Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Education Audits topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
CBA staff warn peer‑review, training requirements in AB 84, SB 414 and SB 719 could force program changes
Summary
On March 20, 2025, California Board of Accountancy staff briefed the board’s legislative committee on three bills — AB 84, SB 414 and SB 719 — that would strengthen oversight of charter school and local education agency audits but could require the board to alter its peer‑review and training frameworks.
California Board of Accountancy staff told the board’s legislative committee on March 20, 2025, that three bills addressing oversight of local education agencies and charter schools — Assembly Bill 84, Senate Bill 414 and Senate Bill 719 — aim to strengthen detection and prevention of charter school fraud but include provisions that would affect the board’s peer review and continuing education frameworks.
Staff summarized core concerns: AB 84 would require accounting firms or CPAs conducting LEA audits to have been peer reviewed by the CBA and to have LEA audits included among engagements selected for peer review. Staff said that requirement would conflict with the nationally established AICPA peer review program that the CBA currently uses; under the national program firms provide lists of engagements and peer reviewers select among required categories, but the program does not mandate that LEA audits be selected for every peer review. Staff said creating a state‑specific peer review requirement would be a large undertaking.
All three bills would also require an initial 24 hours of training for auditors on governmental or LEA topics and further continuing education every two years; AB 84 and SB 719 specify training topics, while SB 414 leaves topic determination to the state controller. Staff noted that at the March CBA meeting the board had directed removal of a duplicative 24‑hour governmental accounting CE requirement, complicating any new statutory CE mandate.
Staff further noted AB 84’s language calling for “certified prior experience” to perform LEA audits, a term the staff said lacks a defined meaning in current law or regulation. The CBA currently relies on professional standards that counsel CPAs to accept engagements only when they have the required competence and resources.
Committee members and staff discussed the bills’ origins — task force recommendations following charter‑school audit failures — and the legislative status: SB 719 failed its committee deadline earlier in the session but elements could reappear in other bills. Staff said there are approximately 50 firms statewide registered to perform LEA audits for the state controller’s office and that passage of these bills could increase referrals to the CBA for investigation.
Based on the discussion, members were supportive of staff continuing to engage with authors and stakeholders to provide technical input. The committee did not take a formal position at the meeting.
