Training providers & employer providers · For training organisations
Learner management, ePortfolio, KSB tracking, off-the-job hours, employer engagement, progress reviews, evidence and reporting in one place — built for providers on the register, inspected by Ofsted, and funded against rules you have to be able to evidence learner by learner.
For independent training providers, employer providers, colleges and commercial training organisations
The problem
Most providers are not short of process. They are short of one place where the process leaves a trace.
An LMS, an ePortfolio, a CRM, an MIS and a set of spreadsheets each hold part of the picture. Data is re-keyed between them, the numbers disagree, and reconciling them becomes a job in its own right.
The cost: staff time spent on reconciliation instead of delivery.The commitment is per learner and the evidence has to hold up individually: what the activity was, when it happened, how long it took and what evidence supports it. Aggregated or retrospectively reconstructed hours are exactly what a funding audit probes.
The risk: hours you delivered that you cannot evidence.Tripartite reviews on schedule, employer contribution to the training plan, employer awareness of progress. When engagement is managed by email it happens, but it does not leave a record anyone can show.
The risk: real engagement that looks absent in the evidence.Apprenticeship assessment is being reformed through 2026–27, and delivery and gateway arrangements will shift with it. A system where assessment is hard-coded becomes a constraint at exactly the wrong moment.
The risk: a system you have to work around during a transition.How it works
One record per learner, contributed to by everyone involved, reported three different ways.
Eligibility, initial assessment, prior learning, the training plan, delivery, evidence, reviews and gateway all attach to the same record, from enrolment to completion.
Learners, employers and coaches contribute from a phone at the point the evidence exists — in the workplace, during a session, at a review — rather than reconstructing it later.
Knowledge, skills and behaviours are mapped rather than attached as documents, so coverage and gaps are visible per learner instead of buried in a portfolio.
Ofsted, funding audit and the employer each need a different view of the same delivery. Producing all three from one record is what removes the reconciliation work.
The record
Structured as data rather than as attachments, so it can be reported on rather than read through.
| Record | What it holds |
|---|---|
| Learner journey | Enrolment, start, planned end, breaks in learning, withdrawals and completions, with dates and reasons. |
| KSB coverage | Which knowledge, skills and behaviours are evidenced, by what evidence, and what remains outstanding. |
| Off-the-job training | Hours recorded per learner with the activity, date and supporting evidence, against the planned commitment. |
| Progress reviews | Tripartite reviews with learner, employer and coach input, on schedule, with actions and follow-up. |
| Employer engagement | Contact, contribution and sign-off per employer and per learner, recorded rather than remembered. |
| Gateway and assessment | Readiness against gateway requirements, with assessment arrangements configurable as reform lands. |
| Funding and returns | Data structured to support funding audit evidence and the returns your MIS process needs. |
Who uses it
See delivery, progress and risk across the whole cohort without waiting for a monthly report to be assembled.
Answer an inspection or audit question from the record rather than from a reconstruction.
Spend the time on delivery rather than on entering the same information into several systems.
Underneath
The requirement sets, evidence types and reporting above are configuration, not a separate product. The same platform runs learner, manager, admin and HR portals, generates training from your own documents, and exports the records you need.
Further reading
FAQ
Yes. Learner records, evidence and progress can be migrated, and we would normally run a pilot cohort in parallel before moving everything, so you are not switching a live caseload on trust.
Assessment arrangements are configuration rather than hard-coded, so gateway requirements and assessment models can be adjusted as the reforms land through 2026–27 without waiting on a product release. We would always suggest checking the current position with your end-point assessment organisation and the published guidance.
TIQPlus structures the delivery data your returns depend on and exports it for your MIS process. Where you already run a funding and returns system, TIQPlus sits alongside it as the delivery and evidence layer rather than replacing it.
No. The same delivery model covers commercial training, short courses and other funded provision, so a provider running a mixed portfolio does not need a separate system for each.
It does, and they are separate product lines. Employer providers often use both: apprenticeship delivery for the programmes they run, and workforce compliance for their own regulated staff.
Also from TIQPlus
Apprenticeship delivery is one side of TIQPlus. The other is workforce compliance for regulated employers.
We will take a real standard you deliver, set up the training plan, and walk through delivery, off-the-job capture, a tripartite review and the evidence pack it produces.
A working session, not a slide deck. We will map your requirements live and tell you honestly whether this fits.
Book a pilot call See the full UK overview