What Verdica's 656 score means for Philip Horwitz
Philip Horwitz's composite score of 656 out of 850 places him in the "elevated risk" band (580–669). This means his profile shows some meaningful concerns that warrant attention, though he is not in the highest-risk category. The score reflects a mixed compliance picture: while his PCAOB audit record and disciplinary history are strong, his credentials and licensing profile is notably weaker and pulls down his overall standing.
A score in this range suggests that while Horwitz may be capable of performing accounting work, there are gaps in his qualifications, licensing standing, or registration status that create compliance friction. For a business owner or individual seeking an accounting provider, a 656 score indicates you should do additional due diligence before engagement. This is not an automatic disqualification, but it does mean verifying his specific qualifications for your state and service needs, and understanding what the licensing gap entails.
How the sub-scores break down
License & Credentials: 340 This is the weakest component of Horwitz's profile. On a scale where 850 is excellent, a score of 340 indicates material deficiencies in either his professional licensing status, credential verification, or both. In the accounting field, this typically reflects missing or lapsed certifications (such as CPA status), incomplete registration with state boards, or credentials that do not match the services being offered. A low score here is a red flag because licensing and credentials are the baseline gatekeepers of professional competence.
PCAOB Record: 810 This is Horwitz's strongest sub-score. The Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (PCAOB) tracks audit quality and compliance for firms that audit public companies. A score of 810 (in the "strong" to "excellent" range) indicates that his firm's audits have generally met PCAOB standards, with few or no significant quality deficiencies noted in inspection findings. This suggests his audit work meets federal standards.
Disciplinary: 850 A perfect score on disciplinary history means there are no substantive complaints, violations, or sanctions recorded against Horwitz in the state or federal regulatory databases Verdica monitors. This is the best possible outcome and indicates a clean compliance record from a regulatory enforcement perspective.
What regulators in CO track for accounting providers
Colorado's state board (likely the Colorado Department of Regulatory Agencies or a similar body) maintains a registry of licensed accountants and verifies their credentials, continuing education, and renewal status. Verdica pulls this registration data to assess whether an provider's license is current and in good standing.
The PCAOB, a federally chartered nonprofit under SEC oversight, inspects accounting firms that audit public companies. Their inspections focus on audit quality, compliance with auditing standards, and firm-wide quality controls. Inspection findings are public and graded; repeated deficiencies can result in escalated oversight or sanctions.
Disciplinary records tracked by Verdica come from both state licensing boards (which may impose sanctions for ethics violations, malpractice findings, or regulatory non-compliance) and federal sources (such as SEC enforcement actions or PCAOB sanctions). These records show whether a provider has faced formal complaints or penalties.
Scores move based on current license status, credential verification, recent audit inspection results, and the absence or presence of disciplinary action. A lapsed license, missing CPA credentials, or unresolved complaints would lower these scores.
Bottom line
Philip Horwitz's 656 score signals a provider with a clean disciplinary and audit track record but unresolved licensing or credential concerns. Before engaging him, verify his current Colorado license status, confirm his credentials match your service needs (especially if you require a CPA), and understand why his credentials sub-score is low. His strong PCAOB and disciplinary history are reassuring, but the licensing gap must be clarified first.