ClaimCenter-Business-Analysts Guidewire ClaimCenter Business Analyst - Mammoth Proctored Exam Free Practice Exam Questions (2026 Updated)

To implement the functionality of associating a specific contact (the "Primary Hospital") with an entity (the "Injury Incident") in Guidewire ClaimCenter, two core configuration components are required:

A new primary hospital role (Option B):In ClaimCenter, the relationship between a Contact and a Claim (or Incident) is defined by aRole. While the contact itself might be a "Medical Care Organization" (existing subtype), thecontextof its relationship to this specific incident is that it is the "Primary Hospital". Defining this role allows the system to distinguish this hospital from other medical providers on the same claim.

A new field on the incident screen (Option C):To allow the user to select, add, or view this contact, a UI element (specifically aClaim Contact Pickeror Input widget) must be added to the Injury Incident screen. This field will be configured to store the relationship and allows the user to perform the required actions: selecting from existing contacts (filtered by the role), entering new ones, or searching the Address Book.

Why other options are incorrect:

A (New Subtype):The base product already includes the MedicalCareOrg contact subtype, which is sufficient to store hospital data. Creating a new subtype is unnecessary unless the data structure (fields) of a hospital is fundamentally different from other medical providers.

D (Address Book Field):Contacts in the Address Book are typically identified by tags or their Subtype, not by adding a custom field just to identify them as a vendor/hospital.

250 to 350 words From Exact Extract of Guidewire ClaimCenter Business Analyst documentation:

To satisfy the requirements for the new "Rideshare" coverage product, the Business Analyst must map the described risks to the correct Exposure Types in the ClaimCenter data model.

Risk: Injury to a first-party driver:In insurance terminology, "First Party" refers to the insured (the driver). Coverage for injuries sustained by the driver themselves is typically handled byMedical Payments(MedPay) or Personal Injury Protection (PIP). Among the choices provided,Rideshare Medical Payments (Option C)is the correct exposure type to cover medical costs for the driver regardless of fault. (Option E, Liability Bodily Injury, would cover injuries toothersthat the driver hit).

Risk: Damaged personal property of third-party passengers:This refers to liability for damage to property belonging to others. While typically "Property Damage Liability," the specific option provided that fits this description isRideshare Personal Property Protection (Option B). This exposure would be configured to capture details about the damaged items (e.g., luggage, electronics) belonging to the passengers.

Why other options are incorrect:

Option E (Liability Bodily Injury):This is for Third Party injuries (e.g., pedestrians or people in other cars), not the First Party driver.

Option D (Under Insured Motorist):This applies when the Rideshare driver is hit by someone else who doesn't have enough insurance. The prompt focuses on the risksofthe driver working, not the financial failure of others.

The Data Dictionary is the definitive reference tool for Business Analysts to explore the data model of a Guidewire application.

Best Practice:To determine if a specific data point (like "distance driven" or "odometer reading") exists in the system's schema, the BA should consult theData Dictionary. This auto-generated documentation lists all entities (such as Vehicle or VehicleIncident) and their associated fields (columns), along with data types and descriptions. This confirms existence even if the field is not currently exposed on the user interface.

Why Option B is better than A:Checking the UI (Option A) is unreliable because a field may exist in the database but be hidden, disabled, or not placed on the specific screen the BA is viewing.

Why Option B is better than C:The Application Guide (Option C) describes standard features and workflows but does not provide a granular, technical list of every database column, nor does it reflect any custom schema extensions added by the implementation team.

Why Option B is better than D:While Guidewire Studio (Option D) is a powerful tool thatcanverify this, it is primarily a developer environment. For a Business Analyst, the Data Dictionary is the intended, accessible "Source of Truth" artifact for data modeling questions without requiring IDE access or technical code navigation.

This scenario highlights the value of Feature Knowledge and Gap Analysis during preparation.

Prevention of unnecessary work (Option A):Because the BA researched and found the "Graphical Incident Capture Accelerator," the team avoided the costly mistake of deciding to "develop the... functionality from scratch." This is a direct outcome of the BA's preparation preventing an inefficient custom build.

Comparison of Legacy vs. New (Option B):The text details that the BA "reviewed ClaimCenter functionality" and explicitly noted the difference ("saw that ClaimCenter did not have... like they have in their current application"). This ability to articulate the gap between theAs-Is(Legacy) and theTo-Be(Base ClaimCenter) allowed the BA to present the Accelerator as the perfect bridge solution.

Why other options are incorrect:

Option C:The team didnotaccept the "base product process" (which lacked the graphics); they accepted theAccelerator(an add-on) to match the legacy expectation of clickable hot spots.

Option D:The decision was not made "in advance." The text states the team made the "quick decision"during the workshop. The preparation enabled theteam'sdecision, but the BA did not make it unilaterally beforehand.

A complete Business Rule (specifically one designed to generate an Activity) consists of a Context (Trigger/Entity), a Condition (Logic), and an Action (Execution).

Missing Element: Actions (Option A):The scenario describes thetrigger("when they are entered"), theintent/condition("resulting from the storm"), and theparametersof the resulting activity (Target: 3 days, Escalation: 5 days). However, it fails to specify theActiondetails required to execute the rule: specifically,whothe activity should be assigned to (The Assignee) and the specific instruction tocreatethe activity instance. Without defining the Action (e.g., "Create Activity 'Review Catastrophe' and Assign to Claim Owner"), the rule cannot function.

Why other options are present:

TriggerEntity (B):Implied as the Claim (since the text says "whenthey[claims] are entered").

RuleCondition (C):While "resulting from the storm" is vague, it represents the business condition. TheAction(assignment) is the most glaring omission preventing the workflow from reaching a user.

AppliesTo (D):This generally refers to the root entity (Claim), which is identified.

To enforce an approval workflow for a specific type of financial transaction (like "Manual Checks") regardless of the dollar amount, a Business Analyst must leverage both Authority Limits and Transaction Approval Rules.

Authority Limits (D):These are the primary controls for financial exposure. While typically used for amounts (e.g., "Limit of $5,000"), they are the foundational mechanism that triggers the system's "Pending Approval" state. For this scenario, an authority limit could be set to $0 for the specific payment method of "Manual Check" to force all such payments into the approval workflow.

Transaction Approval Rules (C):These rules allow for more granular, logic-based approval triggers beyond simple amounts. Since the requirement specifies "all manual checks" (implying a condition based on themethodof payment, not just the amount), aTransaction Approval Ruleis the best practice configuration. The rule would be written to state:"If Payment Method is Manual, then Approval is Required."

Why not A (Approval Routing)?While Approval Routing rules determinewhoreceives the request (the "correct person"), the default behavior in ClaimCenter is to route approvals to the user's Supervisor. Since the requirement is simply "Succeed requires Supervisor approval," the standard routing logic likely suffices without needing new custom configuration. The critical configuration needed is thetrigger(C and D) to stop the payment in the first place.

The User Story Card exhibit contains several documentation errors when compared to standard Guidewire requirements gathering best practices and the specific scenario provided.

Missing Requirement Number and Logic Gap (Option C):

Traceability:In the second row of the exhibit (the payment validation rule), the "Requirement Number" column is completely blank. Traceability back to the original requirements document is mandatory for all entries.

Logic Precision:The requirement explicitly states that the rule applies to"personal auto claims". However, the logic documented in the "Rules" column (If Exposure Type = VehicleDamage Then Block...) doesnotcheck the Policy Type. It relies solely on the Exposure Type, which could exist on Commercial Auto policies as well. To accurately reflect the business requirement, the condition If PolicyType = Personal Auto must be added (similar to how it was done in the first row).

Missing DV/LV Context for Validation (Option D):

UI Anchoring:The second requirement is a validation rule that triggers an error ("Driver's Date of Birth is required..."). For the system to highlight the specific field on the screen (the "Driver Date of Birth" widget) when the error occurs, the rule must be associated with the specificDetail View (DV)orList View (LV)where that field resides (e.g., VehicleIncidentDV). The exhibit lists "Not Applicable" in the "Name of DV or LV" column. This is incorrect because providing the DV name ensures the error message is displayed contextually next to the field rather than as a generic page-level error, improving the user experience.

Why other options are incorrect:

Option A:The LOB column is used for filtering, reporting, and release management. Even if the rule logic checks the policy type, the LOB column is required metadata and should not be removed.

Option B:While the first requirement (the calculation) lacks a DV name (which it should have), it is aBusiness Rule(assignment), not a validation. Therefore, it doesnotgenerate an error or warning message for the user, so the second part of Option B is incorrect.

Option E:The "Rules" column is exactly where the calculation logic (Date of Loss - Date of Birth) belongs. The developer needs this information to implement the automation.

Guidewire ClaimCenter is designed to handle First Notice of Loss (FNOL) scenarios where the policy system is unavailable or the specific policy cannot be immediately located. The correct standard procedure is to create an Unverified Policy claim.

Unverified Policy Workflow:The New Claim Wizard allows the user to select "Unverified Policy" if a search returns no results. This allows the CSR to proceed with capturing critical accident details (Loss Details, Vehicles, Injuries) and providing service to the customer immediately.

Reconciliation:Later, once the correct policy number is found or the policy system comes back online, the claim can be updated. The "Unverified Policy" feature specifically supports the "Select Policy" step of the wizard to ensure claims are not blocked by administrative data issues.

Customer Experience:Option A (asking the customer to call back) is poor service and contrary to ClaimCenter's design philosophy. Option D is incorrect because a verified policy isnota hard blocking requirement for creating a draft claim in this specific workflow.

In the Guidewire implementation methodology, User Stories are categorized into Themes that align with the high-level business processes of the claim lifecycle.

Intake (Option A):TheIntaketheme covers theFirst Notice of Loss (FNOL)process and the "New Claim Wizard." The requirement specified is to capture data regarding the "Reporter" (the person reporting the loss) and their contact preferences. In ClaimCenter, Reporter information is collected at the very beginning of the New Claim Wizard (Step 1: Search/Create Policy and Reporter). Because this data entry occurs during the initial setup of the claim, the User Story governing these UI changes belongs to theIntaketheme.

Context:Improving "expediency of claims processing" often relies on accurate data capture at the Intake stage so that downstream assignment and communication can be handled correctly from the start.

Why other options are incorrect:

Adjudicate (B):This theme covers the investigation, evaluation, and negotiation phases that occurafterthe claim is created.

Settle/Close (D):This theme covers the payment issuance and final closure of the file.

Special Services (C):This typically refers to Vendor Management or specialized sub-processes, not the core FNOL reporter data.

This scenario involves checking financial Authority Limits and determining the correct Approval Routing hierarchy in Guidewire ClaimCenter.

Check Authority Limits:First, compare the transaction amount against the user's specific limits.

The payment is for "repairs to the insured's home," which is classified asClaim Cost(Indemnity).

According to the provided Authority Limit Profile, the Adjuster has a "Payment amount" limit of$5,000for Claim Cost.

The transaction amount is$6,500.

Since$6,500 > $5,000, the limit is exceeded, meaning the paymentrequires approval(Ruling out Option B).

Determine Routing:When a financial transaction requires approval, ClaimCenter routes the approval activity to the supervisor of the group to which the user belongs.

The Adjuster is a member ofProperty - Team A.

According to the Organization chart provided, the Supervisor for "Property - Team A" isSupervisor D.

Therefore, the system will generate an approval activity and assign it specifically to Supervisor D. Supervisor C is the manager of theparentgroup (Western Property Group), so the activity would only go to them if Supervisor Dalsolacked the authority to approve the $6,500, requiring further escalation. However, the initial routing is always to the immediate supervisor.

Why other options are incorrect:

Option A:Supervisor C is the "Grand-boss" (Supervisor of the parent group), not the immediate supervisor.

Option B:The amount ($6,500) clearly exceeds the defined limit ($5,000), so automatic processing is impossible.

Option C:Supervisor A is at the top of the hierarchy (Succeed Insurance), far removed from the initial approval step.

In Guidewire ClaimCenter, the History screen serves as the automated audit trail for the claim file. It is designed to capture and display a chronological list of significant events and user actions that have occurred throughout the claim's lifecycle.

Audit Trail Functionality:The History screen automatically records specific types of events, including:

Field Changes:When critical fields (like Reserve Amounts) are modified, the system logs the "Old Value" and the "New Value."

Assignment Changes:Tracks when the claim was transferred from one user to another.

Rule Execution:Logs when specific business rules (like "Exception Flagged") are triggered.

Data Points:For each entry, the History screen displays theUserwho performed the action, theTimestampof the event, and aDescriptionof the change.

Why other options are incorrect:

Financials > Transactions (A):While this screen shows the financial T-account entries (debits/credits) for the reserve increase, its primary purpose is accounting analysis. It is less efficient for a supervisor looking for a simple "Who/When/What" audit trail compared to the History screen.

Notes (C):Notes are typically used for qualitative narratives and manual entry. While a system notecanbe generated for a reserve change, the History screen is the dedicated, non-editable system of record for tracking field changes.

Loss Details > Status (D):This screen shows thecurrentstate of the claim (e.g., Open, Closed, Litigation Status) but does not provide a historical log of previous values or the specific user actions that led to the current state.

The Check Wizard in Guidewire ClaimCenter enforces strict financial integrity rules. To successfully create a check, the user must define the source of funds and the recipient.

Payment tied to a Reserve Line (Option A):Every payment must be allocated to a specificReserve Line(combination of Exposure, Cost Type, and Cost Category). This ensures that the payment consumes the correct financial reserves and maps to the correct coverage on the policy. You cannot create a "floating" payment; it must be tied to a reserve line.

Payee (Option C):A check is a legal instrument that must be payable to a specific entity. Selecting aPayee(from the claim contacts) is a mandatory step in the wizard.

Why other options are incorrect:

B (Activity):While paymentscanbe linked to activities (e.g., Service Requests), it is optional. Most indemnity payments are made directly without an underlying activity.

D (Date of claim):The Loss Date is a property of the claim, but it is not a component selected or createdduringthe check wizard process. The relevant dates in the wizard are the "Service Period" or "Scheduled Send Date."

In Guidewire implementation methodology (such as SurePath), traceability and organization are maintained through strict naming conventions.

Naming Convention (Option C):A unique identification number is assigned to every User Story Card to create a consistent naming structure:Product - Theme - Subtheme - ID. (For example: CC - FNOL - Vehicle - 001).

Purpose:This convention allows Business Analysts, Developers, and QA testers to easily reference, search, and trace requirements across different tools (e.g., from the Story Card in Excel/Jira to the code in Studio and the test cases in the testing suite).

Why not A, B, or D?Time estimation (A) uses "Story Points," not the ID. Burndown charts (B) track velocity/points, not criteria IDs. Backlogs (D) are organized byBusiness Value/Priority, not just numerically by ID.

In Guidewire implementation projects (often following the SurePath methodology), specific Guiding Principles are established to manage scope and ensure project success.

"We are not building a system from scratch" (Option A):This is the foundational principle of package software implementation. The scenario explicitly states that Succeed is implementing a "slightly modified version of ClaimCenter" (using the base product) rather than building a custom solution. The project team accepts that they are starting with a robust, pre-built application and will only modify it where necessary (e.g., the two specific fields).

"We will challenge current processes" (Option B):The scenario notes that "Currently language is not considered in assignment." To successfully implement the new requirement (bilingual assignment), the project team must challenge and change the legacy business process. Instead of automating the old way of working (which ignored language), they are defining a new, more efficient process that leverages the tool's capabilities.

Why other options are incorrect:

Option C:Adding scope (new fields) generallyincreasesrisk and time rather than accelerating it, unless the scope is strictly MVP. The primary focus here is efficiency, not just speed of deployment.

Option D:While "not revisiting decisions" is a good governance rule, it is not the primary principle illustrated by the decision to modify the UI for specific business value.