The reality manufactured by this review strongly reinforce the concerns and problems raised in the OIG’s earlier Audit. The FDIC must candidly consider its leadership practices, its process and procedures, and the conduct of multiple individuals who made and implemented the decision to require banks to exit RALs in our view. The severity of the events warrants such consideration while we acknowledge that the events described in our report surrounding RALs involved only three of the FDIC’s many supervised institutions. The FDIC has to ask how a actions described inside our report could unfold because they did, in light for the FDIC’s reported core values of integrity, accountability, and fairness. Further, the organization must address exactly just how it may avoid occurrences that are similar the future.
The FDIC removed the term “moral suasion” from its guidance in December 2015, in response to concerns raised in the Audit. We appreciate the main significance of casual talks and persuasion towards the supervisory procedure; nevertheless, we think more should be done to matter the application of ethical suasion, and its particular equivalents, to meaningful scrutiny and oversight, and also to produce equitable treatments for organizations as long as they be at the mercy of abusive therapy.
Because our work is within the nature of an evaluation, rather than a review carried out prior to government auditing requirements, we have been perhaps not making recommendations that are formal. Pokračovat ve čtení „Conclusion and Issues for Consideration“