EVP — AACE Earned Value Professional Quick Reference

Compact earned value formula, baseline, forecasting, variance, and control reference for AACE International AACE Earned Value Professional (EVP) candidates.

Exam-Focused Use

This Quick Reference supports independent review for the AACE International AACE Earned Value Professional (EVP) exam, code EVP. Use it to rehearse earned value terminology, formulas, baseline logic, forecasting assumptions, and common decision points.

For calculation questions, write down BAC, PV, EV, AC, EAC, ETC, and status date first. Most traps come from mixing budget, actual cost, calendar schedule, and authorized baseline concepts.

Earned Value Core Terms

TermAlso seen asMeaningExam trap
BACBudget at CompletionTotal budget for the measured work scopeUsually excludes management reserve unless reserve has been allocated into the baseline
PVBCWSBudgeted value of work scheduled by the status datePlanned value is not actual spending
EVBCWPBudgeted value of work actually accomplishedEV is earned by progress, not by paying invoices
ACACWPActual cost incurred for the work performedShould include accruals/recognized costs, not just cash paid
CVCost VarianceEV - ACNegative means over cost; positive means under cost
SVSchedule VarianceEV - PVExpressed in budget units, not days
CPICost Performance IndexEV / ACBelow 1.0 means cost efficiency is worse than planned
SPISchedule Performance IndexEV / PVCan become less useful late in the project because SV trends to zero at completion
EACEstimate at CompletionCurrent forecast of final costFormula depends on the performance assumption
ETCEstimate to CompleteForecast cost of remaining workETC = EAC - AC
VACVariance at CompletionBAC - EACNegative means projected overrun
TCPITo-Complete Performance IndexRequired future efficiencyCompare TCPI to historical CPI for realism
PMBPerformance Measurement BaselineTime-phased budget plan for authorized workExcludes management reserve
MRManagement ReserveBudget reserve for in-scope unknownsNot for poor performance or out-of-scope work
UBUndistributed BudgetAuthorized budget not yet distributed to control accountsTemporary; should not become hidden reserve
CBBContract Budget BaseAuthorized budget base for the contract workCBB = PMB + MR in common EVM usage
TABTotal Allocated BudgetTotal budget allocated to workMay exceed CBB after a formal over-target baseline
CAControl AccountManagement control point at WBS/OBS intersectionHas scope, schedule, budget, responsible manager
CAMControl Account ManagerPerson accountable for control account performanceMust explain variance, forecast, and corrective action
WPWork PackageNear-term, detailed, planned workShould have objective earning method
PPPlanning PackageFuture work not yet detailed into work packagesMust be refined before execution
LOELevel of EffortSupport activity measured by time passageEarns EV as planned; masks schedule variance
Apportioned EffortAEWork tied proportionally to another discrete taskIts EV depends on the base effort
OTBOver-Target BaselineFormal baseline above contract budget baseNot a routine variance fix
OTSOver-Target ScheduleFormal schedule baseline beyond contractual/specified scheduleRequires disciplined explanation and control

Essential Formula Sheet

Variance formulas:

\[ \text{CV} = \text{EV} - \text{AC}, \qquad \text{SV} = \text{EV} - \text{PV} \]

Index formulas:

\[ \text{CPI} = \frac{\text{EV}}{\text{AC}}, \qquad \text{SPI} = \frac{\text{EV}}{\text{PV}} \]

Completion formulas:

\[ \text{ETC} = \text{EAC} - \text{AC}, \qquad \text{VAC} = \text{BAC} - \text{EAC} \]

Progress formulas:

\[ \%\text{Complete} = \frac{\text{EV}}{\text{BAC}}, \qquad \%\text{Spent} = \frac{\text{AC}}{\text{BAC}}, \qquad \%\text{Planned} = \frac{\text{PV}}{\text{BAC}} \]

To-complete performance:

\[ \text{TCPI}_{BAC} = \frac{\text{BAC} - \text{EV}}{\text{BAC} - \text{AC}}, \qquad \text{TCPI}_{EAC} = \frac{\text{BAC} - \text{EV}}{\text{EAC} - \text{AC}} \]

Earned schedule, when used:

\[ \text{SV(t)} = \text{ES} - \text{AT}, \qquad \text{SPI(t)} = \frac{\text{ES}}{\text{AT}} \]

Where ES is earned schedule time from the PV curve and AT is actual elapsed time at the status date.

Formula Selection Table

NeedFormulaInterpretation
Cost varianceCV = EV - ACNegative: over cost for work accomplished
Schedule varianceSV = EV - PVNegative: less work earned than planned
Cost efficiencyCPI = EV / AC0.80 means earning 0.80 budget units per actual cost unit
Schedule efficiencySPI = EV / PV0.90 means earning 90% of planned budgeted work rate
Forecast if future work follows planEAC = AC + (BAC - EV)Past variance is treated as non-recurring
Forecast if current cost efficiency continuesEAC = AC + (BAC - EV) / CPICommon when cost performance trend is expected to persist
Simplified CPI forecastEAC = BAC / CPIAlgebraically similar when CPI applies to total BAC
Forecast with cost and schedule pressureEAC = AC + (BAC - EV) / (CPI x SPI)Use only when schedule inefficiency is expected to affect cost
Bottom-up forecastEAC = AC + bottom-up ETCBest when remaining work has been re-estimated
Final variance forecastVAC = BAC - EACNegative VAC means overrun expected
Required efficiency to meet BACTCPI = (BAC - EV) / (BAC - AC)If much higher than CPI, BAC may be unrealistic
Required efficiency to meet EACTCPI = (BAC - EV) / (EAC - AC)Tests whether the new EAC is credible

Fast Interpretation Rules

ResultMeaningLikely management focus
CV < 0Over budget for work performedCost root cause, productivity, rates, rework, procurement costs
CV > 0Under budget for work performedConfirm real efficiency, not delayed invoices or missing accruals
SV < 0Behind planned valueSchedule logic, critical path, resources, constraints
SV > 0Ahead of planned valueConfirm work sequence and quality, not premature EV credit
CPI < 1.0Cost efficiency unfavorableForecast EAC impact; identify corrective action
CPI > 1.0Cost efficiency favorableValidate actuals and scope completeness
SPI < 1.0Schedule efficiency unfavorableUse IMS/critical path, not SPI alone
SPI > 1.0Schedule efficiency favorableCheck whether high-value noncritical work is distorting schedule view
TCPI greater than CPIFuture must be more efficient than pastAsk whether corrective action supports it
TCPI far greater than 1.0Aggressive recovery neededBAC or EAC may be unrealistic
SV = 0 at completionNormal arithmetic resultDoes not prove the project finished on time
EV = PV for LOEExpected for level-of-effort workLOE can hide schedule problems

Mini Calculation Example

Given:

ItemValue
BAC1,000
PV500
EV450
AC600
MetricCalculationResultMeaning
CV450 - 600-150Over cost
SV450 - 500-50Behind planned value
CPI450 / 6000.75Poor cost efficiency
SPI450 / 5000.90Behind planned rate
EAC using CPI1,000 / 0.751,333Forecast overrun
VAC1,000 - 1,333-333Negative completion variance
TCPI to BAC(1,000 - 450) / (1,000 - 600)1.375Must perform far better than current CPI

Exam reasoning: the project is both over cost and behind schedule. A rebaseline is not the first answer; first validate data, analyze root cause, forecast, and plan corrective action.

Baseline Structure

LayerPurposeKey control point
Contract or authorized project scopeDefines the work to be managedScope must be traceable to WBS
WBSProduct/project scope decompositionEvery control account should map to WBS elements
OBSOrganization responsibility structureIdentifies who performs/manages the work
RAMResponsibility assignment matrixConnects WBS scope to responsible organization
Control accountPrimary EVM management pointIntegrates scope, schedule, budget, actuals, and responsibility
Work packageDetailed executable workObjective EV method selected before work starts
Planning packageFuture work not yet detailedMust be converted to work packages before execution
PMBTime-phased budget baselineMeasures performance; excludes MR
MRManagement-controlled reserveUsed for in-scope unknowns, not baseline padding
CBBAuthorized budget baseCommonly PMB + MR
TABAllocated budget totalMay differ from CBB after formal OTB

Baseline Integrity Checklist

A defensible performance measurement baseline should have:

  • Authorized scope tied to the WBS.
  • Defined responsible organization and CAM.
  • Time-phased budget aligned to the integrated schedule.
  • Objective earning methods for discrete work.
  • Work authorization before work begins.
  • Clear separation of distributed budget, undistributed budget, and management reserve.
  • Change control for scope, schedule, and budget changes.
  • Traceability from baseline to actual costs and performance reports.
  • Variance thresholds and documented analysis expectations.
  • Forecasting discipline, not just historical reporting.

Control Account Reference

ElementWhat it should containEVP exam emphasis
ScopeSpecific authorized workAvoid ambiguous or duplicated scope
ScheduleActivities, logic, milestones, status dateEV must align with schedule status
BudgetTime-phased resources/costBudget is not a spending plan alone
EV methodHow value is earnedMust be objective and appropriate
Actual cost collectionCost account mapping and accrual rulesAC must match the work scope being measured
CAM accountabilityVariance analysis and forecastCAM explains root cause, impact, and action
Risk linkageKnown threats/opportunitiesEAC should reflect risk exposure
Change historyApproved baseline revisionsPrevents unauthorized baseline movement

Earned Value Measurement Methods

MethodHow EV is earnedBest forCommon trap
0/1000% until complete, then 100%Short tasks with clear completionToo harsh for long-duration work
50/5050% at start, 50% at finishShort tasks with start/finish evidenceOverstates progress when many tasks are merely started
Weighted milestonesPredefined value at milestone completionEngineering, procurement, deliverable-based workMilestones must be objective and weighted before work starts
Percent completeEV based on assessed progressLonger work where physical progress can be measuredSubjective if not backed by measurable criteria
Physical measurementEV from installed quantities or measured outputConstruction, manufacturing, field workRequires reliable quantity tracking
Units completeEV per completed unitRepetitive productionUnit budget must reflect real effort/cost pattern
Apportioned effortEV tied to a related discrete work baseInspection or support proportional to productionBad if base activity is not genuinely related
Level of effortEV equals planned passage of timeManagement/support activitiesProduces no schedule variance by design
Fixed formulaPreset split such as 25/75 or 50/50Low-value, short-duration tasksCan distort status if task durations are too long

Choosing the EV Method

SituationPreferAvoid
Tangible deliverables with objective eventsWeighted milestonesSubjective percent complete
Repetitive measurable quantitiesUnits complete or physical measurementLOE
Long engineering package with interim deliverablesWeighted milestones0/100 if it hides progress too long
Short procurement action0/100 or 50/50Detailed percent complete
Ongoing project management supportLOETreating LOE as discrete deliverable progress
Quality inspection proportional to productionApportioned effortStandalone subjective progress
High-risk work packageObjective milestones with evidenceFormula earning that front-loads EV

Performance Analysis Workflow

    flowchart LR
	    A[Authorize scope and baseline] --> B[Status schedule and progress]
	    B --> C[Collect actual costs]
	    C --> D[Calculate PV, EV, AC]
	    D --> E[Compute variances and indices]
	    E --> F[Validate data quality]
	    F --> G[Analyze root cause]
	    G --> H[Update EAC and risk view]
	    H --> I[Define corrective action]
	    I --> J[Report and control changes]
	    J --> B

Variance Analysis Quality

Weak variance explanationStrong variance explanation
“Overrun due to labor.”“CPI unfavorable due to 20% higher labor hours from rework on drawing package X; corrective action is design review checklist and senior review before release.”
“Behind schedule; will monitor.”“SPI unfavorable because supplier test fixture delivery missed baseline date; recovery requires alternate fixture approval by date X.”
“Costs are high.”“Actual material unit price exceeded baseline assumption; EAC updated using current vendor quote and procurement strategy revised.”
“Variance is timing.”“AC includes early material receipt while EV will be earned at installation next period; no EAC impact if installation occurs as planned.”
“Need more budget.”“Remaining work re-estimated bottom-up; current TCPI to BAC is unrealistic compared with demonstrated CPI; EAC revised.”

A good variance analysis usually includes:

  1. What happened.
  2. Why it happened.
  3. Whether the variance is one-time or recurring.
  4. Impact on schedule, cost, technical scope, and EAC.
  5. Corrective action, owner, and due date.
  6. Whether baseline change, MR use, or customer change is required.

Forecasting Decision Table

ScenarioBetter EAC approachReason
Past cost variance is isolated and correctedAC + (BAC - EV)Remaining work expected to follow plan
Current cost efficiency likely continuesAC + (BAC - EV) / CPIHistorical CPI is predictive
Schedule compression will increase costAC + (BAC - EV) / (CPI x SPI)Cost and schedule inefficiency both affect remaining work
Remaining work has changed in detailAC + bottom-up ETCNew estimate is more credible than index-only forecast
Major risk has materializedBottom-up ETC plus risk impactFormula-only EAC may miss known future exposure
Actuals are incomplete or mispostedFix AC firstForecast from bad actuals is misleading
Scope change is authorizedUpdate baseline through change control, then forecastEAC must reflect authorized scope
Work is mostly completeBottom-up ETCSmall remaining denominator can distort indices
LOE dominates remaining workReview discrete work separatelyLOE can make SPI appear healthier than reality

Change Control and Reserve Use

EventCorrect treatmentIncorrect treatment
Customer adds out-of-scope workFormal change control; adjust scope, schedule, and budget if authorizedUse MR to fund new scope
In-scope risk occursAllocate MR if approved and consistent with governanceHide cost overrun by adding budget after the fact
Planning package is detailedConvert to work packages; maintain traceabilityChange total scope without authorization
Accounting error foundCorrect actual cost dataRebaseline to remove unfavorable CPI
Performance overrun occursAnalyze, forecast, correct; update EACAutomatically add budget to erase variance
Authorized but not yet priced work appearsTrack and budget consistently with authorization rulesTreat as unapproved informal work
Baseline no longer useful due major overrunConsider formal OTB/OTS processQuietly move historical budgets retroactively
Work already performed without authorizationEscalate and resolve authorization issueEarn EV as if baseline existed

Management Reserve Rules

RulePractical meaning
MR is outside the PMBIt is not part of performance measurement until allocated
MR is for in-scope unknownsIt is not for customer-directed new scope
MR allocation should be documentedMR log should show reason, amount, and approval
MR allocation changes PMB/BAC for affected workIt should not change CBB by itself
MR should not mask poor performanceCost variance remains visible unless valid baseline change rules apply

Replanning, Reprogramming, OTB, and OTS

TermMeaningWhen it appearsExam distinction
Internal replanningAdjusting future baseline details within authorized scope/budgetNormal planning refinementShould preserve traceability and not erase history improperly
ReprogrammingMore significant restructuring of plansWhen current plan is not executableRequires disciplined approval and documentation
OTBOver-target baselineFormal recognition that allocated budget exceeds contract budget baseUsed when original budget is no longer realistic for management control
OTSOver-target scheduleFormal schedule baseline beyond target/contractual scheduleSchedule management reset, not proof of no delay
Single-point adjustmentResetting variances in a formal rebaseline contextSometimes associated with OTBMust be transparent; not routine variance cleanup

High-yield point: Do not choose rebaseline as the first response to a variance. First validate data, analyze causes, update forecasts, and define corrective action. Formal baseline resets are governance events.

Schedule and EVM Integration

ConceptWhat to remember
Status dateCommon cut-off for PV, EV, AC, and schedule status
Integrated master scheduleShould contain logic, durations, milestones, and status consistent with EV
Critical pathDetermines schedule completion risk better than SPI alone
Float/slackHigh SPI can coexist with critical path delay if noncritical work earned value early
ConstraintsExcessive hard constraints can hide schedule logic problems
Out-of-sequence workMay earn EV but can distort schedule forecast
LOE activitiesShould not drive critical path or mask discrete work performance
Baseline datesMust be controlled; unauthorized changes weaken variance meaning
Resource loadingSupports time-phased budget and realism of the PMB
Schedule riskShould influence EAC/ETC when recovery actions add cost

Risk, Contingency, and EAC

Risk is not separate from earned value management; it affects forecast credibility.

\[ \text{EMV} = \text{Probability} \times \text{Impact} \]
ItemRole in EVM
Risk registerIdentifies threats/opportunities that may affect cost and schedule
Management reserveBudget for in-scope unknowns at management level
Contingency in estimatesPlanned allowance tied to identified uncertainty, depending on estimating approach
EACShould reflect known risks, trends, and remaining work realism
Corrective actionShould reduce future variance or risk exposure
OpportunityMay improve EAC, schedule, or resource use if credible

Exam trap: a favorable CPI does not eliminate risk. A low-probability, high-impact event may still require management attention and reserve planning.

Data Quality Checks

CheckWhy it matters
Does EV correspond to completed, authorized work?Prevents premature performance credit
Does AC match the same scope as EV?Avoids false CPI
Are accruals included?Prevents favorable CPI caused by late invoices
Are baseline changes approved?Protects PMB integrity
Are LOE and discrete work separated?Prevents LOE from hiding real schedule variance
Is PV time-phased to the schedule?Avoids meaningless SPI/SV
Are actual rates and quantities separated?Helps root-cause cost variance
Are material commitments confused with actual costs?Commitment is not always AC unless reporting rules define it that way
Are subcontractor costs/status current?Late supplier data can distort project metrics
Are negative or unusual values explained?Prevents mechanical formula use

Common Exam Traps

TrapCorrect thinking
“Positive SV means project will finish early.”SV is budget-based; check critical path and schedule forecast
“SPI = 1.0 means on time.”At completion SPI often trends to 1.0; use schedule analysis
“Use MR to cover overruns.”MR is for in-scope unknowns, not poor performance
“Rebaseline whenever CPI is bad.”Analyze, forecast, and correct first
“AC equals cash paid.”AC should reflect incurred cost according to accounting/status rules
“EV is based on money spent.”EV is based on budgeted value of completed work
“Percent complete is always acceptable.”It must be objective and verifiable
“LOE is harmless.”LOE can mask schedule variance and inflate performance appearance
“All EAC formulas are interchangeable.”Each formula carries a different assumption
“A favorable CPI proves no problem.”Missing actuals, deferred work, or quality issues may be hidden
“Negative VAC requires baseline change.”VAC is a forecast result; baseline change requires authorization/governance
“Undistributed budget is reserve.”UB is authorized budget not yet distributed; it is not MR
“Schedule variance is measured in days.”Traditional SV is measured in budget units
“Budget includes fee/profit automatically.”EVM budgets generally focus on cost for authorized work; check the reporting basis

Role and Artifact Reference

Role/artifactMain purposeEVP focus
Project managerOverall cost, schedule, scope, and stakeholder accountabilityUses EVM to decide and communicate
CAMManages control account executionOwns variance explanation and EAC input
SchedulerMaintains integrated scheduleAligns schedule status with EV status
Cost analystCalculates metrics and trendsTests data quality and forecasts
Finance/accountingProvides actual cost dataEnsures AC timing and coding integrity
Subcontract managerManages supplier performanceIntegrates subcontractor EV and actuals
Change control boardReviews baseline changesPrevents unauthorized PMB movement
Risk managerMaintains risk exposureLinks risk to reserve and EAC
WBS dictionaryDefines work scopePrevents scope ambiguity
RAMMaps responsibilityShows who owns each control account
Work authorization documentAuthorizes scope, budget, schedulePrevents informal work
Variance analysis reportExplains significant varianceMust include cause, impact, action
EAC log or forecast fileTracks estimate changesSupports forecast credibility
MR logTracks reserve allocationShows governance and rationale
Baseline change logRecords approved changesPreserves audit trail

“What Should the Manager Do Next?” Decision Table

Situation in question stemBest next action
CPI suddenly worsensValidate actuals and EV, then analyze root cause
SPI is favorable but critical path slippedUse schedule/critical path analysis; do not rely on SPI alone
Supplier invoice missingAccrue or correct AC before interpreting CPI
CAM reports variance with no causeRequire root-cause analysis and corrective action
Customer requests added scopeProcess through change control before adding baseline budget
In-scope technical risk materializesAssess impact, consider MR allocation, update EAC
Control account has future work poorly definedConvert planning packages to detailed work packages before execution
Percent complete appears subjectiveReplace or support with objective milestones/physical measures
EAC formula conflicts with bottom-up estimateEvaluate assumptions; use the more supportable forecast
TCPI to BAC is much higher than current CPIQuestion whether BAC is achievable; update EAC if warranted
Historical variances were erased by baseline movementChallenge baseline integrity and documentation
LOE dominates favorable SPISeparate discrete work analysis from LOE
Work performed before authorizationEscalate authorization and baseline control issue
Overrun is due to poor productivityForecast impact and corrective action; do not use MR automatically
Baseline is no longer a useful management toolConsider formal replanning/OTB/OTS governance

Rapid Calculation Checklist

Before solving:

  1. Identify the status date.
  2. List PV, EV, AC, BAC.
  3. For variance, start with EV minus something:
    • Cost: EV - AC.
    • Schedule: EV - PV.
  4. For index, start with EV divided by something:
    • Cost: EV / AC.
    • Schedule: EV / PV.
  5. Positive variance is favorable; index above 1.0 is favorable.
  6. For EAC, identify the assumption:
    • Future at plan.
    • Future follows CPI.
    • Future affected by CPI and SPI.
    • Bottom-up re-estimate.
  7. Compare TCPI to current CPI for realism.
  8. Check whether the question asks for calculation, interpretation, or management action.

Final Review Targets

Prioritize these before practice sets:

  • EV, PV, AC distinctions.
  • CV, SV, CPI, SPI, EAC, ETC, VAC, and TCPI.
  • EAC formula assumptions.
  • Control account structure and CAM accountability.
  • PMB, MR, UB, CBB, and TAB distinctions.
  • EV measurement method selection.
  • Variance analysis quality.
  • Schedule integration and critical path limits of SPI.
  • Change control versus MR use versus rebaseline.
  • Data quality problems that invalidate metrics.

Next step: work timed earned value calculation and scenario questions, then review each miss by asking whether the error was formula selection, baseline logic, forecasting assumption, or management response.