Background Screening Trends India · Trends Report to model their background screening programs and...

INFORMATION YOU NEED. PEOPLE YOU CAN TRUST.

Quantifying the trends and Qualifying the nature of Applicant fraud in India April to June 2018

TRENDS REPORT

Background Screening Trends India

Trends Report – Q2-2018

Table of Contents

FOREWORD

Dear Clients,

In today’s economy hiring is thorough, but it’s thorough for a reason. We’re increasingly putting our safety into the hands of someone we don’t know. That can be a huge risk, and it’s why background checks are more important than ever - from both a customer and a business perspective.

The fact is, it isn’t just your brand reputation you’re putting at risk; it’s the safety of your customers and employees. And shouldn’t that be the most important thing? When it comes to hiring, we need to be smart about the due diligence and criminal background checks. As the old saying goes: Trust, but verify.

As organizations seek out for the best talent in the market, it has become quite imperative to have a better insight of the current trends in order to hire the right candidate with the required skillset and clean background.

We, at First Advantage, have always taken pride in the fact that most organizations refer to First Advantage’s Trends Report to model their background screening programs and establish relevant & current practices.

As compared to the first quarter (Q1), the second quarter of 2018 has seen an increase of discrepancies in areas such as case level discrepancy, especially in FMCG. In Q2-18, while the total number of cases Verified were highest for the BFSI sector at 35 % followed by IT sector at 30 % and likewise highest number of discrepancy cases are in the BFSI sector at 46 %, the discrepancy based on industries has a totally different story to say -Telecom leading at 17 %, FMCG at 15 % followed by Retail at14 %, BFSI is at 13 % and Healthcare & Pharma at 11 %. For further understanding, please refer to the detailed report inside.

First Advantage in India remains committed towards aligning Indian recruitment and all pre-employment screening practices with the best in the world. With this assurance - I hereby share our second Quarter Trends Report for the calendar year 2018.

Vivek KhannaManaging Director, India RegionFirst Advantage Corporation

Discrepancy Percentage - By Quarter [Q1-11 to Q2-18]

Discrepancy Percentage - By Gender [Q1-18 vs. Q2-18]

Discrepancy Percentage - By Age [Q2-18]

Discrepancy Percentage - By Industry [Q1-18 vs. Q2-18]

Discrepancy Percentage - By Industry by Age [Q2-18]

Discrepancy Percentage - By Industry by Component [Q1-18 vs. Q2-18]

Discrepancy Percentage - By Component [Q3-17 to Q2-18]

Discrepancy Percentage - By Component by Gender [Q1-18 vs. Q2-18]

Discrepancies - By Component across Zones in India and Abroad [Q1-18 vs. Q2-18]

Discrepancies - By Top 6 States [Q1-18 vs. Q2-18]

Employment Discrepancies - By Top 10 Cities [Q1-18 vs. Q2-18]

Education Discrepancies - By Top 10 Cities [Q1-18 vs. Q2-18]

Address Discrepancies - By Top 10 Cities [Q1-18 vs. Q2-18]

Categorization of Discrepancies - By Component Employment [Q1-18 vs. Q2-18]

Categorization of Discrepancies - By Component Education [Q1-18 vs. Q2-18]

Discrepancies - By Education Level [Q1-18 vs. Q2-18]

Categorization of Discrepancies - By Component Address [Q1-18 vs. Q2-18]

Discrepancies - By Employee Category [Q3-17 to Q2-18]

Discrepancies - By Employee Category by Age [Q2-18]

Discrepancies - By Employee Category by Industry [Q1-18 vs. Q2-18]

Verification Success % Vs. Unable to Verify % [Q1-18 vs. Q2-18]

1.A.

1.B.

1.C.

2.A.

2.B.

2.C.

3.A.

3.B.

4.

5.

6.A.

6.B.

6.C.

7.A.

7.B.1.

7.B.2.

7.C.

8.A.

8.B.

8.C.

9.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY [Q2-18]

In this regard, First Advantage helps you make the right decision by presenting essential facts about the current workplace scenario through this trend report. Here are some of the finding that might prove beneficial in the process of a talent search by anyorganization:

As organizations have started to capture talent early on, the overall recruitment process cost is even higher and to be cost-efficient in such cases, knowing a candidate's background becomes all the more important. It helps mitigate risk and saves the time and money involved in hiring a candidate with a fraudulent background.

Talent occupies the most important position in any organization no matter what the current economic scenario may be. Irrespective of the continuously changing nature of recruitment process, the need for a good hire is indispensable. There has been a tremendous shift in the mindset of organizations as well as recruiters when it comes to talent today.

76 % of the Discrepant Cases are males and remaining 24 % are females.

City - wise Bengaluru leads in Employment related discrepancies; Mumbai leads in Education related discrepancies and Pune leads in Address related discrepancies.

Highest number of discrepancies have been observed in the Associate level employees and in that too - the age bracket > = 22 to 30 years has the biggest chunk of discrepant cases at 44.5 %.

Out of every 100 Education Discrepancies identified - 64 are from the Graduate level.

Case Level Discrepancy in FMCG sector has shown an increase in Q2-18 in comparison to Q1-18.

Out of the total occurrences of discrepancies a huge chunk of them have occurred in the Employment Component, followed by Address Component and Education Component.

Discrepancy rates for Employment and Address checks are very high in the Southern zone in India. Discrepancy rates for Education checks are high in the Northern zone.

76 % 24 %

0

255075

100

Beng

alur

u

Mum

bai

Pune

32BACKGROUND SCREENING TRENDS - INDIA 3

GLOSSARY OF TERMS


GLOSSARY OF TERMS

First Advantage is conducting a background check for a candidate ABC [Case].

The check is authorized by a [Client] say XYZ Corp. This client belongs to the BFSI sector [Industry].

FOR EXAMPLE

Client

Case(s)

Industry

Fake

Component(s)

Check(s)

Employee Category

Possible Suspect

One case indicates one candidate. It is denoted by acase reference number which is unique to thatparticular candidate.

Screening carried out for various phases of thecandidate’s background like Employment, Education,Address, etc. are termed as Components.

The organization which authorizes First Advantageto conduct the verification.

The industry sector/segment under which the Clientfalls. All abbreviations used are as per Indianstandards of industry bifurcation and are easilyaccessible via the internet.

A confirmation shared by authorized personnel/bodyon the authenticity of the document/university.

As per the client’s mandate, the screening components include latest Education and two previous Employments ofthe candidate. Here Education and Employment are [Components ] & there are a total of three Checks - one Education[Check] and two Employment [Checks].

Depending on a predefined matrix followed by the client, either as standardized by First Advantage or a clientcustomized matrix - a disconnect identified [Discrepancy] would be categorized as major or minor discrepancy,suspect, [Possible Suspect], etc.

One case can have one or more than one check basedon the credentials being verified.

The designation at which the candidate worked/isworking [current employment] in the organization.

Any organization or company - whose credentialsmight not be genuine.

OVERALL DISCREPANCY


1.A. Discrepancy Percentage - By Quarter [Q1-11 to Q2-18]

Case Level Trend from April to Jun 2018

A study of the Case Level Quarterly Discrepancy Analysis for Q2-18 shows that the discrepancy percentage is at 9.3 % [which goes to say that out of every 100 candidates who were screened by First Advantage - 9 candidates were found to have discrepancies in one or more than one component].

The discrepancy versus verified percentage for 2011, 2012 and 2013 was at 10 percent. In 2014 it had risen to 10.5 percent. In 2015 it has further risen to 11.6 percent. In 2016 it has been consistent at 11.1 percent and in 2017 it averaged at 10.8 percent.

DIS

CRE

PAN

CY

PERC

ENTA

GE

Based on Discrepancy Vs. Verified Cases

2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 20182017

10.9 %

9.6 %

11.0 %

8.1 %

Q1

Q2

Q3

Q4

Q1

Q2

Q3

Q4

10.2 %

8.7 %

10.2 %

10.0 %

Q1

Q2

Q3

Q4

9.6 %

10.6 %

11.0 %

10.7 %

Q1

Q2

Q3

Q4

11.4 %

12.3 %

11.5 %

11.4 %

Q1

Q2

Q3

Q4

10.7 %

10.6 %

Q1

Q2

11.5 % Q3

10.4 % Q4

9.5 %

9.3 %

9.9 %

9.8 %

12.0 %

11.0 %

10.6 %

11.0 %

Q1

Q2

Q3

Q4

10.3 % Q1

9.3 % Q2

Case Level Trend from April to June 2018

1.B. Discrepancy Percentage - By Gender [Q1-18 vs. Q2-18]

71 % of the overall cases verified by First Advantage, in the second quarter of 2018 were Males [which means out of every 100 cases verified - 71 were Males] and the remaining 29 % were Females.

In Q2-18, 76 % of the Overall discrepancy cases were Males [which means out of every 100 discrepancy cases - 76 were Males] and the remaining 24 % were Females.

In Q2-18, 10 % of the Male verified cases were discrepant [which means of every 100 cases verified of the Male gender - 10 were found to be discrepant]. Likewise, 8 % of the Female gender verified cases were discrepant.

The trends of the Male and Female discrepancy cases have decreased by 1 % each.

Discrepancy Based on Gender

OVERALL VERIFIED CASES

73 %

27 %

OVERALL DISCREPANCY CASES

78 %

22 %

GENDER WISE DISCREPANCY %

11 %

9 %

Q1-18

OVERALL VERIFIED CASES

71 %

29 %

76 %

24 %

10 %

8 %

Q2-18

OVERALL DISCREPANCY CASES GENDER WISE DISCREPANCY %


OVERALL DISCREPANCY



1.C. Discrepancy Percentage - By Age [Q2-18]

Please note: Cases wherein the date of birth is not mentioned have been excluded from the analysis. These cases have a 7 % discrepancy.

Highest number of cases have been verified for the > = 22 to 30 years [age bracket] candidates.

Similarly highest number of discrepancies have been detected in the > = 22 to 30 years [age bracket] candidates.

The discrepancy versus verified percentage is highest in the > = 31 to 40 years [age bracket] candidates at 13.1 % [which means 13 out every 100 cases verified were discrepant in the > = 31 to 40 years [age bracket] ], followed by > = 41 to 50 years [age bracket] candidates at 11.7 %.

VER

IFIE

D C

ASE

S %

DIS

CRE

PAN

CY

CA

SES

%D

ISC

REPA

NC

Y V

s. V

ERIF

IED

%

<= 21 years >= 22 to 30 years >= 31 to 40 years >= 41 to 50 years >= 51 years

5.2 %

1.2 %

2.2 %

65.7 %

58.9 %

8.4 %

24.7 %

34.5 %

13.1 %

3.8 %

4.8 %

11.7 %

0.6 %

100.

0 %

100.

0 %

0.7 %

11.0 %

AGE BRACKET-Overall Cases Grand Total

Discrepancy Trends

Today, background screening is notonly restricted to the traditionalsectors like IT, ITES, BFSI,Manufacturing, FMCG sectors, but hasalso shown rapid growth in Retail,Petroleum, Hospitality, Healthcare,Travel, Telecom, Education andEntertainment industries.

In fact, this concept of risk mitigationhas tempted even sectors like NGO,Research, KPO, etc. [basically nonprofit earning sectors] amongstothers, to join the bandwagon andengage in the best practices of duediligence.

Verified Cases % is based on Overall Verified Cases only.Discrepancy Cases % is based on Discrepancy Cases only. Discrepancy Vs. Verified % is based on Discrepancy Vs. Verified Cases.

Numbers in the graph indicate %

2.A. Discrepancy Percentage - Top 10 By Industry [Q1-18 vs. Q2-18]


In Q2-18, the Discrepancy vs. Verified trend in FMCG sector has shown an increase in comparison to the previous quarter.

Verified % Discrepancy % Discrepancy Vs. Verified %

FMCG

IT

TRAVEL &HOSPITALITY

Q1-18 Q2-18

ITES/BPO

MANUFACTURING

ENGINEERING

HEALTHCARE &PHARMA

TELECOM

RETAIL

BFSI

43

6

28

2

717

15

1

214

35

441

3

0

0

0

0

22

4

23

13

11

4

5

30

7

26

0

025

1

320

0

013

1342

34

34

4

513

32

10

5

48

3

1

3024

8

4

46


In Q2-18, total number of cases Verified were highest for the BFSI sector at 35 % [i.e. out of every 100 cases Verified - 35 were from the BFSI sector] followed by IT sector at 30 %.

Likewise highest number of discrepancy cases are in the BFSI sector at 46 % [i.e. out of every 100 discrepancy cases - 46 were from BFSI sector] followed by IT at 23 %.

The discrepancy %, that is the number of cases [Discrepancy Vs. Verified] based on industries, has a totally different story to say, with Telecom leading at 17 % [i.e. out of every 100 Telecom cases verified - 17 cases were discrepant], FMCG at 15 % followed by Retail at 14 %. BFSI is at 13 % and Healthcare & Pharma at 11 %. ITES/BPO is at 8 % and IT follows at 7 %. A surprise element in Engineering sector shows a high discrepancy percent at 22 % but the percentage can be sort of misleading as the number of cases verified for Engineering sector is pretty less in comparison to other sectors.

Discrepancy Trends


2.B. Discrepancy Percentage - By Industry by Age [Q2-18]

<= 21 years

>= 22 to 30 years

>= 31 to 40 years

>= 41 to 50 years

>= 51 years

The Discrepancy vs. Verified % by Age and by Industry is another interesting analytics.

BFSI

3.2 %

11.4 %

16.4 %

14.2 %

9.6 %

4.3 %

ENGINEERING

0.0 %

5.6 %

30.8 %

18.8 %

0.0 %

0.0 %

FMCG

0.0 %

12.2 %

20.4 %

15.4 %

0.0 %

0.0 %

HEALTHCARE& PHARMA

3.2 %

10.2 %

14.8 %

14.3 %

7.4 %

1.8 %

IT

0.8 %

6.5 %

9.0 %

7.9 %

11.2 %

9.9 %

ITES /BPO

2.6 %

5.9 %

10.7 %

30.6 %

22.2 %

0.0 %

MANUFACTURING

0.1 %

2.8 %

13.6 %

11.2 %

8.2 %

9.1 %

RETAIL

13.7 %

14.0 %

17.6 %

30.8 %

0.0 %

8.1 %

TELECOM

1.0 %

13.9 %

30.0 %

29.7 %

0.0 %

0.0 %

TRAVEL &HOSPITALITY

1.9 %

6.0 %

10.7 %

5.9 %

4.8 %

10.0 %

OVERALL

2.2 %

8.4 %

13.1 %

11.7 %

11.0 %

6.6 %

9.3 % 12.5 % 21.9 % 15.2 % 10.9 % 7.1 % 8.1 % 3.6 % 14.0 % 17.0 % 6.0 %

Not consideredin Analysis

Grand Total

DIS

CREP

ANCY

Vs.

VER

IFIE

D %

40.0 %

50.0 %

45.0 %

30.0 %

35.0 %

20.0 %

25.0 %

10.0 %

15.0 %

05.0 %

0.0 %


The overall discrepancy trend shows that the > = 31 to 40 years age bracket is the highest at 13.1 % [which means of every 100 cases verified in this age bracket - 13 cases are discrepant].

Industrial sectors like BFSI, Engineering, FMCG, Healthcare & Pharma, Manufacturing, Telecom and Travel & Hospitality show a high discrepancy trend in > = 31 to 40 years age bracket.

ITES/BPO and Retail shows a high discrepancy trend in > = 41 to 50 years age bracket.

IT shows a high discrepancy trend in the > = 51 years age bracket.

As confirmed in page number 7, cases wherein the date of birth is not mentioned have been excluded from the analysis. The same is applicable to all the above mentioned sectors as well.

Discrepancy Trends

Discrepancy Trends


2.C. Discrepancy Percentage - By Top 10 Industry By Component [Q1-18 vs. Q2-18]

BFSI ENGINEERING

FMCG HEALTHCARE &PHARMA

Based on Discrepancy Vs. Verified Checks

IT ITES / BPO

Employment Address Education Employment Address Education



Q2-

18Q

1-18

Q2-

18Q

1-18

12.9 %

1.8 %

1.7 %

11.8 %

2.0 %

1.5 %Q

2-18

Q1-

18

Q2-

18Q

1-18

Q2-

18Q

1-18

Q2-

18Q

1-18

11.7 %

0.0 %

1.6 %

13.3 %

0.0 %

0.0 %

11.6 %

5.1 %

3.4 %

11.8 %

5.5 %

2.5 %

11.2%

0.6 %

0.7 %

12.9%

0.8 %

0.7 %

4.5 %

1.1 %

0.5 %

5.6 %

5.0 %

0.5 %

8.1 %

0.1 %

0.6 %

11.0 %

4.2 %

0.8 %

Check Level Trend from April to June 2018

OVERALL DISCREPANCY



Based on Discrepancy Vs. Verified Checks

MANUFACTURING RETAIL

TELECOM TRAVEL & HOSPITALITY



Q2-

18Q

1-18

12.0 %

0.3 %

0.4 %

8.8 %

0.7 %

0.6 %

Q1-

18Q

4-17

Q1-

18Q

4-17

15.5 %

12.9 %

5.5 %

17.1 %

19.3 %

2.2 %

6.2 %

9.5 %

0.7 %

8.8 %

12.2 %

0.7 %

11.1 %

0.3 %

2.9 %

12.6 %

2.1 %

1.8 %

Q1-

18Q

4-17

Employment discrepancies versus verifications have increased from 8.8 % in Q1-18 to 12.0 % in Q2-18 in the Manufacturing sector. ITES/BPO has witnessed a drop in discrepancy rates from 11.0 % in Q1-18 to 8.1 % in Q2-18.

The discrepancy rates for Address component has shown a fall in the Retail sector from 19.3 % in Q1-18 to 12.9 % in Q2-18.

Education discrepancies versus verifications have increased from 2.2 % in Q1-18 to 5.5 % in Q2-18 in the Retail sector.

Discrepancy Trends



3.A. Discrepancy Percentage - By Component [Q3-17 to. Q2-18]

ADDRESSEMPLOYMENT

OTHERSEDUCATION

Note:

Employment component has always had the highest number of discrepancies in comparison to other components. 58.2 % discrepancies are formed by it in this quarter [which means out of every 100 discrepancies identified – 58 are of the Employment Component].

At times, discrepancies tagged byFirst Advantage are used ashighlighters, which may serve astriggers for further investigation andmight not necessarily signify a fraudor discrepancy in the literal sense.

These tags/requirements are purelybased on client criteria.

In Q2-18 - discrepancies related to Employment, Address and Education components were at 58.2 %, 5.7 % and 5.6 % respectively.

The remaining [Others] discrepancies of 30.5 %, were related to Criminal, Document Investigation, Database, Reference, etc. clubbed under others.

The Employment related discrepancies have remained consistent at 58 %.

The Address related discrepancies have decreased significantly from 10.2 % in Q1-18 to 5.7 % in Q2-18.

The Education related discrepancies have increased from 4.5 % in Q1-18 to 5.6 % in Q2-18.

Q3-17

56.2 %

7.8 %

5.5 %

30.5 %

5.7 %

5.6 %

30.5 %

58.2 %

Q2-18

10.2 %

4.5 %

26.9 %

58.4 %

Q1-18

Q4-17

7.3 %

6.6 %

25.5 %

60.5 %

Based on Discrepancy checks only

Discrepancy Trends

13

Q2-18 Trends: In the Employment discrepancy checks - Males form the biggest chunk at 78 % [which means out of every 100 Employment discrepancy checks - 78 are Males and 22 are Females]

In Address discrepancy checks, Males are at 71 % and Females are at 29 %

In the Education discrepancy checks - Males form 85 % and the remaining 15 % are Females.

In the Criminal discrepancy checks - Males form 87 % and the remaining 13 % are Females.

3.B. Discrepancy Percentage - By Component By Gender [Q1-18 vs. Q2-18]

ADDRESSEMPLOYMENT

78 %

22 %

71 %

29 %

EDUCATION

85 %

15 %

Q2-

18

CRIMINAL*

87 %

13 %

REFERENCE*

78 %

22 %

DOCUMENTINVESTIGATION*

82 %

18 %

80 %

20 %

ADDRESSEMPLOYMENT

80 %

20 %

74 %

26 %

EDUCATION

84 %

16 %

CRIMINAL*

93 %

7 %

REFERENCE*

76 %

24 %

DOCUMENTINVESTIGATION*

80 %

20 %

78 %

22 %

Q1-

18Q

2-18

Q1-

18


DATABASE*

DATABASE*

*It refers to some of the Components included in the ‘Others’ category. Based on Discrepancy Vs. Verified Checks.


4. Discrepancies - By Component across Zones in India and Abroad [Q1-18 vs. Q2-18]

Based on Discrepancy checks only.

11% 14%

road 9% road road 9%


The discrepancy trend across zones in India and abroad has displayed an interesting spectrum and has remained constant.

Discrepancy trend is consistent in the Employment, Address and Education component across zones in both - the first and second quarter of 2018.

The highlighting factors [Q2-18]:

Discrepancy rates for Employment & Address checks are very high in the Southern zone.Discrepancy rate for Education checks is the highest in the Northern zone.

Q2-18EMPLOYMENT

SOUTH

EAST

NORTH

WEST

39%

25%EMPLOYMENT

EAST

NORTH

WEST

38%

EDUCATION

SOUTH

NORTH

WEST

21%4%

SOUTH

EAST

NORTH

WEST

ADDRESS

32%

EAST

13%14%

21%

29%

25%

21%

28%

33%

Q1-18

ABROAD

ABROADABROAD

ABROAD

ABROADABROAD

EMPLOYMENT

SOUTH

EAST

NORTH

WEST

39%

25%EMPLOYMENT

EAST

NORTH

WEST

38%

EDUCATION

SOUTH

NORTH

WEST

19%3%

SOUTH

EAST

NORTH

WEST

ADDRESS

34%

EAST

14%16%

22%

28%

23%

27%

27%

32%

1%

1%

11%7%

9% 9%


Discrepancy Trends

5. Discrepancies - By Top 6 States [Q1-18 Vs. Q2-18]


In Q2-18, State - wise discrepancies, Maharashtra state leads at 22 % [which means out of every 100 discrepant checks, 22 were from Maharashtra State]

Karnataka closely follows at 21 %. Andhra Pradesh is at 11 % followed by Tamil Nadu at 9 %. Uttar Pradesh follows at 6 % and New Delhi is at 5 %.


Q2-18

KARNATAKA

21 % 5 %

UTTAR PRADESH

6 %

TAMIL NADU

9 %

MAHARASHTRA

22 %

ANDHRA PRADESH

11 %

Q1-18

KARNATAKA

21 %

NEW DELHI

NEW DELHI

5 %

UTTAR PRADESH

6 %

TAMIL NADU

8 %

MAHARASHTRA

22 %

ANDHRA PRADESH

12 %


Discrepancy Trends

8 %

9 %

12 %

3 %

3 %

6 %

4 %

8 %

3 %

4 %

Q1-18

6.A. Employment Discrepancies - By Top 10 Cities [Q1-18 Vs. Q2-18]




Bengaluru, Mumbai and Hyderabad are the metro cities which have topped in Employment related discrepancies in Q2-18.

6.B. Education Discrepancies - By Top 10 Cities [Q1-18 Vs. Q2-18]

Mumbai, New Delhi and Namchi are the cities topping the Education related discrepancies in Q2-18.

Q2-18

16 %

13 %

2 %

2 %

10 %

7 %

5 %

5 %

3 %

8 %

Q1-18

16 %

13 %

2 %

2 %

10 %

7 %

5 %

5 %

3 %

6 %

Mumbai

Hyderabad

Bengaluru

Pune

Gurgaon

Noida

Kolkata

Ahmedabad

Chennai

New Delhi

Mumbai

New Delhi

Hyderabad

Bengaluru

Jhansi

Kanpur

Namchi

Pune

Chennai

Pilani

9 %

7 %

13 %

4 %

2 %

6 %

5 %

4 %

4 %

3 %

Q2-18


Discrepancy Trends

6.C. Address Discrepancies - By Top 10 Cities [Q1-18 Vs. Q2-18]


Pune, Hyderabad and Bengaluru are the metro cities which have topped in Address related discrepancies in Q2-18.


17

Bengaluru

New Delhi

Kolkata

Gurgaon

Pune

Hyderabad

Visakhapatnam

Mumbai

Chennai

Thane

4 %

5 %

5 %

4 %

4 %

1 %

2 %

3 %

3 %

8 %

Q1-18

3 %

11 %

5 %

3 %

5 %

2 %

4 %

3 %

2 %

5 %

Q2-18


Discrepancy Trends

NEGATIVE HR/SUPERVISOR

FEEDBACK

NEGATIVE HR/SUPERVISOR

FEEDBACK

6 %

6 % Q2-

18Q

1-18

18 %

16 %

EXIT FORMALITIESNOT COMPLETED/

ABSCONDING

Q2-

18Q

1-18

EXIT FORMALITIESNOT COMPLETED/

ABSCONDING

7.A. Categorization of Discrepancies - By Component Employment [Q1-18 vs. Q2-18]


Based on Discrepancy checks only.Other False Employment includes Active Employee, Not a Direct Employee, Inflated Compensation, Not eligible for rehire, etc.

INCORRECT TENURE

INCORRECT TENURE

Q2-

18Q

1-18

POSSIBLE SUSPECTCOMPANY

POSSIBLE SUSPECTCOMPANY

6 %

6 %

Q2-

18Q

1-18

Q2-

18Q

1-18INCORRECT

SUPERVISORDETAILS

INCORRECTSUPERVISOR

DETAILS

12 %

16 %Q

2-18

Q1-

18

28 %

30 % INFLATEDDESIGNATION

INFLATEDDESIGNATION Q

2-18

Q1-

1817 %

16 %

4 %

4 %

7 % FAKE DOCUMENT/NOT AN EMPLOYEE

7 %

Q2-

18Q

1-18FAKE DOCUMENT/

NOT AN EMPLOYEE

OTHER FALSE EMPLOYMENT

OTHER FALSE EMPLOYMENT

Employment screening involvesconfirming the accuracy of thecandidate's claims about his/herprevious employment records, withthe HR and/or Supervisor [preferablythe last Reporting Manager] of theprevious employer/s. The verificationsare conducted based on thedocumentary proofs (i.e. copy ofsalary slip, relieving letter, experienceletter, etc.) submitted by thecandidate.

The HR verification would ideallyinclude questions about the tenure,designation, salary, reason forleaving, exit formalities, etc.

The Supervisor verification is morefocused on the skills, performance,strengths, weaknesses and are as ofimprovement, etc. of the candidate.

In addition to the above, it alsoinvolves an intensive research on thenet, and/or physical verificationsconducted to ascertain the existenceof the company.

In Q2-18, as usual, 'Incorrect Tenure' has topped the graph at 28 %. It is followed by ‘Inflated Designation’, ‘Exit Formalities Not Completed/Absconding' and ‘Other False Employment’ at 16 % each.


Discrepancy Trends

38 %

1 %

40 %

1 %

20 %

Q1-18

7.B.1. Categorization of Discrepancies - By Component Education [Q1-18 vs. Q2-18]


17

Based on Discrepancy checks only

Abbreviations:

[AICTE] All India Council for Technical Education[CHEA] Council for Higher Education Accreditation

[DIUS] Department for Innovation, Universities and Skills, UK[PCTIA] Private Career Training Agency of British Columbia

Suspect University/Institute/BoardFake Document

Non Accredited University by CHEA* DIUS** PCTIA*** Other false education

Fake University/Institute/Board

[UGC] University Grants Commission

A study of Education discrepancies shows a very interesting spectrum in the Q1-18 vs. Q2-18 trends.

The discrepancy trend for :

Suspect Institution forms the biggest chunk in this quarter and has increased significantly from 40 % in Q1-18 to 44 % in Q2-18. Fake document has decreased from 38 % in Q1-18 to 31 % in Q2-18.

Discrepancies like ‘Other False Education’ have increased slightly to 22 % in this quarter from 20 % in Q1-18. Other False Education includes Did not officially complete the course, Registration or Credential or membership expired, etc.

31 %

1 %

44 %

2 %

22 %

Q2-18


Discrepancy Trends


7.B.2. Discrepancies - By Education Level [Q1-18 vs. Q2-18]

Based on Education Discrepancy checks only.

GRADUATE POST GRADUATE UNDER GRADUATE

Education discrepancies at theGraduate level have always beentrending on a very high percentage,quarter on quarter, as compared to thePost Graduate and Under Graduatelevels.

Discrepancy by Education level of the candidate is another talking point of the Education verifications conducted by First Advantage.

The discrepancy percentage in the Graduate level has decreased from 71 % in Q1-18 to 64 % in Q2-18 [which means 64 out of every 100 Education discrepancies identified in Q2-18 were from the Graduate level].

The discrepancy trend for Post Graduate level has jumped from 24 % in Q1-18 to 32 % in Q2-18.

The discrepancy trend for Under Graduate level has decreased slightly from 5 % in Q1-18 to 4 % in Q2-18.

Q2-184 %

64 %

Q1-185 %

24 %

71 %

32 %


Discrepancy Trends


7.C. Categorization of Discrepancies - By Component Address [Q1-18 vs. Q2-18]


NOT RESIDING AT ADDRESS PERIOD OF STAY

Q2-18

98 %

2 %

Q1-18

95 %

5 %

Address discrepancies have shown a consistent trend.

‘Period of Stay’ forms the biggest chunk of discrepancies at 98 % [which means out of every 100 Address discrepancy checks - 98 are for ‘Period of Stay’].

2 % of the Address discrepancies are for ‘Not residing at Address’ [which goes to say that out of every 100 Address discrepancies - 2 is for ‘Not residing at Address’].

Address checks are conducted basedon the supporting documents andaddresses shared by the candidate inhis/her background verification form.The checks focus on basically twothings - one is the period of stay atthe given address and secondwhether he/she is actually a residentof the given address or not.

Most of these verifications arephysical verifications - conducted byFADV field associates paying a visit to the given address - which makes the verification all the more concreteand precise.


Discrepancy Trends

Q3-17

13 %

64 %

18 %

2 %3 %


8.A. Discrepancies - By Employee Category [Q3-17 to Q2-18]

In Q2-18 - Associate level discrepancy continues to top the graph at 65 % [which means out of every 100 discrepancy cases - 65 are from the Associate level].

It is followed by Middle Management at 18 % and First Level Supervisor at 12 %.

The graph depicts the Senior Management level discrepancies at 3 %.

The Hierarchy Matrix graph is a quickinsight into the discrepancy byEmployee category [all levels].

The trend has remained consistent forall levels in the last four quarters.

Q2-18

12 %

65 %

18 %

2 %3 %

Q1-18

12 %

64 %

19 %

2 %3 %

Q4-17

12 %

65 %

19 %

2 %3 %

ASSOCIATE MIDDLEMANAGEMENT

FIRST LEVELSUPERVISOR

APPRENTICETRAINEE/ INTERN

SENIORMANAGEMENT

Based on Discrepancy cases only.


Discrepancy Trends



8.B. Discrepancies - By Employee Category By Age [Q2-18]

<= 21 years

>= 22 to 30 years

>= 31 to 40 years

>= 41 to 50 years

APPRENTICE/TRAINEE/INTERN

ASSOCIATE FIRST LEVELSUPERVISOR

SENIORMANAGEMENT

MIDDLEMANAGEMENT


>= 51 years

0.0 %

1.8 %

0.1 %

0.0 %

0.0 %

5.5 %

5.6 %

0.6 %

0.0 %

0.1 %

0.5 %

44.5 %

18.6 %

1.4 %

0.4 %

0.0 %

0.3 %

1.5 %

1.0 %

0.1 %

0.0 %

5.5 %

10.3 %

1.9 %

0.1 %

AGE WISE BYEMPLOYEE CATEGORY

The discrepancy - by Employee Category by Age Level analysis depicts interesting details which basically links both the candidate's age and designation.

Maximum discrepancies have been observed at the Associate level at 44.5 % [which means out of every 100 discrepant cases - 45 are from the Associate level in the > = 22 to 30 years age bracket].

The First Level Supervisor has the highest number of discrepancies in the > = 31 to 40 years age bracket.

Another very interesting permutation and combination of Employee Category and age bracket comes to light in the Senior and Middle Management level and age comparison - the discrepancies are highest in the age > = 31 to 40 years age bracket. An obvious reason for this of course could be - the average time span an employee would take to reach the higher rungs of the ladder [levels] in an organization.

8.C. Discrepancies - By Employee Category By Industry [Q1-18 Vs. Q2-18]


INDUSTRYAPPRENTICE/

TRAINEE/INTERNASSOCIATE FIRST LEVEL

SUPERVISORMIDDLE

MANAGEMENTSENIOR

MANAGEMENT

ENGINEERING

FMCG

HEALTHCARE & PHARMA

IT

ITES/BPO

MANUFACTURING

RETAIL

TELECOM

TRAVEL & HOSPITALITY

Q2-18

BFSI

Q2-18 Q2-18 Q2-18 Q2-18

4.46 %

6.67 %

7.41 %

0.69 %

1.36 %

0.00 %

1.85 %

2.56 %

1.37 %

1.33 %

3.47 %

18.18 %

2.13 %

1.72 %

1.77 %

0.00 %

5.00 %

2.72 %

0.71 %

2.20 %

25.87 %

53.33 %

18.52 %

14.29 %

7.13 %

9.76 %

20.37 %

26.92 %

9.32 %

8.97 %

28.68 %

18.18 %

14.89 %

12.40 %

8.58 %

10.12 %

18.75 %

41.50 %

7.65 %

13.45 %

13.27 %

13.33 %

27.78 %

17.38 %

8.99 %

8.29 %

14.81 %

12.82%

11.51 %

9.63 %

14.06 %

9.09 %

29.79 %

16.03 %

8.40 %

13.36 %

8.75 %

14.29 %

11.57 %

6.85 %

54.42 %

26.67 %

44.44 %

63.17 %

81.04 %

80.00 %

60.19 %

56.41 %

76.99 %

77.08 %

51.45 %

54.55 %

48.94 %

65.84 %

79.79 %

75.71 %

63.75 %

40.82 %

78.83 %

73.35 %

1.98 %

0.00 %

1.85 %

4.48 %

1.48 %

1.95 %

2.78 %

1.28 %

0.82 %

2.99 %

2.34 %

0.00 %

4.26 %

4.01 %

1.46 %

0.81 %

3.75 %

0.68 %

1.25 %

4.16 %

Q1-18 Q1-18 Q1-18 Q1-18 Q1-18

Discrepancy Trends


9. Verification Success vs. Unable to Verify % [ Q1-18 Vs. Q2-18 ]

Checks Completed

Pure Verifications

Cannot be verified

Inaccessible for verification

Information to proceed notreceived from client

Stop Check

Verification not required

Unable to verify

Success Percentage

Q2-18

98.96 %

Q1-18

98.98 %

Based on Checks completed.

Inactive

Q2-18

98.10 %

0.34 %

0.32 %

0.19 %

1.04 %

Q1-18

97.97 %

0.37 %

0.37 %

0.27 %

1.02 %

First Advantage's Verifications success percentage is as high as 99 % approximately [98.98 % in Q1-18 & 98.96 % in Q2-18].

Only a miniscule 1 % of the checks are tagged as Unable to verify where in the Verifying authorities refuse to provide verifications in spite of several requests.

This success percentage includes 1 %of checks which are tagged asCannot be Verified, Inaccessible forVerification, Information to proceednot received from Client, StopCheck, Verification not Required,Inactive, etc.

Reasons are varied like Company/University ceased to exist,Company not maintainingex-employee records, Companyshifted years before, Client wouldnot like to continue with thecandidate's verification for reasonsbest known to them, etc.

These tagging are based on thesimple logic that if First Advantagecannot verify them then no otherBackground Screening company willbe able to procure the verificationgiven the same scenario.

The Q2-18 success percentage is trending as usual - only 1 % of the checks have been tagged as Unable to Verify [UTV]. Certain organizations/verifying authorities do not provide verifications [as in their own verbatim] - it is not one of their priorities, what a candidate does after he/she leaves their organization is least of their concerns. Other major reasons for not being able to procure verifications could be time constraints and lack of awareness of due diligence of the verifier, etc.

Also there are certain clients whowould rather have checks closed as'Unable to Verify' post the requisitenumber of attempts as they are in arush to onboard the candidates.


Discrepancy Trends

Although background screening in India is not a mandate like in the US and other developed countries - the awareness and importance of screening backgrounds is growing at a very fast pace. It is being basically seen as risk mitigating tool which forearms employers and helps weeding out negative resources.

The inflow of cases - in sectors like BFSI, Healthcare & Pharma, IT, ITES/BPO, Telecom and Manufacturing has shown a huge jump at in the second quarter of 2018 as compared to the first quarter. Sectors like Consulting, Logistics, Recruitment and Data Analytics too have shown a spurt in volumes.

A comparative study of the quarterly averages of 2017 [04] and 2018 [02] shows that BFSI, Healthcare & Pharma, IT, Telecom and Travel & Hospitality sectors depict in vast increase [14 % overall] in the case inflow. In addition the study also shows that there has been a hike in volumes in Conglomerate, Data Analytics, Recruitment, Due Diligence and Real Estate sectors.

A quarter on quarter [QoQ] study i.e. the second quarter of 2017 and 2018 has shown 28 % increase in the overall inflow of cases. Sectors like BFSI, IT, Manufacturing, Telecom and Travel & Hospitality have led to the jump in volumes.

Only 1 % of the checks worked upon by First Advantage have ended up as ‘Unable to Verify’. This gives us more reason to cheer as Verifying Authorities across locations are now more willing to support the concept of background screening by providing verifications.

As the awareness is growing it is also serving as a deterrent for a candidate to fake information and at the same time is encouraging them to be more open with sharing information irrespective of the information being negative or positive.

Employers are feeling a lot more confident - since they are equipped with more inside information of the candidate whom they are planning to take on board and are also happy to have the option of making choices and deciding who would be more apt for their organization.


ETHICAL VERIFICATIONS & VALUES NO BLOATING NUMBERS

Credentials of not just the Candidate arescreened but care is also taken, to acquire

verification only from authorized personnelof the HR department or from officiallydesignated email ids of companies theverification is being sought from. Call

recordings in the verification process is aroutine practice to maintain and ensure ourquality. Vendor credentials are scrutinized

and cross verified before engaging in apartnership. First Advantage is incompliance with FCPA and FCRA

regulations. First Advantage also ensuresscreening of its employees in compliance

with the British Standard 7858 guidelines.

The First Advantage Trends Report and itsstudy is purely based on discrepancies as per

the Client and First Advantage definedcriteria. The data percentages do not include

checks which Cannot Be Verified or areInaccessible For Verification due to genuine

reasons, where a company does not holdex-employee records/Organization

/Institute has ceased its operation so records are not available for verification.

CONCLUSIONHIGHLIGHTS DISCREPANCY ANALYSIS [Q2-18]

About First Advantage

Verifications Offered:

First Advantage provides comprehensive screening solutions including employeescreening, vendor screening, consumer screening and ‘know your customer’offering. First Advantage supports thousands of clients globally, includinghundreds of Fortune 1000 companies, by providing integrated, single-sourcesolutions that feature quality products and business practices, con gurabletechnology, helpful compliance and managed services, and highly responsiveclient support.

First Advantage, a talent acquisition solutions provider, offers companies aroundthe globe solutions to improve their decision making and process for talentacquisition across the employment continuum. Custom tailored for each client,the solutions address recruiting, screening and assessment, on-boarding, andre-screening. As employers tackle the challenges of recruitment and talentmanagement, they turn to First Advantage for integrated solutions.

First Advantage provides a comprehensive suite of global talent acquisitionsolutions designed to reduce time, cost and risk associated with candidaterecruiting, applicant tracking, screening, assessments and ongoing retentionprocesses. In India, First Advantage offers Background Screening Servicesand Assessments.

First Advantage combines industryexpertise with information to createproducts and services thatorganizations worldwide use to makesmarter business decisions. FirstAdvantage is a leading provider oftalent acquisition solutions includingemployment background screening,occupational health check-upservices, applicant tracking systems,recruiting solutions, behavioral andskills assessments, and business taxconsulting services. More informationabout First Advantage can be foundat www.FADV.com.

AssessmentsEducationEmploymentCriminalAddressIdentityDatabaseHealthFinancial CredibilityCV ValidationGlobal ChecksSocial Media ChecksOwner / Proprietor


ABOUT US

35,000Customers worldwide

screens on 17.2 million applicants

55million

6millionChecks annually

in India

265000

2500+Customers in

India

Offices in14 countries

Employees

As part of our growing offering of solutions for theemployment continuum in Asia-Pacific, First Advantagehas launched a complete suite of talent acquisitionsolutions including Behavioral and Skill Assessments,Applicant Tracking System, Candidate RelationshipManagement, and on-boarding solutions.

Verify Direct launched in 2009 is the first-ever Asia-Pacific-widecontributory database driven online background screening service.It covers all industries and provides instant verifications throughsecured online transactions 24/7. This online service facilitates fasterverification of facts submitted by candidates seeking employment,loans or for any other legitimate business purpose, with relatively less documentation compared to the current, more conventionalmethods of verifying such facts.

First Advantage combines industry expertise with information to create products and services that organizations worldwide use to make smarter business decisions. First Advantage is a leading provider of talent acquisition solutions, including employment background screening, occupational health check-up services, applicant tracking systems, recruiting solutions, behavioral and

skills assessments, and business tax consulting services. More information about First Advantage can be found atwww.fadv.com Verifications Offered.


A TALENT ACQUISITION SOLUTION PROVIDER

28

The journey for First Advantage 3.0 is just beginning! The new Vision statement is at the core of FADV 3.0.

Our Vision

“Deliver innovative solutions and insights that help our clients manage risk and hire the best talent ”


OUR VISION AND MISSION

VDI SERVICES FOR BUSINESS:BETTER HIRES / BETTER BUSINESS

VDI SERVICES FOR INDIVIDUALS:KNOW MORE / RISK LESS

Companies: Database:

Pre-Matrimonial Screening:

For more information contact us at :+1800.103.5563

[email protected]

VerifyDirectTM is a leading platform offering a full spectrum of premium quality online background screening and risk mitigationsolutions to businesses as well as individuals. A global market leader servicing customers across 150 countries worldwide, FirstAdvantage provides over 55 million checks verifications annually.

Safe, secure, easy to use, quick and affordable, VerifyDirectTM is a simplified portal delivering the same value and robust services tosmall and mid-sized businesses ( SMBs ) and consumers. In India, First Advantage & VerifyDirect operate out of state-of-the-artoffices in Mumbai, Bangalore, Delhi & Chennai with about 5000+ employees.

Background screening includes checks on employment, education, criminal history & address amongst others which can be orderedonline via value deal packages or a la carte.

Make smart hiring decisions by verifying credentials of candidatesand employees. Your workplace gets safer, more productive andyou save on replacement cost.

Ascertain important information about your future partner. Sayno to fake identities. Say no to being duped in marriage.

Protect your family and your belongings. Verify the identity andaddress of the people that have access to your house and life.

Determine the identity of the person who lives in your house. Anessential service for property owners, hostels and real estateagents.

Get an edge over other job-seekers. Get hired faster. Verify yourresume and get First Advantage certified.

Reduce time and costs associated with candidate veification. Ourdatabase gives you quick search access to employment details ofthousands of ex-employees from several multinational firms.


VERIFY DIRECT INTERNATIONALPOWERED BY FIRST ADVANTAGE

Executive Advantage™

The Power Of A Few Can Influence The Behaviour Of Many!The Companies Act 2013 issued by the Ministry of Corporate Affairs lays on us on the Directors of the Board of a Company to ensure that Independent Directors & Key Managerial Personnel appointed are persons of integrity and possess relevant expertise and experience.

The Risks We Help You Mitigate

REGULATORYCOMPLIANCE ISSUES

Negative media

BRAND INTEGRITY & GOODWILL

FINANCIAL RISK

Data / IP TheftAssault /

Harassment damages

Loss of customers &

business

Poor organizational

climate

Here Is Our Offering

A far-reaching background check

Led by specialists

Via expert research methodologies

In a fully compliant manner, abiding by existing laws

Presented in a comprehensive Dossier Report

Choose The Leaders Your Organization Deserves. Choose The Best!

Get TheExecutive Advantage!

Leadership Screening Solutions


31

Provides quality and in-depth information that can solidly corroborate a candidate's professional credentials and background and also helps reveal a wealth of additional information in terms of strengths & weaknesses, attributes demonstrated, behavior, social life and overall personality of a candidate

Comprehensive background screening with a 360 degree perspective on the executive hire is critical for you to make an informed decision.

Executive Screening Packages

*As needed you may opt to include address, passport, PAN card or criminal court checks at an additional cost

Package for India includes the following checks:

First Advantage provides comprehensive background screening solutions that give employers and property managers’ access to actionable information allowing for faster decisions with dramatically better insights. With an advanced global technology platform, superior customer service and compliance expertise delivered by experts who understand local markets, First Advantage helps customers around the world build fully scalable, configurable screening programs that meet their unique needs. Headquartered in Atlanta, Ga., First Advantage supports over 35,000 clients worldwide with offices throughout North America, Europe and Asia. More information about First Advantage can be accessed at www.fadv.com

For further details on Executive Screening, email us at [email protected] or call us on +91 7710022111

360 Degree Check: Understanding candidate’s professional competencies, roles, responsibilities, etc. from co-workers

Directorship Check: Checks if candidate holds any directorship position which has not been declared and poses a conflict of interest to the hiring company

Social Media Check: Can be done for India and for Indian citizens only. Checks candidate’s presence on social media, network strength, social reach, online buzz, quality and intonation of updates where available

Database Check (Global and India): Provides information on any negative, criminal or fraudulent activity reported in the media anywhere in the world

Shadow Referencing: Understand candidate’s background, interaction, feedback, mentionable incidents, people issues, harassment issues, general views, management style, philanthropy, integrity, etc.

CIBIL: Analysis of credit score

Education Check: Verify education, training or other certification claims made by candidates

Employment Check: Verify candidates’ past work history

Why Us?

We conduct 6 Million checks annually

We have conducted 55+ Million screenings

We are a trusted partner to over 35,000 companies worldwide

We adhere to and practice a ‘no tolerance for non-compliance' policy ensuring complete authenticity and auditability

We are compliant with FCPA, FCRA and other local and international regulations


Call +91 80 4252 9400email [email protected] fadv.com/apac

First Advantage - IndiaInterface 7, 1st Floor

Link Road, Malad (West)Mumbai 400 064

+91 22 4069 7000

First Advantage Pvt. Ltd.

Inventor Bldg, Ground FloorInternational Tech Park Ltd (ITPL)Whitefield Road, Bangalore - 560066

+91 80 4252 9400

We Operate in26 Offices, 14 Countries, 5000+ Employees


As the trusted partner of over 35,000organizations worldwide, we at FirstAdvantage provide easy-to-understandbackground screening results so you canconfidently make decisions about prospectiveemployees, vendors and renters. Not onlydoes this safeguard your brand, but you alsoarrive at dramatically better backgroundinsights- insights you can rely on.

It’s time to partner with First Advantage. Nowin 26 locations, 14 countries and conductingover 55 million international backgroundscreens on 17.2 million applicants annually.

Trusted Knowledge. Exceptional People.

Background Screening Trends India · Trends Report to model their background screening programs and...

Documents

Transcript of Background Screening Trends India · Trends Report to model their background screening programs and...