Qualiopi monitoring duty: organising and proving your legal, occupational and pedagogical watch (indicators 23, 24, 25)

Behind the phrase “Qualiopi watch” — which many certification candidates discover only while preparing their audit — sit three distinct indicators of the National Quality Framework: indicators 23, 24 and 25, grouped under criterion 6. Three different watches, three types of sources, but one single logic: the auditor does not want to know whether you read; they want to see what you do with what you read. Here is how to build a monitoring system that is simple, sustainable over time, and solid in an audit.

Three watches, three distinct objects

Criterion 6 of the framework concerns the provider’s engagement with its professional environment. It breaks down into three monitoring indicators:

• Indicator 23 — legal and regulatory watch: tracking developments in vocational-training law (Labour Code, decrees, orders, funders’ doctrine) and adapting your documents and processes accordingly. It is the only one of the three classed as a major non-conformity.
• Indicator 24 — watch on skills, occupations and jobs: following how occupations and skills needs evolve in your sectors, to keep your content in line with the labour market.
• Indicator 25 — pedagogical and technological watch: following pedagogical innovations and tools (hybrid formats, AI, platforms) and showing how they feed into your courses.

The most common confusion is treating the three as one catch-all “watch”. Yet the auditor samples them separately: each indicator needs its own sources, its own traces and its own examples of exploitation.

What research says about useful monitoring

What the framework calls a “watch” corresponds to what management literature calls environmental scanning. A study by Chun Wei Choo published in 2001 in Information Research, “Environmental scanning as information seeking and organizational learning”, shows that the organisations that gain an advantage from scanning are those that structure it as a learning loop — collection, interpretation, then action — rather than as a mere accumulation of information. That is exactly the logic of the Qualiopi audit: collection without exploitation is worth nothing, which is why a binder of printed articles never followed by any action is one of the most frequent non-conformities.

Which sources to follow, indicator by indicator

Indicator 23: the legal and regulatory base

• Légifrance (alerts on the Labour Code, vocational-training sections);
• Centre Inffo: the reference source for training law news;
• France compétences: decisions, framework, doctrine;
• the Ministry of Labour and DREETS publications;
• your certification body, which circulates changes to the framework and its reading guide;
• the Caisse des Dépôts (EDOF news) if you are CPF-referenced.

Indicator 24: occupations and skills

• the branch observatories of your sectors;
• France Travail’s workforce-needs surveys;
• studies by Apec, Céreq or Dares;
• changes to professional certifications (RNCP, specific register) on the France compétences website.

Indicator 25: pedagogy and technology

• specialist journals and sites on instructional design and digital learning;
• professional webinars and trade fairs (traces: registration, attendance certificate, notes);
• trainer communities of practice, MOOCs followed by the team;
• tooling watch: LMS platforms, virtual classrooms, AI tools applied to training.

There is no need to follow fifteen sources per indicator: two or three reliable sources actually consulted are worth more than an impressive but dead list.

Organising the system: the monitoring table

The simplest and most effective support remains a single monitoring table with four columns: date, source and information spotted, indicator concerned (23, 24 or 25), and above all exploitation — the decision taken or the action carried out. A few lines per month are enough. Examples of convincing lines:

Date	Information spotted	Indicator	Exploitation
03/2026	Revaluation of micro-enterprise turnover ceilings	23	Updated the T&Cs article and the contract template
05/2026	Branch survey: rising demand for generative-AI skills	24	Added an “applied AI” module to the office-skills programme
06/2026	Tested an automatic-captioning tool	25	Adopted for replays, noted in the accessibility register

This table tells a story: information comes in, a decision goes out. That is precisely the demonstration expected, and it naturally feeds your continuous-improvement loop.

The evidence to present in an audit

• the monitoring table kept up to date over the audited period (since the previous audit for a surveillance audit);
• active subscriptions (newsletters, alerts) and a few received examples;
• at least one example of exploitation per indicator: an amended document, an updated programme, an adopted tool, with the date and a link back to the corresponding monitoring line;
• for teams: a trace of dissemination (watch item in a teaching meeting, minutes).

The mistakes that cost non-conformities

• A watch created the day before the audit, with ten lines all dated the same week — the auditor immediately spots the lack of regularity.
• Collection without exploitation: archived newsletters, no document ever amended.
• A single undifferentiated watch, impossible to match to the three indicators.
• Out-of-scope sources: an occupational watch on a sector where the provider does not operate.
• No trace of dissemination to the team in multi-trainer structures.

Our audit preparation checklist covers these points among the evidence to gather for all 32 indicators.

Take action

The Complete Qualiopi Kit (€297, 14-day guarantee) includes a ready-to-use monitoring table covering indicators 23, 24 and 25, a source list per type of watch, and the evidence templates expected across the 32 indicators. Setting up your organisation and want a sustainable quality system from day one? The ebook “Create your training organisation in 30 days” (€67) structures all these obligations step by step — or choose the full pack (€347).