Resolving a government FCPA investigation is a costly proposition; if a company is required to retain a monitor, the costs skyrocket. Companies can limit the burden of monitorship, however, by carefully vetting their monitor candidates and choosing a monitor that is business-minded, pragmatic and efficient. This article details the specific characteristics a company should look for when choosing a monitor and discusses strategies for limiting the costs of monitorship. The first article in this three-part series examined precedent, practice and trends in post-settlement FCPA reporting obligations; discussed the shift to less traditional forms of reporting; explained the process by which reporting obligations are created; and described the mechanics of the most intrusive types of reporting – traditional monitorship and self-reporting. See “How to Find a Business-Minded Compliance Monitor and Minimize Reporting Requirements When Negotiating an FCPA Settlement (Part One of Three)” (Feb. 20, 2013). The second article in this series provided real-world examples of innovative reporting requirements and outlined strategies for negotiating the most beneficial reporting requirements possible. See “How to Find a Business-Minded Compliance Monitor and Minimize Reporting Requirements When Negotiating an FCPA Settlement (Part Two of Three)” (Mar. 6, 2013).