What Verdica's 768 score means for Hancock Askew & Co
Hancock Askew & Co's composite score of 768 out of 850 places the firm in the "strong" performance band (740–799). This means the firm demonstrates solid compliance credentials and regulatory standing relative to industry benchmarks. A score in this range indicates that a business owner or audit committee can reasonably expect the firm to meet standard professional and legal requirements for accounting services.
The 768 score reflects a weighted calculation across three regulatory dimensions: licensing, PCAOB audit history, and disciplinary record. Since no independent customer reviews have been indexed for this entity, the score is derived entirely from objective regulatory data. Readers should interpret this as a baseline compliance assessment rather than a comprehensive quality evaluation. A strong score does not guarantee perfect execution on every engagement, but it does signal that regulators and oversight bodies have not flagged systemic issues.
How the sub-scores break down
License & Credentials: 780
This sub-score reflects Hancock Askew & Co's standing with Ohio's state board registration and the firm's ability to maintain required professional licenses. A score of 780 in this dimension indicates the firm is current on registration requirements and meets baseline qualification standards. State boards track whether accountants and firms maintain active licenses, complete required continuing education, and remain in good standing. A high score here means no known lapses or conditional registrations that would restrict the firm's ability to practice.
PCAOB Record: 705
The Public Company Accounting Oversight Board inspects registered audit firms periodically and documents findings in public reports. A PCAOB score of 705 is below the sub-score average but still within acceptable range. This reflects the firm's inspection history and any audit quality observations documented by the PCAOB. PCAOB findings typically note areas such as engagement documentation, audit procedures, and compliance with auditing standards. A mid-range score suggests the firm has experienced some quality findings during inspections, but not at a severity level that would trigger enforcement action or suspension.
Disciplinary: 850
A perfect score in this dimension indicates no public disciplinary actions, sanctions, or enforcement history on record with the state board or PCAOB. This is a clear positive indicator. Disciplinary records capture formal complaints, violations of professional standards, license restrictions, or sanctions imposed by regulators. The absence of any such history reflects a clean regulatory footprint.
What regulators in OH track for accounting providers
Ohio's state board and the PCAOB maintain overlapping but distinct oversight roles. The state board registers individual CPAs and firms, verifies continuing education compliance, and investigates complaints from clients or other professionals. Violations can range from technical licensing lapses to ethical breaches or incompetent audit work.
The PCAOB, a federal body created under the Sarbanes-Oxley Act, inspects audit firms that handle public company audits. PCAOB inspections examine completed audit engagements for compliance with auditing standards and quality control procedures. Common findings include insufficient evidence collection, failure to challenge management assumptions, or inadequate documentation. Scores improve when firms demonstrate robust quality control, engagement-level documentation, and remediation of prior findings.
Both bodies track metrics like engagement quality, timely regulatory filings, and adherence to professional standards. A firm's composite score moves higher when state and federal records show clean disciplinary history and few or remediated PCAOB inspection findings.
Bottom line
Hancock Askew & Co presents a strong compliance profile with a 768 score and a clean disciplinary record. Before engaging the firm, prospective clients should confirm that the specific service line (audit, tax, consulting) aligns with the firm's registered capabilities in Ohio, and should request references from similar-sized or similar-industry clients to validate quality expectations beyond regulatory compliance.