Research and analysis

Driver CPC periodic training: quality assurance and compliance for 2012 to 2013

Published 1 July 2013

© Crown copyright 2013

This publication is licensed under the terms of the Open Government Licence v3.0 except where otherwise stated. To view this licence, visit nationalarchives.gov.uk/doc/open-government-licence/version/3 or write to the Information Policy Team, The National Archives, Kew, London TW9 4DU, or email: psi@nationalarchives.gov.uk.

Where we have identified any third party copyright information you will need to obtain permission from the copyright holders concerned.

This publication is available at https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/driver-cpc-periodic-training-quality-assurance-and-compliance-for-2012-to-2013/driver-cpc-periodic-training-quality-assurance-and-compliance-for-2012-to-2013

1. About the audit programme

The Driving Standards Agency (DSA) and the Joint Approvals Unit for Periodic Training (JAUPT) carry out audit visits of training centres and courses that are approved for Driver Certificate of Professional Competence (CPC) periodic training.

2. Types of audit

There are 3 types of audit visit:

  • JAUPT centre audit
  • DSA centre audit
  • Driver CPC course audit

2.1 JAUPT centre audit

This is a visit to the approved training centre to make sure that policies and procedures match those stated in the centre’s application.

Each approved training centre now has an audit visit within the first year of its approval.

2.2 DSA centre audit

This visit is done following a referral from JAUPT about operational failings or as part of an investigation into a complaint.

The aim is to inspect training records and to check them against the hours uploaded onto the recording and evidencing database.

2.3 Driver CPC course audit

This visit is to a course to confirm that the mandatory requirements are being followed and to see the quality of the course.

DSA course audits generally focus on the follow up of failings identified at the initial JAUPT audit or investigate complaints. These ‘top level’ visits are designed to counter alleged malpractices.

3. Aims of the programme

The aims of the audit programme are to:

  • promote consistency
  • raise standards

  • ensure compliance in operational procedures and course delivery through the:

    • promotion of best practice and improved procedures
    • identification and resolution of issues with individual Driver CPC periodic training providers

Course audits are unannounced which acts as a deterrent to training centres.

The audit programme supports Driver CPC regulations by:

  • deterring short training (less than 7 hours)
  • revoking non-compliant training record uploads
  • identifying potential fraud

4. Outcomes in 2012 to 2013

JAUPT carried out 293 centre audits and 794 course audits. Where serious non-compliance was identified the case was referred to DSA.

During 2012 to 2013 DSA took on 166 cases from JAUPT. Of these:

  • 52% focussed on centres failing to provide course dates - 2 providers have been warned that their approval may be suspended if they continue to fail to co-operate
  • 27% focussed on short delivery
  • 8% had issues with identity checking and course registration
  • 7% involved course validations, the delivery of unapproved material and possible fraud
  • 6% had centre issues with record keeping and policies
  • less than 1% of cases required further investigation of potential fraud

Where short delivery was identified or where the course was delivered outside the period of approval:

  • 53 drivers had their hours invalidated
  • 81 uploads were blocked (i.e. the centre was told not to upload the training hours) which affected 81 drivers

These outcomes have significant repercussions for training centres as they must resolve the situation with the drivers who attended the course. This might include re-delivering the training and paying compensation.

Other common issues identified through centre and course visits:

  • the risk of courses not meeting the required duration
  • failings in identity checking and course registration
  • poor record keeping
  • failure to provide fair processing notices
  • failure to follow the approved course plan

5. Achievements

There is strong evidence that the audit programme has been effective.

When training centres have been challenged about their delivery of periodic training courses and their processes and procedures at centre audits, they have taken positive steps to fix issues.

Back to top