Virginia Board of Accountancy (VBOA) to Form Peer Review Oversight Committee; VSCPA Offers Feedback

The Virginia Board of Accountancy (VBOA) is establishing a Peer Review Oversight Committee to oversee the process and review of peer review in the Commonwealth effective July 1, 2010.

To provide reasonable assurance that peer reviews are conducted and reported in accordance to the AICPA Standards for Performance and Reporting on Peer Reviews, the PROC will monitor the VSCPA Peer Review Program, which administers the AICPA Peer Review Program in Virginia.

The VSCPA Peer Review Program also undergoes a biennial oversight process conducted by the AICPA, and received clean reports on its last two oversights, conducted in 2007 (PDF) and 2009 (PDF).

In establishing the PROC, the VBOA is following the recommendation of the National Association of State Boards of Accountancy (NASBA) that all state boards perform oversight of approved practice-monitoring programs as part of their usual and customary duties when practice monitoring is a condition of licensure, as is the case for licensed Virginia firms.

Read more about the establishment of the PROC, including the VSCPA's feedback to the VBOA here.

Peer Review Board Meeting Hits Several Hot Topics

It’s cold and rainy in Phoenix today, just like back home in Richmond. Despite the gloomy weather, we’re accomplishing a great deal today at the Peer Review Board meeting.

Here are a few items on the agenda:

• Increased peer review requirements for A-133 engagements
• Strategies to increase the pool of future peer reviewers
• Increasing input on standards and oversight implementation from technical reviewers and administrators
• Planning for the Peer Review Conference, to be held August 1–3, 2010, in San Antonio, Texas

We’ve been talking a great deal about the second bullet point in Virginia. We currently have about 50 peer reviewers who perform reviews in Virginia, which is a good, strong number. But many of those reviewers perform only one or two reviews each year, which means several reviewers are stretched thin. Not to mention that several of the more active reviewers are nearing retirement. It’s important to ensure we have a healthy pool of strong peer reviewers moving forward to adequately meet the need.

This profession prides itself on strong self-oversight. We have an obligation to keep the Peer Review Program as strong as it is now. I’m glad we’re addressing this important issue, and I look forward to more discussion on this topic today.

Back to the meeting. …