CORU social worker CPD audits: what the published figures show

CORU audits social workers for CPD, and it has published figures from two audits that say almost opposite things. Read either in isolation and you will draw the wrong conclusion about how much risk a thin portfolio carries. Read both and the real lesson is clear: the requirement is easy to meet and the recording standard is where people fail.

What the requirement actually is

Every CORU registrant, including every social worker, must obtain 30 CPD credits in each 12-month period. It applies whether you are full-time, part-time, on leave or working abroad, and there is no carry-forward. Credits are self-determined on the basis that one hour of new or enhanced learning equals one credit.

Crucially, CORU accredits nothing. Its own FAQ is unambiguous: "CORU does not have any role in the development, delivery or accreditation of CPD activities", and "Each registrant is responsible for identifying suitable CPD activities that will meet their own learning needs". There is no approved-provider list to buy from and no badge that satisfies the Board. Its guidance is at coru.ie.

The 2025 mandatory audit: 167 called, zero non-compliant

CORU's Annual Report 2025 records four CPD audits across five professions, with 462 registrants called in total. Social workers were the largest cohort: 167 called, made up of 122 randomly selected and 45 automatically selected. Of those, 13 were voluntary removals from the register, 99 were found compliant and none were found non-compliant.

Across all professions that year, excluding deferrals, removals and the ineligible cohort, CORU reports 99.1 per cent compliant and 0.9 per cent non-compliant.

The number nobody writes about is the deferral rate. Of the 167 social workers called, 63 requested a deferral — 38 per cent — and 55 were granted, 8 refused. Across all professions it was 122 deferral requests from 462 called. That is the real operational story: more than a third of a profession, asked to produce a portfolio, asked for more time instead.

The 2018 audit: 51 per cent did not meet the requirements

The Social Workers Registration Board's CPD Audit Trend Report covers a 24-month cycle from 31 May 2015 to 31 May 2017, and the figures look alarming next to 2025. Of 343 registrants invited — 10 per cent of the register — 25 per cent chose to take part, and 115 portfolios arrived in time for inclusion. Of those, 49 per cent met the CPD requirements set by the Board and 51 per cent were deemed not to have achieved all of them. On recording standards, almost two thirds achieved the expected standard and over a third did not. Only 35 per cent met both the requirements and the recording standards.

After feedback, the proportion meeting both rose to 51 per cent.

Why the two sets of figures are not comparable

This is the part to get right. The 2018 audit was voluntary and self-selecting — a 25 per cent opt-in rate, plus volunteers who had not been selected. A voluntary audit attracts people who either keep good records or want help, and it tells you nothing reliable about the register as a whole. Setting its 51 per cent failure rate against 2025's 0.9 per cent non-compliance and concluding that social workers have improved dramatically would be a misreading of both.

What the 2018 report does support is the more useful finding: the movement from 35 per cent to 51 per cent after feedback. People who were doing adequate CPD were recording it in a way the Board could not accept, and a round of feedback fixed a substantial share of it. The radiographers' audit found the same pattern — 44 per cent met the recording standard on first submission, and after follow-up every single portfolio was deemed compliant.

What this means in practice

• The failure mode is documentation, not activity. Both audits found that people were learning and recording it badly. A reflective record that links activity to practice is the fix.
• Deferral is normal but not automatic. CORU states plainly that "workload and work-related commitments are not a sufficient reason to defer an audit and such requests will be refused." Leave qualifies where more than six months of it fell within the audit period.
• Being audited once makes a second audit more likely. Registrants previously granted a deferral, found non-compliant, or recorded as non-engagement are automatically selected next time, on top of the random sample.
• Repeat failure escalates. CORU's audit policy provides that if a registrant receives an outcome of non-compliance or non-engagement in more than one audit, a Fitness to Practise complaint of professional misconduct may be raised.
• Keep your documentation for as long as you are registered. CORU's answer is exactly that. Note a trap: CORU's own policy mentions destroying submitted records 30 days after a Board meeting — that is CORU's housekeeping for copies you sent it, not a retention period for you.

Neither current CORU policy document states what percentage of a register will be audited. The 5 and 10 per cent figures come from the 2018 trend reports only and should not be presented as current policy.

For the radiographers' equivalent, see our CORU radiographers CPD audit trend report. For how Irish accredited-provider status works where it does exist, see accredited CPD as a statutory status in Ireland. And for the employer side of training records, see HIQA staff training records: seven years or four.