The CFP Board’s oversight of planners is due for an overhaul.
That is one of
The CFP Board, which oversees the industry’s most-used credential, has faced mounting scrutiny and been the subject of several news investigations, including a recent one by
The task force — formed in July after the Journal’s story — found “significant failures in the execution of the CFP Board’s enforcement program and attendant communications to the public,”
While noting that some reforms are already underway, the task force urged the CFP Board to take additional measures which, if enacted, could affect more than 85,000 CFPs and the millions of clients they serve.
Among the task force’s multiple recommendations: The board should strengthen the role and authority of public members on the board of directors. The board should either require a majority of its directors be public members or assign responsibility for monitoring enforcement to a committee that has a majority of public members.
"We laud the CFP Board for commissioning this task force to issue a public report this critical," wrote Todd Cipperman, managing principal of Cipperman Compliance Services, in a note to clients. "However, this report will cause big problems for the CFP Board and the industry. The CFP Board must take action to create a credible enforcement program or risk a diminution of its public perception. The industry can now expect the involvement of yet another supervisory body that can conduct audits and impose penalties."
The task force also that some public members should have supervisory experience in enforcement at a regulator. The CFP Board ought also to require that its appeals committee have public members. Short tenures for directors and the chair are a handicap, the task force found.
“The board is foregoing the substantial benefits that come when directors serve for longer periods of time and gain a deeper understanding of the organization they oversee. The first year or two of a single four-year term is likely to be spent learning the board’s processes and procedures, leaving only a few years to be fully engaged in board of director matters,” the task force report says.
The CFP Board’s general counsel is also burdened with too many responsibilities, the task force says.
The report also faulted oversight of CFP Board promotion of the certified financial planner mark and the board’s LetsMakeAPlan.org website. “Promotional activities should be subject to independent evaluation by the board of directors’ public members and approval of a majority thereof,” the task force says.
To buttress the board’s enforcement program, the task force calls for stepped up resources and new procedures. For example, the CFP Board should receive reports on its program at every board meeting and it ought to “retain a seasoned director of enforcement… who should periodically report directly to the board of directors in executive session and who does not also serve as General Counsel.”
A review of every CFP certificant should be conducted at least once each year, the task force says
For its part,
The board says it will continue to mull the task force’s recommendations, some of which may require additional public comment.
In July,