Qualiopi Indicator 24: organizing your monitoring of occupations, skills and employment trends

On paper, Indicator 24 of the French National Quality Standard (Référentiel National Qualité) looks like a duplicate of Indicator 23: more monitoring, another table to keep up to date. In practice, it’s a different exercise. While Indicator 23 checks that you track the regulations governing your activity (CPF, funding, administrative obligations), Indicator 24 checks that you track the evolution of occupations and skills in the sectors where you train — and above all, that this monitoring translates into concrete adjustments to your training offer. It’s this impact requirement that trips up many providers at audit time: the table exists, but nobody can show what it actually changed.

What Indicator 24 really requires

The indicator’s wording, in the version of the standard currently in force, reads as follows: the provider carries out monitoring, at a national and/or local level, of developments in occupations, skills and employment in its sector(s) of activity, and makes use of the results. It is a common assessment indicator, applicable to all provider categories (training actions, skills assessments, VAE, apprenticeship training centers), attached to criterion 6, “Integration into the professional environment.”

The auditor checks two elements separately:

1. The existence of a structured system. It is not enough for the manager to casually browse the news from time to time: there must be a formalized record (register, table, shared file) tracing the sources followed, the consultation dates, and the information retained.
2. The effective use of the results. Monitoring that leads nowhere carries no weight with the auditor. They look for concrete examples where a piece of information changed a training content, added a module, or shifted a learning objective.

For a new entrant, only the setup of the system is required at the initial audit; the evidence of impact is more naturally examined at the surveillance audit, once the monitoring has had time to produce effects.

Which sources to follow, depending on your sector

Unlike legal monitoring (Indicator 23), which relies on a common base for all providers (Légifrance, the Ministry of Labour, France Compétences), monitoring of occupations and skills is specific to your training field. A few free public sources cover most needs:

• Sector observatories, funded by the Opcos (prospective observatories of occupations and qualifications). Each professional branch publishes sector studies on in-demand occupations, emerging skills, and hiring needs. If you train for a sector covered by an identified Opco (construction, healthcare, transport, services…), start there: these publications are designed precisely to feed this kind of monitoring.
• France Travail’s ROME occupation sheets, regularly updated, which describe the evolving skill requirements for each listed occupation.
• Céreq publications (Centre for Studies and Research on Qualifications), the reference public body on the link between training and employment.
• RNCP registration sheets from France Compétences, whose periodic revisions directly signal the skills added or removed from a certification — a strong, easy-to-use signal for adjusting a program.
• Sector publications: professional unions, federations, occupation-focused trade shows, specialized magazines in your field.

A provider training across several sectors doesn’t need to follow all of these for each one: two or three sources that are actually consulted and used per sector of activity beat a long list that is never opened.

Building a usable monitoring table

A credible Indicator 24 monitoring table fits in a few columns, kept up to date on a regular basis (monthly or quarterly, depending on how much news your sector generates):

Consultation date	Source	Information retained	Sector concerned	Action taken
03/2026	Opco observatory [name]	New digital skill identified as a priority	Occupation X	3-hour module added to the program
06/2026	Revised RNCP sheet	Skills block modified	Certification Y	Corresponding course material updated

The last column is the most scrutinized at audit: it’s what demonstrates the “use of results” the standard requires. A table that only lists dates and sources, never an “action taken” line, signals monitoring for show — exactly the kind of gap that earns a minor non-conformity, even one that’s easy to fix.

Evidence to present at audit

Beyond the table itself, several elements strengthen the file:

• minutes of pedagogical meetings where the monitoring findings were discussed;
• newsletters or alerts received from sector observatories (screenshot or archive);
• before/after training programs, showing the change made;
• participation in a trade show, sector conference, or webinar (certificate, program);
• exchanges with businesses in the sector or with Opcos, if they fed into a content change.

The goal isn’t to pile up evidence but to be able to walk through, on one or two precise examples, the full path: information captured, decision made, content changed.

A practice backed by management research

Information monitoring isn’t just a compliance obligation: it’s a long-studied topic in management science. A study by Josée Audet, published in 2003 in the Revue internationale P.M.E. (“La veille stratégique chez les PME de haute technologie: une étude de cas par comparaisons intersites” — strategic monitoring in high-tech SMEs, a multi-site case study), shows that in small organizations, the most effective monitoring is not the one drawing on the most sources, but the one driven by leaders’ actual propensity to use it to guide decisions — a finding that applies directly to a small training provider: a modest, living table beats an ambitious system nobody ever opens.

Common mistakes to avoid

• Mixing up Indicator 23 and Indicator 24 in a single catch-all table, which blurs the auditor’s reading of each indicator on its own terms.
• Only following general vocational-training news (already covered by Indicator 23) without ever getting down to the occupations and skills specific to your sector.
• Documenting the monitoring without ever showing an action taken, which strips the file of the evidence of use required by the standard.
• Improvising the table right before the audit: a history that starts three weeks before the audit date is immediately noticeable and raises questions about the sincerity of the process.

For the full requirements, see the Indicator 24 — monitoring occupations, skills and employment page, along with the neighboring Indicator 23 — legal and regulatory monitoring fact sheet so you don’t confuse the two systems.

Take action

The Complete Kit Certif includes a ready-to-use monitoring table template for Indicators 23, 24 and 25, with example sources and evidence of use already drafted. If you’re preparing your file indicator by indicator, the Ebook “Building your training organization in 30 days” walks through the method step by step, and the Complete Pack bundles both to secure your entire audit preparation.