How to Write CBA for PEng Application

What is the CBA and Why Does Writing Matter?

Understanding the Purpose of CBA

The Competency-Based Assessment (CBA) is the cornerstone of the engineering licensure process in Ontario and many other Canadian provinces. It’s not just about proving that you’ve worked in engineering—it’s about demonstrating that you’ve developed and can apply professional competencies required to practice safely, ethically, and independently as a Professional Engineer.

At its core, CBA evaluates your experience across 34 key competencies grouped under seven categories at most regulators (APEGA, whose system NAPEG and Engineers Yukon applicants also use, has 22 competencies in six categories). The categories include Technical Competence, Communication, Project Management, and Professional Accountability. These competencies are designed to ensure that your experience aligns with both Canadian engineering standards and public safety expectations.

For instance, the PEng CBA assessors look for your ability to:

• Apply technical knowledge in real-world settings

• Communicate effectively with technical and non-technical stakeholders

• Understand ethical obligations and regulatory frameworks

• Show leadership and growth over time

The better you understand what each competency represents, the more precise and relevant your examples will be.

Why Your Writing Style Can Make or Break the Submission

Writing your CBA is not just a box-ticking exercise—it’s your chance to stand out as a competent and ethical engineering professional. While the technical depth of your experience is essential, how you communicate that experience is equally important.

Assessors are evaluating your submission for:

• Clarity of your role and responsibilities

• Relevance of the work to the competency

• Independent thinking and decision-making

• Outcomes and impacts of your actions

A poorly written CBA can underrepresent great experience. For example:

• Vague statements like “I helped the team with design” won’t cut it.

• Overly technical jargon without context might confuse the assessors.

• Missing the “why it mattered” makes even good examples fall flat.

Remember, this is not a technical report—it’s a competency narrative. Your writing should reflect your thought process, judgment, and leadership.

Before You Start Writing

Before diving into writing your Competency-Based Assessment, take a strategic pause. The difference between a smooth CBA experience and a frustrating rewrite often comes down to how well you prepare before you write. This section will walk you through essential groundwork that sets your CBA submission up for success.

Read the Full List of 34 Competencies

The first step in understanding how to write CBA effectively is knowing exactly what you’re being evaluated on. At most regulators, the CBA system evaluates you across 34 competencies grouped into 7 categories (APEGA: 22 competencies in 6 categories, with no Personal Continuing Professional Development category):

1. Technical Competence

2. Communication

3. Project and Financial Management

4. Team Effectiveness

5. Professional Accountability

6. Social, Economic, Environmental & Sustainability

7. Personal Continuing Professional Development

Each competency has detailed descriptions and indicators. These are examples of typical engineering tasks that demonstrate you’ve mastered that skill. Indicators are not checklists, but they help you select and tailor your examples appropriately. Explore the full list of your association guideline here.

CBA Pro asks what each competency and its indicators need before it turns your answers into a draft, so you know what each one asks for. See how long CBA writing takes.

Match Your Experience with the Right Competencies

One of the most time consuming part of the PEng CBA writing is matching your experience with the right competency. While some experiences can apply to multiple competencies, each write-up should be customized to reflect what the specific competency asks for. For example:

• For Technical Competence, emphasize engineering calculations, code compliance, and risk analysis.

• For Communication, highlight how you explained ideas to clients, wrote reports, or gave presentations.

• For Professional Accountability, focus on ethics, decision-making, and code of conduct.

Use the indicators in the CBA guide as writing prompts. Think of them as clues that help you reflect on your experience in the right way.

You likely have more experience than you think, but choosing the right examples for the right competencies is key. Here’s how to approach it:

• Scan all 34 competencies (22 at APEGA) and highlight the ones you feel confident in.
• Shortlist 1–2 candidate projects for each competency, then pick the strongest: you submit exactly one example per competency.
• Group similar experiences to reduce overlap in writing (some examples can be used across multiple competencies with proper tailoring).

Use a spreadsheet to track which experiences you’ll use for which competencies. CertNova’s CBA Pro ranks your projects against each competency and shows you early where information is still missing.

CBA Pro interviews you through each of the competencies step by step. It helps you:

• Rank your engineering experience against the right competencies

• Answer questions on what each competency’s indicators need

• See where information is still missing before you submit

With CBA Pro, you answer questions about work you already did, so you never start from a blank page.

How to Structure Your Work Examples

Writing clear and impactful examples is the heart of your CBA submission. Even if your engineering experience is strong, poor structure or vague storytelling can cause assessors to question your competence. That’s why understanding the Situation-Action-Outcome (SAO) framework is critical when learning how to write CBA effectively.

The Situation-Action-Outcome (SAO) Framework

This three-part format is the gold standard for CBA writing. It keeps your examples focused, easy to follow, and aligned with how assessors evaluate performance.

Here’s how to break it down:

• Situation: Set the stage. What project were you working on? What was the problem, challenge, or goal? Be concise but give enough context for someone unfamiliar with your role to understand.

• Action: This is the most important part. What you did matters most. Highlight your engineering decisions, tools, processes, and reasoning. Use “I” statements and focus on your independent contributions—not just what the team did.

• Outcome: What was the result? Mention impact, improvements, savings, risk mitigation, or any feedback received. Quantify results where possible.

Example:

“I led the redesign of a stormwater drainage system that had failed during peak flow. I performed hydraulic simulations, adjusted pipe slopes, and worked with the municipality for approvals. The updated system reduced flooding incidents by 85% during heavy rainfall events.”

CBA Pro asks interview-style questions based on what your association looks for and turns your answers into a Situation, Action, Outcome draft. You review it, fill any [bracket] where a fact is missing, and own the final wording.

A note on AI: AI can help you organize your notes and check your own draft for gaps, but your examples must be your own work and you remain responsible for them. EGBC, EGM, Engineers Nova Scotia and Engineers PEI prohibit using AI (or third parties) to create or embellish examples; APEGS and PEO hold you fully responsible for the accuracy and authenticity of anything AI helped with.

Writing Tips to Maximize Your Ratings

Once your structure is solid, it’s time to refine your writing. The way you communicate your engineering experience plays a big role in how assessors rate each competency. Even if your technical work is strong, vague, overly complex, or passive writing can lower your ratings.

Here’s how to sharpen your CBA examples and increase your chances of scoring high:

Use “I” Statements to Show Ownership

Assessors want to see what you did—not what the team or company accomplished. Avoid phrases like “The team developed a solution…” or “We were responsible for…” Instead, be assertive and specific.

• ❌ “We improved the system design to meet new standards.”

• ✅ “I redesigned the system based on updated CSA codes and led the review with our senior engineer.”

This not only shows leadership but also clarifies your individual impact, which is key to a high score.

Include Technical Details Without Overloading

Yes, you need to show technical depth—but don’t fall into the trap of writing a design report. Stick to what you did, how you did it, and why it mattered. Use numbers, tools, codes, and standards—but avoid over-explaining theories or background info.

Focus your details on:

• Software, codes, or regulations used

• Specific calculations or simulations you performed

• Engineering judgments or trade-offs you made

Think of your assessor as a senior engineer—they understand engineering but need clarity on your specific role and decision-making.

Quantify Results and Project Impact

Assessors love numbers. If your actions led to savings, efficiencies, improvements, or risk reduction—say it, and show it. This helps connect your work to tangible outcomes, which strengthens your case.

Examples:

• Reduced material cost by 12% through design optimization

• Eliminated a 3-week project delay by resolving procurement bottlenecks

• Improved system reliability by 25% based on FMEA analysis

Where you can’t quantify results directly, describe qualitative impacts like process improvement, stakeholder satisfaction, or regulatory compliance.

Self-Assessment and Validator Ratings

Your CBA submission includes two critical support elements: your self-assessment and validator ratings. Both offer assessors additional context to evaluate your competence, so it’s important to treat them strategically. For your self-assessment, rate each competency honestly based on your level of independence and experience. This isn’t just a formality—it helps assessors understand how you perceive your own growth. Our guide on how to approach self-assessment provides practical examples and rating tips. If you honestly can’t reach a competency’s minimum yet, gain more experience before submitting: APEGA’s system won’t accept a self-rating below the minimum, and EGBC advises against submitting one. Remember that the assessor’s rating, not yours or your validator’s, decides the outcome.

Equally vital are your validators, the professionals who verify and rate your work. Choosing the right ones can make or break your application. Ideally, validators should be engineers who directly supervised or closely observed your work. If you’re unsure who qualifies or how to coordinate effectively, check out our article on how to choose the right validators. Brief them in advance so they know which examples they will be asked to validate. They rate your work independently, and their ratings and comments are confidential, so you won’t see them.

Minimum numbers differ by regulator: PEO requires at least one validator (never more than one per competency), APEGA at least three, and APEGS, EGBC, EGM, Engineers Nova Scotia, APEGNB, Engineers PEI and PEGNL at least four. Several of these also require one validator to be your supervisor and at least two to be licensed engineers (or equivalent); see how many validators you need.

Let CBA Pro Make This Easy

CBA Pro interviews you through each of the 34 competencies step by step. It helps you:

• Rank your engineering experience against the right competencies

• Answer guided questions, with an example answer under each one

• Get your answers back as a Situation, Action, Outcome draft built around PEO’s indicators

• See where information is still missing before you submit

• Keep each section within PEO’s character limits with a live count

• Get a readiness grade for each competency

With CBA Pro, you answer questions about work you already did, so you never start from a blank page.

Try it now!