Trying to avoid helper column formula

[Gliffix101]

Hello All,

I have a data set where an Entry is graded Pass/Fail on a series of inspection points. If any of the inspection points "Fail", the Entry is considered a fail. I'm looking to write a formula that reviews each line and counts each Entry that is a Pass. I have been able to accomplish this so far by adding a helper column with the formula =IF(COUNTIF(A2:M2,"Fail"),"Fail","Pass") but my data set changes constantly, so I'd like to avoid using a helper column if at all possible. Formula need is the Question Mark below:

Data Set (Sheet1!):
[TABLE="width: 611"]
<colgroup><col><col><col><col><col></colgroup><tbody>[TR]
[TD]Loan Number[/TD]
[TD]Question 1[/TD]
[TD]Question 2[/TD]
[TD]Question 3[/TD]
[TD]Helper Column[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Entry 1[/TD]
[TD]Pass[/TD]
[TD]Pass[/TD]
[TD]Pass[/TD]
[TD]Pass[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Entry 2[/TD]
[TD]Pass[/TD]
[TD]N/A[/TD]
[TD]Pass[/TD]
[TD]Pass[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Entry 3[/TD]
[TD]Pass[/TD]
[TD]Fail[/TD]
[TD]Pass[/TD]
[TD]Fail[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Entry 4[/TD]
[TD]Fail[/TD]
[TD]Fail[/TD]
[TD]Fail[/TD]
[TD]Fail[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Entry 5[/TD]
[TD]Fail[/TD]
[TD]N/A[/TD]
[TD]Pass[/TD]
[TD]Fail[/TD]
[/TR]
</tbody>[/TABLE]

Master Sheet (Summary!):

Total Number of Entry: =SUM(Number of Entry passed + Number of Entry failed)
Number of Entry passed: ?
Number of Entry failed: ?


Thank you,

Bill

 

[mse330]

Glad to help & thanks for reporting back

 

[Aladin Akyurek]

I tried Aladin's way, but it was giving me incorrect calculations back. I liked mse330's post because I can apply that same function to other tasks without the specificity the formula required for Aladin's post.

Bill

Incorrect, are you sure?

 

[Gliffix101]

I'm sure the formula works as intended, but I have some variability and anomalies in the data set that I can account for better with mse's solution vs. the formulas you posted. Thank you, though!

 

[Aladin Akyurek]

I tried Aladin's way, but it was giving me incorrect calculations back. I liked mse330's post because I can apply that same function to other tasks without the specificity the formula required for Aladin's post.

Bill

I'm sure the formula works as intended, but I have some variability and anomalies in the data set that I can account for better with mse's solution vs. the formulas you posted. Thank you, though!

I'm not convinced. But no problem, thanks for the info.

 

[Gliffix101]

Thank you for the response! Never an issue to have more than one right way to do something.