What Verdica's 656 score means for David Greiner
David Greiner's composite score of 656 out of 850 places him in the elevated risk band (580–669). This means his profile shows acceptable compliance in some areas but notable concerns in others that warrant attention before engagement.
A score in this range suggests the provider meets baseline regulatory requirements in certain dimensions—enough to remain actively licensed and registered—but falls short of strong or excellent standing. For a business owner or individual considering this provider, a 656 score signals that additional due diligence is warranted. This is not a red flag that should automatically disqualify the provider, but it does mean you should verify credentials independently, clarify service scope, and potentially request references or detailed engagement terms before committing.
The score reflects a mixed compliance profile. While PCAOB audit findings are strong, the licensing and credentials dimension significantly pulls down the overall assessment. This imbalance is the core reason the composite lands in elevated rather than acceptable territory.
How the sub-scores break down
License & Credentials: 340 This is the weakest component of Greiner's profile and the primary driver of the lower composite score. On a 0–850 scale, 340 indicates significant gaps or concerns in licensing status, credential verification, or registration completeness as tracked by California's state board. In the accounting industry, this dimension typically reflects whether a provider holds required CPA licensure, maintains current registration, has met continuing education requirements, and has a clean disciplinary history within the licensing system. A score this low suggests there may be missing credentials, lapses in registration, or unresolved state board issues that would concern a potential client.
PCAOB Record: 810 This is Greiner's strongest sub-score and sits in the strong-to-excellent range. The PCAOB (Public Company Accounting Oversight Board) audits accounting and auditing firms that work with public companies. A score of 810 reflects favorable findings in PCAOB inspections, suggesting that when subject to federal oversight, the provider's audit quality, documentation, and compliance controls have been evaluated and not flagged with major deficiencies. This is a positive signal for firms handling publicly traded company audits or SEC-regulated work.
Disciplinary: 850 This is an excellent score and indicates no substantive disciplinary actions or complaints on record with California's accounting board. A clean disciplinary history is table stakes in accounting, but it is worth noting that this provider does not have a track record of formal violations or enforcement actions at the state level.
What regulators in CA track for accounting providers
California's state board and the PCAOB maintain separate but complementary oversight:
State Board Registration tracks CPA licensing, continuing professional education (CPE) compliance, and disciplinary history. A provider must maintain an active license, renew on schedule, and complete mandatory CPE hours. Violations—such as unlicensed practice, continuing education lapses, or ethical breaches—trigger disciplinary action and lower licensing credentials scores.
PCAOB Inspections examine audit workpapers, internal quality controls, and partner compliance for firms that audit public companies. Inspection findings document whether audit procedures met standards, whether documentation was adequate, and whether the firm's quality control processes are effective. Firms with repeated or serious findings face scrutiny and potential sanctions.
Verdica's scoring methodology uses these two data streams to create a composite picture: the state board subscription captures local compliance and conduct, while the PCAOB record reflects performance on federal auditing standards. A gap between them—as seen here with a weak credentials score and strong PCAOB score—can suggest licensing administrative issues or credential gaps that don't necessarily reflect audit quality on public company work.
Bottom line
Greiner's 656 score is mixed: strong federal audit findings are offset by state licensing and credentials concerns. Before engaging, verify his current CPA license status directly with the California board, clarify what services he offers, and understand which of those services fall under PCAOB oversight versus state-only regulation. The disciplinary score is clean, but the credentials gap merits explicit clarification.