internal control mechanism moderating the four
variables (litigation, prevention, examination, and investigative) is 0.011, which is
statistically significant at (p<0.05). The R 2 change of internal control mechanism
moderating the effect of investigative practice on fraud detection is 0.074, which is
statistically significant at (p<0.001). The R 2 change of internal control mechanism
moderating the effect of investigative and preventative practice on fraud detection is
0. 001, which is statistically significant at (p<0.05). The R 2 change of internal control
mechanism moderating the effect of investigative, preventative and examination
practices on fraud detection is 0. 043, which is statistically significant at (p<0.001).
The R 2 change of internal control mechanism moderating the effect of investigative,
preventative, examination and litigation practices on fraud detection is 0. 008, which
is statistically significant at (p<0.05). The study concluded that investigative,
preventive, examination and litigation practices significantly affected fraud detection.
Internal control mechanisms had a significant moderating effect on the relationship
between investigative practice, preventive practice, examination practice, litigation
practice and fraud detection. The study recommends that the county government
should impose the use of forensic accounting and auditing to deter corruption in all
sectors of the economy. |
en_US |