How to assess a senior FP&A candidate

Assess a senior FP&A candidate with a job-relevant work sample, a structured interview and references on work they owned. Use consistent criteria for calculation accuracy, business judgment and communication. This fictional dataset and scorecard provide a starting exercise; they do not establish a validated pass score or prove seniority on their own.

month,revenue_budget_kusd,revenue_actual_kusd,cogs_budget_kusd,cogs_actual_kusd,opex_budget_kusd,opex_actual_kusd,ebitda_budget_kusd,ebitda_actual_kusd,materials_actual_kusd,freight_logistics_actual_kusd,direct_labor_actual_kusd,salaries_benefits_actual_kusd,professional_services_actual_kusd,software_facilities_actual_kusd
2026-01,1200,1205,618,620,250,248,332,337,458,17,145,208,9,31
2026-02,1220,1215,628,626,250,286,342,303,460,19,147,211,42,33
2026-03,1250,1260,644,650,253,258,353,352,478,21,151,213,11,34
2026-04,1280,1275,659,670,253,256,368,349,483,34,153,214,9,33
2026-05,1300,1290,670,676,257,259,373,355,490,31,155,216,8,35
2026-06,1320,1240,680,643,257,259,383,338,471,22,150,217,8,34

assignment_id,task_name,business_purpose,review_due,owner,access_approver,dataset_state,acceptance_evidence,decision_authority,blocker,next_action
,,,,,,,,,,

assignment_id,task_name,business_purpose,review_due,owner,access_approver,dataset_state,acceptance_evidence,decision_authority,blocker,next_action
FCA-FIN-01,Prepare the April reconciliation for two subsidiary accounts,Give the controller a supported explanation of the two subsidiary account balances and a record of unresolved differences after the April ledger close.,"May 8, 2026, 15:00 America/New_York; Reviewer A (controller) reviews the prepared file, unresolved mappings, and access blocker. Example time: replace before assigning. Portal verification and final acceptance remain pending.","Owner A, the new finance hire","Reviewer A, the controller, confirms ERP and shared-drive access and approves read-only bank portal access",April ledger closed as of the 5th; bank statement uploaded to the approved shared drive; the two subsidiary accounts still need confirmed chart-of-accounts mappings,Reconciliation file with source references and explanations for differences; confirmed account mappings; Reviewer A records acceptance after reviewing unresolved items,Reviewer A decides account mappings and treatment of unexplained differences,Bank portal access is pending. Preparation from approved uploaded files can proceed; portal verification remains blocked,Owner A prepares the reconciliation from approved files and flags missing evidence. Reviewer A confirms mappings and resolves portal access before portal verification and final acceptance.
FCB-ROPS-01,Review possible duplicate CRM records offline and recommend next steps,Give sales operations an evidence-based recommendation for each flagged pair and identify the ownership decisions needed before considering any separately authorized CRM change.,"September 16, 2026, 14:00 America/New_York; Reviewer B (sales operations lead) reviews the offline recommendations and unresolved ownership questions. Example time: replace before assigning. No live CRM changes are authorized.","Owner B, the new RevOps hire","Reviewer B, the sales operations lead, confirms access to the approved export; no live CRM write or merge access is needed",Monday export for one sales region; an automated rule flagged possible duplicate pairs; none have received human review,"Assessment log covering each flagged pair, the evidence considered, a proposed next step and unresolved questions; Reviewer B reviews and records acceptance",Reviewer B decides how to handle conflicting ownership and whether a separate authorized change should follow,Some pairs have open deals with conflicting ownership and no agreed resolution rule. A final recommendation on those pairs is pending a decision,Owner B records the conflicting evidence and continues reviewing other pairs. Reviewer B resolves the open questions before those recommendations are accepted. No records are merged in this assignment.

A resume may say a candidate owned a forecast or reported to a CFO. A work sample gives you another kind of evidence: how they reconcile numbers, distinguish an observation from an explanation, and write a recommendation. Their past responsibilities still need a structured interview and references.

Updated September 15, 2026: this revision keeps the case fictional and clarifies the dataset limits, reviewer responsibilities, and role-specific assessment.

This resource is for US CFOs and finance leaders assessing a senior FP&A hire, including candidates in Latin America. Apply the same role requirements wherever you recruit. It contains a fictional case, a downloadable dataset, an answer key and a scorecard. It is a practice resource you can adapt, not a validated hiring test or an account of Opus's internal assessment process.

Download the complete practice dataset (CSV), then use the candidate brief and interviewer scorecard.

What the exercise tests

The Association for Financial Professionals' FP&A skills framework covers finance and business acumen, technology and data, and personal and team effectiveness. This case tests a small part of those capabilities: interpreting financial performance, handling a dataset and communicating with a decision-maker.

The US Office of Personnel Management describes work samples that resemble job activities and are evaluated by trained assessors or task outcomes. Have the manager who understands your FP&A role adapt the task and review the response. A spreadsheet exercise alone cannot establish whether someone has owned a planning cycle or worked effectively with an operating team.

This case focuses on variance analysis and questions for the next forecast. It does not test a full operating model, treasury management, technical accounting or every competency a senior FP&A role might require.

Candidate brief

The following business and figures are fictional. They do not describe an Opus client, placement or market benchmark.

You are joining a mid-size manufacturing business as an FP&A analyst. The CFO wants a first-half 2026 performance review before a board meeting. You have monthly budget and actual revenue, cost of goods sold (COGS), operating expenses (Opex), and EBITDA, plus actual cost detail. All amounts are in thousands of US dollars.

For this simplified case, EBITDA equals revenue minus COGS minus Opex. The expense lines exclude depreciation, amortization, interest and taxes. The file contains no balance sheet, cash collections, sales volumes, product mix or line-item cost budgets. Do not invent them. Treat possible explanations as questions to investigate.

Prepare a 250–400-word note for the CFO with the largest changes, supporting calculations, what remains unknown and one recommended next action. Include a small calculation sheet that reconciles the first-half EBITDA difference to revenue, COGS and Opex. Explain which assumptions you would revisit before updating the forecast and what further information you would need to assess cash effects.

Budget 60–90 minutes for the written work and a 30-minute discussion. These are planning estimates. Agree on the deadline, compensation and any access or timing accommodations before starting. Use the same information and assessment criteria for every candidate, with the agreed accommodations. Decide in advance whether tools such as AI assistants are allowed and what use must be disclosed.

Give every candidate the complete CSV at the outset. There is no extra table to unlock by asking the right question. In the discussion, ask why they chose their next questions and how the answers could change their recommendation.

The fictional dataset

The CSV contains six monthly rows, the summary figures below, and the full actual cost breakdown. Columns ending in "_kusd" are thousands of US dollars. Monthly cost details reconcile to the COGS and Opex totals.

Actual COGS is split into materials, freight and logistics, and direct labor. Actual Opex is split into salaries and benefits, professional services, and software and facilities. The complete breakdown is supplied in the CSV download. There are no budgets for these individual cost lines, so they support month-to-month observations rather than line-item budget variances.

Interviewer answer key

The answers are public because this is a practice resource. For a live selection exercise, adapt the case and figures to the role before distributing the same version to your candidates. Recalculate the key after any change. A memorized number from this page is not evidence of financial judgment.

Revenue and EBITDA

First-half revenue is $7.485 million against a $7.570 million budget, an $85,000 shortfall. June accounts for $80,000 of it: $1.240 million actual versus $1.320 million budget, or 6.1% below plan. The prior five months together are $5,000 below budget.

A useful response identifies June as the main revenue deviation and asks sales about the underlying volume, pricing, mix or timing. The dataset cannot tell you which explanation is correct.

First-half EBITDA is $2.034 million against a $2.151 million budget, a $117,000 shortfall. The bridge is:

COGS totals $3.885 million against $3.899 million budget; Opex totals $1.566 million against $1.520 million budget. February, April and June EBITDA are $39,000, $19,000 and $45,000 below their monthly budgets respectively. A candidate should reconcile the full half, including the other months, rather than treating selected monthly misses as the complete bridge.

Cost questions worth asking

Freight and logistics actuals rise to $34,000 in April and $31,000 in May, compared with $17,000–$22,000 in the other months. Ask operations what changed: shipment volumes, rates, mix or expedited deliveries could be relevant. Without a freight budget or operating detail, the candidate cannot establish a freight budget overrun or its cause.

Professional services actuals reach $42,000 in February, compared with $8,000–$11,000 in the other months. Ask what the charge covered and whether further charges are expected. A single observed spike does not prove the expense is nonrecurring, so removing it from a forecast requires more evidence.

These cost details identify questions to investigate. They do not explain the full EBITDA variance by themselves. Materials and labor also contribute to COGS, and revenue changes affect the comparison.

Gross margin and the next forecast

First-half gross margin is 48.1% actual versus 48.5% budget, calculated from total revenue and total COGS for the half. Use the aggregate amounts, rather than an unweighted average of monthly percentages. The gap is about 0.4 percentage points.

Ask what the candidate would change in the next forecast if June's revenue miss continued, and what they would do if sales confirmed it was only a timing shift. They should state the assumptions behind either scenario and identify which costs would move with revenue. The dataset does not establish that relationship.

EBITDA is not a cash balance. To assess cash implications, request collection timing, receivables, inventory, payables, capital spending and other relevant cash movements. A precise runway estimate from this dataset would rely on missing information.

Interviewer scorecard

Use the anchors to record evidence, not to generate an automatic hiring decision. Ask two reviewers with relevant finance experience to score independently before discussing the response. Keep their notes and disagreements; a total alone hides what needs further investigation.

Business judgment

1. Restates totals without identifying a material change.
2. Finds a change but treats unsupported explanations as facts.
3. Prioritizes June revenue and unusual cost months; separates observations from hypotheses.
4. Connects the findings to specific business questions and explains how different answers would change the forecast.

Communication

1. The CFO cannot identify the conclusion or requested decision.
2. Describes the changes but leaves the decision or uncertainty unclear.
3. Leads with the conclusion, supports it with relevant figures and proposes a next action.
4. Makes the decision, owner and remaining uncertainty clear enough for an executive discussion.

Calculation and model accuracy

1. Material errors prevent the EBITDA bridge from reconciling.
2. Totals reconcile but a material comparison or margin calculation is wrong.
3. Reconciles revenue, COGS, Opex and EBITDA; calculates the aggregate margin correctly.
4. Also checks the detail totals, uses consistent signs and identifies the limits of the available data.

There is no validated pass score for this case. A one-point difference between candidates does not prove a meaningful difference in ability. Discuss the evidence against the actual role requirements, then probe missing or contradictory evidence in the interview.

A clear response should fit the requested format, with any agreed accommodations. Do not treat a word-count overrun, a request for more time or a communication preference as a substitute for evaluating the competencies the job requires. If professional English is a role requirement, define the relevant written and spoken tasks consistently before assessment.

Where to source senior LATAM FP&A talent

Finding qualified candidates and evaluating them are separate jobs. For a portfolio-company search, compare Opus, Near, Hire South and LatamCent against the same reporting brief. Their published finance offerings establish relevant sourcing options; the shortlist still needs evidence of the responsibilities your role requires.

Provider descriptions reviewed September 14, 2026. These are published service facts, not an independently measured ranking. Ask each provider for its current support and replacement terms. A role catalog or a “vetted” label does not prove that a particular candidate has the required experience.

Opus is a strong fit for an established US company that needs a dedicated finance professional working inside its team, with its own finance leader setting priorities. Opus handles contracts, payroll, benefits and employment administration while your manager directs the work. For a portfolio company, define whether the hire prepares business-unit analysis, consolidates management reporting or supports sponsor requests. Name the person who approves assumptions and signs off on reporting.

Separate sourcing from the employment model

A recruiting-only engagement can end when a candidate joins your employment arrangement. A service with ongoing employment administration has different responsibilities. Do not call every full-time placement “direct hire,” or assume that every recruiter is the legal employer. Confirm the employing entity, country, reporting line, administration scope and written terms.

You can also source through an internal recruiter or referrals and separately arrange local employment or an employer-of-record service, where suitable. An EOR addresses employment administration; it does not by itself supply FP&A assessment expertise. Compare internal sourcing capacity and qualified reviewer time as well as provider scope. You do not need to build a foreign payroll function merely because you sourced the candidate yourself.

From provider shortlist to this assessment

Give each provider the accounting framework, ERP or planning tool, reporting cadence and audience. Add any multi-entity definitions, acquisition-related responsibilities and operating-team interactions. Ask what the candidate personally owned in a forecast cycle: assumptions, challenges, revisions and decisions. Request references that can verify that work without disclosing confidential figures.

Keep the provider's screening notes separate from your interview evidence. Use the complete case, CSV and rubric on this page, or a consistently adapted version, with the agreed accommodations. If the screen and exercise conflict, investigate the discrepancy before deciding. Neither a provider endorsement nor one practice score settles the hiring decision.

Before the first assignment: separate the hiring test from the hired person's task

Everything above is how you assess someone before you hire them. Once a finance or RevOps hire actually starts, the first real assignment is a different document with a different purpose: a scoped handoff, not another test. Opus publishes a blank first-assignment handoff CSV and fictional examples. The files use nine handoff fields: business purpose, review due date, task owner, access approver, dataset state, acceptance evidence, decision authority, blocker and next action; plus assignment_id and task_name to identify the assignment. The examples use an approved copy or export, not a production change, and the template does not require live CRM or finance-system write access. Use it once someone is hired, after the assessment above has already made the hiring decision.

Check ownership beyond the exercise

Ask the candidate about a forecast or reporting process they actually owned: who supplied assumptions, who challenged the model, what changed after the review, and which decisions were theirs. A candidate can describe their contribution without disclosing a former employer's confidential figures.

Use consistent job-related questions and rating criteria, as described in OPM's structured-interview guidance. References can help verify the candidate's responsibilities and how they worked with operating leaders. This case does not replace those checks or a role-specific assessment of systems such as Excel, a planning platform or your ERP.

AFP's FPAC exam development process includes job analysis, test specifications and professional testing expertise. This practice case has not undergone that validation and is not an AFP exam or credential.

Fit the case to the finance role

FP&A may cover forecasting, planning, variance analysis and decision support. A controller may own close, reconciliations, controls and accounting judgments. Responsibilities overlap in some organizations, so define the scope rather than imposing a rigid title boundary. Our controller hiring guide covers close ownership and technical accounting assessment.

For a portfolio-company search, name the business, manager, reporting audience and acquisition-related responsibilities before adapting the case. Do not assume the FP&A hire owns every number sent to the sponsor. The PE portfolio hiring guide covers those decisions; the accounting placement guide compares provider models if you are still deciding how to run the search.

Frequently asked questions

Where can I find pre-vetted senior LATAM FP&A candidates?

Opus, Near, Hire South and LatamCent publish relevant finance recruiting offerings linked above. Ask for FP&A-specific screening evidence, references on actual planning responsibilities, and the current employment and support terms. A controller-adjacent catalog alone does not establish senior FP&A expertise.

Should I assess candidates a recruiting partner already vetted?

Use the partner's evidence alongside a consistent role-related assessment and interviews. This fictional case can help you discuss financial reasoning, but it is not validated and has no automatic pass score. Explore conflicting evidence rather than treating one weak result as an automatic disqualification.

Is a controller candidate automatically qualified for FP&A?

No. Verify close and reconciliation ownership separately from forecasting, modeling and operating-team decision support. If the role combines both, assess both against the actual responsibilities. The existing case covers only part of that scope.

Talk to Opus about your FP&A role. Bring the responsibilities, systems, reporting expectations and working hours so we can assess the search.