Consultation outcome

Occupational Certificates

Updated 10 September 2026

Qualification purpose (question 26)

What Ofqual proposed

We proposed to put in place the following purposes for Occupational Certificates, on which awarding organisations should base their own qualification-specific purposes:

A. To provide Learners with nationally agreed knowledge, understanding and skills related to progression to a specific occupation, and transferable skills relevant to that overall sector.

B. To provide Learners with the ability to apply knowledge, understanding and skills in relevant practical and occupationally specific contexts.

C. To motivate Learners to complete the qualification and progress to a specific occupation.

D. To provide employers with accurate and consistent information concerning Learners’ attainment in relation to the knowledge, understanding and skills assessed as part of the qualification.

E. To provide information about a Learner’s readiness to progress to an apprenticeship or employment.

F. To provide a basis for schools and colleges to be held accountable for the performance of their Learners.

It was proposed that these purposes should all be met to the greatest extent possible, but where trade-offs are required, they should be prioritised in the order set out.

We also proposed to disapply General Conditions E1.1 and E1.2 (which require qualifications to have an objective), given that Occupational Certificates would instead have to meet the purposes set out by Ofqual.

Consultation feedback

The majority of those who commented on the qualification purposes were supportive of the proposed approach overall.

Respondents commented on the order in which the purposes were prioritised. Some thought that purposes relating to the practical application of knowledge, skills and understanding should have a higher priority than those relating to the acquisition of knowledge and understanding. It was suggested that this was an issue for Occupational Certificates as they are intended to support progression directly into skilled employment.

Some respondents highlighted a tension between Occupational Certificates supporting entry to employment and the requirement to meet purposes D and E through compensatory assessment approaches. Some respondents thought common purposes may not be appropriate for all Occupational Certificates, as some subjects would require learners to demonstrate full occupational competence. In particular, there were some specific comments about the early years practitioner Occupational Certificate, which would need to meet DfE’s full and relevant criteria for early years qualifications.

Decision

We have decided to introduce the purposes as consulted on, but to change the order in which they are prioritised.

We think it is important to signal the importance of these qualifications in providing information to employers about what a student can do, and have therefore decided to increase the priority for purposes D and E, and to move those above general purpose C. We think this better reflects the role that these qualifications will play in supporting decisions about a student’s readiness to enter employment.

This means that the revised prioritisation of the purposes for Occupational Certificates is as follows:

A. To provide Learners with nationally agreed knowledge, understanding and skills related to progression to a specific occupation, and transferable skills relevant to that overall sector.

B. To provide Learners with the ability to apply knowledge, understanding and skills in relevant practical and occupationally specific contexts.

C. To provide employers with accurate and consistent information concerning Learners’ attainment in relation to the knowledge, understanding and skills assessed as part of the qualification.

D. To provide information about a Learner’s readiness to progress to an apprenticeship or employment.

E. To motivate Learners to complete the qualification and progress to a specific occupation.

F. To provide a basis for schools and colleges to be held accountable for the performance of their Learners.

This revised prioritisation will make it clearer that in Occupational Certificates which include content relating to requirements expected by employers, such as the full and relevant criteria in the early years practitioner Occupational Certificate, the information about learners’ attainment in relation to these criteria is a key consideration in assessment design.

This might inform decisions about assessment approaches; for example, whether or not the use of compensatory approaches would align with this purpose in these qualifications.

Qualification size (question 27)

What Ofqual proposed

DfE intends that the size of Occupational Certificates should be between 540 and 720 Guided Learning hours.

To ensure this, we proposed to require awarding organisations to design their qualifications to meet the size specified by DfE. We also proposed to disapply Ofqual’s existing General Condition relating to qualification size (E7 – Total Qualification Time).

Consultation feedback

The majority of respondents supported this proposal. As the overall size of the qualifications is outside of Ofqual’s remit, this question only sought views on whether respondents agreed with the approach, and did not provide an opportunity for comments.

Decision

We have decided to implement this proposal as consulted on.

This means that awarding organisations will be required to design Occupational Certificates in line with the size specified by DfE.

Qualification content (question 28)

What Ofqual proposed

Occupational Certificates will be based on DfE-set core content providing an overview of a sector, and on occupation-specific content from relevant occupational standards also specified by DfE.

We proposed to require awarding organisations to comply with the requirements set out in DfE’s content document for each Occupational Certificate, and to explain how they have done so as part of their assessment strategy. 

We also proposed that awarding organisations must comply with any requirements and have regard to any guidance published by Ofqual relating to the interpretation of that content. 

Consultation feedback

There was broad support across respondents for the proposal to comply with the requirements set by DfE.

Respondents considered that this was important for promoting consistency and for providing assurance that learners were being assessed against nationally recognised expectations.

However, it was suggested that there should be some flexibility in the subject content to reflect local employer needs and sector variation.

Decision

We have decided to implement this proposal as consulted on. This means that awarding organisations will be required to comply with the requirements set out in DfE’s content document for each Occupational Certificate, and to explain how they have done so as part of their assessment strategy. 

Awarding organisations will also be required to comply with any requirements and have regard to any guidance published by Ofqual relating to the interpretation of that content.

We have clarified that awarding organisations can elaborate on the subject content for the purpose of designing their qualification, as long as this does not compromise comparability or size. They will not be permitted to add to or remove content specified by DfE. The detail of the content itself is a matter for DfE.

Grading scale (questions 29, 30)

What Ofqual proposed

The Secretary of State for Education set the expectation that Occupational Certificates should have a single grading scale, ensuring consistency between awarding organisations for qualifications that are designed against the same content and must meet the same assessment requirements. This is intended to help students, employers, schools, colleges, further and higher education institutions and the public understand and interpret the results of qualification and assessments.

We proposed a 3-point grading scale: pass, merit, and distinction  (P/M/D) with the addition of an unclassified option (U).

Consultation feedback

The majority of respondents either agreed or strongly agreed with the proposal for a 3-point grading scale and with the proposal for that scale to be labelled pass/ merit/ distinction.

The primary reason respondents supported a 3-point scale was that it is clear and easy to understand, and is familiar, being used in a number of other vocational and technical qualifications. Respondents thought it struck the right balance between having a sufficient number of grades to recognise differences in achievement and being straightforward to interpret.

Some respondents commented that the inclusion of merit and distinction grades would support learner engagement and motivation.

Several respondents emphasised the importance of ensuring that it is clear what achievement of each grade signals, particularly the pass grade, and how this relates to a learner’s level of competence and their readiness to progress to an apprenticeship or employment.

Although in the minority, some awarding organisations disagreed with the proposal for a 3-point grading scale. These respondents thought a 3-point scale would not provide sufficient differentiation of learner attainment.

Some of these respondents suggested a 4-point scale (pass/ merit/ distinction/ distinction*), as this would still be easily understood by stakeholders, whilst also improving the accuracy of learner outcomes to support progression decisions. They said that this could be especially important given the diverse cohort likely to take Occupational Certificates, and the potentially varied sizes of the qualifications.

Decision

We have decided to implement the pass/ merit/ distinction grading scale as consulted on.

While it would allow greater differentiation, we do not think it necessary to introduce an additional distinction* grade in these qualifications given their applied and practical nature. Our view is that the proposed grading scale will allow for appropriate differentiation between students and will provide clear information to users to support selection decisions relating to the progression of students.

Assessment methods (questions 32, 33)

What Ofqual proposed

We proposed to put in place requirements relating to the methods of assessment to be used in Occupational Certificates, covering both timetabled and other forms of assessment.  

We proposed that the balance of assessment methods for all Occupational Certificates should be:

• timetabled assessments, which contribute 30% towards the overall qualification grade 

• other forms of assessment, which contribute 70% towards the overall qualification grade  

This was intended to ensure that the balance of assessment methods is appropriate for the purposes of these qualifications and their vocational subject content.

Synoptic assessment

We proposed to require awarding organisations to include synoptic assessment in both timetabled and other methods of assessment. That is, to ensure that students would have opportunities to:  

• demonstrate the ability to draw together different areas of knowledge, understanding and/or skills from across the full course of study
• develop responses which allow a Learner to construct and develop a sustained line of reasoning – or an equivalent logical sequence, depending on the nature of the task – which is coherent, relevant and effectively structured, and
• demonstrate knowledge, understanding and skills in response to authentic, vocationally-related contexts and scenarios.

Consultation feedback

Many respondents supported the inclusion of both timetabled and other forms of assessment, and the proposal for Ofqual to specify the balance of these.

Respondents thought that this would support consistency and comparability across awarding organisations. They said that requiring a balance of assessment methods would provide clear expectations for centres and learners, while recognising that Occupational Certificates are intended to be practical, occupational and employment-focused.

Respondents valued the inclusion of a substantial proportion of methods of assessment which would support the assessment of occupationally relevant skills, practical competence, workplace behaviours and readiness for employment or apprenticeships.

In relation to timetabled assessments, respondents noted that these would help to maintain standards and support consistency across awarding organisations, and said this element could provide confidence for learners, centres and employers.

Support for the proposal was often qualified by concerns about whether the proposed proportions would be suitable across all subjects, with respondents suggesting that there should be some flexibility on a subject-by-subject basis.  

Synoptic assessment 

Many respondents supported the proposed approach to synoptic assessment for Occupational Certificates.

They said that synoptic assessment would support progression to employment or apprenticeships as it would enable learners to use knowledge, understanding and skills in a holistic way in authentic occupational contexts.

Respondents also welcomed the absence of prescribed weightings, saying that this would allow awarding organisations to design approaches appropriate to different occupational subjects and learner cohorts.

However, some respondents expressed concern that synoptic assessment could become over-standardised or too academic, relying on extended written responses rather than the practical performance, observation and professional judgement that they viewed as the best way to demonstrate occupational competence.

Some respondents asked for clearer guidance on ‘developed responses’, on how the three elements of synoptic assessment should operate in practice, and on how requirements should apply where qualifications included optional content, routes or different programmes of learning.

Decision

We have decided to implement the approach to assessment methods for Occupational Certificates as consulted on. This means that they will be required to include:

• timetabled assessments, which contribute 30% towards the overall qualification grade 

• other forms of assessment, which contribute 70% towards the overall qualification grade 

Timetabled assessments do not have to take the form of a written, theoretical examination, and should also include more applied and practical assessments. They must be designed to be taken at the same time, and be set and marked by awarding organisations, but our requirements will allow scope for innovation and will not prevent the use of forms of assessment that meet these requirements.

The balance of assessment methods  still allows for a significant amount of assessment in each qualification to be through forms of assessment such as projects, performances or demonstrations of skills, reflecting the applied and practical nature of aspects of the content.

Synoptic assessment 

We have decided to set requirements relating to synoptic assessment, but will make changes to the drafting of these to make sure they are clear.

We have decided to amend our proposed definition to be:

In designing and setting the assessments for an Occupational Certificate which it makes available, or proposes to make available, an awarding organisation must ensure that, taken together, those assessments include questions or tasks which allow Learners to –

(a) demonstrate the ability to draw together different areas of knowledge, understanding and/or skills from across the full course of study, and

(b) construct and develop an extended line of reasoning which is relevant, coherent and effectively structured

In this updated definition, we have removed the requirement for an assessment to require students to “demonstrate knowledge, understanding and skills in response to authentic, vocationally-related contexts and scenarios”. We have decided instead to include this expectation as part of our overall assessment requirements and guidance, as it is applicable to a broader range of assessments, not just to synoptic assessment.

We have also expanded our guidance on synoptic assessment to more clearly explain these expectations.

We have clarified that synoptic assessment in Occupational Certificates must occur across the assessments, but does not necessarily have to be included in both assessment methods. This means synoptic assessment could occur in timetabled and/or other forms of assessment.

We have provided a more detailed explanation of key terms in the definition and clarified that individual synoptic tasks or questions are not required to assess both a) and b) in the same task, nor is it necessary for every question or task within an assessment to be synoptic.

Assessment availability (questions 36, 37)

What Ofqual proposed

The Secretary of State for Education expects Occupational Certificates to have a modular assessment structure, so that assessment can take place at appropriate points during the course of study.

We proposed to put in place requirements relating to the availability of assessments, balancing the intention for there to be a modular approach with controls that would help secure the setting and maintenance of standards.

We proposed that there should be:

• one or two assessment series each academic year for timetabled assessments

• one or two submission windows each academic year for centre marks or grades for other forms of assessments to be submitted to awarding organisations for Moderation

We did not propose to specify when these assessment series should take place.

We proposed that students be allowed to retake Occupational Certificate assessments in any series in which they are offered, and to submit new or amended work when retaking other forms of assessment. 

Consultation feedback

Assessment series

The majority of respondents agreed with this proposal, welcoming awarding organisations making assessments available at fixed points each year.

Some awarding organisations and colleges though said that assessment should happen at the point at which learners demonstrate competence, and reflect the way in which courses are delivered and the timing of employment or apprenticeship opportunities. They said that limiting each assessment method to one or two fixed points per academic year could prevent assessment when learners were ready, and delay progression.

Several respondents, particularly in engineering, building services engineering and land‑based sectors, highlighted that practical competence develops through continuous applied learning and that workplace‑linked assessment often depends on workshop capacity, site access, seasonality and employer involvement, which may not align with fixed series. They cautioned that inflexible availability could reduce the authenticity of occupational assessment and weaken employer confidence.

Retakes

Respondents welcomed the proposal not to restrict retake opportunities, recognising this as appropriate for qualifications designed to support progression into employment or apprenticeships.

Some respondents emphasised that the level 2 cohort is often diverse, and that retake opportunities are essential for building the confidence needed for successful transitions into work.

Respondents noted that learners should not be prevented from progressing on the basis of a single underperformance, particularly where further time and practice can improve the demonstration of practical skills, occupational behaviours and applied knowledge.

It was also noted that for learners at risk of becoming NEET, timely retake or resubmission opportunities can be decisive in maintaining engagement and preventing withdrawal.

Some respondents commented on the importance of allowing centre marks to be carried forward when retaking timetabled assessments, to reduce unnecessary re-assessment and allow learners to focus on improving specific aspects of their performance.

Decision

Assessment series

We have decided to implement our proposed approach.

This means that assessments in Occupational Certificates will be available as follows:

• one or two assessment series each academic year for timetabled assessments, with timing determined by awarding organisations
• one or two windows for centre marks or grades for other forms of assessments to be submitted to awarding organisations for Moderation, with timing determined by awarding organisations

This strikes an appropriate balance between ensuring standards, minimising the impact of frequent assessments on teaching and learning, and allowing flexibility for awarding organisations and centres in the design and delivery of assessments.

While we recognise that some schools and colleges would like more frequent assessment opportunities, our view is that allowing this could distract from teaching and learning. It could also increase the burden on awarding organisations, schools and colleges of delivering frequent assessments.

As Occupational Certificates are 2-year courses, this means that there will be up to 4 opportunities for each method of assessment over the duration of the course.

Awarding organisations will have flexibility to decide on the timing of their assessment series and we will not require all subjects to use the same series or windows, meaning they can take account of factors, such as seasonality, which may be relevant in some subjects.

Retakes

We have decided to implement the approach to retakes as consulted on. This means that awarding organisations may permit students to retake timetabled and other forms of assessments in any series in which they are available.

Where students retake other forms of assessment, we will permit awarding organisations to allow students to submit new assessment evidence or revised evidence from tasks they have already completed.

Combined with the availability of assessments described above, we believe that this will provide sufficient flexibility for students to retake assessments where required.

Assessment setting and marking (questions 34, 35, 38, 39, 40)

What Ofqual proposed

Setting assessments

To ensure robust oversight of assessment, we proposed that awarding organisations should set all timetabled assessments. 

We also proposed that awarding organisations should set all other forms of assessment. Recognising that schools and colleges operate in a variety of different contexts, we proposed that awarding organisations would be able to allow centres to adapt aspects of these, such as the context of the questions or tasks, provided this does not change the level of demand of the assessment or its reliability.

Marking assessments

We proposed that all timetabled assessments should be marked by awarding organisations. 

We proposed that awarding organisations be permitted to allow centres to mark other forms of assessment, or to mark them themselves, or to use a combination of these approaches. 

Where awarding organisations permit centres to mark assessments, we proposed that centre-marking must be subject to awarding organisation Moderation, meaning that centre-marking is checked, and where necessary adjusted, before results are issued.

We proposed to allow awarding organisations to use either numerical mark-based approaches, directly graded approaches, or a combination of these in the marking of Occupational Certificates.

Consultation feedback

Setting assessments

Most respondents supported the proposal for assessments to be set by awarding organisations. Respondents viewed this as a reasonable way to protect consistency, comparability and public confidence in new qualifications.

Some respondents emphasised the importance of consistent approaches to setting assessments, and the need to maintain employer confidence in qualifications linked to employment and apprenticeship progression.

There was strong support for controlled centre adaptation of centre-marked assessments. Respondents welcomed this proposal as a way of allowing providers to use relevant local employer contexts and occupationally specific environments.

Several respondents highlighted sector‑specific variation, particularly in land‑based, engineering and building services engineering sectors. They noted that equipment, processes, seasonality, site conditions and employer practices could differ significantly between settings, and that controlled contextual adaptation was the only realistic way to maintain both validity and deliverability across such diversity.

Respondents asked for clear, practical guidance on what adaptations would be permitted to help centres understand how far they could go in reflecting local employer requirements and practical constraints without weakening standards.

Marking assessments

Respondents supported the proposed approach to marking.

Respondents generally agreed that awarding organisations should be responsible for marking timetabled assessments, but that other forms of assessment could be centre-marked.

Most respondents supported permitting the use of either numerical mark-based approaches or directly graded approaches, or a combination of these approaches. Respondents thought directly graded approaches were better suited to practical, competency-focused assessment while mark-based approaches were often more appropriate for assessments targeting analytical skills.

The majority of respondents agreed that awarding organisations should conduct Moderation of centre-marked assessments. Respondents said Moderation would ensure consistency and comparability, and secure public confidence that standards were being upheld.

At the same time, respondents cautioned that the requirement could impose significant administrative and resource burden, and called for a proportionate approach.

Amongst the small number of respondents that disagreed with the proposal, there was a view that requiring Moderation was disproportionate for the level and purpose of these qualifications, and that this requirement could deter awarding organisations from developing qualifications and centres from choosing to deliver them. 

Decision

Setting assessments

We have decided to implement the proposed approach to the setting and adaptation of assessments as consulted on. 

We will require awarding organisations to set all timetabled assessments.

We will also require awarding organisations to set all other forms of assessment, but will permit them to allow centres to adapt aspects of these.  

We recognise the concerns about ensuring consistent approaches between awarding organisations in relation to the extent of any adaptations, and the need to ensure that making adaptations does not become burdensome for centres. We have decided to expand the proposed guidance for awarding organisations about the approach to adapting assessments, to ensure that as far as possible, approaches are consistent. 

Marking assessments

We have decided to implement the proposals in relation to marking assessments and Moderation of centre-marked assessments as consulted on.

While there were concerns about the approach to Moderation of directly-graded centre-marked assessments, we consider it important that centre marking of all components is checked, and where necessary adjusted, before results are issued.

We therefore think it is necessary to require these assessments to be subject to Moderation, and do not think it would be appropriate to allow approaches in which marking is not subject to checking before results are issued.

Setting and maintaining standards (question 41)

What Ofqual proposed

We proposed to put in place requirements covering how standards should be set and maintained, including how grade boundaries for key grades in mark-based assessments are set.

This included requirements relating to the evidence to be used when setting and maintaining standards, and guidance on the use of that evidence.

We proposed that standard setting in directly-graded assessments should use grading criteria to reflect the nature of the assessments, rather than a separate awarding process which may be more appropriate for mark-based assessments.  

We proposed that awarding organisations should design Occupational Certificates to use compensatory approaches, to ensure that performance in one area can be compensated for by performance in another.

We also proposed that awarding organisations should not be permitted to award qualifications in the first year they are made available, to support approaches to setting initial standards.

Consultation feedback

There was support for the proposed approach to setting and maintaining standards, which respondents thought would support comparability, consistency and reliability.

A small number of respondents commented that some colleges may want to deliver the qualifications in less than 2 years, and that students in the first cohort for each subject would therefore not have the same opportunities as those in later cohorts to achieve their qualification in one year.

Decision

We have decided to implement our proposal to put in place requirements covering the way in which standards should be set and maintained.

We have also decided not to allow awarding organisations to award Occupational Certificates in the first year in which a subject is made available, as consulted on. While we recognise concerns that there may be some students in the first cohort of a subject who may wish to take an Occupational Certificate in one year, we think it is important to prohibit this in order to ensure that initial standards are set properly.

We have decided to make a change to our proposal that all Occupational Certificates must be designed to use compensatory assessment approaches at qualification level.  

In the early years practitioner Occupational Certificate, the subject content includes the ‘full and relevant’ criteria used to determine whether someone can count in staff to child ratios in an early years setting. It is important that employers are able to identify whether or not the criteria have been met in full, and the use of compensatory approaches to assessment may undermine this need. 

We have decided therefore not to require the use of compensatory assessment approaches, but to issue guidance around the use of compensation. Our starting point will be that compensatory assessment approaches should be used unless there is a strong reason why it is not appropriate, for example where there are specific requirements in relation to the knowledge, understanding or skills needed as a minimum entry requirement for employment in that occupation.

While this applies only to this Occupational Certificate currently, it is possible that others, for example where the content includes health & safety expectations, might be similar in future tranches. Permitting non-compensatory approaches will ensure awarding organisations can design their qualifications to meet the needs of employers in such instances. 

Reviews of marking, reviews of Moderation and appeals (question 42)

What Ofqual proposed

We sought views on whether arrangements for reviews of marking, reviews of Moderation of centre-marked assessments, and appeals should be put in place for Occupational Certificates, and whether these arrangements should be similar to those that exist in GCSEs and A Levels.

We proposed that any such arrangements would be consulted on separately at a later date.

Consultation feedback

There was strong support for the introduction of reviews of marking, Moderation and appeals arrangements for Occupational Certificates, and respondents supported aligning the arrangements with those used for GCSE and A Level students.

Respondents considered that consistency across qualifications would make the system easier to understand and administer.

Some respondents said that the arrangements would need to reflect the vocational and occupational nature of the qualifications and highlighted potential limitations of applying processes developed for traditional examination-based qualifications to Occupational Certificates.

It was noted by respondents that it would be important for reviews to take place in sufficient time to support progression decisions, as delays could have significant consequences where learners were seeking progression into employment, apprenticeships or further occupational training.

Decision

We have decided to put in place arrangements for the review of marking, review of Moderation and appeals in Occupational Certificates.

We intend for these to ensure that students have the same opportunities to challenge results as those taking GCSEs and A Levels.

We will consult on the proposed approach to this, and the rules needed to implement it.