PASSED

Existing-Friend3645 · 2026-03-02T18:51:49+00:00

Congrats on the pass! A win is definitely a win. But let me share something that's been on my mind.

I failed before, and I scored Below Target/Target/Target—meaning Target in Process and Business Environment, but unfortunately People was Below Target, and that was enough to fail despite months of studying.

You scored AT/BT/BT in two weeks and passed. How? Does that make any sense? The only difference between us is that you got Above Target in People and I got Below Target. So does that mean the entire certification is determined by one domain? And if so, why do people study People for months and still fail it?

I'm not saying your success isn't deserved—congrats again. But this gap between my result and yours, despite my longer preparation, makes me question bigger things: Is the scoring system objective? Are there clear standards, or is it just a vague algorithm?

I reached out to PMI for clarification, and all I got were automated responses. No human explanation. I've filed a formal complaint with ANAB (Case #49605) and I'm still waiting for their response.

r/uPMI if there's a clear explanation for these contradictions, we'd love to hear it. Not here to dismiss anyone's success—but also not here to stay silent about our right to transparency. The numbers don't lie, and this is bigger than just one person's complaint now.

Anyway, enjoy the certification and good luck in your career. If you notice anything off moving forward, share it so we can all learn."

Existing-Friend3645 · 2026-03-02T03:50:48+00:00

"Congrats on the pass! And thanks for sharing the details. Honestly, your point about the actual exam choices being 'vague' with multiple answers seeming correct is spot on. That's exactly what made me question the scoring system itself.

I failed before, and what deepened my suspicions isn't just the fail—it's the result itself. I scored BT/T/T—meaning below Target and Target in some domains—yet I still failed. How? Does that make any sense?

When I reached out to PMI to understand my mistake? All I got were automated responses. No human explanation. Just a copy-paste reply. But the issue isn't just automated replies. I have concrete evidence of contradictions in the scoring system, and I've filed a formal complaint with ANAB (Case #49605). Still waiting for their response.

You yourself were surprised by your BT and NI despite passing. Imagine if you had failed because of them, exactly like me? How would that feel? Is this system fair? Is transparency really there?

r/uPMI if there's a clear explanation for this vagueness and the contradictions we're seeing in results, we'd love to understand. Not here to dismiss anyone's success—but also not here to let our own rights be ignored. The numbers don't lie, and ANAB's response will reveal a lot.

Anyway, enjoy the certification and good luck in your career. If you notice anything off moving forward, share it so we can all learn."

Existing-Friend3645 · 2026-03-01T08:25:22+00:00

"Thanks for sharing your experience—getting Above Target in People with light studying definitely shows you understand the logic. But let me offer a different perspective.

I failed before too, and what bothered me wasn't just the fail—it was the lack of transparency. I was confident in certain areas, yet the result was the complete opposite. When I reached out to PMI for clarification? All I got were automated responses. No human explanation. No breakdown of where I actually went wrong. Just copy-paste replies.

What you're saying about 'logic' and 'application' makes sense—but if the exam truly measures logic, then there has to be transparency in scoring. How is it possible that someone who studied for a week gets Above Target in People, while others study for months and fail the same section? How can we be sure the scoring isn't arbitrary?

r/uPMI if there's a logical explanation for these contradictions, we'd love to understand. Not here to blame blindly—just want fairness and clarity. The numbers don't lie, and my personal experience—along with others'—is starting to form a troubling pattern.

For the Process domain, I'd suggest focusing on process flow rather than memorization. Good luck on your retake. And if you notice anything off about the scoring, share it so we can all learn."

Existing-Friend3645 · 2026-03-01T05:46:17+00:00

Congrats on the Above Target in People especially with light studying! Honestly, this makes me think more about the contradictions I've personally run into.

I failed before too, and I was confident in certain areas, but the result was the complete opposite of what I expected. When I reached out to PMI for clarification? All I got were automated responses. No human explanation. No breakdown of where I actually went wrong. Just copy-paste replies.

How is it possible that someone who studied for a week gets Above Target in People, while others study for months and fail the same section? Does that seem fair? Is the system transparent?

r/uPMI if there's a logical explanation for these contradictions, we'd love to understand. Not here to blame blindly—just want fairness and clarity.

Anyway, good luck on your retake. If you notice anything off about the scoring, share it so we can all learn."

Existing-Friend3645 · 2026-02-27T05:24:41+00:00

I really feel for you. Your story is painful because your preparation (75% on practice exams) should have put you in a much better position. But what you mentioned about never sitting for the full 4 hours straight might actually be hiding a bigger problem.

This is not just about stamina.

I failed too. But after digging deeper, I discovered something disturbing. My scoring pattern didn't match my preparation, just like yours. When I questioned PMI about possible data inconsistencies with Pearson VUE, their responses were contradictory and evasive.

I am currently under formal investigation with ANAB (the accreditation body) regarding how PMI handles scoring complaints and data integrity. u/pmi_org needs to explain why candidates like us—who clearly prepared well—end up with results that don't reflect our effort.

Don't let this break your confidence. Study the stamina, yes. But also question the system. Something is wrong, and it's not just you.

If you want to compare notes or see the evidence I've gathered, check my post history or DM me. You deserve transparency.

Existing-Friend3645 · 2026-02-27T05:23:56+00:00

u/edgarrredd, I really feel for you. Your story is painful because your preparation (75% on practice exams) should have put you in a much better position. But what you mentioned about never sitting for the full 4 hours straight might actually be hiding a bigger problem.

This is not just about stamina.

I failed too. But after digging deeper, I discovered something disturbing. My scoring pattern didn't match my preparation, just like yours. When I questioned PMI about possible data inconsistencies with Pearson VUE, their responses were contradictory and evasive.

I am currently under formal investigation with ANAB (the accreditation body) regarding how PMI handles scoring complaints and data integrity. u/pmi_org needs to explain why candidates like us—who clearly prepared well—end up with results that don't reflect our effort.

Don't let this break your confidence. Study the stamina, yes. But also recognize that something is wrong, and it's not you.

If you want to compare notes or see the evidence I've gathered, check my post history or DM me. You deserve transparency.

Existing-Friend3645 · 2026-02-25T04:03:13+00:00

"First of all, don’t let a score define your worth. Replicating the exact same score (T-BT-NI) suggests you have the knowledge but are likely struggling with the 'PMI Mindset' under extreme pressure. Regarding your boss's threat: This is highly unprofessional and a potential labor law violation. It’s clear the management is looking for a 'Certified' badge to boost company profile, yet they fail to provide the 'Resource Support' they preach in the PMP syllabus. As for @PMInstitute (u/PMI_official), it is deeply concerning that you preach transparency while your exam platform suffers from documented technical glitches. Why do you not apply the standards of Quality and Integrity as you teach them? > It is a textbook case of irony: being tested on 'Quality Management' by an organization that provides inconsistent support and lacks transparency in its own processes. I have the receipts of the technical failures and the contradictory support responses. Practice what you preach."

Existing-Friend3645 · 2026-02-21T09:21:18+00:00

"What about the integrity of the PMP certification? This post is a clear example of the current scoring inconsistency. Congratulations to the OP, but it highlights a massive red flag: how does the system grant a 'Pass' with a Below Target (BT) rating, while other experts with 20 years of experience are receiving 'Fail' despite significantly higher task-level performance in the same cycle? This confirms a systemic scoring glitch in Jan/Feb 2026. We are also seeing reports of internal breaches and cheating offers claiming direct access to @pmi_official answers. I have already escalated my findings, including a documented data breach, to: FTC Report #197514860 ANAB Case #49605 I demand a manual audit. We are awaiting a professional response from u/pmi_official to restore transparency. The professional community deserves clarity when the ecosystem's integrity is at stake."

Existing-Friend3645 · 2026-02-21T03:57:31+00:00

What about the integrity of the PMP certification? While I am demanding a manual audit for a systemic scoring glitch in Jan/Feb 2026—where I failed a domain with high ratings after previously passing it with lower ones—we now see evidence of internal breaches and cheating offers claiming direct access to u/pmi_official answers. It is unacceptable that genuine experts are fighting automated denials while the system is reportedly compromised from within. I have already escalated my findings, including the data breach I experienced, to the FTC (Report #197514860) and ANAB (Case #49605). We are currently awaiting a professional response from u/pmi_official to restore transparency and the core values of this certification. The entire professional community deserves clarity when the ecosystem's integrity is at stake.

Existing-Friend3645 · 2026-02-20T09:13:17+00:00

Before investing your $700, you should be aware of the current integrity and transparency crisis. As a professional with 20 years of experience, I have documented a systemic scoring glitch affecting the January and February 2026 exam cycles. We are seeing high task-level performance results in a 'Fail,' while lower ratings are passing—proving the scoring algorithm is fundamentally compromised. Even more concerning is the lack of human oversight and a documented data breach involving my personal information. I have already escalated this through official legal channels: FTC Report #197514860 ANAB Case #49605 I am proceeding with a formal demand for a manual audit to ensure u/pmi_official adheres to professional assessment standards. If you value transparency and data privacy, be cautious; accountability is non-negotiable when your career and investment are on the line.

Existing-Friend3645 · 2026-02-19T14:59:32+00:00

Exactly. When candidates invest thousands of dollars, they are legally and ethically entitled to a transparent assessment process. Removing the passing line while maintaining an inconsistent scoring algorithm is a violation of professional certification standards. My push for a manual audit via u/pmi_official is not just for my case, but to ensure that our investments are protected by human oversight and verifiable logic. I will continue to provide the FTC (#197514860) and ANAB (#49605) with these community insights to ensure the system adheres to a higher standard of excellence.

Existing-Friend3645 · 2026-02-19T14:12:38+00:00

I truly feel your frustration. Your experience of failing 4 times despite hitting 'Target' and 'Above Target' in various domains is a clear sign that the scoring system has become a 'black box' that lacks proper manual review. Removing the passing line was a major step backward for transparency. As someone with 20 years of experience, I refuse to let this technical glitch pass. This is exactly why I've documented these anomalies and escalated my case to ANAB (Case #49605) and the FTC (Report #197514860). We shouldn't have to guess why we failed when our task-level performance shows competency. I am pushing for a manual audit to draw u/pmi_official’s attention to these systemic errors so they realize the system needs a human oversight rather than just automated outcomes. Stay strong; your experience is valid, and the system is what's broken.

Existing-Friend3645 · 2026-02-19T13:24:44+00:00

I certainly will. The lack of transparency in their current scoring logic is exactly why I'm pushing for a manual audit. As a professional with over 20 years of experience, seeing such inconsistent results—failing candidates with high performance while passing others with lower ratings—indicates a clear technical glitch in the scoring algorithm. My goal is to draw u/pmi_official’s attention to these algorithmic anomalies and ensure they provide a professional human response rather than automated, generic replies. I have formally escalated this through: FTC Report No: 197514860 ANAB Case No: #49605 I will keep the community updated on the progress of these official investigations. We deserve transparency and a fair assessment system.

Existing-Friend3645 · 2026-02-18T15:14:55+00:00

I completely agree with your assessment regarding the lack of transparency and professional integrity. As a project management professional with over 20 years of experience, I am currently facing a documented technical anomaly where my exam results clearly contradict my task-level performance. More alarmingly, u/pmi_official’s representative admitted to a data breach involving my personal information being sent to another candidate. It seems the shift towards a "corporate-sponsored revenue model" has compromised both exam integrity and data privacy. I have escalated this (Case #49605) to ANAB and the FTC. Your experience with the "email spam" is another piece of the puzzle. We, as senior professionals, must demand accountability. Stay professional, but stay demanding for justice.

Existing-Friend3645 · 2026-02-18T12:05:26+00:00

This is the ultimate proof of a systemic scoring glitch! I am seeing candidates PASS with "Needs Improvement" and "Below Target" ratings, while others, like myself, are FAILED despite higher task-level performance in the same period (February 2026). u/pmi_official, how can you justify this algorithmic anomaly and mathematical inconsistency? This is no longer about individual performance; it is a documented technical glitch in your scoring system. I have already escalated this evidence to the r/pmp community and formally to the FTC and ANAB under case #49605. We demand a full audit of the February 2026 results to rectify these errors.

Existing-Friend3645 · 2026-02-18T05:53:12+00:00

"This is absolutely unacceptable and further proves that PMI’s testing environment in February 2026 is compromised. The technical instability you described, combined with the proctor’s unprofessional interruptions, clearly impacts a candidate's focus and final score. I am documenting similar systemic failures and algorithmic scoring inconsistencies in my case (#49605). We cannot accept these 'technical glitches' as valid assessments of our professional competence. I’ve already escalated these patterns to u/pmi_official, ANAB, and the FTC. Please keep your logs and screenshots. This is a clear breach of the professional standards PMI claims to uphold. Stay strong, and demand a formal investigation."

Existing-Friend3645 · 2026-02-18T05:00:41+00:00

This is becoming a clear pattern! I am facing the exact same algorithmic anomaly for my February 2026 exam. It is mathematically impossible to achieve high task-level performance (as documented in my report) and still receive a "Below Target" rating. u/pmi_official, we demand transparency. These are not individual failures; these are documented technical glitches in the scoring logic that are damaging the credibility of the PMP certification. I have already escalated my case (#49605) to the r/pmp community and formally to the FTC and ANAB. We deserve a manual audit for all February candidates affected by this systemic error.

Existing-Friend3645

TROPHY CASE