Based on a review of the literature, this paper examines criticisms leveled against the communication audit developed by the International Communication Association (ICA) and then offers a modified version of the audit designed to meet those criticisms. Following a brief introduction, the first section of the paper reviews criticisms of the audit, noting that they fall into seven categories: (1) lack of centralized control over the data collection process, (2) inability to compare local organizations with national norms, (3) lack of follow-up procedures to test for impact, (4) the limitations of an essentially perception-based tool, (5) problems with its structure, (6) methods of data analysis, and (7) procedures for developing recommendations for the client-organization. The second section describes the new ICA Ohio University Regional Data Bank and compares it to the ICA audit National Data Bank, while the third presents a follow-up analysis of the impact of the regional data bank. The fourth section suggests procedures for developing client-centered recommendations, and the fifth section presents the modified survey instrument--the Survey of Organizational Communication--and discusses the impact of the instrument changes on future research efforts. Extensive tables of data and a copy of the modified instrument are appended. (FL)