さらに、It-Passports CPCMダンプの一部が現在無料で提供されています：https://drive.google.com/open?id=1uRcF446keeBstUgOBJC6RhNtcsPuK_DR
CPCM試験のAPPテストエンジンのような多くの受験者は、非常に強力に思えるので。 このバージョンに興味がある場合は、購入できます。 このバージョンでは、CPCM試験問題集の質問と回答だけでなく、実践と習得が容易な機能も提供します。 携帯電話、iPadなどのブラウザを開くことができる場合にのみ、あらゆる電子製品で使用できます。 常に実際のテストに不安がある場合、またはテストの終了時間を制御できない場合、NCMA CPCM試験ブレーンダンプのAPPテストエンジンは、時間指定テストを設定し、実際のテストシーンをシミュレートできます。
NCMA CPCM（Certified Professional Contracts Manager）認定試験は、契約分野で高く評価されている認定プログラムです。この認定試験は、契約管理の分野における候補者の知識とスキルを検証するように設計されています。認定試験は、契約管理の専門家の専門協会であるNational Contract Management Association（NCMA）によって管理されています。
It-Passportsは多種なNCMA認証試験を受ける方を正確な資料を提供者でございます。弊社の無料なCPCMサンプルを遠慮なくダウンロードしてください。
NCMA CPCM試験の準備には、多大な時間と努力が必要です。候補者は、NCMAの契約管理知識体系（CMBOK）やその他の学習資料を確認し、試験でカバーされるすべてのトピックに精通していることを確認する必要があります。また、候補者が試験の準備をするためにスタディグループに参加したり、コースを受講したりすることをお勧めします。
質問 # 60
Which of the following refers to a method for measuring project performance that compares the amount of work that was planned with what was actually accomplished to determine if cost and schedule performance went as planned?
正解：B
解説：
The correct answer is A (Earned Value) because, within the NCMA Contract Management Body of Knowledge (CMBOK), Earned Value Management (EVM) is a key performance measurement technique used to assess both cost and schedule performance of a project. It integrates scope, schedule, and cost data to provide an objective measure of project progress.
Earned Value compares three primary metrics: Planned Value (PV) , which represents the work that was scheduled; Earned Value (EV) , which represents the work actually accomplished; and Actual Cost (AC) , which reflects the cost incurred. By analyzing these metrics, contract managers can determine whether the project is ahead of or behind schedule and under or over budget.
This method is particularly valuable in contract management because it provides early warning indicators of performance issues, allowing corrective actions to be taken before problems escalate. It is widely used in both government and commercial contracting environments to ensure accountability and effective performance monitoring.
Option B ( Baseline ) refers to the approved plan against which performance is measured but is not the measurement method itself. Option C ( Estimate at Completion ) is a forecasting tool derived from earned value data. Option D ( WBS ) is a planning tool used to define scope, not measure performance.
Thus, Earned Value is the correct and comprehensive method for evaluating project performance in CMBOK.
質問 # 61
The __________ process is to ensure the delivered goods or service meets the specifications, terms, and conditions of the contract.
正解：C
解説：
The correct answer is D because, under NCMA CMBOK, the "Ensure Quality" process is specifically focused on verifying that delivered goods and services conform to the contract's specifications, terms, and conditions . This process is a core component of the post-award contract administration domain , where the buyer actively monitors and validates contractor performance.
CMBOK emphasizes that ensuring quality involves inspection, testing, validation, and acceptance activities
. These activities confirm that the contractor's outputs meet defined requirements before formal acceptance is granted. It also includes the use of quality assurance (process-oriented) and quality control (product-oriented) techniques to prevent defects and ensure compliance throughout contract performance.
Option A (Physical Contract Completion) refers to the stage when all deliverables have been completed, not the process of verifying their quality. Option B (Performance Planning) occurs earlier in the lifecycle and focuses on defining how performance will be managed, not verifying results. Option C (Administer Contract) is a broader domain that includes many activities, including quality assurance, but does not specifically describe the process of ensuring compliance with specifications.
Thus, consistent with CMBOK post-award practices, the Ensure Quality process is the primary mechanism used to confirm that contractual requirements are fully met before acceptance and closeout.
質問 # 62
Which domains are identified in the Post-Award Life Cycle Phase?
正解：A
解説：
The correct answer is A because, according to the NCMA Contract Management Body of Knowledge (CMBOK), the Post-Award life cycle phase is structured around two primary domains: Administer Contract and Closeout Contract . These domains represent the formal organization of activities that occur after contract award and continue through completion and final closure.
The Administer Contract domain focuses on managing contract performance, including monitoring compliance, managing relationships, handling changes, ensuring performance quality, and addressing issues such as delays or disputes. It encompasses a wide range of operational and governance activities required to ensure that both parties fulfill their contractual obligations.
The Closeout Contract domain involves all activities necessary to formally complete the contract. This includes verifying that all deliverables have been accepted, finalizing payments, resolving any outstanding claims or disputes, completing documentation, and archiving records. CMBOK emphasizes that effective closeout ensures legal and administrative completeness while capturing lessons learned.
Option B is incorrect because "Close Contract" is not the standard terminology used in CMBOK; the correct term is Closeout Contract . Option C is incorrect because "Perform Contract" is not a defined domain in the framework. Option D lists important activities but not the official domains.
Thus, consistent with CMBOK structure, the Post-Award phase consists of Administer Contract and Closeout Contract .
質問 # 63
When reviewing technical factors in a solicitation package, the evaluation team should __________.
正解：C
解説：
The correct answer is C (review non-cost/price factors on their own merits) because, according to NCMA CMBOK, evaluation of proposals during the source selection process must maintain a clear separation between technical (non-price) evaluation and cost/price evaluation . This ensures fairness, objectivity, and compliance with stated evaluation criteria.
CMBOK emphasizes that technical evaluation teams are responsible for assessing factors such as technical approach, management capability, past performance, and compliance with requirements , strictly based on the criteria defined in the solicitation. These factors must be evaluated independently of price considerations to avoid bias and ensure that the technical quality of proposals is judged on its own value.
Option A (use a deficiency log) may be part of internal evaluation tracking but is not the primary principle guiding evaluation. Option B (verify proposed funding sources) is unrelated to technical evaluation and pertains more to financial oversight. Option D (consider price proposals) is incorrect because price evaluation is conducted separately, often by a different team or through a distinct process.
CMBOK highlights that maintaining this separation enhances transparency, integrity, and defensibility of the source selection process, ensuring that award decisions are based on a balanced and properly structured evaluation of all relevant factors.
質問 # 64
Scenario 6.0: 2
ABC Corporation (ABC) entered into a firm-fixed-price, indefinite-delivery/indefinite-quantity (IDIQ) contract with a Federal buyer for the purchase of various "Soviet-style" parts. The contract language allowed for changes to:
o Drawings, designs, or specifications when the supplies to be furnished are to be specially manufactured for the buyer; o The method of shipment or packing; and o Place of delivery.
The contract also specified that:
If any such change causes an increase or decrease in the cost of, or the time required for, performance of any part of the work under this contract, whether or not changed by the order, the buyer shall make an equitable adjustment in the contract price, the delivery schedule, or both, and shall modify the contract.
ABC was unable to obtain a particular part required to fulfill a delivery order under the contract, and missed the deadline for delivery. Two years after the deadline passed, with no delivery, the failure provided cause for termination for default under the conditions outlined in the contract. To avoid default, ABC entered into Bilateral Modification 4 with the buyer. The modification required ABC to provide additional parts as consideration for late delivery. The modification also stated that a new delivery date for the original delivery would be determined in another modification.
ABC remained unable to purchase the parts to fulfill the original order. A new modification, Bilateral Modification 7 , provided that ABC would deliver "new production" models of the parts in question, rather than the "new surplus" parts specified in the original delivery order. The idea to deliver new production models of the parts had originated with ABC and was accepted by the buyer. ABC did not attempt to negotiate any changes in price, no discussions of price were held, and no price adjustment was included in this modification.
ABC completed delivery of these parts on time. However, the new production models cost significantly more than the new surplus parts originally ordered.
Approximately four months later, ABC submitted a request for equitable adjustment (REA) to the buyer. In the REA, ABC requested $1,369,377.47 , which represented the difference in price between the parts called for by the original delivery order and the parts ABC ultimately delivered. The buyer rejected the request.
Question:
Does "Bilateral Modification 7" contain constructive changes, entitling ABC to submit the REA?
正解：D
解説：
The correct answer is D because, under NCMA CMBOK principles, a constructive change occurs when a contractor performs work beyond the contract requirements due to informal direction, defective specifications, or government conduct, without a formal modification being issued. In such cases, the contractor may be entitled to an equitable adjustment.
In this scenario, however, Bilateral Modification 7 explicitly changed the requirement from delivering
"new surplus" parts to "new production" models, and this change was mutually agreed upon by both parties
. Because the modification was formalized as a bilateral agreement , it supersedes the original delivery order requirements. The contractor (ABC) then performed exactly in accordance with the revised contractual terms , not beyond them.
CMBOK emphasizes that once a bilateral modification is executed, it reflects mutual assent , and any associated risks-unless explicitly reserved-are considered accepted by both parties. ABC did not negotiate a price adjustment at the time of the modification, nor did it reserve the right to seek additional compensation later. Therefore, the increased cost does not qualify as a constructive change.
Option A is incorrect because increased cost alone does not establish a constructive change. Option B is irrelevant to the definition of constructive change. Option C is incorrect because ABC did not perform beyond contract requirements; it complied with the modified agreement.
Thus, consistent with CMBOK post-award change management principles, no constructive change occurred.
質問 # 65
......
CPCM資料勉強: https://www.it-passports.com/CPCM.html
P.S.It-PassportsがGoogle Driveで共有している無料の2026 NCMA CPCMダンプ：https://drive.google.com/open?id=1uRcF446keeBstUgOBJC6RhNtcsPuK_DR