These types of reviews are really multiple assignments....there are two clear objectives:
1. A review of the "quality" of work.
2. The review appraisers opinion of value.
Therefore, this would be covered under scope of work. I downloaded the following form the AI website. (emphasis is mine).
Example #6: Limited scope review assignments
The definition of “appraisal review” in USPAP is “the act or process of developing and communicating an opinion about the quality of another appraiser’s work”. The Comment to says “the subject of an appraisal review assignment may be all or part of an appraisal report, the work
file, or a combination of both.” This definition itself beckons the appraiser to delineate the scope of the review assignment. Clearly an appraisal review need not involve examination and critique the entire appraisal report. If it does not involve the entire report, however, the appraiser must specify what the review does involve. Further, “quality” itself has – potentially – a broad meaning. An opinion of quality may range from a statement that the “required elements” of the report are present to a concurrence or disagreement with the appraised value. Just as Standards Rule 1-2(f) requires the appraiser to identify the scope of work in the appraisal process, Standards Rule 3-1© requires the reviewer to “identify the scope of work to be performed” in the review assignment. The scope of work in an appraisal review assignment may be expanded, or narrowed, in a number of ways. For example, the reviewer might (or might not):
· Physically inspect the property that is the subject of the appraisal (the “field review”, as
opposed to a “desk review” in which the reviewer does not inspect);
· Check the appraiser’s math;
· Test the income approach using alternative yield/capitalization rates;
· Collect and verify additional sales/rent comparables;
· Re-run the cash flow;
· Examine the appraisal report in light of FIRREA/Fannie Mae/Freddie Mac/SBA/ other
requirements;
· Develop a differing opinion of value;6
· Etc.
Whether or not the reviewer inspects the property that is the subject of the appraisal becomes part of the scope of work decision. If the intended use of the review is for the client to obtain a level of confidence in the abilities of the appraiser who prepared the report, a “desk review” may be
adequate. If, on the other hand, the client wishes to also have an independent opinion of the value of the property, or a verification of the value, the scope of work may need to be expanded to include a field inspection as well as a re-enactment of the valuation process.
6 In the event the reviewer develops his or her own opinion of value, the reviewer must have adequate
support and reasoning to do so, to the same degree as one would in developing an appraisal under Standard1. The reviewer’s opinion of value may be reported, however, in the review report. Refer to the Comment
to Standards Rule 3-1©. See also Advisory Opinion ##.)