A reviewer marked up your draft before an assessor could
The comments are anchored to the exact passage they are about, numbered in the margin, and each carries a suggested rewrite you can drop into your draft in one click.
- Referenced text marked inside the editor, with a numbered chip at each mark
- “Use this wording in my draft” swaps the passage in place
- Progressive reveal — placeholders first, comments second
Action
I recalculated the horizontal curve and the team decided on the transition spiral length, then carried the chosen alignment through IFC.
Reviewer comment · Individual contribution
“The team decided” hides what you did. Assessors reject examples where the applicant's own decision can't be separated from the group's.
Placeholders first, comments second — the rail hands out one job at a time.
What the reviewer pass looks for
The reviewer reads your draft the way an assessor will: hunting for the four things that get competency examples rejected. Is this a specific event or a job description? Can your individual contribution be separated from your team's? Is there real engineering judgment visible, or only activity? Is the outcome evidenced or asserted?
Where it finds a problem, it does not tell you in general terms. It marks the passage — amber, inside the textarea, with a numbered chip at the end of the mark — and files a comment card carrying the same number. Click the chip and the comment scrolls into view; the connection between 'this sentence' and 'this problem' is never something you have to reconstruct.
Each comment comes with a concrete rewrite. One click swaps the referenced passage for the suggestion, and if that rewrite needs a fact you have not given, the bracket it introduces is added to your placeholder list automatically.
How the rail hands out work
- 1
Placeholders first
Fifteen comments and twelve placeholders arriving together is the fastest way to make someone close the tab. The rail shows placeholders first; the comments stay behind a single line until the placeholders are filled or you choose to open them.
- 2
One placeholder at a time
The wizard marks the active placeholder yellow in the editor and each filled one green, with a single 'Fill & next' action.
- 3
Then the comments, numbered
Each rail card wears the number of its mark in the draft. Click either to jump to the other.
- 4
Track changes is a view, toggled once
Insertions green, deletions struck red — a mode you turn on when you want it, not a diff box parked under every section.
What makes it usable rather than overwhelming
Anchored, not summarised
A comment that says 'strengthen the outcome section' is advice. A comment attached to the sentence that fails, with the replacement written out, is a fix.
One-click rewrites
You are not asked to re-derive the improvement from the criticism. The suggested wording is right there, and accepting it is a single action you can undo.
Nothing you typed is discarded
Every AI action persists pending editor text first. Running a recheck while mid-sentence cannot cost you the sentence.
Recheck when you want it
The final polish and recheck are on-demand actions with their credit cost on the button, so a round of edits does not silently spend anything.
Getting feedback before the regulator gives it to you
The structural problem with a Competency-Based Assessment is the length of the feedback loop. You write twenty-odd examples over several months, submit, and wait — and if the submission comes back with comments, you are re-writing under time pressure with a partial explanation of what went wrong.
Anything that shortens that loop is worth disproportionately more than anything that speeds up the writing itself. A marked-up draft at the moment you finish writing it is the cheapest possible correction; the same correction arriving from an assessor months later costs a resubmission cycle.
This is also why the reviewer pass and the human P.Eng review are positioned as two different moments rather than competing products. The AI reviewer runs on every version while you are still writing. A licensed P.Eng reads the finished thing once, before you submit. One is for iteration, the other is for judgment.
Trusted by engineers 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.”
3 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.”
1 week 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.”
4 months ago
Next in CBA Pro
Know if it's ready before an assessor does
A letter grade that re-grades itself on your newest edits, and a 0–5 self-assessment score coloured against your regulator's own minimum.
Learn moreNothing you write is ever overwritten
Every draft is an immutable version, and the comments and placeholders are filed against the version they describe. Edit fearlessly.
Learn moreThen a real P.Eng reads it
A licensed Professional Engineer reads every competency line by line — five business days, with one complimentary meeting included.
Learn moreThe reviewer pass — questions applicants ask
Three things: the reviewer has your competency's actual indicators and reviewer expectations in front of it, the comments are anchored to specific passages rather than delivered as a summary, and the suggested rewrites obey the same non-invention rule as the draft — a rewrite that would need a fact you have not supplied comes with a placeholder rather than a plausible number.
Yes. Paste your own text into the editor and run the reviewer pass on it. Everything downstream works the same way.
No. Every comment can be read and ignored, and every applied rewrite can be edited afterwards. The comment tells you what an assessor is likely to flag; what you do about it is your call.
As many as your plan's draft-generation allowance covers — 20 on Foundation, 45 on Progression, 70 on Professional. Each metered action shows its credit cost on the button before you press it.
In short
CBA Pro's reviewer pass marks up a competency draft with comments anchored to the exact referenced passage (highlighted inside the editor with a numbered chip linking to the matching comment card), each carrying a suggested rewrite that can be applied to the draft in one click. Work is revealed progressively — placeholders first via a one-at-a-time wizard, then comments — and track changes is an optional view showing insertions in green and deletions struck through in red. Pending editor text is always saved before any AI action runs.
Run one full competency, free
Every step, on a real competency, with no card. Everything you write carries over the moment you upgrade.