What Verdica's 820 score means for Matthew Cook
Matthew Cook's composite score of 820 out of 850 places him in Verdica's excellent band (800–850), indicating strong overall compliance standing across the dimensions Verdica measures. This score reflects the aggregation of three regulatory and credential dimensions: licensing, PCAOB audit history, and disciplinary record. A score in this range suggests that Matthew Cook has maintained current credentials, has not accumulated significant audit findings or disciplinary actions on record, and meets or exceeds baseline industry expectations for accounting provider compliance.
Readers should interpret an 820 score as a marker of low regulatory risk—not a guarantee of service quality, but evidence that an independent auditor or state regulator has not flagged material concerns. The gap of 30 points between Cook's score and the maximum (850) indicates minor variances in one or more sub-dimensions; these gaps are typical at the high end of the scale and do not suggest systemic problems. For a business owner or individual evaluating accounting providers, this score is a credible starting point for vetting, though it should be paired with references, service agreements, and direct communication about engagement scope.
How the sub-scores break down
License & Credentials: 810
This sub-score reflects whether Matthew Cook holds active, valid licenses and certifications required to practice accounting in Colorado. A score of 810 indicates current registration with state authorities and no lapsed or suspended credentials on file. The 40-point gap from maximum suggests either a minor administrative variance (such as a renewal status pending review) or a minor credential-related flag that did not rise to disciplinary level. In plain terms: Cook is licensed and in good standing, with no red flags blocking his ability to practice.
PCAOB Record: 810
The Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (PCAOB) inspects and reports on audit quality for firms that audit public companies. A PCAOB sub-score of 810 indicates that any audit findings or observations on record are not severe. The PCAOB tracks deficiencies in audit execution, independence compliance, and quality control. A score in this range means Cook or his firm has not triggered major enforcement actions or repeated audit failures. Like the credentials score, the 40-point differential from maximum suggests minor observations rather than systemic audit failures.
Disciplinary: 850
This perfect sub-score indicates no disciplinary actions, complaints, or sanctions on record with state boards or regulators. This is the cleanest possible standing and reflects no history of ethics violations, client complaints upheld by regulators, or corrective orders. When this sub-score is at maximum while others are not, it typically means the provider's compliance issues (if any) stem from technical or administrative factors rather than conduct concerns.
What regulators in CO track for accounting providers
Colorado's state board and the PCAOB together monitor accounting providers to protect public company shareholders and market integrity. The PCAOB conducts periodic inspections of audit firms and documents findings in public reports; these may cite deficiencies in audit procedures, insufficient testing, or inadequate documentation. State boards track licensing status, continuing education compliance, and disciplinary matters such as fraud allegations, gross negligence, or violations of professional codes.
Scores move upward when providers renew licenses on time, pass PCAOB inspections cleanly, and maintain clear disciplinary records. Scores decline when audit findings accumulate, licenses lapse, or state boards substantiate complaints. Verdica's methodology weights these three dimensions to produce a single risk indicator, allowing quick comparison across providers.
Bottom line
Matthew Cook's 820 score indicates an accounting provider with strong regulatory standing and low compliance risk. Before engaging, cross-check his specific experience with your industry, request client references, and confirm his liability insurance and scope of services match your needs. A high score does not replace due diligence on engagement terms and fit.