Free NCIDQ IDPX Practice Test

Correct answer: B. Vendor B, by $400.

Compare the full cost of the same scope. Vendor A totals $19,600 + $1,100 + $1,500 = $22,200. Vendor B totals $21,800, which is $400 less. Quotation instructions exist so every vendor prices the same defined scope; your job is to compare like with like.

Why the other options are wrong

• A. $2,200 compares Vendor A's base price with Vendor B's all-in price. It leaves out A's delivery and installation.
• C. Once every listed charge is added, the totals differ by $400.

Source: Original scenario; arithmetic shown in the explanation · AIA, A751–2019 FF&E quotation instructions summary — Synopsis; Purpose

Correct answer: C. Field-measure the affected area, record the discrepancy, and base the fit test on the verified dimensions.

A feasibility study is only as good as its existing-conditions information. When an old drawing conflicts with what you can see, verify the part that affects the decision before you rely on it. CSU's feasibility guidelines treat existing conditions and the quality of prior data as core inputs. A walk-through won't reveal concealed conditions, so note what you couldn't verify, but measure what you can.

Why the other options are wrong

• A. The plan is already contradicted by the space. Treating it as accurate builds the error into the study.
• B. Averaging two numbers doesn't produce a real dimension.
• D. Feasibility is meant to answer the fit question before design and construction money is spent, not after.

Source: California State University, Feasibility Study Guidelines — §§1.1–1.2, p. 3

Correct answer: 18 working days.

The original critical path is A–C–D: 4 + 10 + 2 = 16 days. B had 4 days of float, because A–B–D took only 4 + 6 + 2 = 12. A 6-day slip uses up those 4 days of float, and the extra 2 days push the finish. The new longest path is A–B–D: 4 + 12 + 2 = 18 days. GAO's scheduling guidance makes the same point: an activity off the driving path can absorb delay up to its float, and anything beyond that moves the finish.

Common mistake: 22 adds the full 6-day slip to the original 16, ignoring B's float. 16 assumes B's float covers the whole delay, but it only covers 4 of the 6 days.

Source: Original scenario; arithmetic shown in the explanation · GAO Schedule Assessment Guide (GAO–16–89G) — pp. 77–79 and 92–96

Correct matches: 1. Shop drawing; 2. Product data; 3. Sample.

A201–2017 §3.12 defines all three. Shop drawings are prepared specifically for the project to show how part of the work will be built. Product data is standard information from manufacturers or suppliers, marked to show what's being provided. Samples are physical examples that set the standard the finished work is judged against. None of them is a Contract Document; they show how the contractor plans to meet the Contract Documents.

Common mistake: The common mix-up is calling a marked-up catalog page a shop drawing. Here, the catalog sheet is standard manufacturer information with the selected model identified, so it is product data.

Source: AIA A201–2017, standard submittal provisions — §§3.12.1–3.12.4, p. 15 · AIA Contract Documents, What Is a Submittal in Construction? — Common Types; responsibility discussion; Are Submittals Part of the Contract Documents?

Correct answer: A. No. Visits are periodic and not exhaustive, and the contractor controls means, methods and safety.

A201–2017 §4.2.2 has the architect visit at appropriate intervals to become generally familiar with progress and quality and to judge whether the work, when finished, will conform. It also says the architect isn't required to make exhaustive or continuous inspections and doesn't control construction means, methods, sequences or safety programs. Those belong to the contractor.

Why the other options are wrong

• B. That describes full-time inspection, which A201 expressly doesn't require.
• C. Directing a crew's sequence is a means-and-methods decision that belongs to the contractor.
• D. Visits cover quality as well as progress.

Source: AIA A201–2017, publisher’s standard-form sample — §4.2.2, p. 18 · AIA, G711–2018 Architect's Field Report instructions — Synopsis; Completing G711–2018

Correct answer: C. Design-build.

Design-build puts design and construction under one agreement with one entity, so one team answers for both. That's the defining feature, not a promise that it's cheaper or faster.

Why the other options are wrong

• A. In design-bid-build, the owner holds separate contracts with the designer and the builder, and the phases run in sequence.
• B. In CM at risk, the owner still holds a separate contract with the architect. The construction manager gives input during design and then holds the trade contracts.

Source: DBIA, What Is Design-Build? — Definition · AIA/AGC, A Primer on Project Delivery Terms — Printed pp. 2–4: design-bid-build, CM at risk, design-build

Correct answer: C. The circulation staff and branch manager who run the desk every day.

Operational requirements come from the people who perform the work. CSU's feasibility guidelines separate sponsors from key stakeholders and call for gathering user needs directly. The sponsor keeps her budget authority; she just isn't the source for workflow detail.

Why the other options are wrong

• A. Budget authority isn't operational knowledge, and she has said so.
• B. A dealer can advise on products, but doesn't know the library's workflows.

Source: California State University, Feasibility Study Guidelines — §§1.1 and 1.4, pp. 3–4

Correct answer: $356,000.

Contingency = 10% × $240,000 = $24,000. Total = $240,000 + $60,000 + $30,000 + $2,000 + $24,000 = $356,000. Read the base for a percentage carefully; here it's construction only. These figures are made up for practice and aren't typical rates or real permit fees.

Common mistake: $365,200 applies 10% to everything ($332,000 × 1.10). $332,000 leaves the contingency out.

Source: Original scenario; arithmetic shown in the explanation

Correct answer: C. The specification still governs, because the deviation wasn't flagged and approved through a modification.

Under A201–2017 §3.12.8, approving a submittal doesn't excuse a deviation from the Contract Documents unless the contractor specifically told the architect about it in writing when submitting, and the change was then authorized through a minor change, change order or construction change directive. None of that happened here.

Why the other options are wrong

• A. A review stamp isn't a contract modification.
• B. The requirement didn't change, so the stamp doesn't create an owner-paid extra.
• D. Submittals aren't Contract Documents (§3.12.4), so review marks on them don't rewrite the contract.

Source: AIA A201–2017, standard submittal provisions — §3.12.8, p. 16 · AIA Contract Documents, What Is a Submittal in Construction? — Common Types; responsibility discussion; Are Submittals Part of the Contract Documents?

Correct matches: 1. Bid bond; 2. Performance bond; 3. Payment bond.

The SBA describes all three. A bid bond backs up the bid itself. A performance bond guarantees the work gets done. A payment bond guarantees the people supplying labor and materials get paid. A surety company stands behind each one.

Common mistake: Performance and payment bonds are easy to swap. Performance protects the owner's finished project; payment protects the subs and suppliers.

Source: U.S. Small Business Administration, Surety bonds — Types of surety bonds

Correct answer: C. Documented functional testing against the owner's requirements.

That's what commissioning does: it verifies and documents that systems perform the way the owner requires. GSA describes it as confirming the building and its systems work as intended, with a process that runs from planning to occupancy. Seeing equipment in place doesn't prove it performs.

Why the other options are wrong

• A. Photos show installation, not performance.
• B. An invoice proves payment, not function.
• D. A certificate of occupancy is the jurisdiction's approval to occupy. It doesn't verify the owner's own performance requirements.

Source: GSA, Building commissioning, retro-commissioning and re-tuning — Building commissioning

Correct answer: D. There's an 8-hour shortfall to solve with more qualified hours or a scope or date change.

Available: 2 × 18 = 36 hours. Needed: 44. Shortfall: 44 − 36 = 8 hours. Spotting the gap is the first step; the fix is to find qualified hours or adjust scope or date with the people who can approve that. Don't assume overtime exists. CSU's guidelines list team members' available time as part of assessing resources.

Why the other options are wrong

• A. 36 hours is less than 44.
• B. 26 counts only one designer's hours.
• C. 36 is the hours available, not a surplus.

Source: Original scenario; arithmetic shown in the explanation · California State University, Feasibility Study Guidelines — §2.2, p. 5

Correct answer: A. Another manufacturer's sheet vinyl: 12% cheaper and meets all three requirements.

Value engineering cuts cost while keeping the essential functions. The FAR defines it that way: remove cost without giving up the item's required functions and characteristics. Only the other manufacturer's sheet vinyl keeps every stated requirement.

Why the other options are wrong

• B. Cheaper, but it drops a required function (cleanability).
• C. This proposal fails the required slip-resistance value. Removing scope is not automatically wrong; sacrificing an essential requirement is the problem.
• D. It saves money by failing the durability requirement.

Source: FAR 48.101, Value engineering: general — 48.101(a)

Correct answer: D. The buyer, because risk passed when the conforming chair was duly delivered to the carrier.

Under Maine's §§2-319 and 2-509, this shipment contract places transit risk on the buyer once conforming goods are duly delivered to the carrier. A destination contract instead keeps risk with the seller until the required tender at the destination. Contrary agreements and seller-breach rules can change the result; neither applies in this scenario. This answers the allocation between buyer and seller, not the carrier's liability or an insurance claim. Read the freight terms before the order is placed; that's when they matter.

Why the other options are wrong

• A. That describes FOB destination.
• B. Scheduling the installer to receive the goods does not assign it the buyer's transit risk in this order.
• C. Specifying a product doesn't make the designer the buyer or the carrier.

Source: Maine UCC §2-319, F.O.B. and F.A.S. terms — §2-319(1)(a)–(b) · Maine UCC §2-509, Risk of loss — §2-509(1), (4) · Maine UCC §2-510, Effect of breach on risk of loss — §2-510(1)

Correct answer: B. Price the change and wait for authorization before doing the work.

AIA describes the G709 proposal request as a request for pricing on a possible change. It doesn't authorize the work. Authorization would come later, typically through a change order, or a construction change directive when the owner and architect direct a change before full agreement on the adjustment.

Why the other options are wrong

• A. Nothing has authorized the work yet.
• C. A construction change directive is a separate, signed direction to proceed. A pricing request isn't one.
• D. It asks for a response: the contractor's pricing.

Source: AIA, G709–2018 Proposal Request instructions — Synopsis

Correct answer: A. May 3, the date of substantial completion.

AIA's G704–2017 instructions say required warranties start on the date of substantial completion unless the certificate lists different start dates. Unfinished list items don't push that date; they get finished within the time the certificate allows.

Why the other options are wrong

• B. Final payment comes later and doesn't set the warranty start under this form.
• C. Substantial completion can be certified while listed items remain.

Source: AIA, G704–2017 Certificate of Substantial Completion instructions — Using G704–2017; warranty start

Correct answer: A. A zoning (land-use) review with the local jurisdiction.

Zoning decides which uses are allowed where, and zoning is one of the feasibility knowledge areas on CIDQ's IDPX blueprint. Check it before the client commits to the lease.

Why the other options are wrong

• B. An existing certificate does not establish that the proposed fitness-studio use is permitted by zoning at that address.
• C. Area tells you whether it fits, not whether it's allowed.

Source: CIDQ IDPX Exam Blueprint (2026 & forward) — Both pages: overview, domain headings and task lists · SBA, Launch your business — Local zoning ordinances — Local zoning ordinances

Correct answer: $216,320.

Year 1: $200,000 × 1.04 = $208,000. Year 2: $208,000 × 1.04 = $216,320. The 4% rate is given for this question; it isn't a forecast of real market pricing.

Common mistake: $216,000 adds simple interest (4% of $200,000, twice) instead of compounding. $208,000 escalates only one year.

Source: Original scenario; arithmetic shown in the explanation

Correct answer: A. The owner holds separate contracts with the architect and the CM.

The AIA/AGC primer describes CM at risk as a construction manager who provides preconstruction services during design and then takes on construction risk by holding the trade contracts. The architect has a separate contract with the owner, with no contract between the architect and the CM.

Why the other options are wrong

• B. There's no contract between the architect and the CM at risk.
• C. That describes a CM as adviser. "At risk" means the CM holds the trade contracts.
• D. That would be design-build.

Source: AIA/AGC, A Primer on Project Delivery Terms — pp. 3–4, CM at risk

Correct answer: Row 2.

Row 2 is open and its due date (May 12) has passed. Row 3 is open but not due until May 24. Row 4 came back late, but it was returned, so the next move is the contractor's resubmittal. Under this log's stated convention, a dash means the review remains open; it doesn't mean approved or rejected. Under A201–2017 §4.2.7, the architect reviews submittals on the agreed submittal schedule or, without one, with reasonable promptness, so tracking due dates matters.

Common mistake: Row 4 is tempting because it was late, but it isn't open. Row 3 is open but on time.

Source: AIA A201–2017, publisher’s standard-form sample — §4.2.7, p. 18 · AIA Contract Documents, What Is a Submittal in Construction? — Common Types; responsibility discussion; Are Submittals Part of the Contract Documents?

Correct answer: Row 3.

Changing a crew's work sequence is a construction means-and-methods decision, and A201–2017 §4.2.2 leaves those to the contractor. The other lines record observations, note a deviation for the contractor to correct, or request information, which is what a field report like AIA's G711 is for.

Common mistake: Line 2 can look like an order, but it records a deviation from the specification for the contractor to fix. It doesn't tell the contractor how to do the work.

Source: AIA A201–2017, publisher’s standard-form sample — §4.2.2, p. 18 · AIA, G711–2018 Architect's Field Report instructions — Synopsis; Completing G711–2018

Correct matches: 1. Owner's sponsor; 2. Operations manager; 3. Design lead.

A responsibility matrix exists so decisions go to the person assigned to them. Funding is the sponsor's, how the space operates is the operations manager's, and coordination between consultants is the design lead's. CSU's guidelines call for sorting stakeholders by role and interest for the same reason.

Common mistake: This tests the stated matrix, not a universal rule. On another project the same decisions could sit with different people.

Source: California State University, Feasibility Study Guidelines — §1.4, p. 4; role assignments supplied in the item

Correct answer: Row 3.

4,000 × $3.50 = $14,000, not $12,000, so line 3 understates the estimate by $2,000. The others check out: 1,200 × 42 = 50,400; 9,500 × 1.20 = 11,400; 800 × 4.25 = 3,400. Check every extension before an estimate goes to the owner.

Common mistake: Line 4 has the odd-looking unit price, but its math is right.

Source: Original scenario; arithmetic shown in the explanation

Correct answer: C. Ask Vendor C to clarify its installation scope and price.

You can't compare quotations until they cover the same scope. AIA's A751 FF&E quotation instructions set out how vendors ask questions and how quotations are clarified and reviewed, and these instructions expressly allow clarification. The clarification does not itself establish that Vendor C is eligible for award; the issued quotation instructions still control.

Why the other options are wrong

• A. The lowest total may be lowest only because installation is missing.
• B. Assuming the scope is included is how disputes start.
• D. One incomplete quotation doesn't spoil the others. The permitted clarification establishes the missing information before the owner decides how to treat Vendor C's quotation.

Source: AIA, A751–2019 FF&E quotation instructions summary — Articles 3–4; project’s clarification rule stated in the item

Correct answer: B. Conformance with the design concept and the Contract Documents, not verification of the accuracy and completeness of field dimensions or quantities.

A201–2017 §4.2.7 limits the architect's review to checking conformance with the information and design concept in the Contract Documents. It does not transfer responsibility for the accuracy and completeness of dimensions or quantities from the contractor. The standard provision also says review is not approval of construction means, methods or safety precautions. Field measuring stays with the contractor.

Why the other options are wrong

• A. Review does not relieve the contractor of checking the accuracy and completeness of field dimensions or quantities.
• C. Means and methods aren't approved by review.
• D. The review is against the Contract Documents, not taste.

Source: AIA A201–2017, publisher’s standard-form sample — §4.2.7, pp. 18–19

Correct answer: A. The contractor prepares a list of the items still to finish or correct.

AIA's G704–2017 instructions say the contractor prepares the list of items to complete or correct, and the architect checks and revises it. The architect prepares the certificate once the work is substantially complete, and the owner, architect and contractor all sign it. Leaving an item off the list doesn't relieve the contractor of finishing it.

Why the other options are wrong

• B. The architect reviews and revises the contractor's list rather than starting it.
• C. The architect prepares the certificate; the owner signs it along with the others.

Source: AIA, G704–2017 Certificate of Substantial Completion instructions — Using G704–2017 · AIA A201–2017, publisher’s standard-form sample — §9.8.2, p. 26

Correct answer: B. It's 100 square feet short.

Required usable area = 2,000 × 1.25 = 2,500 square feet. Available is 2,400, so the space is 100 square feet short. The circulation factor comes from the client's standard in this question; it isn't a code value.

Why the other options are wrong

• A. That compares net program area with usable area and skips circulation.
• C. That applies the factor to the available space (2,400 × 0.75 = 1,800 net), which isn't the stated method.

Source: Original scenario; arithmetic shown in the explanation

Correct answer: B. It needs 10 weeks, two more than are available.

1 + 6 + 2 + 1 = 10 weeks, against 8 available. Finding the conflict early lets the owner choose among real options, such as a different product, an interim desk, or a later date. Whether any of them works depends on the project; the schedule only tells you there's a problem.

Why the other options are wrong

• A. Ten weeks is more than eight.
• C. It's two weeks over, not even.

Source: Original scenario; arithmetic shown in the explanation · GAO Schedule Assessment Guide (GAO–16–89G) — Best Practice 2, sequencing activities

Correct answer: $3,720.

(12 × $150) + (20 × $90) + $120 = $1,800 + $1,800 + $120 = $3,720. Fee structures are an IDPX contract topic. The rates here are invented for practice, not market data.

Common mistake: $3,600 leaves out the reimbursables. $7,680 multiplies all 32 hours by the $240 combined rate.

Source: Original scenario; arithmetic shown in the explanation · CIDQ IDPX Exam Blueprint (2026 & forward) — Both pages: overview, domain headings and task lists

Correct answer: C. The architect's order for a minor change in the work.

A201–2017 §§7.1.2 and 7.4 let the architect alone issue a written order for a minor change that does not adjust the contract sum or time and is consistent with the intent of the Contract Documents. This matches the facts given. The instruction still needs to be in writing.

Why the other options are wrong

• A. A change order can record a zero-cost change, but it requires the owner, architect and contractor to sign.
• B. A construction change directive requires the owner's and architect's signatures; it is not issued by the architect alone.

Source: AIA A201–2017, publisher’s standard-form sample — §§7.1.2, 7.2.1, 7.3.1 and 7.4, pp. 21–23 · AIA, G710–2017 Architect’s Supplemental Instructions — Synopsis · AIA Contract Documents, Construction Change Directives vs. Change Orders — Comparison of change orders and construction change directives; signatures and proceeding with work

Correct answer: B. A post-occupancy evaluation.

A post-occupancy evaluation (POE) systematically assesses a building after people have used it for a while, measures it against the goals that guided the design, and feeds lessons into future projects. That's exactly the owner's question.

Why the other options are wrong

• A. Punch lists close out construction; they don't evaluate how the space works for people.
• C. Functional testing of building systems alone does not answer how well staff experience the office layout. The requested activity is an occupant-focused evaluation.
• D. Warranty claims address defective work.

Source: National Academies, Learning from Our Buildings (2001), ch. 2 — Chapter 2, p. 9

Correct answer: D. Report the $150,000 gap now with options so the owner decides before design continues.

The funding gap is $1,150,000 − $1,000,000 = $150,000. Feasibility studies exist to surface problems like this while they're cheap to fix. The owner needs the gap and real options before more design money is spent. CSU's guidelines frame the study as the basis for that decision.

Why the other options are wrong

• A. Designing a project the owner can't fund wastes fees and time.
• B. Removing contingency hides the risk rather than solving it.
• C. Bidding an unfundable project wastes everyone's effort.

Source: California State University, Feasibility Study Guidelines — §1.1, p. 3

Correct order: C → E → A → D → B.

Each step depends on the one before it. Staff can't move into swing space that isn't ready, the Phase 1 area can't be renovated while people are in it, and the swing space isn't free for Phase 2 until Phase 1 staff move out. That chain of dependencies is what a phasing schedule maps.

Common mistake: The usual slip is starting Phase 2 before Phase 1 staff have moved home, which leaves two groups needing one swing space.

Source: GAO Schedule Assessment Guide (GAO–16–89G) — Best Practice 2; project dependencies stated in the item

Correct answer: B. The owner.

Under B254–2019 the architect acts as the owner's agent. Each vendor contract must name the owner as purchaser, and warranties are issued in the owner's name. The architect isn't buying the chairs for resale.

Why the other options are wrong

• A. The architect signs as the owner's agent, not as the buyer.
• C. The installer isn't a party to the purchase.

Source: AIA, B254–2019 FF&E purchasing agent services summary — Synopsis; Purpose

Correct answer: A. Issue a numbered addendum to every vendor before the due date.

Addenda keep every vendor pricing the same documents. AIA's A751 FF&E quotation instructions cover how updates to the quotation documents are sent out, and this project's instructions say how: numbered addenda to all vendors. A change order is for changes after a contract exists.

Why the other options are wrong

• B. Telling one vendor gives them an unfair advantage and leaves the others pricing the wrong fabric.
• C. Nothing has been awarded yet, and waiting means every quotation prices the wrong fabric.
• D. An RFI answer to one vendor doesn't reach everyone.

Source: AIA, A751–2019 FF&E quotation instructions summary — Article 3, addenda

Correct answer: $84,000.

$88,000 − $4,000 = $84,000. Only accepted alternates change the contract amount; Alternate A was priced but not accepted.

Common mistake: $90,000 applies both alternates. $94,000 applies only Alternate A, the one the owner rejected.

Source: Original scenario; arithmetic shown in the explanation

Correct answer: D. A temporary certificate of occupancy from the building official.

The 2021 IBC §111.3 provision allows the building official to issue a temporary certificate of occupancy before all permitted work is finished when the portion to be occupied can be used safely. The official sets its validity period. A certificate of substantial completion for a portion is a contract milestone between the parties, but it isn't the jurisdiction's permission to occupy.

Why the other options are wrong

• A. It's a contract milestone between owner, architect and contractor, not a governmental approval.
• B. The contractor doesn't have that authority.
• C. A facilities director isn't the building official, even when the owner is the same city.

Source: ICC, 2021 Application and Administration of the I-Codes — §111.3, slide 144, PDF p. 48 · AIA, G704–2017 Certificate of Substantial Completion instructions — Synopsis; Using G704–2017; execution/signature guidance

Correct answer: B. Send the architect an RFI and hold fabrication of that top.

A201–2017 §3.2.2 requires the contractor to report discovered document inconsistencies to the architect as an RFI. Here, holding fabrication of the disputed top avoids committing to an unresolved material choice; it is not a direction to stop unrelated work. An RFI asks for clarification; it doesn't by itself authorize extra cost or time.

Why the other options are wrong

• A. Picking the cheaper option resolves the conflict in the contractor's favor without authority.
• C. Questions about the documents go through the architect, who administers the contract.
• D. Nothing authorizes a second top.

Source: AIA A201–2017, publisher’s standard-form sample — §3.2.2, p. 12 · AIA, G716–2004 Request for Information instructions — Synopsis

Correct answer: A. Proceed with the directed work while the adjustment is worked out.

A construction change directive takes effect with the owner's and architect's signatures; the contractor's isn't required. AIA explains that under A201 the contractor is generally expected to proceed with the directed work while cost and time are settled. If the parties later agree, a change order records it.

Why the other options are wrong

• B. Waiting for agreement is exactly what a CCD is designed to avoid.
• C. The contractor's signature isn't needed for a CCD to take effect.

Source: AIA Contract Documents, Construction Change Directives vs. Change Orders — Signatures and proceeding with directed work

Correct answer: $45,000.

Retainage = 10% × $250,000 = $25,000. Earned less retainage = $225,000. Less previous certificates: $225,000 − $180,000 = $45,000. That's the same flow as AIA's G702 form: work completed and stored, less retainage, less previous certificates. The architect still reviews the application and may certify a different amount.

Common mistake: $70,000 forgets retainage. $20,000 subtracts retainage twice.

Source: Original scenario; arithmetic shown in the explanation · AIA, G702–1992 Application and Certificate for Payment instructions — Using G702, lines 4–8