Fact Sheet: Training Product Equivalence

National Training Packages are one of the key pillars of Australia's vocational education and training (VET) system. Training Packages define:

• occupational skills standards in units of competency against which training delivery and assessment of competency occur; and
• the combination of units of competency, known as packaging rules, that must be achieved for an individual to be awarded a nationally recognised qualification or skill set.

Training Packages are developed through a process of consultation with industry and key stakeholders nationally and may change over time as industry needs change. When a training package is updated, developers determine equivalence of units of competency and qualifications in accordance with the Training Package Organising Framework.

From 1^st July 2025, this document brings together three separate documents previously titled the National Training Package Products Policy (TPPP), the Standards for Training Packages and the Training Package Development and Endorsement Process Policy.

This Fact Sheet provides guidance on meeting the requirements of Outcome Standard 1.3 within the Registration Standards 2025 (2025 Standards).

What does ‘equivalence’ mean for national training products?

In the Training Package Organising Framework the term equivalence is used in two contexts:

• Units of competency; and
• Qualifications.

Units of Competency

When a unit of competency is determined to be equivalent to the unit it supersedes, it means that the work outcome described by the two units of competency is unchanged. Training package developers determine equivalence by mapping the skills and knowledge (elements, performance criteria and assessment requirements) required to achieve the workplace outcomes of the new and superseded units. When the mapping of the two units align, the unit is determined as equivalent and when they do not align, the unit is determined as not equivalent.

When units are not equivalent, specific detail of the changes are included in the unit mapping information located in the Companion Volume Implementation Guide.

Determination of equivalence may also be impacted by licensing, regulatory, legislative or certification requirements.

Qualifications

When a qualification is determined as equivalent to the qualification it supersedes, it means that the occupational outcome and/or AQF level described by the two qualifications is unchanged.

The occupational outcome is determined to have changed when the skills and knowledge required to achieve the occupational outcome of the new and superseded qualifications cannot be mapped to each other and therefore the qualifications are deemed not equivalent.

As with units of competency, determination of equivalence may also be impacted by licensing, regulatory, legislative or certification requirements. The detail of these changes are included in the qualification mapping information within Companion Volume Implementation Guides.  An example is provided below from the BSB Training Package.

What should an RTO do when a new version of a training product is released?

Before implementing the new training product

A thorough review of the new version of the training product should be conducted even if qualifications or units of competency are deemed to be equivalent. Equivalence doesn’t necessarily mean that there are no changes for training and assessment purposes. The review process should identify all changes to ensure they are implemented as part of the scope management process within the RTO.

Examples of changes that are typically applied include changes to:

• the structure of qualification/s;
• the way that the training and/or assessment must occur;
• the teaching and learning materials as well as assessment tools;
• performance evidence, conditions or context;
• what has to be included in the assessment; or
• the requirements for trainers and assessors.

Where units of competency are deemed equivalent there will likely be changes, and assessment tools must be reviewed and updated prior to use to ensure alignment with any changes. This is a requirement under Outcome Standard 1.3 and critical to maintaining compliance and quality.

In the example below from the CPC Training Package, the units in two versions of the training package were determined as equivalent. For this example, the focus is on the assessment requirements of the units.

It is clear there are substantial differences in the assessment evidence that is required by the two versions of the unit. For example, the earlier version of the unit requires students to carry out the full range of site supervision activities over a period of time, while the later version of the unit primarily requires evidence of the student planning to supervise administration activities. The current unit also specifies the type of site inspection and documentation required.

Although they are determined equivalent for workplace outcomes, the assessment tools require review and updating in order to meet the assessment requirements as detailed in the new unit and as per the requirements in Outcome Standards 1.3 and 1.4. Given the differences between the units, many other aspects of an RTO’s teaching and learning materials may also need adjustment to enable the learner to meet the requirements of the training product and in line with Outcome Standard 1.1.  

The RTO’s Responsibilities

In the VET sector, equivalence impacts a number of processes. The most common are:<\/strong>

• training package transition - changing the RTO’s scope of registration;
• credit applications from an individual learner; and
• determining the vocational competency of trainers and assessors.

Training Package Transition - Changing an RTO’s Scope

When a training package transition process occurs, it can change an RTO’s scope of registration in regard to the units of competency, skill sets and/or qualifications.

Equivalent training products will be automatically added to an RTO’s scope of registration without requiring an application or incurring a fee. RTOs are able to continue enrolling students and deliver the superseded product until ready to deliver the new equivalent product within the 12-month period during which enrolments are still permitted as per Compliance Requirement 14.

RTOs will need to add non-equivalent training products to scope by applying to TAC through the RTO Portal.

When a training product changes, the RTO must have a plan to ensure the transition process occurs in accordance with Compliance Requirement 14 (transition of training products). 

When the new training product is added to an RTO’s scope of registration, the RTO is obligated to ensure that they:

• market the training product to potential students in an accurate and ethical manner;
• have a strategy for the delivery and assessment of the training product suitable for the target learners;
• have all training resources, equipment and facilities required to deliver and assess in accordance with the Training Package requirements and their training and assessment strategy;
• have support services available for the target learners when required;
• assure the strategy, resources, and practices for the training product are relevant for current industry practice;
• have staff who are vocationally competent and industry current to deliver and assess the new training product;
• ensure a review of the assessment tools for the new training product is conducted prior to their use;
• have a plan for the validation of the assessment outcomes of the new training product; and
• have a plan for the transition of students from the old to new training product when required.

Each of these obligations involve some form of review that is based on a clear understanding of the differences between the new and superseded training product. The most common way for an RTO to determine the differences between training products is to conduct a mapping and consider the implications of the differences.

Any changes identified through an equivalence mapping must be documented and used to inform the RTO’s continuous improvement system. This includes updates to strategies, tools, resources, and staff capability. RTOs should treat equivalence mapping as key evidence informing their self-assurance activities and continuous monitoring of compliance against the Standards.

It is important to note that mapping is not only a transition activity but a key part of an RTO’s ongoing validation and continuous improvement processes. Mapping informs validation by identifying where updates may be required to training and assessment strategies, tools, or materials. This also supports compliance with the principles of assessment (fairness, flexibility, validity, reliability) and rules of evidence (validity, sufficiency, authenticity, currency).

For example, the First Aid units of competency from the Health Training Package have been recently updated in which the unit HLTAID003 has been superseded by HLTAID011. The HLT Health Training Package First Aid Companion Volume provides the following information about the changes to the unit:

_{Source: HLT Health Training Package First Aid Companion Volume Implementation Guide V3.2}

The training package developers determined the unit as not equivalent and highlighted the areas of the unit of competency and assessment requirements that have changed in the Companion Volume. This information is a useful starting point for RTOs, as it indicates areas of particular focus for the RTO’s mapping and comparison process.

An example of how an RTO could carry out mapping to determine changes between the new and superseded unit and the impact on training and assessment is provided further below. RTOs should use their mapping to determine what actions are required and a timeframe for these to be completed. The example only maps the unit elements and performance criteria. In practice, RTOs will also need to map the assessment requirements.  Following any changes made, the RTO must also ensure that the new assessment tools meet the requirements of Outcome Standards 1.3, 1.4 (assessment), and reflecting any changes to learning materials/resources as required and as per Outcome Standards 1.1 and 1.8.

As a result of this mapping, the RTO may need to make additional changes to the training and assessment strategy.  For example, does the amount of training provided need to be adjusted? Is there any additional information that should be provided to potential learners about the course the RTO is offering? Do the trainers and assessors need any gap training to enable them to deliver and assess the new units?

Feedback and insights from mapping activities, validation sessions, and industry consultations should be used to review and refine the RTO’s strategies, assessment tools, and delivery approaches. This feedback loop ensures the RTO remains aligned with current workplace expectations and unit requirements, particularly when assessment conditions or performance expectations have shifted over time. Consultation with industry during this review process is strongly encouraged, even for equivalent units, to ensure the RTO's delivery remains relevant and credible.

For example, the review may reveal a new unit places greater emphasis on sustainability practices, prompting an update to the assessment scenarios. Validation may identify that current tasks don’t fully address revised performance criteria. Industry feedback might highlight changes in workplace technology or processes, requiring updates to training resources or the amount of practical training provided. This feedback should directly inform updates to the training and assessment strategy, learning materials and delivery methodologies, and assessment tools.

What are auditors looking for?

During an audit, the auditor requires evidence the RTO has established a process to identify the impact on the training and assessment operations of the RTO when units have been determined as equivalent or not equivalent. The auditor will seek evidence of the specific impacts identified, and the steps and actions the RTO has taken to ensure transition to the new training product meets all requirements of the 2025 Standards.

Evidence might include:

• mapping of unit content and gap analysis;
• assessment tools updated clearly aligned to the current unit of competency;
• records of industry consultation and how feedback informed changes to learning resources, assessment tools, delivery strategies and facilities and equipment;
• updated trainer competencies, industry currency activities or professional development;
• entries in continuous improvement register demonstrating actions taken as a result of the equivalence review and how those actions were implemented and monitored; and
• completed validation activities including mapping and assessment tool reviews against the updated unit requirements. 

Examples of mapping and transition plans. Highlighted areas indicate areas of difference.