CPD Record Examples for Accountants: Three Worked Records

Blank CPD templates are easy to find and not very useful, because the hard part was never the layout. It is knowing how much detail counts as enough. ICAS publishes an article answering the question “Do you have example CPD records I can use as guidance?”, which tells you members ask for worked examples rather than empty grids.

So this page sets out what the regimes actually require you to record, three worked examples, and the specific things that make a record fail. The examples are illustrative constructions, not specimens approved by any body — the field lists they are built from are taken from the regimes’ own published requirements.

What you are actually required to record

The field lists are more prescriptive than most people expect, and they differ:

Notice what Poland and SAICA have in common: a justification or reason field. A log of dates and hours satisfies neither. That is the single most common omission.

Example 1 — a practice auditor under an hours-based regime

Illustrative. Suits France, Spain, Poland, Austria and similar.

Why this record works: each line names the provider, states duration as it appears on the attendance record rather than as advertised, assigns a category the regime recognises, and identifies the evidence held. The committee line records an office held — which France requires explicitly.

Example 2 — an industry accountant relying mostly on non-verifiable activity

Illustrative. Suits ACCA’s unit route and ICAEW members not in practice, where the verifiable share is lower.

Why this record works: the fourth column does the work. It is the justification field Poland requires and the reflection SAICA asks for, and it converts “I read a journal” into a defensible entry. Non-verifiable does not mean unrecorded — see our guide to recording non-verifiable CPD.

Example 3 — an outcomes-based reflective plan

Illustrative. Suits SAICA and any regime measuring by output rather than input.

• Competence identified: sustainability reporting assurance, triggered by two clients entering scope.
• Why now: I will be asked to accept engagements I am not currently competent to deliver.
• Planned activity: a certificated assurance course by Q2; the applicable standard read in full; a review of two published assurance reports.
• Completed: course in April, 14 hours, certificated. Standard read May. Reports reviewed June.
• Evaluation: competent on limited-assurance procedures; gap remains on greenhouse gas quantification.
• Action on the remaining gap: engage a specialist for the quantification element rather than accept it unsupported.
• Unplanned learning: a regulator webinar in September that changed my view on materiality; recorded with reason.

That last pair matters. South Africa’s audit regulator explicitly asks what it means for your work if a development gap remains after the activity — whether you need to bring in an expert or restaff. A plan recording an unresolved gap and a decision about it is stronger than one claiming everything closed.

What makes a record fail

These are the specific, documented failure modes:

• Slides and registration emails are not evidence. CPA Australia states that presentation slides, registration emails and general course materials are not sufficient for verifying ethics CPD.
• Advertised duration is not your duration. Record what the attendance record shows. Spain caps a day at 8 hours regardless, and discounts repeat attendance at the same course to 50% and then 25%.
• Untracked e-learning may not count as formal. Germany counts e-learning only where participation duration can be evidenced; Switzerland additionally requires a personalised learning check. See whether webinars count as CPD.
• A failed assessment can void the hours. In Spain, self-study hours cannot be certified or counted if the auditor fails the assessment.
• Hours alone are not compliance. Uganda’s institute answers the question “does the accumulation of 40 CPD hours make me compliant?” with a qualified no.
• No reason recorded. Where the regime asks why, a date-and-hours log is incomplete on its face.

How long to keep it

• France — six years, set in the Code de commerce.
• Czechia — at least five years from the end of the relevant year.
• Poland — three years from the end of the calendar year of completion, produced within 30 days of a request.
• Italy — no fixed period: until the disciplinary limitation period expires.
• Germany, Austria, Portugal — no period stated in the instruments, which argues for longer rather than shorter.

Five years clears every explicit period except France’s six. Our guide to CPD penalties explains why the record, not the learning, is where the real risk sits.

Frequently asked questions

Is there an official example CPD record? Some bodies publish guidance examples. The records above are illustrative constructions built from published field requirements, not specimens approved by any body — always check your own body’s template and accepted format.

Can I use my own format? Often, but not always. ICAS fields the question of whether a record kept in a different format from its template can be submitted, which implies the answer is body-specific.

What is the most commonly missed field? The reason or justification. Poland requires an explanation of how the activity updated your knowledge; SAICA requires why the learning was planned.

Do I record non-verifiable activity? Yes. It usually counts toward the total even where it cannot count toward the verifiable share.

What evidence should I attach? Certificates naming the activity and duration, attendance registers, and for self-study your own contemporaneous note. Not slides, and not the registration email.

Keep a record that survives a review, with Learnsignal

Our CPD courses are certificated with the activity name, date, duration and subject — the fields these regimes ask you to declare, in the form they ask for. See also whether hours carry forward. Field requirements cited here are published by the bodies and regulators themselves, including SAICA.