Firm Practice Review Program
Practice reviews of registrant firms are governed by section 63(4) of the Professional Governance Act (PGA) and section 8.10 of the Bylaws. The goal of a practice review is to help registrant firms identify risks and gaps in their practice and provide an opportunity to remediate the risks and gaps. In cases where significant deviations from the standards expected of practising registrant firms are identified, more punitive rather than remedial action may be taken.
Firm practice reviews are conducted by assessors appointed by the Audit and Practice Review Committee (APRC) who are typically subject matter experts in the industry, area of practice, or scope of which the practice review is focused. Participation by the registrant firm in a practice review is mandatory. A practice review will include:
- A review of the information submitted by the firm’s Responsible Registrant;
- A review of 3-5 project files;
- An interview with the Responsible Registrant and any other potential individuals who may have information to inform the results of the practice review;
- A report being prepared by the assessor which is then provided to the registrant firm for comment; and
- The complete report is provided to the APRC (along with the comments by the registrant firm) for review and adjudication.
How Can a Practice Review Be Initiated?
A practice review of a registrant firm may be authorized by the APRC, the Registrar, or the Investigation Committee if the registrant firm consents or information is obtained through an audit, a complaint, another practice review, or an investigation that indicates the PGA or Bylaws have been contravened.
Records and information provided to the APRC or to an assessor during your practice review are generally confidential and are in most cases protected from disclosure to anyone other than the APRC, assessors, officers, and Engineers and Geoscientists BC staff. More information about the confidentiality of practice reviews can be found in section 110 of the PGA.
As a result of a practice review, the APRC may close the matter with no further action, impose limits or conditions on the practice of the registrant firm, or refer the matter to the Investigation Committee.
Firm Audits Versus Practice Reviews
An audit takes a proactive, quality-assurance approach whereas a practice review is a reactive process that is performed when professional or ethical issues or risks have been identified.
Practice reviews tend to be more technical in nature and may focus on specific processes, areas of practice, or projects.
Have a question about the Practice Review Program? Email us at [email protected] for more information.