Are courses CPD accredited?

Courses on the Care Learning platform are not currently accredited by an external CPD body. We want to be straightforward about this, and to explain why we believe it does not affect the value or regulatory suitability of the training we provide.

Courses on Care Learning are available free of charge. We made a deliberate decision to offer accessible, high-quality learning without placing cost as a barrier for individual practitioners or smaller care and early years providers. This ethos also informs our position on CPD accreditation. We do not believe that a paid quality mark is a prerequisite for good training, and we do not pass accreditation costs on to learners in the form of course fees.

It is worth being clear that CPD accreditation is not a universal requirement for training in health, social care, or early years. The majority of professional development activity in these sectors does not require an accredited course — it requires appropriate, relevant, and up-to-date learning that can be evidenced. CPD accreditation may carry additional weight in specific circumstances, most notably where a professional body mandates it for regulated professionals completing formal CPD logs, or where an employer has a specific procurement requirement tied to a named accreditation body. Outside of those situations, it is not a regulatory necessity.

Where CPD accreditation is genuinely essential for a learner’s specific professional requirements, we acknowledge that other training providers offer accredited courses and we would encourage learners to explore those options. We would rather signpost someone to the right solution than overstate what our platform provides.

We are also aware that CPD accreditation in the training sector is not always as rigorous as its marketing suggests. Some accreditation bodies assess only a sample of courses from a provider rather than reviewing every lesson or module individually before awarding their mark. This means that an accreditation logo on a course page does not always reflect a comprehensive, independent review of that specific content. We are equally aware that some training providers describe their courses as accredited through processes that are, in effect, self-certification — where the provider themselves determines that their content meets the standard without meaningful external scrutiny. We raise this not to dismiss accreditation entirely, but to encourage employers and learners to look beyond logos when evaluating training quality. The content itself, and the expertise behind it, matters more than the mark it carries.

We are actively evaluating CPD accreditation for selected courses and may introduce it in the future where it adds genuine value for specific learner groups or professional requirements. Any decision to pursue accreditation will be made on its merits, not as a marketing exercise.

What CQC Says About Training Accreditation

The Care Quality Commission (CQC) is the regulator for health and adult social care services in England. When assessing whether providers meet their training obligations, CQC operates under Regulation 18 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 (Regulated Activities) Regulations 2014, which requires providers to ensure staff receive the training, support and professional development necessary to carry out their roles safely and competently.

On the question of accreditation, the CQC’s published guidance is clear:

“Regulation 18: Staffing in the Health and Social Care Act does not state which training packages providers should use or what training must include. This means that we can’t promote, endorse, or require providers to undertake any named training programme.” — CQC, Brief Guide: Mandatory Training on Learning Disability and Autism

In practice, CQC inspectors assess whether staff are demonstrably competent and whether providers can evidence a robust approach to training governance. The presence or absence of a CPD accreditation mark on a course does not determine compliance. What matters is whether the training is appropriate to the role, up to date, and supported by clear completion records.

Notably, the Care Certificate standards themselves — the recognised induction framework for new health and social care workers, published by Skills for Health, Skills for Care and NHS England — are described in the official guidance as “recommended and non-accredited.” This reinforces that non-accredited training is entirely consistent with meeting CQC expectations.

What Ofsted Says About Training Accreditation in Early Years

Ofsted inspects registered early years settings in England under the Education Inspection Framework (EIF), which was renewed and came into effect from November 2025. The framework assesses the quality of education, safeguarding, leadership and management, and children’s outcomes.

Ofsted does not require early years practitioners to have completed CPD-accredited courses. Inspectors look at whether leaders support staff to develop their professional knowledge and skills, and whether that development translates into high-quality practice with children. The focus is on the impact of training on outcomes — not on which body endorsed the course material.

The revised EIF explicitly moves away from checklist-style evidence gathering. Inspectors look for a culture of genuine professional development, informed by the Early Years Foundation Stage (EYFS), rather than a portfolio of certificates from accredited providers.

Our Approach to Quality

While our courses do not carry an external CPD mark at this time, we take the quality and accuracy of our content seriously. Our courses are:

• Aligned to current legislation, regulatory guidance, and sector frameworks including the Care Certificate standards, EYFS, and CQC’s Fundamental Standards
• Regularly reviewed to reflect updates in law, guidance, and best practice
• Supported by clear learning outcomes and formal completion certificates suitable for use in staff training records, supervision files, and CQC or Ofsted inspection evidence

We are proud that over the past six months, not a single complaint has been raised regarding the accuracy of our course content. We consider this a meaningful indicator of the standards our content team maintains — and one that speaks more directly to quality than an accreditation mark alone.

We also recognise that no content is infallible. Legislation changes, guidance is updated, and practice evolves. If any learner, manager, or employer identifies information within our courses that they believe to be inaccurate or out of date, we commit to investigating and resolving the matter within 24 to 48 hours. We treat every accuracy concern as a priority, not an inconvenience. Our aim is to ensure that every course on the platform reflects current law and best practice at all times, and that anyone who raises a concern receives a prompt, transparent response.

Our View on Training Quality

We believe that the quality of training is best judged by the people closest to practice — the managers, leads, and employers responsible for the development of their teams. A CPD logo from a private accreditation body is not a substitute for that professional judgement.

We encourage managers and training leads to review our course content directly before committing to the platform. We offer trial access so you can assess the depth, accuracy, and relevance of our material for your specific setting and workforce. We are confident that our courses will stand up to that scrutiny.

If you have specific accreditation requirements — for example, for qualified nurses completing NMC revalidation, social workers fulfilling Social Work England CPD obligations, or other regulated professionals — we recommend checking the requirements of the relevant professional body. We are happy to advise on whether our content is suitable for those purposes.

Looking Ahead

We are keeping CPD accreditation under active review. If and when we pursue it, we will prioritise courses where accreditation has clear, demonstrable value for specific learner groups — rather than applying it wholesale as a blanket marketing position. We will be transparent with our users about any changes to our accreditation status.

In the meantime, if you have questions about whether our courses are suitable for your organisation’s training requirements, please contact us. We would rather answer that question honestly than rely on a logo to do it for us.