pqs compliance audit audit report (user choice … · pqs compliance audit audit report (user...

PQS Compliance Audit Audit Report (User Choice 2010-2016 & 2016-2017)

SUPPLIER ATTACHMENT 1

Registration Code 32438

RTO Lynchpin Enterprises Pty Ltd trading as Keystone Training

Address

Units 36 & 37

17 Cairns Street

Loganholme QLD 4129

PARTICIPANTS

Lead Auditor Kathiravelu Navaratnam Auditor(s)

Suzanne Sheppard

Auditor Phone (07) 3513 5462

Supplier Michelle Daphne Day, CEO

AUDIT DETAILS

Date(s) 2 to 3 March 2017

Location Loganholme

PQS Agreement(s) PS101446

Type Monitoring Re-audit

Outcome Compliant Not Compliant

Notes

Qualification Code

Qualification Number of

Students Sampled

CPC30111 Certificate III in Bricklaying/Blocklaying 14

CPC30211 Certificate III in Carpentry 10

CPC30611 Certificate III in Painting and Decorating 6

2 Department of Education and Training

Version 8 – July 2016

ASSESSMENT Compliant Not Compliant Not Examined

N/C N/A

For each competency for each student the supplier has:

gathered sufficient evidence that competency has been achieved, as expressed by the relevant endorsed industry/enterprise competency standards of a Training Package or by the learning outcome of an accredited course to support the outcome of the assessment (AVETMISS Outcome identifier 20) (PQS Agreement, Clause 9) (User Choice 2016-2017 Policy, Clause 2.4 (Table 3))

retained sufficient evidence to support that students have attempted all assessments and failed in at least one method (AVETMISS Outcome identifier 30) (PQS Agreement, Clause 9) (User Choice 2016-2017 Policy,

Clause 2.4 (Table 3))

retained sufficient evidence to support recognition of prior learning (AVETMISS Outcome identifier 51) (PQS Agreement, Clause 9) (User Choice 2016-2017 Policy, Clause 2.4 (Table 3))

retained sufficient evidence to support transition of student to a superseding qualification and similar units of competency are deemed to be non-equivalent (PQS Agreement, Clause 9) (User Choice 2016-2017

Policy, Clause 2.3.3) (User Choice 2016-2017 Policy, Clause 2.2.3 and 2.4 (Table 3))

not been funded for delivery of a unit of competency/module through RPL in any instance where this leads to the entire qualification being achieved through RPL (User Choice 2016-2017 Policy, Table 5)

Non-compliances

Insufficient Assessment for AVETMISS Outcome 20

For 27 students in the sample, the assessments to support AVETMISS Outcome identifier 20 did not meet training package requirements. The supplier had failed to capture critical aspects of assessment for example where required to demonstrate on more than one occasion, and/or using a different combination of materials or specifications. The assessment retained was insufficient for 190 units of competency.

This issue applies to the following students and units of competency.

Qualification Student name Unit/s of competency

CPC30111

Certificate III in Bricklaying/ Blocklaying

Joshua Bartlett, CPCCCM1012A, CPCCCM1013A, CPCCCM1014A, CPCCCM1015A, CPCCBL2001A, CPCCBL2002A, CPCCBL3009A, CPCCCA3002A, CPCCCM2006B, CPCCCM2008B, CPCCCM2009A

Callen Clarke CPCCBL2001A, CPCCBL2002A, CPCCBL3002A, CPCCBL3009A, CPCCCA3002A, CPCCBL3003A, CPCCBL3004A, CPCCBL3005A

Shaun Convine CPCCBL3013A, CPCCBL3015A, CPCCCM3001C, CPCCCO2013A, CPCCSF2004A

Baylee Mckenna CPCCBL2001A, CPCCBL2002A, CPCCBL3002A, CPCCBL3003A, CPCCBL3004A, CPCCBL3005A, CPCCBL3009A, CPCCCA3002A, CPCCCM2009A

Andrew Neill CPCCBL2001A, CPCCBL3002A, CPCCBL3009A, CPCCCA3002A, CPCCCM2009A, CPCCBL2002A, CPCCBL3003A, CPCCBL3005A, CPCCBL3004A

Joshua Richards CPCCBL3018A, CPCCSF2004A

Andrew Richardson CPCCCM1012A, CPCCCM1013A, CPCCCM1014A, CPCCCM1015A, CPCCCM2006B, CPCCCM2008A, CPCCOHS2001A, CPCCBL2001A, CPCCBL2002A, CPCCBL3009A, CPCCCA3002A, CPCCCM2001A, CPCCCM2009A

Jordan Sekova-Smith CPCCBL2001A, CPCCBL2002A, CPCCBL3009A, CPCCCA3002A, CPCCCM2009A

Kallum Shaw CPCCBL3003A, CPCCBL3004A, CPCCBL3005A

Lachlan Staples-Murphy

CPCCCM1012A, CPCCCM1013A, CPCCCM1014A, CPCCCM1015A, CPCCCM2006B, CPCCCM2008B, CPCCOHS2001A



Dennis Summerton-Fawkner

CPCCCM1012A, CPCCCM1013A, CPCCCM1014A, CPCCCM1015A, CPCCCM2006B, CPCCCM2008B, CPCCOHS2001A, CPCCBL2001A, CPCCBL2002A, CPCCBL3009A, CPCCCA3002A, CPCCCM2001A, CPCCCM2009A

Lee Utner CPCCBL3013A, CPCCBL3015A, CPCCSF2004A, CPCCCO2013A

CPC30211 Certificate III in Carpentry

Jack Belford

CPCCCA2002B,CPCCCA2011A, CPCCCA3003A

CPCCCA3017B, CPCCCM1012A, CPCCCM1014A, CPCCCM1015A, CPCCCM2010B, CPCCOHS2001A

Scott Elliot

CPCCCA3005B, CPCCCA3006B, CPCCCA3008B, CPCCCA3013A, CPCCCA3017B

Jesse Harris

CPCCCA3004A, CPCCCA3005B

Haydn Hedges

CPCCCA2003A, CPCCCA3001A, CPCCCA3010A, CPCCCA3012A, CPCCCA3013A, CPCCCA3014A, CPCCCA3016A, CPCCCA3017B, CPCCCM2007B

Joshua Little CPCCCA3001A, CPCCCM1012A, CPCCCM1013A

Nicolas Mccrae

CPCCCM2008B, CPCCCM2010B, CPCCCA3003A, CPCCCA3005B

Johnathon Noffke

CPCCCM2008B, CPCCCA3010A, CPCCCM2010B, CPCCCA3013A

Braiden Poole CPCCCA3001A, CPCCCO2013A, CPCCCA3004A

Leroy Taylor CPCCCM2008B, CPCCCM2010B

CPC30611

Certificate III in Painting and Decorating

Ezio Capriglione

CPCCCM1012A, CPCCCM1013A, CPCCCM1014A, CPCCOHS2001A, CPCCPD2011A, CPCCPD2012A

Jake Dominick

CPCCPD2011A, CPCCPD3021A, CPCCPD3022A, CPCCPD3024A, CPCCCM1015A, CPCCCM2001A, CPCCCM2003B, CPCCPD3025A, CPCCPD3030B, CPCCPD3023A, CPCCPD3029A, CPCCSP3003A, CPCCCM2008B, CPCCCM3001C, CPCCPD3027A, CPCCPD3028A, LMFGG2008B, CPCCPD3026A, CPCCPD3031A

Luke Muller CPCCCM1012A, CPCCCM1013A, CPCCCM1014A, CPCCOHS2001A, CPCCPD2011A, CPCCPD2012A, CPCCPD3021A, CPCCPD3022A, CPCCPB3026B, CPCCPD2013A, CPCCPD3023A, CPCCPD3026A

Mitchell O'Grady

CPCCCM2003B, CPCCPD3025A, CPCCPD3024A, LMFGG2008B, CPCCCM3001C, CPCCPD3027A, CPCCPD3028A

Dane Stuart

CPCCCM2001A, CPCCPD3024A, CPCCPD3026A, CPCCCM1015A, CPCCCM2003B, CPCCPD3023A, CPCCPD3025A, CPCCPD3029A, CPCCPD3030B, LMFGG2008B

Alex Wilson CPCCCM1012A, CPCCOHS2001A, CPCCCM1013A, CPCCCM1014A, CPCCPD2011A, CPCCPD2012A

It is noted that the supplier has begun to rectify these assessment issuestems following an ASQA audit late last year, some of the rectification process has been noted at audit, e.g. developing marking guides, however none of the new assessment has been implemented yet. The supplier stated that it had ceased training in these units once the issues had been raised at the ASQA audit. The supplier was advised of the non-compliance relating to insufficient retention



of critical aspect of assessment evidence as outlined above, and detailed within Attachment 2, “Schedule of Overpayments” as defined in Clause 8.1 of the Pre-qualified Supplier Agreement. The department will seek recovery for the overpayments.

Missing assessment for AVETMISS Outcome Identifier 20

The evidence provided by the supplier did not contain the documented assessment to support AVETMISS Outcome 20 claims for the following two students:

Student Unit/s of competency Detail

Joshua Bartlett CPCCBL2001A, CPCCBL2002A, CPCCBL3009A, CPCCCA3002A, CPCCCM2006B, CPCCCM2008B, CPCCCM2009A

Missing theory assessment documents in file

Shaun Covine CPCCCM3001C, CPCCCO2013A, CPCCSF2004A Missing theory assessment documents in file

The supplier was advised of the non-compliance relating to the missing assessment documents as outlined above, and detailed within Attachment 2, “Schedule of Overpayments” as defined in Clause 8.1 of the Pre-qualified Supplier Agreement. The department will seek recovery for the overpayments.

Missing evidence for AVETMISS Outcome Identifier 30

The supplier advised that the students who had Outcome 30 claims against them had all been entered as continuing enrolments into the old Student Management System (SMS) by the previous owners. These students were either cancelled or transferred to another RTO. Thus, no assessments were conducted for all AVETMISS Outcome identifier 30 for 43 units of competency, involving three students in CPC30111 Certificate III in Bricklaying/Blocklaying and two students in CPC30211 Certificate III in Carpentry. The contracts for the five students were cancelled and the supplier used AVETMISS Outcome identifier 30 in error to remove the students from its SMS. This has resulted in payment to the supplier by the department.

Student Units of competency Detail

Aston Atherinos BSBSMB401A, CPCCCA2003A, CPCCCA3002A, CPCCCA3005B, CPCCCA3006B, CPCCCA3007C, CPCCCA3008B, CPCCCA3010A, CPCCCA3012A, CPCCCA3013A, CPCCCA3014A, CPCCCA3015A, CPCCCA3017B, CPCCCA3023A, CPCCCM2001A, CPCCCM2002A, CPCCCM2007B, CPCCCO2013A

For five students, assessments had not been taken place for the units of competency claimed.

Daniel Bass CPCCBL3013A, CPCCBL3015A, CPCCBL3018A, CPCCSF2004A

Shaun Convine CPCCBL3018A

Jesse Harris CPCCCA3006B, CPCCCA3007C, CPCCCA3008B, CPCCCA3018A, CPCCCA3019A, CPCCCA3020A, CPCCCA3021A, CPCCCM1015A, CPCCCM2002A, CPCCCM3001C, CPCCSF2003A, CPCCSF2004A

Jonathan Lonie CPCCBL3006A, CPCCBL3010A, CPCCBL3012A, CPCCBL3013A, CPCCBL3014A, CPCCBL3015A, CPCCBL3018A, CPCCSF2004A

The supplier was advised of the non-compliance relating to the inappropriate use of AVETMISS Outcome identifier 30 as outlined above, and detailed within Attachment 2, “Schedule of Overpayments” as defined in Clause 8.1 of the Pre-qualified Supplier Agreement. The department will seek recovery for the overpayments.

Rectification Required

Assessment for AVETMISS Outcome Identifier 20

The supplier must implement a process to ensure the full range of assessment evidence for each unit of competency is retained. Further, it must ensure that assessment items capture all evidence required to meet training package requirements. In addition, the supplier must also ensure all assessment is marked, dated, signed, and all evidence is retained prior to the submission for claim for payment.



Missing assessment for 20 outcome

The supplier must implement a process to ensure the evidence that competency has been achieved and retained before making claim for payment. The supplier must also ensure that the assessments are marked, signed and dated by the assessor to support the assessment outcome.

Missing evidence for 30 outcome

The supplier must discuss the inactive students who had been incorrectly reported as AVETMISS Outcome 30 with Contract Management and Performance of the Department to ensure that an appropriate AVETMISS Outcome identifier is applied for them so that the student management and information system can be updated without incurring payment from the Department. The supplier needs to ensure that correct AVETMISS data is entered.

The supplier will not be required to submit evidence to the department to demonstrate non-compliances have been sufficiently addressed. However, rectification action must be immediately undertaken (unless otherwise advised by the lead auditor) to address all identified non-compliances and will be examined as part of future audit or monitoring activity.

TRAINING Compliant Not Compliant Not Examined

N/C N/A

The supplier retained information and material necessary to provide a complete record of training and assessment, including:

records of each student’s participation in training for each unit of competency, including records of the commencement of educational content, attendance and progression. (PQS Agreement, Clause 9)

The supplier has retained evidence:

to support the student’s participation in the learning activity prior to withdrawing (AVETMISS Outcome identifier 40). (PQS Agreement, Clause 9) (User Choice 2016-2017 Policy, Clause 2.4 (Table 3))

Training Plans and Training Records

Where training is required to be delivered by the employer or the SRTO, the employer or the SRTO has at intervals of not more than 3 months:

required the apprentice or trainee to produce the training record to have the particulars of the training completed by the apprentice or trainee during the interval entered and has kept the record complete, accurate and up-to-date by entering the particulars in it. (FET Regulations r. 4(6))

Non-compliances

Insufficient evidence of training

For all students in the sample, the supplier used student contact sheets to record the evidence of training. In many instances, the students contact sheets and training records did not contain the participation in training by each unit of competency, including location of training, hours of training, trainer name and signature, and student name and signature. Accordingly, the supplier maintained insufficient evidence of training to substantiate student participation in training in all units of competency.

Regular updating of training records

For all students in the sample, the supplier did not retain documented evidence that the training record had been kept complete, accurate and up-to-date by entering the particulars in it. . The supplier failed to update the training records at intervals of not more than three months.


Insufficient evidence of training

The supplier must review and revise its process for maintaining the record of participation in training. The new process should encompass evidence of training for every student for each unit of competency, including location of training, hours of training, trainer name and signature, and student name and signature. The supplier could modify the student contact sheet to include the additional information to demonstrate the participation in in training.

Regular updating of training records

The supplier must implement a process to ensure all training records are kept accurate and up to date in intervals of not more than three months.

The supplier will not be required to submit evidence to the department to demonstrate non-compliances have been sufficiently addressed. However, rectification action must be immediately undertaken (unless otherwise advised by the lead auditor) to address all identified non-compliances and will be examined as part of future



audit or monitoring activity.

ADMINISTRATIVE Compliant Not Compliant Not Examined

N/C N/A

Induction information

The supplier provided, for each unit of competency:

rate of student contribution fees

partial tuition fee exemption categories

full exemption tuition fee categories

full refunds for units not commenced and proportionate refunds for units commenced but not completed

any additional fees to be charged to the employer/industry (User Choice 2016-2017 Policy, Clause 2.6)

Records

The supplier retained information and material necessary to provide a complete record of training and assessment, including:

a copy of the qualification(s) and statement(s) of attainment issued to each student. (PQS Agreement, Clause 9)

The supplier provided, for each unit of competency:

a completed and accurate assessor’s marking guide, criteria and observation checklists for the unit of competency. (PQS Agreement, Clause 9)

Training Plans

signatures of all parties (student, employer and SRTO) sighted for all training plans FET Act s. 74(1)

The SRTO has taken reasonable steps to ensure each training plan is signed: (a) if the training plan is the initial training plan for the apprentice or trainee – within 3 months of the start of the apprenticeship or traineeship FET Act s. 74(2)(a); or (b) if a training plan for an apprentice or trainee ends because the SRTO registered training organisation has been replaced – within 28 days after the replacement day (FET Act s. 74(2)(b)); or (c) if a training plan for an apprentice or trainee ends because the registered training contract has been permanently, temporarily or a statutory transfer – within 28 days after the transfer of the contract (FET

Act s. 74(2)(c)) The SRTO ensured a copy of the signed training plan is given to each apprentice or trainee, and the

employer, within 14 days after the parties sign it (FET Act s. 75)

Requirements of a Training Plan for an Apprentice or Trainee

The training plan format implemented by the organisation contains the minimum requirements as outlined within Guide to Training Plans and Training Records and the nationally approved training plan template (released 11 September 2014) (PQS Agreement, Clause 9.1(c)) (Evidence Guide (User Choice 2016-2017) for FET Act

2014, Training Plans) Individual training plans within student files have been fully developed (PQS Agreement, Clause 9.1(c)) (Evidence

Guide (User Choice 2016-2017) for FET Act 2014, Training Plans) Training plans address training package requirements in relation to the selection and sequencing of units

of competency (PQS Agreement, Clause 9.1(c)) (Evidence Guide (User Choice 2016-2017) for FET Act 2014, Training

Plans)

Training Records

The SRTO has provided the apprentice or trainee with the appropriate training record to be kept for the apprenticeship or traineeship within 14 days after a training plan is signed by the parties to the training plan (FET Regulations r. 4(1))

AVETMISS Reporting Requirements

The supplier has:

retained sufficient evidence to support credit transfers (AVETMISS Outcome identifier 60) (PQS Agreement,

Clause 9) (User Choice 2016-2017 Policy, Clause 2.4 (Table 3))



retained sufficient evidence that an induction was conducted and training plan developed prior to the student’s training contract being cancelled or the student changing suppliers (SRTO1 Administration Payment) (User Choice 2016-2017 Policy, Clause 2.4.7)

Non-compliances

Training Plans

In the sample reviewed for this audit, 29 out of 30 training plans were not fully developed and did not contain the minimum requirements, e.g. training and assessment methods, signatures of all parties and date of the training plan signed. In particular, the practical method of assessment was not recognised in the training plan across the sample. The training plan was missing for one student, Jack Belford in Certificate III in Carpentry. The supplier has also failed to document that the training plans have been provided to all parties within 14 days of being signed by the parties.

Issuing Training Records

For the sample reviewed, the supplier retained no evidence of providing training records to students within 14 days after their training plans had been signed by all parties. However, the supplier provided evidence to support that it has developed a new process for new enrolments to meet this compliance requirements by the department.

Evidence of credit transfer

The supplier was unable to provide evidence to support the AVETMISS Outcome identifier 60 for 21 units of competency for two students. The following table provides the details.

Student name Credit transferred units of competency Details

Mitchell O,Grady CPCCCM1012A, CPCCCM1013A, CPCCCM1014A, CPCCCM1015A, CPCCCM2001A, CPCCCM2008B, CPCCCM2010B, CPCCOHS2001A, CPCCPB3026B, CPCCPD2011A, CPCCPD2012A, CPCCPD2013A, CPCCPD3021A, CPCCPD3022A, CPCCPD3023A, CPCCPD3026A, CPCCPD3029A, CPCCPD3030B, CPCCPD3031A, CPCCSP3003A

Certificates or Statements of attainment were missing

Joshua Richards CPCCCO2013A Certificates or statements of attainment were missing

The supplier was advised of the non-compliance relating to the credit transfer and reporting AVETMISS Outcome identifier 60 as outlined above. The supplier did not claim funds from the department.


Training Plans

The supplier must ensure that training plans are fully developed for all students with the minimum requirements, and be signed and dated by all parties. The supplier must also ensure that a signed copy of the training plan has been issued to students and employers within 14 days of all parties signing and retain evidence this process has occurred.

Issuing Training Records

The supplier must ensure that it continues with its new process to retain evidence it has issued training records to each student within 14 days of the training plans being signed by all parties. The supplier must retain all documented evidence to support this compliance requirement by the department.

Evidence of credit transfer

The supplier must ensure that it has obtained and retained documented evidence of attainment for all units of competency for all students before granting AVETMISS Outcome identifier 60 for them and then reporting to the department.


EMPLOYER RESOURCE ASSESSMENT Compliant Not Compliant Not Examined

N/C N/A

The supplier provided evidence it:



assessed employment arrangements of each student to ensure the employer provides adequate facilities, range of work supervision and the on-the-job training required by the Act. (User Choice 2016-2017 Policy, Clause

1.2) sourced or developed an employer resource assessment document which addresses the employment and

training arrangements required under the Act for traineeships and apprenticeships (PQS Agreement, Clause

9.1(c)) (Evidence Guide (User Choice 2016-2017) for FET Act 2014, Employment Arrangements) has taken appropriate action when the employment arrangements do not meet the requirements of the

Act, the Agreement and/or the qualification (User Choice 2016-2017 Policy, Clause 1.2)

Non-compliances

Employer Resource Assessment

Employer Resource Assessments (ERAs) were not available for all six students in CPC30611 Painting and Decorating qualification. The ERAs had incomplete information for 10 students in CPC30111 Certificate in Bricklaying/Blocklaying Bricklaying and one student in CPC30211 Certificate III in Carpentry. This included the following:

The details of the students with no and/or incomplete information on ERA as above are:

Qualification Student name Detail

CPC30111 Certificate III in Bricklaying/

Blocklaying

Joshua Bartlett Supervision was not listed

No justification for excess ratio of number of apprentices to qualified persons

Not signed by employer and supervisor

Callen Clarke No justification for excess ratio of number of apprentices to qualified persons

Shaun Covine No ratio of number of apprentices to qualified persons

Not signed by employer and supervisor

Baylee Mckenna No ratio of number of apprentices to qualified persons

Not included licence number and details of qualification of supervisor

Andrew Neil No justification for excess ratio of number of apprentices to qualified persons

Joshua Richards No Employer Resource Assessment available in student file

Kallum Shaw No Employer Resource Assessment available in student file

Jordan Sekova-Smith ERA was not done before the training begain for thea student

Dennis Summerton-Fawkner SupervisioSupervisorn was not listed

No ratio of number of apprentices to qualified persons

Lee Utner No justification for excess ratio of number of apprentices to qualified persons


Jesse Harris No supervision listed.

No justification for excess ratio of number of apprentices to qualified persons

CPC30611 Certificate III in Painting and Decorating

Ezio Capriglione No Employer Resource Assessment available in student file

Jake Dominick No Employer Resource Assessment available in student file

Luke Muller No Employer Resource Assessment available in student file



Mitchell O'Grady No Employer Resource Assessment available in student file

Dane Stuart No Employer Resource Assessment available in student file

Alex Wilson No Employer Resource Assessment available in student file

The supplier was advised of both non-availability and/or incomplete ERA as outlined above and where appropriate detailed within Attachment 2, “Schedule of Overpayments” as defined in Clause 8.1 of the Pre-qualified Supplier Agreement. The department will seek recovery for the overpayments.


Employer Resource Assessment

The supplier must have completed and signed Employer Resource Assessment for all students by using the new departmental template prior to commencing training. The supplier must ensure listing of apprentices by employer and provide justification for ratio’s as appropriate as per the new required process. The supplier should also note that part of the new process is to review Employer Resource Assessments every three months.


FEES Compliant Not Compliant Not Examined

N/C N/A

The supplier has:

charged student contribution fees for all students (excluding school-based apprentices and trainees (SATs) and appropriately approved exemptions) and retained evidence of fees collected (User Choice 2016-

2017 Policy, Clause 2.6.1) calculated individual student contribution fees at the correct rate taking into consideration any partial or full

exemptions (User Choice 2016-2017 Policy, Clause 2.6.1) retained sufficient evidence to support the granting of student contribution fee exemptions (User Choice 2016-

2017 Policy, Clause 2.6.2 and Clause 2.6.3) not charge a student contribution fee for any SAT (User Choice 2016-2017 Policy, Clause 2.6.3)

not charged student contribution fees for units of competency/modules granted, or which should have been granted, through credit transfer/national recognition (User Choice 2016-2017 Policy, Clause 2.6.3)

not charged student contribution fees for units of competency/modules when the student has transferred to a superseding qualification and the unit of competency/module is deemed to be non-equivalent (User Choice

2016-2017 Policy, Clause 2.6.3) not charged student contribution fees for students undertaking a qualification as part of a Skilling

Queenslanders for Work – Work Skills Traineeship (User Choice 2016-2017 Policy, Clause 2.6.3) not charged Queensland Year 12 graduates who have commenced a High Priority qualification within 12

months of completing Year 12 (User Choice 2016-2017 Policy, Clause 2.6.4) retained sufficient evidence that additional charges to the employer have been negotiated (User Choice 2016-

2017 Policy, Clause 2.6.5) not charged a fee for:

(a) the provision of materials essential to achieving competence (b) the development and supply of a training plan (c) the development and supply of the initial training record (User Choice 2016-2017 Policy, Clause 2.6.7)

not withheld the issuance of a qualification or statement of attainment due to non-payment of fees (User

Choice 2016-2017 Policy, Clause 2.6.9)

Refunds

The supplier has:

provision for full refunds to students for Student Contribution Fees charged for training delivery that had not commenced at the time of cancellation of the enrolment. (User Choice 2016-2017 Policy, Clause 2.6.6)

provision for proportionate refunds where the student has withdrawn from a Unit of Competency/Module. (User Choice 2016-2017 Policy, Clause 2.6.6)



provision for refunds for employers/industry for additional charges paid beyond the student and government contributions. (User Choice 2016-2017 Policy, Clause 2.6.6)

ON THE JOB VERIFICATION Compliant Not Compliant Not Examined

N/C N/A

The supplier retained information and material necessary to provide a complete record of training and assessment:

including evidence that the supplier has a process in place to capture confirmation from the employer that the student has consistently demonstrated competent performance in workplace tasks relevant to the unit of competency/module. User Choice Policy 2010 – 2016

including evidence the supplier has consistently retained evidence that confirmation has been obtained from the employer that the student has consistently demonstrated competent performance in workplace tasks relevant to each unit of competency for each student prior to submission of claims for payment User

Choice Policy 2010 – 2016 (Evidence Guide (User Choice 2016-2017) for FET Act 2014, Assessment)

Non-compliances

On-the-job-verification The supplier used the training record as evidence to substantiate on-the-job verification for all 30 students in the sample across the three qualifications. The training records have been signed by all parties to the training. The training records did not provide sufficient confirmation that each student had demonstrated competent workplace performance for each nits of competency. Table below show the details:

Qualification Student name

CPC30111 Certificate III in Bricklaying/Blocklaying

Joshua Bartlett, Daniel Bass, Callen Clarke, Shaun Convine, Jonathan Lonie, Baylee Mckenna, Andrew Neill, Joshua Richards, Andrew Richardson, Jordan Sekova-Smith, Kallum Shaw, Lachlan Staples-Murphy, Dennis Summerton-Fawkner and Lee Utner.


Ashton Atherinos, Jack Belford, Scott Elliot, Jesse Harris, Haydn Hedges, Joshua Little, Nicolas Mccrae, Johnathon Noffke, Braiden Poole, and Leroy Taylor.

CPC30611 Certificate III in Painting and Decorating

Ezio Capriglione, Jake Dominick, Luke Muller, Mitchell O'Grady, Dane Stuart, and Alex Wilson.

The supplier consented to the non-compliance and instituted changes to the training record at audit and a copy of the revised training record was supplied to audit. The supplier was advised of the insufficient on-the job verification as outlined above, and detailed within Attachment 2, “Schedule of Overpayments” as defined in Clause 8.1 of the Pre-qualified Supplier Agreement. The department will seek recovery for the overpayments.


On-the-job-verification

The supplier must improve training record book to indicate the achievement of appropriate level of workplace performance and competence for each unit of competency completed for individual student to ensure the documented on-the-job-verification.


AVETMISS DATA Compliant Not Compliant Not Examined

N/C N/A

The supplier has:

reported the Delivery mode identifier specified in AVETMISS for the relevant delivery mode. (User Choice

2016-2017 Policy, Clause 2.4.3) reported the Outcome code identifier specified in AVETMISS for the relevant outcome. (User Choice 2016-

2017 Policy, Clause 2.4.3)



reported accurate AVETMISS activity start and activity end dates for each student for each unit of competency (PQS Agreement, Clause 9.1)

submitted AVETMISS postcodes that accurately reflect the location in which the majority of training has been undertaken (User Choice 2016-2017 Policy, Clause 2.4.3)

not submitted claims for payment for units in excess of the competency count for the qualification (User

Choice 2016-2017 Policy, Clause 2.4 Table 5))

not submitted claims for payment for units of competency previously assessed as competent (User Choice

2016-2017 Policy, Clause 2.4 Table 5))

Non-compliances

Reported activity end dates

The supplier reported inaccurate AVETMISS activity end dates for eight students enrolled in CPC30111 Certificate III in Bricklaying/Blocklaying, totalling 33 units of competency. In all occasions, except for Lachlan Staples Murphy, the reported end dates were prior to the last sign-off of practical assessment. Accordingly, the supplier claimed funds from the department before the completion of all aspects of assessments. For Lachlan Staples Murphy, the dates reported for two units of competency were more than thirty days after the units completed.

Student Name Module Reported End Date

Actual End Date

Joshua Bartlett CPCCCM1012A 11/07/2016 13/07/2016

CPCCCM1013A 11/07/2016 13/07/2016

CPCCCM1014A 11/07/2016 13/07/2016

CPCCCM1015A 11/07/2016 13/07/2016

Callen Clarke CPCCBL2001A 27/08/2016 28/08/2016

CPCCBL2002A 27/08/2016 28/08/2016

CPCCCA3002A 28/08/2016 22/10/2016

Andrew Neil CPCCBL3002A 27/08/2016 23/10/2016

CPCCBL3009A 27/08/2016 28/08/2016

CPCCBL3003A 22/10/2016 23/10/2016

CPCCBL3005A 22/10/2016 23/10/2016

Dennis Summerton-Fawkner CPCCCM1012A 8/10/2016 10/10/2016

CPCCCM1013A 8/10/2016 10/10/2016

CPCCCM1014A 8/10/2016 10/10/2016

CPCCCM1015A 8/10/2016 10/10/2016

CPCCCM2006B 8/10/2016 10/10/2016

CPCCCM2008B 8/10/2016 10/10/2016

CPCCOHS2001A 8/10/2016 10/10/2016

Lachlan Staples Murphy CPCCCM1014A 12/09/2016 13/06/2016

CPCCCM1015A 12/09/2016 13/06/2016

Andrew Richardson CPCCCM1012A 8/10/2016 10/10/2016

CPCCCM1013A 8/10/2016 10/10/2016

CPCCCM1014A 8/10/2016 10/10/2016

CPCCCM1015A 8/10/2016 10/10/2016

CPCCCM2006B 8/10/2016 10/10/2016

CPCCCM2008A 8/10/2016 10/10/2016

CPCCOHS2001A 8/10/2016 10/10/2016

CPCCBL2001A 13/11/2016 17/11/2016

Kallum Shaw CPCCBL3003A 21/11/2016 25/11/2016

CPCCBL3004A 21/11/2016 25/11/2016

CPCCBL3005A 21/11/2016 25/11/2016

Lee Utner CPCCBL3015A 11/07/2016 9/07/2016

CPCCSF2004A 8/09/2016 18/09/2016



The supplier has been advised of the non-compliance relating to the reported activity end date as above.

Credit Transfer

The supplier claimed funds from the department for six students for a total of 21 units of competency previously assessed as competent in two certificate III qualifications (CPC30211 and CPC30111), instead of granting them with credit transfer. The supplier was given a list of units of competency with duplicate claim for verification and validation and no evidence was provided to justify why the credit transfers had not been acknowledged.

The following units of competency should have been submitted as a credit transfer:

Student name Current qualification code

Units of competency previously achieved

Elijah Bailey CPC30211 CPCCCM1012A, CPCCCM1013A, CPCCCM1014A, CPCCCM1015A, CPCCCM2001A, CPCCOHS2001A

Joshua Bartlett CPC30111 CPCCCM1012A, CPCCCM1013A, CPCCCM1015A

Jake Hargreaves CPC30111 CPCCCM2001A, CPCCOHS2001A

Nicolas Mccrae CPC30211 CPCCCM1012A,CPCCCM1013A, CPCCCM1014A, CPCCCM1015A, CPCCOHS2001A

Michael Morgan CPC30111 CPCCBL2002A, CPCCBL3005A, CPCCOHS2001A

Jonathan Norffke CPC30211 CPCCCM2001A, CPCCOHS2001A


Reported activity end dates

The supplier must develop and implement a process to ensure it consistently submits accurate and valid AVETMISS activity end dates for each unit of competency for all students. The supplier must develop and implement a process to ensure that it does not claim funds from the department before the actual activity end dates for each unit of competency for each student. The supplier must also ensure that activity end dates are reported within the 30 days of completion and sign off all aspect of assessment for each unit of competency for every student.

Credit Transfer

The supplier must identify, grant and report credit transfer for eligible units of competency for the relevant students and not claim funding for them from the department. The supply must also retain evidence of achievement of unit/s of competency before granting credit transfer for eligible students.


All documents are available online at: www.training.qld.gov.au.

http://www.training.qld.gov.au/

pqs compliance audit audit report (user choice … · pqs compliance audit audit report (user...

Documents