Cyber AB Updated CMMC-CCP Exam Questions and Answers by nikola

Step 1: Responsibility for Subcontractor Compliance

The prime contractor (contractor organization)is responsible for ensuring thatits subcontractorshave the requiredCMMC certification levelbefore engaging them inDoD contracts that involve FCI or CUI.

This requirement is enforced throughflow-down clausesinDFARS 252.204-7021, which mandates that subcontractors handlingCUImeet the necessaryCMMC Level 2 or Level 3 requirements.

DFARS clause 252.204-7012 establishes the safeguarding of Covered Defense Information (CDI), which aligns with CUI categories. The clause specifies that the DoD is responsible for determining whether information is Controlled Unclassified Information (CUI) and marking it accordingly before sharing it with contractors. Contractors do not make determinations about what constitutes CUI; they are responsible for safeguarding information once it is received and marked as CUI.

Reference Documents:

DFARS 252.204-7012,Safeguarding Covered Defense Information and Cyber Incident Reporting

CMMC Model v2.0 Overview, December 2021

The Certified Third-Party Assessment Organization (C3PAO) enters into a contractual relationship with the OSC. As part of that contract, the C3PAO maintains a non-disclosure agreement (NDA) to protect sensitive and proprietary information reviewed during the assessment.

Supporting Extracts from Official Content:

CAP v2.0, Roles and Responsibilities (§2.8): “The C3PAO maintains a non-disclosure agreement with the OSC to protect all sensitive information disclosed during the assessment.”

Why Option B is Correct:

Only the C3PAO contracts directly with the OSC and is bound to protect assessment data.

NIST, The Cyber AB (formerly CMMC-AB), and OUSD A & S do not enter NDAs directly with OSCs.

References (Official CMMC v2.0 Content):

CMMC Assessment Process (CAP) v2.0, Section on OSC–C3PAO agreements.

===========

CAP v2.0 makes “assessment readiness” a formal gate in Phase 1 (Conduct the Pre-Assessment) . The purpose of Phase 1 is for the C3PAO to evaluate whether the OSC has adequately prepared for the assessment of its Level 2 security requirements. If evidence submitted ahead of the assessment is found to be insufficient such that the OSC is not prepared to proceed, CAP describes an Adverse Determination of Assessment Readiness : the Lead CCA should inform the Affirming Official and provide a written explanation for recommending the assessment be suspended —without giving remedial advice.

CAP then addresses what happens next: if the OSC decides to cancel or postpone the assessment, both parties should settle affairs per the agreement (including return of proprietary information), and they may discuss revisiting the assessment when the OSC is fully prepared. This maps directly to “Postpone the assessment” as the best answer.

The other options don’t match CAP’s prescribed handling. CAP does not require notifying the Cyber AB for routine evidence insufficiency (A). “Cancel” (B) is an OSC decision path, but CAP explicitly calls out postponement/suspension as the appropriate procedural response to lack of readiness. “Contact the C3PAO for guidance” (D) is unnecessary framing here because the assessor/Lead CCA is acting on behalf of the C3PAO under CAP’s Phase 1 readiness determination and suspension process.

===========