The shortest path to a draft that proves something
Generic prompts produce generic examples. CBA Pro interviews you instead: it walks the competency's own reviewer expectations, indicators and common weaknesses as a checklist and asks direct questions about the gaps your chosen experience leaves open: three to ten of them, each saved with the gap it closes.
- Each saved question shows the gap it closes
- Answerable while the rest are still streaming in
- The interview never uses a credit
Questions from this competency's own rubric
You can answer question 1 while question 3 is still being written.
Why the questions are competency-anchored
A competency is not a topic. It is a short list of indicators: specific, observable things an assessor is looking for. 'Progressive responsibility' is not asking whether you were busy; it is asking whether the scope of decisions you owned grew, and whether you can point at the moment it did.
CBA Pro treats that list, with the competency's reviewer expectations and common weaknesses, as a checklist against the experience you picked in step 1. For each gap it asks one direct question in the competency's own vocabulary, and each saved question shows the gap it closes, so you can see why it is being asked. If you already told CBA Pro something about the same job under another competency, that answer is filled in for you to check.
Generic any-competency questions are explicitly banned. You will not be asked to 'describe a challenge you overcame'; you will be asked which decision on this package was yours alone to make, and what standard governed the tolerance you applied.
How answering works
- 1
Questions stream in, and you can start immediately
Type into question one while question four is still being written. Your answers are re-matched by question text if the saved order differs, so nothing lands against the wrong prompt.
- 2
Detail pays off
Every answer earns Points, more for longer ones, up to 30 a question. More importantly, specific answers are what let step 3 produce a draft with fewer placeholders to fill afterwards.
- 3
Save and continue never fails silently
If a required question is unanswered, the page jumps to the first one rather than refusing with a message you have to hunt for.
- 4
Come back and add more
Remembering a detail two days later is normal. Return to step 2, add it, and run the draft again from your updated answers. The earlier draft stays in your version history.
What this replaces
Guessing what the assessor wants
The indicator list is published by your regulator. Turning it into questions is the difference between hoping you covered it and knowing which item each sentence answers.
A blank text box
The hardest part of a competency example is not the writing; it is knowing which facts belong in it. Answering eight specific questions is a genuinely easier task than drafting from nothing.
Waiting for the model to finish
Each question can be answered the moment it appears, and what you type carries over when the full set is saved, so you are never staring at a spinner.
Paying to find the gaps
Steps 1 and 2 never use a draft or evaluation credit. The metered part starts at the draft, once you have answered what the competency needs.
Indicators, enabling competencies and what assessors read for
Canadian competency frameworks separate technical competencies from enabling ones: communication, ethics, management, professional accountability. Applicants over-invest in the technical half and under-invest in the enabling half, then find that the enabling competencies are where the thin examples were.
The reason is structural: technical work leaves artefacts you can point to, while an enabling competency usually needs you to reconstruct a conversation, a decision or a piece of judgment from memory. Nobody writes that down at the time. Questions anchored to the indicator are the fastest way to get it back out.
It also changes what you write. An indicator asking for evidence of individual contribution cannot be satisfied by 'the team decided'. Being asked the question directly (which decision was yours alone?) usually produces the sentence the example was missing, in your own words.
Trusted by P.Eng applicants across Canada
Sadegh Behboudian
“Using CBA Pro by CertNova Software Solutions helped me get my P.Eng. approved on the first attempt without any CBA rejections. What surprised me most was that the challenge wasn't my experience, it was how to present it properly. Having the right structure and guidance made the entire process much more manageable. Definitely saved me time and avoided the usual back-and-forth revisions.”
5 months ago
M. Ibrahim
“This was a wonderful experience. Hossein and Jenny were very helpful and prompt to reply to my emails and questions. Hossein got on a call with me before enrolling just to answer my questions. The review for my CBA questions was detailed, thorough with clear direction on what needs to be done to improve, which made it very easy for me to fix my answers. They gave me a time for looking into my CBA questions. They ended up delivering earlier than promised. Finally, they are very fairly priced. Definitely recommend their service for anyone looking to get someone to assess their CBA answers.”
2 months ago
Nahal Nobahar
“I recently used this service to review and strengthen my competency submissions for my P.Eng. application, and I had a very positive experience. Reza and the team provided detailed and thoughtful feedback on my existing drafts, helping me clearly understand what was missing and what needed improvement to meet the expectations of the P.Eng. assessment process. They didn't just correct wording, they guided me on how to better structure my responses, highlight my individual contributions, and align my examples with the required competencies. What I found especially valuable was their ability to point out gaps in my explanations and suggest exactly what kind of technical details, context, and outcomes should be included. Their feedback made it much easier to refine my responses and present my experience in a clear, concise, and professional way. Overall, this service was extremely helpful for improving both the quality and clarity of my submission. I would recommend it to anyone who is working toward their P.Eng. designation and wants expert guidance to strengthen their application.”
7 months ago
Next in CBA Pro
Your answers, formatted to your character limit
Situation, Action, Outcome, measured against your regulator's character limit, with everything you haven't told it left as a placeholder you fill.
Learn moreA five-step workspace per competency
Match your experience, close the gaps, draft, review, finalize. The screen always answers “what do I do next?”, and steps 1 and 2 use no credits.
Learn moreSee what is still thin before you submit
A letter grade that re-grades itself on your newest edits, and a 0 to 5 self-assessment score coloured against your regulator's own minimum.
Learn moreGap questions: questions applicants ask
Between three and ten, depending on the competency and on how much your chosen experience already proves. A thinner match tends to produce more, which is itself useful information about whether it is the right example.
No. Experience matching and the interview questions never use a draft or evaluation credit (opening a competency does take one of your plan's competency slots). The first draft and each review round use a preliminary draft credit; recheck, polish and the self-assessment score use an AI evaluation; the submit-readiness grade is free.
Required questions need an answer before the draft is made, but your answer can say what you do not know yet, and optional ones can be left blank. Either way, a fact the draft needs that you have not confirmed comes back as a bracketed placeholder rather than an invented one, so you can find the number, the standard or the date and fill it in afterwards.
Yes. Answers are free text and anything you include is used. The questions are a floor, not a ceiling.
In short
In CBA Pro's step 2, CBA Pro interviews the applicant: gap questions are drawn from the selected competency's own reviewer expectations, indicators and common weaknesses as a checklist and asking direct questions about what the applicant's chosen work experience has not yet proven, three to ten in all, each saved with the gap it closes. Answers the applicant gave about the same job under other competencies are pre-filled for them to check. Questions stream in and can be answered while later ones are still arriving, and the interview uses no credits. A fact the draft needs that the applicant has not confirmed becomes a bracketed placeholder rather than an invented fact.
Run one full competency, free
Every step, on a real competency, with no card. Everything you write carries over the moment you upgrade.