Unfortunately, no – and anyone who says they can is overselling. A resume is a 1–2 page summary of your duties and high‑level accomplishments. A Competency‑Based Assessment goes deep into specific situations where you applied judgment, solved problems, and met indicators (for example, competency 1.1 on regulations, codes, and standards).

That level of detail is not in a resume. Our role is to provide you with a step‑by‑step structure, examples, and tools so you can draft your own competency stories, then refine them before you submit. Your aim is to consistently score around 3 or higher (“meets requirements”) on the 0–5 scale your regulator uses (see EGBC’s 0–5 Competency Rating Scale (EGBC) as one example). 

If you’ve already written your CBA or have specific competencies rejected, we have two review options:

Option A – Commentator AI™ only
Option B – P.Eng. expert review + Commentator AI™

Please email [email protected] for current availability, disciplines covered, and pricing.

Our Commentator AI™ tool can review competencies from any engineering discipline and give you structure, clarity, and 0–5 scoring feedback. This is included with the Pro and Full Licensing Pathway options. Human P.Eng. draft reviews are more specialised and are offered as an optional add‑on for Pro and Pathway students only:

• The add‑on is a 15‑competency review by a licensed P.Eng. consultant.
• The price is $399 CAD + tax, on top of your course fee.
• It is currently available in these areas:
  • Civil (3 consultants: structural, infrastructure, geotechnical)
  • Mechanical (3 consultants: HVAC / fire protection; manufacturing; aerospace)
  • Electrical (power)
  • Chemical (process design, HSE, and industrial plant operations)
• You can order it inside the CBA course, in Step 8.1.1, once you are close to a full draft.

If you are looking for feedback on your draft, we generally recommend:

1. Start with Pro or the Full Licensing Pathway.
2. Use Commentator AI™ to score and refine all of your competencies first.
3. If you are in one of the disciplines above and still want more support, you can then add the 15‑competency P.Eng. review for $399 + tax.

If your discipline is outside these areas, the Pro/Pathway levels plus Commentator AI™ will still help you strengthen your examples, but a P.Eng. review may not be available for your exact stream.

No. We can’t guarantee that using our course or review service will remove all other requirements from your association.

Regulators consider many factors we can’t control (the actual experience you have, where you were educated, how your validators respond, and how closely you implement our recommendations).

Our goal is to give you the best possible structure, examples, feedback, and tools so your CBA submission is as clear and strong as it can be. That reduces the chances of extra steps, but it can’t eliminate them completely.

No. The start and end dates for each competency refer to the time period for that specific project or example, not your entire employment with a company.

Each competency example should typically cover at least one month of work on that situation.

Yes. Validation is critical to your CBA submission. Choose validators who: – Know your work well, and – Have a reputation for replying on time. If a validator can’t or won’t confirm your experience (for example, they’ve retired or are ill), contact your association and ask if you can change validators so your file is not held up unnecessarily.

We offer pass‑related guarantees on our higher‑support tiers only:

• Minimum ($217 CAD + tax)
  • CBA course access only (4 weeks).
  • No pass‑related guarantee, refunds, or email support.
  • This is the basic option for self‑directed engineers.

• Pro ($377 CAD + tax) & Full Licensing Pathway
  • CBA course with 12 to 14 weeks of access.
  • Includes Commentator AI™, email support, and a written pass‑related guarantee (see the full conditions on our Guarantee page).
  • In short, if you complete the required steps and your competencies are still not accepted, we will either continue your access and support until you get your CBA fully accepted, or refund your CBA course fee, depending on the option you choose.

We cannot guarantee that your CBA will be accepted or that you will be licensed – regulators make those decisions. Our guarantees are about standing behind our course and support when you complete the required steps.

A Competency-Based Assessment (CBA) is one of the final major steps before licensure, so mistakes at this stage can be costly in both time and money.

Industry salary studies consistently show that licensed engineers typically earn more than unlicensed engineers:

• A National Society of Professional Engineers (NSPE) salary survey found licensed professional engineers earn, on average, several thousand dollars more per year than unlicensed engineers, including about $5,000 more annually in one report.
• The Ontario Society of Professional Engineers (OSPE) salary report (page 6) found that licensed engineers earn roughly 7–14% more than unlicensed engineers on average.

Having a CBA rejected can:

• Delay your licensure by months while you wait for feedback and resubmission windows
• In some cases, lead to application closure, forcing you to restart parts of the process

Our CBA Blueprint course is built to help you submit a clearer, stronger, regulator-aligned CBA the first time, so you can improve your chances of acceptance and avoid losing months or more to preventable rewrites.

Yes. If you’re submitting a CBA for Professional Engineers Ontario (PEO), Engineers Geoscientist BC (EGBC), APEGS, Engineers Geoscientist Manitoba (EGM), Engineers Nova Scotia, APEGNB, PEGNL, Engineers PEI or other CBA‑based regulators, this course is designed to help you prepare your examples.

This course is not suitable for Quebec. 

Yes – with adaptation notes.

APEGA uses a 22‑competency framework (1.1 to 6.5) that is very close to the 34‑competency 1.1 to 7.3 system used across Engineers Canada. The main differences are:

• 12 competencies were removed as they were seen as being less critical; the remaining 22 largely match the national framework.
• APEGA allows more room in the Situation–Action–Outcome sections.
• Some competencies are renumbered (for example, 5.4 nationally is 5.1 for APEGA).

Inside the course, we focus on helping you:

• Show your personal role clearly (not just what the team did).
• Write clear, concise competency stories that match what regulators look for.
• Use examples and AI feedback to strengthen weak areas before you submit.

If your association uses a 22‑competency framework (such as APEGA, NAPEG, or Engineers Yukon), we recommend you:

• Enroll in this course, and
• Use the Step 0.3 adaptation PDF inside the course for easy‑to‑follow mapping notes.

Your overall goal remains the same: consistently reach about 3 or higher (“meets requirements”) on the 0–5 scale your regulator uses – see this summary from EGBC as a reference: 0–5 Competency Rating Scale (EGBC).

Most regulators expect your CBA examples to be written first‑hand from your own experience, in your own words. For example, APEGA states that application forms and work experience documents must be completed by the applicant and that AI‑generated content is generic and does not outline individual situations, as required. You can read their guidance here: APEGA – Use of Artificial Intelligence (AI) Tools.

Our recommendation is:
– You may use AI tools to organize your thoughts, check spelling/grammar, or improve clarity of text that you already wrote from your real experience.
– You should not use AI to invent stories, exaggerate your role, or paste in generic examples that aren’t truly yours – that risks misrepresenting your experience and breaching your Code of Ethics.

Inside the course, Commentator AI™ is designed to help you refine and score drafts you’ve already written, not to manufacture experience. Always check your own regulator’s guidance and make sure your final submission is honest, detailed, and clearly based on your actual work.