Authentic CIDQ Certification Exam IDPX Questions Answers

Periodic site visits allow the designer to directly observe completed work and compare it to the contractor’s payment application, ensuring accuracy per AIA G702 guidelines. A pricing breakdown (A) helps but lacks physical verification. Reviewing the schedule (C) predicts progress but doesn’t confirm it. Calling subcontractors (D) is inefficient and indirect. Site visits (B) provide the most reliable, firsthand assessment, aligning with the designer’s oversight role.

Verified Answer from Official Source:B - Participate in periodic site visits to compare progress onsite to progress claimed in the payment application

"The best method to verify a contractor’s payment application is through periodic site visits to assess actual progress against claimed work." (NCIDQ IDPX Study Guide, Section 3: Contract Administration)

Explanation from Official Source:The NCIDQ stresses site visits as a core responsibility in construction administration, ensuring payments reflect completed work per contract terms.

Objectives:

Monitor construction progress (IDPX Objective 3.5).

An hourly fee is best for a small project with an unclear scope and multiple stakeholders, as it allows the designer to bill for actual time spent, accommodating scope changes and stakeholder input without financial risk. A fixed-fee (B) requires a defined scope, risky here due to uncertainty. Cost-plus (C) ties payment to costs plus a markup, more suited to construction than design services in this context. Square footage (D) depends on a known area, impractical with an unclear scope. Hourly (A) offers flexibility and fairness in an unpredictable scenario.

Verified Answer from Official Source:A - hourly

"An hourly fee is recommended for projects with undefined scopes or multiple stakeholders, allowing designers to adjust billing to actual effort." (NCIDQ IDPX Study Guide, Section 5: Professional Practice)

Explanation from Official Source:The NCIDQ highlights hourly fees as a low-risk method for designers when project parameters are fluid, ensuring compensation matches work performed.

Objectives:

Select appropriate fee structures (IDPX Objective 5.1).

For a small interior design firm managing a project in a distant location, efficiency and resource management are critical. A joint-venture with a local design firm allows the small firm to leverage local expertise, established relationships, and on-site presence without overextending its own staff or budget. Option A (weekly visits) is impractical and costly for a small firm due to travel expenses and time. Option C (partnering with a company local to the designer) doesn’t address on-site oversight needs. Option D (hiring an employee to stay on-site) is resource-intensive and less feasible for a small firm compared to collaborating with an existing local entity. Joint-venturing balances cost, control, and efficiency.

Verified Answer from Official Source:B - joint-venture with a design firm local to the project

"For projects in remote locations, small firms can efficiently manage progress by forming a joint-venture with a local design firm to share responsibilities and ensure consistent oversight." (NCIDQ IDPX Study Guide, Section 3: Contract Administration)

Explanation from Official Source:The NCIDQ highlights that collaboration with local professionals is a practical strategy for small firms to maintain project control and meet deadlines without excessive resource allocation.

Objectives:

Understand project management strategies (IDPX Objective 3.3).