Investigation simulations, structured feedback and measurable competency assessment.
Policies and automated tools set the rules. But the analyst still has to interpret the alert, weigh limited or contradictory information, choose the right checks and document the reasoning behind the decision.
Even with screening configured correctly, the quality of a decision depends on the analyst's professional judgement. AML Casework lets analysts practise decisions on training scenarios, receive structured feedback and repeat difficult typologies with no risk to clients or the business. The senior analyst steps in for a targeted review of identified gaps instead of checking every step by hand.
Regulatory requirements, supervisory expectations and financial-crime methods keep changing. The case library is updated to reflect new legislation, guidance and typology material. Every module lists its version, update date and the sources used.
The platform records assigned modules, completion dates, the analyst's decisions, assessment results, repeat attempts and the version of the training material. This data forms a structured report for internal control, audit and, where required, supervisory review.
The analyst works through the same kind of cases they will meet in real work.
Study the client profile, documents, the reason the alert fired and the flow-of-funds graph.
Close the alert, request additional information or EDD, escalate to the MLRO or draft an STR/SAR.
Get feedback on missed risk indicators, the quality of the rationale, the action chosen and the use of investigation resources.
In a training scenario the number of additional requests is limited. This teaches the analyst to ask for information that genuinely affects the risk assessment. The limit is a simulator mechanic and does not replace the mandatory checks required by law and the company's internal procedures.
The analyst must state the facts, risk indicators and internal-procedure provisions the conclusion rests on.
The analyst states how confident they are in the decision. The platform compares it with the outcome and flags overconfidence and topics that need repetition.
A single training programme and clear criteria for clearing analysts to work independently.
Accuracy of conclusions, missed risk indicators, justified requests, escalation quality and adherence to target handling time.
History of assignments, completions, decisions, scores, repeat attempts and material versions — per employee and per team.
By separate agreement, we convert your company's anonymised cases into training modules that reflect its products, internal procedures and the risk scenarios analysts actually encounter.
The procedure for transferring, anonymising, storing and deleting materials is set out in the contract and data-processing terms.
Passes on practical experience and the company's internal context. But it takes a lot of senior time and is hard to scale across the whole team.
Helps master the functions and logic of a specific tool. It usually doesn't account for your company's internal procedures, risk appetite or product scenarios.
Provides a structured theoretical foundation and confirms programme completion. But a single exam doesn't always show how an analyst makes and justifies decisions in difficult situations.
Centralises training assignment, completion tracking and reporting. The result depends on the content: standard modules tend to test knowledge rather than the quality of practical decisions.
Your cases. Every decision recorded. Analytics on the team's competency gaps and documented training outcomes for internal control, audit and supervisory review.
AML Casework doesn't replace internal policies, mentoring or an LMS. It brings them together into a repeatable process of practical training and decision assessment.
