What was the company’s starting point?
An SME that trained a lot, often in a hurry, and almost never got reimbursed. The problem was not eligibility, but the order of operations.
This case study is composite and anonymous: it brings together situations we meet in our assignments with food companies, without describing any particular client, and it contains no amounts.
The company packs and processes fruit and vegetables in the Souss region, for export. It employs permanent teams and recruits seasonal workers for each season. Its main European buyer asks it for a certification recognised by the GFSI (Global Food Safety Initiative); management is hesitating between BRCGS Food Safety Issue 9 and IFS Food Version 8, depending on what its customers expect.
The funding at stake is Morocco’s continuing training scheme. OFPPT, the Office de la formation professionnelle et de la promotion du travail, is the public vocational training office; it reimburses part of what companies spend on their employees’ continuing training through special training contracts (contrats spéciaux de formation, CSF). GIACs (groupements interprofessionnels à l’appui du conseil), inter-professional advisory groups set up by employers’ professional organisations, usually by sector, fund the training engineering that comes first.
The starting diagnosis came down to three findings:
- No plan. Training was decided as customer audits and recruitment came along.
- No owner. HR, quality and production each ordered their own training, with no common file.
- Applications filed too late, or never. The few files that existed fell under unplanned training, for lack of approved engineering.
How were the engineering and the plan built?
By starting before the financial year: eligibility check and access application in October, engineering approved by the GIAC, then a plan signed off by management before the spring.
Access to the system
The finance department first checked that its vocational training tax (taxe de formation professionnelle, TFP) declarations were in order over the “TFP year”, that is, from 1 July N-2 to 30 June N-1, and obtained the certificate from the CNSS, Morocco’s national social security fund. The access application was filed on the OFPPT portal from October N-1, as the CSF page allows. The May 2006 manual provides for the access certificate to come with a document giving, as an indication, the company’s reimbursement ceiling: that document set the frame of the budget, before any calculation. Check with OFPPT that it is still issued with the access certificate.
Training engineering
The analysis of needs by job role was submitted to the sector GIAC before the spend was committed. The stakes went beyond funding the engineering itself: under the manual, a plan derived from engineering not approved by the GIAC is treated as a set of unplanned actions. Approval of the engineering therefore conditioned the rate of almost every action of the year. The documents and deadlines for that approval should be confirmed with the competent GIAC.
The plan
The plan separated the populations, because they have neither the same needs nor the same calendar:
Action | Population | Period | Target regime | Point to watch |
|---|---|---|---|---|
HACCP and leading the HACCP team | HACCP team | Before the season | Planned, external provider | Link with the chosen standard |
Requirements of the chosen GFSI standard | Managers, quality | Before the mock audit | Planned, external provider | BRCGS or IFS choice settled before filing |
Hygiene and good practices | Permanent operators | Just before the season | Planned, external provider | Groups by job role, realistic headcounts |
Internal audit | Future internal auditors | After the system is documented | Planned, external provider | Participants’ availability |
First aid | Designated first-aiders | At the start of the year | Planned, external provider | Labour Code obligation (art. 317) |
Getting started on a new line | Line operators | At commissioning | In-house training | Identified trainer, original attendance sheet |
The plan was displayed on the premises, as the model contract annexed to the manual requires (art. 8), and a single training manager was appointed as the contact for the CSF management unit, the OFPPT office that handles the company’s files (art. 6).
How were the funding applications filed?
All planned actions were filed before 30 June, in one complete technical file, and no session started less than ten calendar days after the application was received, as Amendment No. 2 (avenant n° 2) of 2 June 2014 requires.
The technical file brought together the GIAC’s certificate of approval of the engineering, the report of the engineering action, the summary sheet of actions and providers (model 1), one sheet per action (form F2) and one sheet per provider (form F3). For each action, the training field was chosen carefully from OFPPT’s list: it places the action in the cost schedule (nomenclature des coûts), the basis of the retained cost.
The eligibility of each training provider was checked on the portal, by its CNSS number, before the entry was made. The special training contract was then collected, signed with the legalised signature of the authorised person and returned within the deadlines.
What happened during the year?
Three unexpected events, all handled through the procedure rather than through improvisation.
- A change in shift rotation. Two hygiene sessions had to change date. The company sent the management unit a modification notice (model 3) more than 24 hours before the start, as Amendment No. 2 provides. Without that notice, neither session would have been reimbursed (model contract, art. 11).
- An urgent requirement from the buyer. After a visit, the buyer asked for allergen management training for managers, which was not in the plan. It was filed as unplanned training before the session, respecting the minimum deadline of five calendar days. It was reimbursable, at the reference rate for unplanned training: 40% instead of 70%.
- In-house training. The most experienced line supervisor trained the line operators on the new line. The original attendance sheet showed the topic, the days and the identity and signature of the trainer. The reimbursement of this planned in-house training stayed below the limit set by the manual: 30% of the total financial participation granted.
During each external session, the evidence was produced on the spot: QR-code attendance, test, end-of-session evaluation, numbered certificate and training report, following the sequence described in before, during and after training. The attendance sheet in the manual’s format (model 5), stamped by the provider and by the company, was drawn up the same day. If you record attendance electronically, confirm with OFPPT the attendance sheet format it accepts.
How did the financial files lead to reimbursement?
One file per action, filed as soon as the action closed and checked by a second person before filing. The company did not wait for the 31 December N+1 deadline set by OFPPT’s CSF page.
Each file included the original invoice (model 4), the attendance sheet (model 5), the summary evaluation sheet validated by the provider (form F4), the certificate of delivery (model 6) and the proof of payment, with copies marked “Conforme à l’original” (certified true copy) and stamped by the company. These documents are detailed in CSF reimbursement file: supporting documents and checklist.
Only one discrepancy was notified with the transfer order: in two operator sessions, registered participants had not turned up and had not been replaced. The reimbursement of those actions was calculated in proportion to the participants who actually attended, as the model contract provides (art. 14). No appeal was justified; the lesson went into the next plan, with named invitations and a list of substitutes.
The action files were archived for five years, the period set by the model contract (art. 9), in anticipation of a document and on-site inspection (Law No. 60-17, art. 26 and 28). The May 2006 manual and its Amendment No. 2 of 2 June 2014, published on OFPPT’s website, remain the reference in force.
What lessons for your training plan?
The reimbursement of training is decided at both ends of the financial year: at the start, through approved engineering and applications filed on time; at the end, through complete files filed without delay. In between, every change is reported before it happens. For the Moroccan site of a foreign group, this is the calendar to follow, whatever the group’s own budget cycle.
The detailed path, step by step, is described in our OFPPT training reimbursement guide; the division of roles between management, HR, line managers and finance in our guide to OFPPT special training contracts for CEOs and HR.