What Verdica's 820 score means for Nicholas Stenger
Nicholas Stenger's composite score of 820 out of 850 places him in Verdica's "excellent" band (800–850), indicating strong overall compliance standing relative to peer accounting providers. This score reflects available regulatory data on licensing, PCAOB audit quality, and disciplinary history tracked by state and federal oversight bodies.
A score in this range suggests that from a compliance perspective, this provider has demonstrated consistent adherence to professional standards as measured by regulator records. Readers should interpret this as a positive signal, though not as a guarantee of service quality or fit for any specific engagement. The score is built on objective regulatory data—not subjective performance reviews—so it speaks narrowly to compliance posture, not client satisfaction, technical expertise, or value-for-money.
For someone evaluating accounting providers, a score of 820 means the regulatory record does not raise red flags. This is useful baseline information but should be combined with other due diligence: client references, cost estimates, service scope, and industry specialization.
How the sub-scores break down
License & Credentials (810/850): This sub-score reflects the status and scope of state board registration and professional licensing. A score of 810 indicates that Stenger holds required credentials in Colorado and that his license standing is in good order. Minor deductions in this dimension typically arise from administrative issues—late renewals, incomplete documentation, or restrictions on scope—rather than revocation. A score at this level suggests he meets the baseline legal requirement to practice and has not faced significant credential sanctions.
PCAOB Record (810/850): This reflects audit quality and compliance findings from the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board, which monitors auditors of public companies. A score of 810 suggests that any PCAOB inspections or audit findings have not revealed systemic quality failures, material non-compliance with auditing standards, or repeated deficiencies. Scores in this band typically indicate the provider passed inspection or had minor, non-recurring observations that were adequately remediated.
Disciplinary (850/850): This is a perfect score, indicating no substantiated disciplinary actions from state boards, the PCAOB, or other regulatory bodies during the period captured in Verdica's data. A score of 850 means there is no record of complaints upheld, license restrictions, fines, or sanctions.
What regulators in CO track for accounting providers
Colorado's state board and the PCAOB focus on several compliance dimensions that drive Verdica's scoring:
State Board Registration: Colorado requires accounting practitioners to register and maintain active licenses. Regulators track renewal status, credential validity, and any restrictions (e.g., audit-only privileges). Violations include practicing without a license, failing to renew, or misrepresenting credentials.
PCAOB Audit Inspections: For providers who audit public companies, the PCAOB conducts triennial or triennial-plus inspections. These assess compliance with auditing standards (AICPA/PCAOB), internal quality controls, documentation rigor, and independence requirements. Common findings include inadequate evidence collection, deficient risk assessment, or failures to identify material misstatements. Repeated or unresolved findings can result in enforcement action.
Disciplinary Records: State boards and the PCAOB maintain public disciplinary files. Infractions range from technical violations (e.g., advertising claims, fee disputes) to serious matters (fraud, negligence in audits, conflicts of interest). Published disciplinary actions serve as the basis for Verdica's disciplinary sub-score.
These mechanisms create a regulatory floor—not a ceiling—for competence. High compliance scores indicate absence of documented violations, not necessarily excellence in practice.
Bottom line
Nicholas Stenger's score of 820 reflects a clean regulatory record with no disciplinary history and solid license and audit standing. This positions him in the excellent compliance tier, making him a lower-risk choice from a regulatory perspective. Anyone considering his services should still verify client references, confirm service scope matches their needs, and confirm fee structure before engaging.