The AICPA's special Peer Review Task Force released a set of recommendations to enhance the transparency of the Institute’s Peer Review Program.

Recognizing the increased demand for peer review information by regulators and other users, the Task Force recommended that the peer review reports of firms that have received a second consecutive modified and any adverse peer review report should be provided to state accountancy boards.

Other key Task Force recommendations include:

• Peer review reports should be as concise as possible and written in “plain English.” The “grading” terminology should be simplified and the report should be a stand-alone document that discloses the significant matters affecting the type of report issued.
• The current peer review administrative oversight processes should be made more transparent by communicating the objectives, procedures, and
  results of oversight to the public through annual, and in certain cases biannual, reports issued by the
  AICPA and the state CPA societies that administer
  the program.
• To ensure a level playing field for all practitioners, all state boards of accountancy should require peer review as a condition of licensure.
• The AICPA should conduct a comprehensive peer reviewer recruitment campaign to attract new, quality peer reviewers and to educate firms on the benefits of having its owners and staff members involved in performing peer reviews.
• The AICPA should continue its peer review communications efforts to members and users of
  peer review.
• The AICPA’s Peer Review Board should continue to ensure the high quality of peer reviewers, establish additional minimum requirements to be a peer reviewer, and consider requiring additional minimum criteria such as the number of accounting and auditing hours spent by a reviewer in his or her own firm.
• The AICPA should provide a mechanism for members to comply with state board licensing requirements by allowing any AICPA firm to voluntarily post its peer review results in the AICPA’s current public file regardless of membership in a specific AICPA section or audit quality center.

The recommendations were developed after nearly a year of study, which included an online poll in early 2005 that assessed members’ attitudes about greater transparency of peer review results. More than 2,500 members responded to the poll, providing valuable insight into ways to make the peer review process more effective and transparent.

The Task Force’s full report is available from the AICPA web site. In addition, the AICPA has released a downloadable Q&A document that addresses many questions related to the new recommendations.