Assessment of current needs for the monitoring of certification programs and examination processes of professional organizations

15-17 May 2019



The experts participating in this visit aimed to evaluate and document SARAS’ current needs with respect to the examination of professional competence and monitoring of Professional Accounting Organizations.

For this purpose, the experts together with representatives of SARAS analyzed the legal provisions of Directive 2014/56/EU (amending Directive 2006/43/EC), Order 2017/16 and Order 2017/13 of the local legislation, and the 2016 Law on Accounting, Reporting and Auditing in order to identify gaps, share knowledge, experience and best practices. 



The most important gaps identified in relation to the compliance of national legislation with the provisions of the EU legislation are summarized below.


Gaps related to the Directives

  • Under EU Directives, SARAS has responsibility over professional certification programs (professional training and continuous education) and relevant examination procedures. SARAS may delegate these tasks to PAOs. The delegation must specify the delegated tasks and conditions under which these tasks are to be carried out and in such a manner so that conflicts of interest are avoided. Those issues are not properly addressed in Orders 13 and 16.
  • Directive 2006/43/EC specifies the training course subjects for professional certification for testing theoretical knowledge. Order 16 (Ch. II, Article 16) presents the training course subjects under different titles/names and classification, based on the International Educational Standards of IFAC. A concordance table is required showing that all EU Directive subjects are fully covered.
  • The exemption criteria presented in Order 16 (Ch. IV, Article 20) must be further developed and explicitly presented. For example, provision must be made for candidates that have attended training courses from professional organizations outside Georgia, or University graduates that have attended similar courses with less credit units under the European Credit Transfer System.
  • Further, the courses that may be exempted at the basic and intermediate level must be explicitly defined.
  • Based on Article 6 (Ch II), ‘the training course shall be conducted according to the curriculum (syllabus)’. The syllabi of the training courses must be specified in Order 16. Alternatively, the order should state that syllabi are under the approval of SARAS
  • The exam process manual as described in Article 18 (Ch. III) must be further developed to reflect best practice. For example, specific provisions must be prepared for the examination of persons with special needs. In addition, examination format (e.g. the combination of true/false, multiple choice, etc.) for basic and intermediate training courses must be clearly specified (Ch. II, Article 15, 2a and 4).
  • The exams committee as described in Article 19 (Ch. III) must be restructured to include representatives from SARAS and Universities, in order to improve transparency and legitimacy, in accordance with best practice and the spirit of EU Directives. It is important that the exams committee is chaired by an outsider (i.e. University professor).
  • The rules for appealing against the exam results, as presented in Article 14 (Ch. IV), must be explicitly determined in Order 16.
  • The process of monitoring the transparency, the quality and the compliance of professional organizations, entities conducting educational activities and bodies conducting specialized exams with the Directive is only mentioned in Article 12 (Ch. III). It must be explicitly described and detailed, e.g. controlling the quality of the training courses and of the training staff, explaining the measures used for the assessment of a certification program as referred to in Article 11 (Ch. III).