METHODOLOGY
Independently measured. Real results.
Priwall by mePrism's removal-rate calculations were independently recalculated by Sensiba LLP under an AICPA AT-C Section 215 agreed-upon procedures engagement.
View the efficacy results →>99%
confirmed removal
at 90 days
Across a representative sample of Priwall's enterprise customers.
Independent practitioner
Sensiba LLP
Certified B Corp CPA firm
Engagement standard
AICPA AT-C Section 215
Agreed-upon procedures
Subject matter
Enterprise data
Removal-rate calculations
THE METHODOLOGY
What is an agreed-upon procedures engagement?
AICPA AT-C Section 215 is the standard for agreed-upon procedures engagements. It describes work in which a CPA practitioner performs specified procedures on a defined subject matter and reports the resulting factual findings.
Read the AICPA standard information →Defined subject matter
The engaging party and practitioner agree on what will be tested.
Specified procedures
The practitioner performs those procedures on the defined subject matter.
Factual findings
The practitioner reports what the procedures found.
Reader evaluates the results
The report does not provide an overall opinion on the company or service.
AT A GLANCE
What was measured?
Sensiba LLP performed specified procedures on Priwall's removal-tracking data and independently recalculated key metrics.
Removal-rate calculations
Independently recalculated from the underlying removal-tracking data.
Selected records
Verified selected records against corresponding broker pages.
Defined population
A representative sample of Priwall's enterprise customers.
THE FINDINGS
What did the measurement find?
Across a representative sample of Priwall's enterprise customers.
>99%
confirmed removal
at 90 days
Independently recalculated by Sensiba LLP from the underlying removal-tracking data.
Read the full report → View full efficacy results →
>92%
confirmed removal at 30 days
Independently recalculated from the underlying removal-tracking data.
4 days
median time to first confirmed removal
A median of 4 days means half of the records reached their first confirmed removal by day four.
25 records
Sensiba LLP independently queried corresponding broker pages and compared the results.
Same site cohort
as Consumer Reports
Sensiba LLP isolated the relevant Consumer Reports sites to enable a like-for-like comparison.
Enterprise data
The subject matter was removal-tracking data from Priwall's enterprise deployments.
Factual findings
The practitioner report presents factual findings from specified procedures — not a product certification or an overall conclusion on service quality.
WHY THIS METHODOLOGY?
A defined, measurable outcome.
Priwall's efficacy claim is a discrete, measurable fact. The agreed-upon procedures format allows a practitioner to:
Inspect
Review the underlying removal-tracking data.
Recalculate
Independently reproduce the reported removal-rate calculations.
Verify
Compare selected recorded statuses against the corresponding broker pages.
FREQUENTLY ASKED QUESTIONS
Questions about the measurement.
A few common questions about the engagement, its scope, the comparison methodology, and the practitioner report.
AICPA AT-C Section 215 is the AICPA standard for agreed-upon procedures engagements. In this type of engagement, a CPA practitioner performs specific procedures on defined subject matter and reports factual findings from those procedures. The report is designed to be read alongside its stated scope and procedures.
No. Priwall by mePrism's AICPA AT-C Section 215 agreed-upon procedures engagement is a specified-procedure engagement, not a financial-statement audit or a broad evaluation of the company. The practitioner report tells readers exactly what Sensiba LLP did and what it found, rather than making a company-wide conclusion.
Priwall by mePrism has a separate SOC 2 Type 2 report on security controls. SOC 2 and the AICPA AT-C Section 215 agreed-upon procedures engagement answer different questions. The SOC 2 Type 2 report addresses security controls. The practitioner report addresses defined efficacy calculations.
Incogni's August 2025 Deloitte report used ISAE 3000 (Revised) and addressed stated process and volume claims, including broker coverage, request cadence, and requests processed. Priwall by mePrism's Sensiba LLP practitioner report uses AICPA AT-C Section 215 procedures to recalculate removal-rate outcome figures and test a defined sample of recorded removal statuses. Both forms of independent work can be useful, but their standards and scopes differ.
Consumer Reports' 2024 Data Defense study was an independent consumer-journalism test that recruited 32 volunteers and evaluated results across 13 people-search sites under its published methodology. Priwall by mePrism's Sensiba LLP practitioner report is a standards-based engagement performed on Priwall by mePrism's tracked enterprise data. The CR-13 subset makes the site denominator comparable, but the two efforts retain different populations and study designs.
Qualified enterprise buyers can request access to the underlying data package under a mutually acceptable NDA. Priwall by mePrism will provide the materials permitted by privacy, contractual, and security obligations.
Sensiba LLP is a U.S. CPA firm providing accounting, tax, assurance, and advisory services. Sensiba LLP performed Priwall by mePrism's 2026 AICPA AT-C Section 215 agreed-upon procedures engagement.
The final practitioner report is available through the methodology page.
Read the practitioner report → Read the methodology →The full efficacy results, including the reported removal-rate figures and comparison context, are available on the Priwall efficacy page.
View the efficacy results →Priwall by mePrism intends to refresh independent efficacy measurement as its enterprise dataset, broker coverage, and reporting period mature. No future engagement date or scope is committed until it is documented.
The practitioner report gives procurement teams a defined, third-party-tested basis for evaluating the disclosed removal-rate figures. It does not replace a buyer's security review, legal review, privacy assessment, commercial diligence, or service-level evaluation. Use it as evidence for the efficacy claim within its stated scope.