At yesterday’s GIPS(R) (Global Investment Performance Standards) conference in San Francisco, someone asked a question about the legitimacy or appropriateness of GIPS verifiers who don’t bother to show up at their clients’ offices to conduct verifications. I wasn’t in the room at the time and didn’t ask the question (though it was a great one), but understand that the response, though not as forceful perhaps as I would have liked, did basically state that verifiers should be going to their clients’ offices.
I equate remote verifications to the idea of getting a physical remotely. Can you imagine a doctor who told you that you didn’t have to come in, but could simply respond to his or her questions over the phone? While the cost might be lower and the procedure more convenient, do you really think that the results would be beneficial?
The GIPS Verifiers/Practitioners subcommittee needs to memorialize this position so that we can put a stop to this highly inappropriate practice.