A private equity (PE) sponsor cannot ignore a company’s anti-corruption history and compliance program upon completing its pre-acquisition due diligence and vetting. After an investment is made, a PE sponsor must confront how it will supervise the portfolio company’s compliance program to optimally protect the investment and itself. Sponsors are forced to perform balancing acts, however, because exercising control over a portfolio company’s anti-corruption compliance program also introduces an increased risk of liability. This final article in our three-part series examining corruption risk and liability related to portfolio companies discusses how a PE sponsor can approach oversight and various strategies for handling an anti-corruption issue that arises after a deal has closed. The first article addressed the PE industry’s compliance and enforcement climate, along with the risks a firm faces related to its portfolio companies. The second article examined key components of pre-deal assessment and diligence, when to walk away from a deal and when it may make sense to invest in companies that have had Foreign Corrupt Practices Act problems. See “Five Compliance Lessons Private Fund Managers Can Glean From Och-Ziff’s FCPA Settlement” (Nov. 3, 2016); and “ALM General Counsel Summit Reveals How Private Fund Managers Can Adopt a Robust Compliance Program and Address FCPA Risks” (Dec. 3, 2015).