View original document

The full text on this page is automatically extracted from the file linked above and may contain errors and inconsistencies.

WASHINGTON, D. C.  20551

SR 00-4 (SUP)
February 29, 2000

Outsourcing of Information and Transaction Processing

Banking organizations are increasingly relying on services provided by other
entities to support a range of banking operations. Outsourcing of information and transaction
processing activities, either to affiliated institutions or third-party service providers, may help
banking organizations manage data processing and related personnel costs, improve services,
and obtain expertise not available internally. At the same time, the reduced operational control
over outsourced activities may expose an institution to additional risks.
The federal banking agencies have established procedures to examine and
evaluate the adequacy of institutions' controls over service providers.1 This SR letter reiterates
and clarifies the Federal Reserve's expectations regarding the management of risks that may
arise from the outsourcing of critical information and transaction processing activities by
banking organization. Operations addressed under this supervisory letter include the
origination, processing, and settlement of payments and financial transactions, information
processing related to customer account creation and maintenance, as well as other information
and transaction processing activities that support critical banking functions, such as lending,
deposit-taking, fiduciary, or trading activities. While the guidelines outlined in this letter
apply to outsourced services, rather than products purchased or licensed from technology
vendors (such as systems and software), many of the risk management techniques may also be
applicable to the use and maintenance of such products.
Outsourcing Risks
Outsourcing of information and transaction processing involves similar
operational risks that arise when these functions are performed internally, such as threats to the
availability of systems used to support customer transactions, the integrity or security of
customer account information, or the integrity of risk management information systems.
Under outsourcing arrangements, however, the risk management measures commonly used to
address these risks, such as internal controls and procedures, are generally under the direct
operational control of the service provider, rather than the serviced institution that would bear
the associated risk of financial loss, reputational damage, or other adverse consequences.
Some outsourcing arrangements also involve direct financial risks to the serviced
institution. For example, for some transaction processing activities, a service provider has the
ability to process transactions that result in extensions of credit on behalf of the serviced

institution.2 A service provider may also collect or disburse funds, exposing the institution to
liquidity and credit risks should the service provider fail to perform as expected.
Risk Management
The Federal Reserve expects institutions to ensure that controls over outsourced
information and transaction processing activities are equivalent to those that would be
implemented if the activity were conducted internally. The institution's board of directors and
senior management should understand the key risks associated with the use of service
providers for its critical operations, commensurate with the scope and risks of the outsourced
activity and its importance to the institution's business. They should ensure that an appropriate
oversight program is in place to monitor each service provider's controls, condition, and
performance. The following areas should be included in this process:
Risk assessment:  Before entering into an outsourcing arrangement,
the institution should assess the key risks that may arise and options
for controlling these risks. Factors influencing the risk assessment
could include, for example, the criticality of the function to the
institution, the nature of activities to be performed by the service
provider, including handling funds or implementing credit decisions,
the availability of alternative service providers for the particular
function, insurance coverage available for particular risks, and the
cost and time required to switch service providers should problems
Selection of service provider:  In selecting a service provider for
critical information or transaction processing functions, an institution
should perform sufficient due diligence to satisfy itself of the service
provider's competence and stability, both financially and
operationally, to provide the expected services and meet any related
Contracts:  The written contract between the institution and the
service provider should clearly specify, at a level of detail
commensurate with the scope and risks of the outsourced activity, all
relevant terms, conditions, responsibilities, and liabilities of both
parties. These would normally include terms such as:
Required service levels, performance standards, and penalties.
Internal controls, insurance, disaster recovery capabilities, and
other risk management measures maintained by the service
Data and system ownership and access.
Liability for delayed or erroneous transactions and other
potential risks.
Provisions for and access by the institution to internal or
external audits or other reviews of the service provider's
operations and financial condition.
Compliance with any applicable regulatory requirements and
access to information and operations by the institution's

supervisory authorities.
Provisions for handling disputes, contract changes, and contract
Terms and conditions should be assessed by the institution to ensure
that they are appropriate for the particular service being provided and
result in an acceptable level of risk to the institution.4 Contracts for
outsourcing of critical functions should be reviewed by the
institution's legal counsel.
Policies, procedures, and controls:  The service provider should
implement internal control policies and procedures, data security and
contingency capabilities, and other operational controls analogous to
those that the institution would utilize if the activity were performed
internally. Appropriate controls should be placed on transactions
processed or funds handled by the service provider on behalf of the
institution. The service provider's policies and procedures should be
reviewed by client institutions.
Ongoing monitoring:  The institution should review the operational
and financial performance of critical service providers on an ongoing
basis to ensure that the service provider is meeting and can continue
to meet the terms of the arrangement. The institution's staff should
have sufficient training and expertise to review the service provider's
performance and risk controls.
Information access:  The institution must ensure that it has complete
and immediate access to information critical to its operations that is
maintained or processed by a service provider. Records maintained at
the institution must be adequate to enable examiners to review its
operations fully and effectively even if a function is outsourced.
Audit:  The institution's audit function should review the oversight of
critical service providers. Audits of the outsourced function should
be conducted according to a scope and frequency appropriate for the
particular function. Serviced institutions should conduct audits of the
service provider or regularly review the service provider's internal or
external audit scope and findings. Service providers should have an
effective internal audit function or should commission
comprehensive, regular audits from a third-party organization.5 Audit
results and management responses must be available to examiners
upon request.
Contingency plans:  The serviced institution should ensure adequate
business resumption planning and testing by the service provider.
Where appropriate based on the scope and risks of the outsourced
function and the condition and performance of the service provider,
the serviced institution's contingency plan may also include plans for
the continuance of processing activities, either in-house or with
another provider, in the event that the service provider is no longer
able to provide the contracted services or the arrangement is
otherwise terminated unexpectedly.

International Considerations
In general, arrangements for outsourcing of critical information or transaction
processing functions to service providers located outside the United States should be
conducted according to the risk management guidelines described above. In addition, the
Federal Reserve expects that these arrangements will be established in a manner that does not
diminish the ability of U.S. supervisors to review effectively the domestic or foreign
operations of U.S. banking organizations and the U.S. operations of foreign banking
organizations. In particular, examiners should evaluate the adequacy of outsourcing
arrangements in the following areas:
Oversight and compliance:  The institution is expected to demonstrate
adequate oversight of a foreign service provider, such as through
comprehensive audits conducted by the service provider's internal or
external auditors, the institution's own auditors, or foreign bank
supervisory authorities. The arrangement must not hinder the ability
of the institution to comply with all applicable U.S. laws and
regulations, including, for example, requirements for accessibility and
retention of records under the Bank Secrecy Act.
Information access:  The outsourcing arrangement should be
conducted in a manner so as not to hinder the ability of U.S.
supervisors to reconstruct the U.S. activities of the organization in a
timely manner if necessary. Outsourcing to jurisdictions where full
and complete access to information may be impeded by legal or
administrative restrictions on information flows will not be acceptable
unless copies of records pertaining to U.S. operations are also
maintained at the institution's U.S. office.
Audit:  Copies of the most recent audits of the outsourcing
arrangement must be maintained in English at the institution's U.S.
office and must be made available to examiners upon request.
Contingency plan:  The institution's contingency plan must include
provisions to ensure timely access to critical information and service
resumption in the event of unexpected national or geographic
restrictions or disruptions affecting a foreign service provider's ability
to provide services. Depending on the scope and risks of the
outsourced function, this may necessitate back-up arrangements with
other U.S. or foreign service providers in other geographic areas.
Foreign banking organizations:  With the exception of a U.S. branch
or agency of a foreign bank that relies on the parent organization for
information or transaction processing services, foreign banking
organizations should maintain at the U.S. office documentation of the
home office's approval of outsourcing arrangements supporting its
U.S. operations, whether to a U.S. or foreign service provider. The
organization's U.S. office should also maintain documentation
demonstrating appropriate oversight of the service provider's
activities, such as written contracts, audit reports, and other
monitoring tools. Where appropriate, the Federal Reserve will
coordinate with a foreign banking organization's home country
supervisor to ensure that it does not object to the outsourcing

Foreign branches or subsidiaries of U.S. banks and Edge
corporations:  Documentation relating to outsourcing arrangements of
the foreign operations of U.S. banking organizations with foreign
service providers should be made available to examiners upon
Examination Implementation
In the development of the examination scope and risk profile, examiners should
determine which information and transaction processing activities critical to the institution's
core operations are outsourced. During the on-site examination, the adequacy of the
institution's risk management for these critical service providers should be assessed and
evaluated. The overall assessment should be reflected in the relevant components of the
Uniform Information Technology Rating System examination rating, or the Uniform Financial
Institution Rating System, if an information systems rating is not assigned.
This supervisory letter should be shared with banking organizations. If you have
any questions regarding this letter, please contact Heidi Richards, Manager, Specialized
Activities, (202) 452-2598.

Richard Spillenkothen
Cross Reference:  SR letter 97-35

Refer to the Federal Reserve Commercial Bank Examination Manual (updated May 1998),
Section 4060 Computer Services, and the FFIEC Information Systems Examination Handbook
(1996 Edition). Other supervisory guidance has addressed outsourcing of business activities,
such as internal audit (see SR letter 97-35, “Interagency Guidance on the Internal Audit
Function and its Outsourcing.”) See also Federal Reserve Bank of New York, “Outsourcing
Financial Services Activities: Industry Practices to Mitigate Risks,” October, 1999 (available
at  Return to text
For example, an institution may authorize a service provider to originate payments on
behalf of customers for which the institution is required to honor by law or contract, such as
ACH credit transfers.  Return to text
Where the service provider is affiliated with the serviced institution, Sections 23A and 23B
of the Federal Reserve Act may apply. In particular, Section 23B provides that the terms of
transactions between a bank and its non-bank affiliate must be comparable to the terms of
similar transactions between nonaffiliated parties.  Return to text
Additional information regarding common contract provisions can be found in the Federal
Reserve Commercial Bank Examination Manual and the FFIEC Information Systems
Examination Handbook. In addition, FFIEC Supervisory Policy SP-5 requires each serviced
institution to evaluate the adequacy of its service provider’s contingency plans.  Return to text

AICPA Statement of Auditing Standards No. 70 “Reports on the Processing of
Transactions by Service Organizations,” commonly known as SAS 70 reports, are one
commonly used external audit tool for service providers.  Return to text
SR letters | 2000
Home | Banking information and regulation
Accessibility | Contact Us
Last update: July 26, 2001