At its fall meeting, the AICPA governing council approved the designation, which was proposed by the AICPA information technology executive committee. It is expected to help CPAs penetrate a segment of the technology services market that until now has had no specific professional leadership.

The AICPA created the new credential to establish public awareness of the CPA as the preferred information technology (IT) professional, enhance the quality of IT services members provide, increase practice development opportunities and advance the careers of CPAs employed in business and industry, education and other areas.

The AICPA will grant the CITP designation to individuals based on business experience, lifelong learning and, if necessary, an examination. Those not meeting minimum experience and learning requirements will have to pass an IT competency examination, which is expected to be available by September.

Initial accreditation will cover a three-year period; a $500 initiation and materials fee applies. To maintain the designation, CPA/CITPs will have to pay an annual fee of $250 and meet reaccreditation requirements every third year thereafter.

The CITP designation is the first developed under the auspices of the national accreditation commission, a new senior AICPA committee responsible for advancing the accreditation process.

The AICPA will introduce the CITP credential at its Tech 2000 conference in Atlanta, May 10–12, 2000. More information is available on the Web at http://citp.aicpa.org .

The SEC practice section peer review process task force has issued a report containing recommendations to strengthen the peer review process to help it keep pace with changes in the accounting profession.

Mike Conway, chairman of the SECPS executive committee, which approved the task force’s proposals after they were made in January, said, “The new rules will make the process more effective because it will focus on evaluating auditor performance instead of examining documents to see whether a firm is complying with quality control systems and professional standards.” He also added that “the peer review reporting process will be more transparent.”

The SECPS executive committee directed the SECPS peer review committee to implement those recommendations falling within its purview. Meanwhile, the auditing standards board and the Public Oversight Board also are addressing the task force’s proposals.

Rick Miller, chairman of the task force, told the JofA that “the peer review process is nearly 25 years old and although we improve it every year, the time had come to reflect on it because of the rapid pace of changes in our profession—globalization, alternative practice structures, developing audit methodologies and quality control systems, technology and new staffing and training models. The peer review process needs to keep pace with these changes.”

The task force identified a need for improvement in the following areas of the peer review program: reporting, process, governance and oversight, and qualifications and training of peer reviewers.

The task force found not everyone who uses the peer review process fully understands it. “We need to improve that,” Miller said. “We also need to better communicate things noticed during peer reviews—best practices, constructive suggestions and matters that go beyond professional standards. This will encourage candid communication,” he added.

Regarding the review process itself, Miller said, “We need to recognize differences in firms’ size and complexity. Right now, there’s mostly a one-size-fits-all approach that we must customize. For larger firms, we need to better integrate the peer review and inspection processes, have more frequent reviewer involvement and better focus on higher-risk areas and emerging issues. Finally, we want the review process to be more flexible and responsive to change.”

On the subject of governance and oversight, Miller said, “The POB plays a key role in overseeing and adding credibility to the peer review process, so we recommended it deepen its oversight during the performance of reviews.”

With respect to training peer reviewers, Miller said, “The task force recommended better training—primarily of review team captains—and establishment of an evaluation process to provide feedback and help eliminate poor performers.”

The AICPA peer review board also will consider the task force’s recommendations for applicability to the AICPA peer review process.

Miller expressed hope that the task force’s recommendations would be implemented in time for peer reviews conducted in 2001.

The AICPA is introducing Independence, a CD-ROM CPE course that reviews the Institute’s authoritative literature on independence standards, including newly issued SECPS requirements; SEC independence regulations; and Independence Standards Board standards.

The six-hour interactive course features testing and review modules, an extensive reference section, a glossary of key terms, links to relevant Web sites, an option for sending questions to the AICPA by e-mail and access to downloadable updates. The course’s reference section includes AICPA rule 101 and related interpretations 01 through 14; ethics rulings on independence, integrity and objectivity, as applicable (ET 191); SEC rule 2–01 on qualifications of accountants; SEC sections 601 and 602 of the Codification of Financial Reporting Policies; SECPS independence quality controls; and ISB Standards nos. 1 and 2.

The AICPA recommends that six hours of CPE credit be granted to those completing the course (product no. 739035), which can be ordered by calling 1-888-777-7077. The cost to members is $89; to nonmembers, $109.