The Nevada Society of CPAs (NVCPA) administers the AICPA Peer Review Program for Montana, Nevada, Nebraska, Utah, and Wyoming. In addition, the NVCPA administers the State Peer Review program for Nevada, Nebraska, Montana, Utah, and Wyoming.
Enrollment in the peer review program is not required as a condition of membership in the NVCPA.
For all other states, please refer to the specific membership conditions of that State.
AICPA Peer Review Program (AICPA PRP) participants are those firms who have AICPA members as partners, shareholders, etc. Firm enrolled in this program are subject to enhanced oversight from the AICPA.
State Program participants are those firms who do not have AICPA members as partners, shareholders, etc. The NVCPA utilizes the AICPA PRP guidelines and will perform oversights with members of the Peer Review Committee.
For FAQ’s on the AICPA Peer Review Program, click here.
The Peer Review Program is an educational and remedial program designed to help improve the quality of your practice. To see the specific reporting requirements for your state, click on the below appropriate link:
Montana Board of Public Accountants (http://boards.bsd.dli.mt.gov/pac#0)
Nebraska Board of Public Accountancy (www.nbpa.ne.gov)
Nevada State Board of Accountancy (www.nvaccountancy.com/peerreview.fx)
Utah State Board of Accountancy (www.dopl.utah.gov/licensing/accountancy.html)
Wyoming Board of Certified Public Accountants (http://cpaboard.state.wy.us)
On May 1, 2017, the AICPA launched PRIMA – a new application for all firms (AICPA & State Program) to be able to enter information electronically. This web based system will be used for the administration and tracking of all peer reviews. You will notice a number of improvements that will allow for efficient and effective peer review administration, however you will still receive the same high quality service from the NVCPA.
Significant changes within PRIMA include:
Please read Getting Started in PRIMA here.
If you are a brand-new firm, please complete the Public Accounting Firm Creation Form. This form can then be returned to email@example.com for processing.
For all firms that have their firm registered with the AICPA, please log into PRIMA and enroll by clicking on Manage My Firm.
To see what type of review your firm is required to have, please refer read here.
A System Review is designed to provide a peer reviewer with a reasonable basis for expressing an opinion on whether, during the year under review: a. The reviewed firm’s system of quality control for its accounting and auditing practice has been designed in accordance with quality control standards established by the AICPA and b. The reviewed firm’s quality control policies and procedures were being complied with to provide the firm with reasonable assurance of performing and reporting in conformity with applicable professional standards in all material respects.
This type of review is for firms that perform engagements that are under the Statement on Auditing Standards (SASs,) the Government Auditing Standards (Yellow Book), examinations under the Statement on Standards for Attestation Engagements (SSAEs), or engagements under the PCAOB standards as their highest level of service.
Example procedures in a System Review include, but are not limited to: • interviewing firm personnel, • examining CPE records, • examining outside consultations regarding A&A matters, • examining independence representations, • testing a reasonable cross-section of the firm’s engagements with a focus on high-risk engagements and significant risk areas.
The majority of the procedures in a System Review should be performed at the reviewed firm’s office. A reviewer can request the AE’s approval to perform the review at a location other than the reviewed firm’s office if an on-site peer review is cost prohibitive or extremely difficult to arrange, or both.
The scope of the peer review does not encompass other segments of a CPA practice, such as tax services or management advisory services, except to the extent they are associated with financial statements, such as reviews of tax provisions and accruals contained in financial statements
The majority of the procedures in a System Review should be performed at the reviewed firm’s office, unless the reviewer has requested and received prior approval from the administering entity. (To request an offsite system review, the reviewer can fill out the form here and submit to firstname.lastname@example.org)
The objective of an Engagement Review is to evaluate whether engagements submitted for review are performed and reported on in conformity with applicable professional standards in all material respects.
Enrolled firms that only perform services under SSARSs or services under the SSAEs that do not require System Reviews are eligible to have Engagement Reviews.
An Engagement Review consists of reading the financial statements or information submitted by the reviewed firm and the accountant’s report thereon, together with certain background information and representations and the applicable documentation required by professional standards.
An Engagement Review does not provide the review captain with a basis for expressing any form of assurance on the firm’s system of quality control for its accounting practice. However, firms eligible for an Engagement Review may elect to have a System Review.
Approximately 6 months prior to a firm’s review due date, PRIMA will generate a notification for the managing partner and/or peer review contact to update their PRI (Peer Review Information). Once completed, the PRI will be submitted to the NVCPA for approval. The next step, SCH (Scheduling) will generate and the firm will enter in their commencement date, exit conference date and reviewer information. It is the firm’s responsibility to select a reviewer. To find a reviewer, please click here. The SCH will be submitted to the NVCPA for approval. If education & industry matches, the NVCPA will approve the SCH and the review may commence. The review cannot commence until approval from the NVCPA has been received.
The firm will work with their approved reviewer and work towards completion by the stated due date. It is recommended that the firm have their exit conference at least 3 weeks prior to the due date to account for any unseen complications.
A firm may request a due date extension prior to the original due date. Extension requests are performed within PRIMA.
Once the review has been completed, the reviewer will upload all necessary documents through PRIMA and submit to the NVCPA. The NVCPA will perform an administrative review and forward to technical review.
Administrative review of the completed peer review documents allows for an initial review to ensure all proper procedures were followed. The NVCPA will contact the reviewer for any initial changes that need to be made. The technical review is done by an experienced reviewer contracted with the NVCPA.
The review can take anywhere from 2 – 3 weeks depending on necessary communication with the reviewer.
Once the review has gone through the administrative and technical review process, all documents are submitted back to the NVCPA for inclusion on the next available RAB agenda. The RAB meets multiple times per year. Upcoming meeting dates are as follows and are subject to change:
The RAB will perform an additional review of the reviews and will consider them for acceptance. Firms can expect to receive their acceptance letter within 14 days of each RAB. In some cases, firms will be required to perform follow-up actions before the review can be closed. Those letters will also be issued within 14 days of the RAB.