What does a GIAC expect from a training needs analysis?
That it starts from a real development project and leads to precise recommendations for upgrading skills. The GIAC does not fund an inventory of wishes: it funds a study that turns into training.
GIACs, the “groupements interprofessionnels à l’appui du conseil” of Law No. 60-17 (art. 32), are inter-professional advisory groups set up by employers’ professional organisations. They fund part of the training engineering of member companies in their sector, while OFPPT, Morocco’s public vocational training office, reimburses part of the training itself through its special training contracts (contrats spéciaux de formation, CSF).
The standard agreement annexed to the GIAC procedures manual of March 2003 sets out the content of the application and the assessment criteria. The company’s application includes an information form following the GIAC’s template, proof of payment of the vocational training tax (taxe de formation professionnelle, TFP) and a document describing the development project (export market, technology investment, upgrading to standards), the objectives and expected results, the provider’s proposal and its estimated cost (art. 12). The GIAC then assesses three elements (art. 13): eligibility, the study’s capacity to make the recommendations needed to support the upgrading of the company’s skills, and the availability of funding.
The study has two readers, in this order. First the GIAC, which receives at the end of the intervention the final report drawn up by the consultancy and a summary presentation of the actions that will be implemented (art. 17). Then the CSF management unit (Unité de gestion des CSF), which requires, for each planned action, the report of the engineering action, the GIAC’s certificate of approval of the engineering and the plan in the format of its sheets (CSF manual, P 2.1). A well-run needs analysis serves both readers without being rewritten.
How do you scope the study before filing the application?
By writing, on one page, what the company wants to become, who is concerned and when the plan must be ready. This scoping feeds both the GIAC application and the provider’s proposal.
Scoping heading | What it contains | Example |
|---|---|---|
Development project | The medium-term objective that creates the need | Launch a range for export and obtain the certification customers require |
Scope | Sites, departments, populations, headcount | One site, production and logistics, supervisors included |
Available data | What already exists and can be used | Organisation chart, job descriptions, audit reports, non-conformities, accidents, annual reviews, review of the previous plan |
Governance | The management sponsor and the GIAC contact person | General manager as sponsor; HR director as contact person, as the model contract provides (art. XII) |
Timeline | The date by which the engineering must be approved | Before the CSF technical file is filed, by 30 June at the latest |
Provider | Resources, duration, cost excluding taxes, independence | Consultancy with no organisational or family link with the company (standard agreement, art. 9) |
Take a manufacturer of hygiene products in the Berrechid region launching a range for export. Its scoping fits in a few lines: a new packing line, the requirements of a customer standard, recruitment of operators, two newly promoted team leaders. That is enough for the GIAC to understand the need and for the consultancy to price its intervention.
One timing rule overrides the others: the study begins only after the favourable opinion of the commitments advisory committee (comité consultatif des engagements) and the signature of the contract, no later than fifteen days after that opinion. The model contract requires the GIAC to be informed of the study’s start date 24 hours in advance (art. VI), and the GIAC may visit the company during the study to check the information provided (art. V).
Which method should you follow, step by step?
Eight steps, from strategy to an approved plan. Each leaves a written record: that is what makes the study verifiable by the GIAC and defensible in an inspection.
Step | Method | Record to keep |
|---|---|---|
1. Translate the strategy into requirements | Start from the strategic diagnosis if there is one, otherwise from an interview with management | Note of strategic directions and deadlines |
2. Map the job roles | Trades, roles, headcount, critical roles | Map of job roles |
3. Set the required skills | By role, with their origin: regulation, customer or standard, performance | Skills framework by role |
4. Measure the gaps | Manager interviews, tests or workstation observation, audits, non-conformities, accidents | Skills and gaps matrix |
5. Qualify each gap | Training, or another lever: procedure, equipment, organisation, recruitment | List of needs kept and set aside, with the reason |
6. Prioritise | Common grid, arbitrated by management | Signed prioritisation grid |
7. Build the actions | Objective, population, headcount, duration, format, period, training field | Action sheets ready for the plan |
8. Present and approve | Presentation to management, then submission to the GIAC | Final report and approved plan |
Three steps make the difference in practice.
Measure, do not just collect. A training request voiced by a manager is a hypothesis. It becomes a gap when evidence supports it: a placement test, a workstation observation, a recurring non-conformity, an audit result, a near miss. Law No. 60-17 in fact lists defining employees’ needs, where appropriate on the basis of a skills assessment, among the operations treated as continuing training (art. 7 and 10).
Set aside what is not a training need. A defect caused by unstable settings, a missing procedure or a poorly equipped workstation is not fixed in a classroom. The report says so, and refers the point to the company’s action plan. This sorting is what gives credibility to the recommendations the GIAC assesses.
Write the actions in OFPPT’s format. Each action in the plan becomes an identification sheet (form F2) in the CSF technical file, with its training field chosen from the list published by OFPPT, and each provider gets a sheet of its own (form F3). The field matters: the retained cost, the basis for CSF reimbursement, is set according to the nomenclature of costs by training field (CSF manual, glossary). The four prioritisation criteria we apply (obligation, deadline, risk, performance) are presented on our page OFPPT special training contracts (CSF) and GIAC funding.
What deliverables go to the GIAC, then to the CSF management unit?
A report, a presentation of the actions and proof of payment go to the GIAC; a plan in the format of the sheets, with the certificates of approval, goes to the CSF management unit.
Deliverable | Minimum content | Recipient | Requirement |
|---|---|---|---|
Final study report | Context, development project, method, findings by role, recommendations | GIAC | Model contract, art. VIII; standard agreement, art. 17 |
Summary presentation of the actions | Training plan and, where relevant, other actions: investment, organisation | GIAC | Standard agreement, art. 17 |
Proof of payment | Accounting documents for the intervention, full payment of the provider | GIAC | Standard agreement, art. 17 |
Training plan | Summary sheet (model 1), action sheets (F2), provider sheets (F3) | CSF management unit | CSF manual, P 2.1 |
Engineering documents | Report of the engineering action, GIAC’s certificate of approval and, if there is one, that of the strategic diagnosis | CSF management unit | CSF manual, P 2.1 |
Also keep the intermediate documents for yourself: map of roles, skills matrix, prioritisation grid. They serve for evaluating the actions, for the annual review and for management system auditors, who ask how the company determines and demonstrates the competence it needs. Confirm with the competent GIAC the expected report template and the time taken to issue the certificate of approval.
Which mistakes cost the approval or the planned rate?
Almost all of them come down to the order of operations or the quality of the evidence. They can be caught before filing.
- Starting before the contract. Under the standard agreement, funding depends on a contract being signed between the GIAC and the company (art. 16), after the favourable opinion of the commitments advisory committee. A study started before this contract risks remaining unfunded.
- Choosing a provider linked to the company. The standard agreement requires a provider with no organisational or family link with it (art. 9).
- Delivering a generic report. A copied catalogue, with no findings by role and no recommendations, does not meet the GIAC’s assessment criterion (art. 13).
- Leaving needs without evidence. An action that nothing ties to a measured gap weakens the whole plan.
- Getting approval too late. A plan derived from engineering that the GIAC has not approved is treated as a set of unplanned actions (CSF manual), at the reference rate of 40% instead of 70%.
- Letting the report and the sheets disagree. Different headcounts, durations or fields between the report and the F2 sheets prompt questions during review.
- Concentrating the plan without justification. The CSF manual lists among the actions to be checked as a priority those of a plan more than 30% delivered by a single body (point 7.3).
The last mistake happens after the study: not implementing the plan. The standard agreement makes any new GIAC funding conditional on implementation of the previous plan (art. 10).
Which checklist should you run before submitting the study?
Twelve checks, to be carried out by a second person before submission to the GIAC.
The full framework, from GIAC membership to the CSF technical file, is described in our GIAC training engineering guide. To see the method applied end to end, read our industrial SME case study. The CSF file that takes over afterwards is detailed in OFPPT CSF application step by step.