Submitting your Practical Experience Reporting Tool (PERT) reports is a key milestone in obtaining your Canadian CPA designation. After you provide your detailed experience report, it is very common for the CPA reviewer in charge of assessing your submission to have follow-up questions or request revisions.

Getting your report returned with reviewer comments is a standard part of the PERT process. Before outlining how to systematically tackle these revisions, there are a few important realities about the review process that candidates should understand.

The Human Element of PERT Reviewers

When you submit a PERT report, it is evaluated by a human reviewer. Because this process involves human judgment, there is naturally an element of subjectivity.

Two candidates could submit nearly identical experience reports. For one reviewer, the report might clear perfectly without a single question. For another reviewer, that exact same report might receive reviewer comments and revision requests. Because there is no way of perfectly predicting a reviewer’s specific preferences, receiving comments doesn’t necessarily mean you did something wrong. It simply means that your specific reviewer needs a little more context to connect the dots and confidently approve your competencies. We talked about this in detail, specifically for Alberta PERT candidates who have a reputation of facing a more challenging reviewer hurdle.

Managing Expectations: The Reality of Progression

Another common reason you might receive reviewer comments is related to where you are in your CPA journey. CPA reviewers expect to see progression in your experience over time; they will almost never approve a Level 2 technical proficiency right out of the gate.

This is a topic we have talked about in the past on the blog as well. For example, in our article, Is One Example Enough for PERT Enabling Competencies?, we discussed how the core strategy for completing your competencies relies on demonstrating a gradual progression. In your first report, you might claim a Level 0. In your second, a Level 1. It isn’t until your later reports, after providing multiple complex examples over time, that a Level 2 is typically granted.

Similarly, we have highlighted this expectation in our guide on Catching up on CPA PERT Reports. Even if you are submitting multiple catch-up reports at once, you must still show a chronological progression. If you submit your very first 6-month report and request a Level 2, the reviewer will likely ask for revisions or downgrade you to a Level 1. They need to see your duties evolve and your autonomy increase over the full 30 months.

5 Key Steps to Respond to CPA Reviewer Comments

Understanding these expectations helps frame the reviewer’s feedback. Now, let’s look at how to tackle the revisions efficiently through a clear, 5-step process.

Step 1: Note Your Response Deadline

Before you review the comments or begin drafting a response, you must make note of your submission deadline and set yourself as many alarms and reminders as required to ensure you don’t miss this. This is critical. It is not a suggestion. You cannot request an extension. You must reply within the timeline.

Missing this deadline essentially causes you to “surrender” any experience within the report that did not get cleared on the first pass. If you do not respond within the time allotted, you lose your ability to go back and edit or revise those comments to utilize your experience. We have seen students lose the ability to use over 2 years of hard-earned experience simply due to failing to respond within the allotted time limit. Treat this deadline as an absolute priority.

Step 2: Read and Process the Feedback Objectively

When a report is returned for revisions, it is important to process the feedback objectively before making any edits. Read the reviewer’s comments carefully. Reviewers often leave specific notes about what is missing or what requires clarification. Your objective in this step is simply comprehension: understand exactly what the reviewer is saying and what aspect of your role they are trying to clarify.

Step 3: Pinpoint the Targeted Area of Your Report

PERT reports are comprehensive and contain multiple sections. Once you have read the feedback, you need to pinpoint exactly which section the reviewer is targeting. Start by identifying:

• Is this a Technical Competency or an Enabling Competency?
• Which specific sub-competency is being targeted? (e.g., Financial Reporting vs. Audit and Assurance).
• Which specific part of your response is in question? (Are they looking at the Situation, the Action, or the Result?)

By isolating the exact area of your report the reviewer is speaking about, you keep your revisions focused and avoid unnecessarily altering sections of your report that were already approved.

Step 4: Identify the Actionable Change Required

Next, identify what actionable change the reviewer wants you to make. Ask yourself what the core of their request is. Reviewer comments usually fall into a few common categories:

• Lack of specific examples: You may have explained a process generally (e.g., “I perform variance analysis”), and the reviewer requires a real-world example of a specific, non-routine variance you analyzed.
• Missing the “How” and “Why”: You might have stated what you did, but the reviewer needs to understand how you did it step-by-step, and why it matters to the organization.
• Clarifying Autonomy: The reviewer might need you to use “I” instead of “We” to clarify your independent role versus your manager’s or team’s role.
• Progression/Complexity: Based on the progression expectations mentioned earlier, they may need you to demonstrate more complexity to justify granting a higher proficiency level.

Translate their comment into a direct instruction. (For example: “The reviewer needs me to add an example of a complex accounting standard I applied.”)

Step 5: Draft a Targeted Revision

With a clear understanding of the targeted area and the required change, you can now draft your revision.

When writing your response, be clear, concise, and direct. Address the reviewer’s comments explicitly. If they asked how you calculated a specific metric, provide the exact methodology. If they asked for the impact of your work, explicitly state: “The impact of this analysis was…”

You rarely need to rewrite your original response entirely. Usually, you only need to add a few specific sentences or a new paragraph to your original draft to bridge the gap. Provide the specific evidence the reviewer requested so they can confidently approve your level.

• Pro-Tip: Before resubmitting, read the reviewer’s original comment, and then immediately read your new draft. Ensure your addition directly and thoroughly answers their prompt.

Final Thoughts

Navigating PERT is a detailed process, and receiving reviewer comments is simply a standard step on your path to the CPA designation. The reviewer’s goal is to ensure your experience meets the requirements set by CPA Canada. Guard your deadlines carefully, manage your expectations regarding progression, and follow a systematic approach to your revisions to get your reports cleared efficiently.

Looking for additional support with your PERT reports, aiming for Level 2 competencies, or studying for the CFE? Review the resources, templates, and CPA coaching programs available at www.gevorgcpa.com to help navigate your path to becoming a Canadian CPA.