What Verdica's 850 score means for CohnReznick LLP
CohnReznick LLP in North Carolina has achieved a composite Verdica score of 850 out of 850, placing it in the "excellent" band (800–850). This score reflects a clean regulatory record across the dimensions Verdica tracks: professional licensing, PCAOB audit findings, and disciplinary history.
A score of 850 indicates that, based on available public regulatory data, there are no red flags in the indexed sources. For a business owner or audit committee evaluating an accounting provider, this means the firm has maintained full compliance with state registration requirements and has not generated findings or complaints in the PCAOB audit system or state disciplinary records that would lower its standing.
It is important to note that Verdica's score is derived only from regulatory databases—PCAOB records and state board registration—and does not yet include independent customer reviews. The absence of customer feedback does not affect the score; it simply means the public review component has not yet been populated for this entity. A reader should interpret the 850 as a strong regulatory compliance signal, not a complete picture of client satisfaction or service quality.
How the sub-scores break down
License & Credentials (850): This sub-score reflects CohnReznick's registration status with the North Carolina state board and the validity of its professional licenses. An 850 in this dimension means the firm is properly registered and maintains all required credentials without lapses or restrictions. In the accounting industry, licensing is foundational; a low score here would indicate expired licenses, failure to renew, or conditional registration. CohnReznick shows no such issues.
PCAOB Record (850): The Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (PCAOB) conducts inspections of audit firms and issues findings on the quality of audits and compliance with auditing standards. An 850 score in this category indicates that Verdica's indexed PCAOB inspection results show no material findings or deficiencies. Firms with lower scores in this dimension typically have received PCAOB reports noting audit quality control issues, inadequate documentation, or violations of auditing standards. A high score here is a meaningful compliance marker because PCAOB inspections are rigorous and public.
Disciplinary (850): This sub-score aggregates any formal disciplinary actions from state boards, the SEC, or other regulators. An 850 indicates no indexed disciplinary history—no suspensions, revocations, sanctions, or complaints that resulted in formal action. Accounting firms with lower disciplinary scores have faced formal complaints, consent orders, or penalties from state licensing boards or federal regulators. CohnReznick's clean record in this area means the firm has not been the subject of regulatory enforcement.
What regulators in NC track for accounting providers
The North Carolina state board maintains a registry of licensed accounting firms and CPAs, tracking renewal status, continuing education compliance, and any restrictions or conditions on practice. The PCAOB, a federally mandated authority created under the Sarbanes-Oxley Act, inspects audit firms at least every three years and publishes findings on audit quality, internal quality controls, and compliance with professional standards. These inspections can result in ratings such as "passed," "passed with deficiency," or more serious findings tied to specific audits or practices.
Disciplinary records come from state boards responding to complaints, investigations into potential violations of accounting rules, or referrals from federal agencies. Common reasons for lower scores include failure to maintain adequate documentation, deficient audit procedures, non-compliance with continuing education requirements, or misconduct findings.
Verdica uses these public sources because they represent standardized, externally audited compliance metrics rather than self-reported data.
Bottom line
CohnReznick LLP presents a clean regulatory profile with an excellent 850 score across all tracked dimensions. A business owner or audit committee considering this firm should still conduct their own due diligence—review references, understand fee structures, and confirm service capabilities for your specific needs—but the regulatory record shows no compliance concerns based on available public data.