Three questions every Federal CFO should be asking about fraud, waste, and abuse prevention

Fraud, waste, and abuse (FWA) in government programs isn’t just a financial issue—it’s a credibility issue. And in 2025, under a renewed mandate from the Trump administration, federal Chief Financial Officers (CFOs) are being asked to do far more than ensure compliance and maintain financial reporting standards. They’re being asked to serve as frontline defenders of America’s fiscal integrity—delivering timely, accurate and reliable financial information, safeguarding public funds and leading efforts to strengthen internal controls and operational efficiency across their agencies.

Two executive orders issued in March underscore the urgency. The first—“Modernizing Payments To and From America’s Bank Account”—places the Department of the Treasury at the center of all federal financial activity, requiring agencies to modernize, digitize and unify their payment operations. The second—“Protecting America’s Bank Account Against Fraud, Waste, and Abuse”—sets a new standard for government-wide accountability, demanding aggressive action to identify, prevent and recover losses from FWA.

Against this backdrop, every CFO across federal agencies—whether under the CFO Act or not—faces difficult questions about their current posture and future readiness. Here are the three most critical:

• Are we proactively preventing fraud, waste and abuse (FWA) in our financial systems—and are we fully integrated with Treasury’s modernized payment architecture?

The most significant shift in federal financial strategy under recent executive orders is a move from reactive detection to proactive prevention. Historically, agencies relied on audits, manual reviews or IG investigations to uncover misuse—often after the damage was done. That’s no longer acceptable.

Modernized payment systems, guided by Treasury’s centralized services, now enable agencies to embed risk-scoring, anomaly detection and identity verification directly into the payment pipeline. The goal is to flag suspicious transactions before funds leave government accounts—not weeks or months later. If your fraud controls begin after the transaction is processed, they’re already too late.

At the same time, Treasury’s evolving role as a central financial steward requires agencies to align with its technical and policy infrastructure. This includes real-time payment visibility, standardized digital formats and centralized fraud monitoring. Agencies must move away from siloed, agency-specific systems and toward interoperable, Treasury-connected platforms. Delays in integration or resistance to standardization not only increase FWA exposure but also introduce compliance risks.

Key takeaway: Prevention must be built into the front end of financial systems, and integration with Treasury’s architecture is no longer optional—it’s essential for both compliance and resilience.

•  Do we have a dedicated task force to respond when fraud indicators emerge?

Even with the best prevention tools in place, anomalies will surface—and when they do, agencies must be ready to act fast. That means having a cross-functional FWA response team in place: a task force that includes finance, legal, IT, program operations, and communications. This team should be empowered to investigate flagged transactions, coordinate with Treasury and oversight bodies and take corrective action in real time.

Without a clear post-incident playbook and designated personnel, even minor anomalies can spiral into major reputational and financial risks. Who owns the response? Who triages alerts? Who communicates findings to leadership and external stakeholders? These questions must be answered before—not after—anomalies occur.

Key takeaway: Prevention is only half the equation. Agencies must also establish a rapid-response task force to investigate, contain and resolve FWA incidents as they arise.

• Do we have the authority, tools and workforce in place to meet a modern FWA mandate?

FWA prevention is no longer a narrow finance function. It requires cross-functional coordination, modern data platforms, and a workforce trained to recognize financial, cyber, and operational fraud patterns.  It requires augmenting Government data sets with Commercial data sets to prevent FWA.

CFOs must take a hard look at whether their teams have the tools—advanced analytics, AI-enabled monitoring, digital identity verification—as well as the governance structures to act swiftly when fraud indicators emerge. Do financial analysts have access to program data? Can your agency flag and stop a high-risk payment within minutes? Do you have a fraud operations center with enough reach and authority?

Key takeaway: A 2025 FWA strategy demands 2025-level systems, skills, and decision-making agility.

The Path Forward

President Trump’s 2025 executive orders represent more than policy—they mark a turning point. For too long, fraud has been treated as a cost of doing business in government. Now, it’s a test of leadership.

Federal CFOs have a rare opportunity—and a clear mandate—to rethink how their agencies protect taxpayer dollars. The challenge is significant, but so is the momentum. With Treasury leading the charge and digital modernization underway, agencies that act now can build smarter, faster, and more accountable financial systems.

That work begins with a fresh look at the financial management strategy. Reassessing existing playbooks—and doing so with trusted partners who understand federal systems, policy requirements, and the nuances of various agencies’ infrastructures—can help leaders uncover both immediate gaps and long-term opportunities. With the right expertise in the room, today’s compliance pressure can evolve into tomorrow’s competitive advantage in mission delivery and financial integrity.

To explore how modern tools and strategies can help your agency meet the 2025 FWA mandate, download our CGI Fraud, Waste and Abuse Prevention Platform solution brief.