Help & FAQs

PPMP requirements depend on the province(s) where your firm practices.

In provinces such as British Columbia and Alberta, firms registered with regulators like Engineers and Geoscientists BC and APEGA are required to maintain documented professional practice systems that meet regulator expectations.

Even in provinces without a formal PPMP mandate, firms are still expected to demonstrate sound professional practice and risk management.

Not always. Regulator templates are guidance tools, not complete solutions.

Regulators expect firms to tailor their PPMP to their actual operations, project types, and risk profile. A generic or minimally modified template often fails to demonstrate how procedures are implemented in practice.

Auditors typically look for evidence that:

• Required procedures are documented
• Roles and responsibilities are clearly defined
• Professional work is appropriately checked and verified
• Risk assessments are conducted where required
• Records are properly retained and accessible
• Staff understand and follow the PPMP

The focus is not perfection—it is demonstrated control, consistency, and accountability.

No. Audit outcomes are determined solely by the regulator and can never be guaranteed.

A well-designed and properly implemented PPMP reduces risk and uncertainty, improves audit readiness, and demonstrates professionalism—but it does not replace the regulator’s independent judgment.

Under the Permit to Practice programs with Engineers and Geoscientists BC (EGBC) and APEGA, firms are required to conduct a formal PPMP review at least annually.

• This annual review is not optional. Regulators expect firms to:
• Confirm that PPMP procedures remain current and accurate
• Verify that procedures reflect how the firm actually operates
• Identify and document any required updates or improvements
• Retain records demonstrating that the annual review was completed

In addition to the required annual review, PPMP updates are also expected when there are material changes to the firm’s services, organizational structure, risk profile, or applicable regulatory requirements.

From the regulator’s perspective, the annual review demonstrates ongoing oversight, accountability, and active management of professional practice, not just the existence of documentation.

Not all work products require the same level of checking. Regulators expect firms to apply risk-based decision-making when determining audit requirements.

What matters is that the firm can explain how it decides when checking is required and can show that the decision process is documented and consistently applied.

The most common issue is inconsistent implementation, not missing documentation.

Firms often have written procedures that staff are unaware of or do not follow consistently. Regulators place significant weight on evidence that procedures are understood, applied, and embedded into daily practice.

Not necessarily. Many firms operate with a single core PPMP framework that is adjusted to address province-specific regulatory requirements.

The key is ensuring that provincial differences are clearly identified and properly addressed within the documentation and implementation.

A properly implemented PPMP:

• Clarifies professional accountability
• Reduces reliance on informal or ad-hoc decisions
• Creates defensible records of professional judgment
• Supports consistent quality across projects
• Demonstrates due diligence to regulators

In practical terms, PPMPs exist to protect the firm and its professionals, not to create administrative burden.