Elaine Cahoon, KPMG Senior Manager, Risk Management – Independence, Karen Kerber, former PRB Member and current PMTF – Government Compliance Audits Subgroup Chair, Nancy Miller, KPMG Managing Director, Risk Management – Independence, and Flo Ostrum, PMTF – Government Compliance Audits Subgroup Member and State and Local Governments Expert Panel Member, will discuss performing peer reviews of engagements under Government Auditing Standards with emphasis on enhancing audit quality areas of focus. They will also discuss new standards and guidance from the U.S. Government Accountability Office and impact to peer review.

• Analyze the key changes to Government Auditing Standards, including peer review considerations.
• Recognize the challenges to maintaining audit quality in governmental and single audit engagements and impact to peer reviewers.
• Explore best practices when performing reviews of governmental engagements.

Marilee Lau, PRB Practice Monitoring Task Force Member for EBP, Roland O’Brien, PRB Practice Monitoring Task Force Member for EBP, Michael Auerbach, Chief Accountant for the US Department of Labor – EBSA, Marcus Aron, Senior Auditor for the US Department of Labor – EBSA, and Jeff Gendreau, PRB Member will discuss performing peer reviews of Employee Benefit Plan engagements, including documentation issues, findings and deficiencies. They will also discuss how recent professional standards and regulatory developments impact peer review.

• Identify significant items frequently overlooked when an EBP Audit was deemed nonconforming.
• Use bold questions and italicized considerations when completing the Employee Benefit Plan Audit (EBP) Checklist.
• Determine whether peer review documentation provides the basis for reviewer conclusions prior to the report acceptance process.

Karen Kerber, former PRB Education and Communication Task Force Chair, will welcome attendees to Washington, DC.

Sue Coffey, Executive Vice President – Public Practice, will present on high level developments in the accounting world.

• The latest trends reshaping the accounting profession.
• How technology can enable us to enhance quality in existing service areas, and provide opportunity in new service areas our clients and businesses increasingly demand.
• Recognize common drivers of non-conforming engagements.

Jim Brackens, Vice President – Ethics and Practice Quality, and Andrew Pope, Peer Review Board Chair, will provide an update on the Enhancing Audit Quality initiative, discuss the latest developments in peer review, and other “hot topics” within the Peer Review Program.

• Identify the significant objectives of the Peer Review Program.
• Recall significant elements of the current EAQ Initiative.

Brian Bluhm, Chair of the PRB Oversight Task Force, Suzanne Heidenreich, Technical Reviewer for the California Society of CPAs, Chuck Jordan, Alabama Society of CPAs, Paul Pierson, Illinois CPA Society, Clynt Hart, Committee Member – Alabama Society of CPAs, Karen Welch, Chair of the PRB Education and Communication Task Force, and Richard Wortmann, PRB Oversight Task Force Member, will present a mock Report Acceptance Body (RAB) meeting to highlight some best practices for Committee and RAB members. Peer reviewers, technical reviewers and administrators will also benefit from seeing the nature of RAB discussions when a review is presented for acceptance.

• Recall the roles of individuals that attend Report Acceptance Body meetings.
• Identify issues in materials presented to the Report Acceptance Body.
• Recall peer review guidance for acceptance, delayed acceptance, and deferrals of peer reviews.

Participants will be divided into breakout groups to consider case studies and short question and answer cases on issues and problems related to the performance and administration of Peer Reviews, including discussion of recently issued Reviewer Alerts. A member of the AICPA Staff, Peer Review Board or other designated individual will facilitate each breakout group.

Brian Bluhm, Chair of the PRB Oversight Task Force, and Richard Hill, PRB Oversight Task Force Member, will provide an update on recent changes to Peer Review administration, common findings from RAB observations, and an overview of how recent changes in peer review guidance impact committees and report acceptance.

• Evaluate materials presented to the Report Acceptance Body.
• Differentiate between reviewer performance findings and reviewer performance deficiencies.
• Apply peer review guidance for acceptance, delayed acceptance, and deferalls of peer reviews.

Suzanne Heidenreich, PRB Oversight Task Force Member, Barbara Lewis, PRB Standards Task Force Member, and Brad Coffey, Manager – Peer Review, will provide an update on items impacting technical reviews and report acceptance, with an emphasis on the evaluation of peer review working papers and how to appropriately document your technical review procedures.

• Use updated checklists to perform technical reviews of System Reviews and Engagement Reviews.
• Distinguish important concepts related to performing technical reviews of peer review documentation related to engagements subject to Government Auditing Standards and the Single Audit Act.
• Use guidance to assess and document reviewer performance considerations for Report Acceptance Bodies.
• Identify applicable guidance related to the report acceptance process.

Chuck Jordan, Alabama Society of CPAs, and Clynt Hart, Committee Member – Alabama Society of CPAs will provide an in-depth discussion on recent peer review guidance changes, address common questions from peer reviewers and cover best practices for getting peer reviews through the report acceptance process.

• Identify where reviewers often don’t comply with the peer review standards, as identified through RAB observations.
• Identify best practices when completing peer review documentation.
• Differentiate between the various options for corrective actions and implementation plans so you can recommend the step to help your peer review clients improve.

• Discuss elements of the peer review process.
• Discuss the use of PRIMA during the peer review process.
• Review available resources.