CORU Remediation Learning for a Fitness to Practise Case

Remediation in CORU cases

CORU describes fitness to practise as a process concerned with issues that affect your ability to practise in your profession, not just in your current job. A complaint is measured against the Code of Professional Conduct and Ethics set by your own Registration Board, so the first thing to understand is which parts of your Code the complaint engages. Anyone can complain, including people who use services, employers, colleagues, An Garda Síochána and the Registration Boards themselves.

The grounds of complaint are set out in the Act. They include professional misconduct, poor professional performance, a relevant medical disability, failure to comply with conditions or with an undertaking or consent given to a committee of inquiry, a prohibition or restriction on practising in Ireland or elsewhere, a breach of the Act, and certain criminal convictions. The ground matters, because it determines whether your case goes to the Professional Conduct Committee or to the Health Committee if it progresses.

Remediation will not make a complaint disappear, and CORU does not vet course providers. What it can do is give the committees and Council concrete evidence that you understand what went wrong, have addressed it, and are safe to keep practising. That evidence is most persuasive when it is targeted at the concern, starts early and is backed by people who have seen your practice since.

Before you start

No regulator vets or recommends remediation course providers, and no course can guarantee an outcome. Take advice from your indemnity provider, union or solicitor, and agree with them which learning is relevant to your case.

Which course fits your CORU concern

Most complaints engage one or two themes of your Code. Start with the theme, then choose learning that fits it. All courses below are suitable for CORU registrants.

Professional boundaries with people who use services

Boundary concerns in social work, social care and therapy settings often involve personal relationships, gifts, contact outside work or online contact. Committees will want to see that you understand why the power imbalance matters and how you now manage contact. Supervision records showing how you handle boundary questions are strong supporting evidence.

Records, case notes and reports

Late, incomplete or inaccurate case notes, assessment reports and treatment records are a common theme across CORU professions. Show that you know what an accurate, timely and attributable record looks like in your role, and support it with recent audits of your own records or feedback from a supervisor.

Confidentiality and information sharing

Sharing information about people who use services without a lawful basis, or accessing records you had no reason to view, goes to the heart of trust. Your learning should cover when information can be shared, consent, and the safeguards that apply online and on social media.

Honesty and probity

Falsified records, inaccurate timesheets or mileage claims, misleading statements to an employer and inaccurate declarations to CORU, including about CPD, raise questions of integrity. Reflection must avoid minimising and explain why the conduct was dishonest and what it did to trust.

Communication, respect and dignity

Complaints about dismissive, discriminatory or disrespectful communication with people who use services, families or colleagues engage the respect and dignity parts of every Code. Remediation should show what you now do differently, including how you support decision making where capacity is in question.

Competence and safe practice

Poor professional performance covers practice that falls below the standard expected, such as an inadequate assessment, a missed risk or working beyond your competence. Pair learning with supervised practice and evidence from your workplace that the gap has closed.

Safeguarding and raising concerns

Failing to act on a safeguarding concern, or to escalate a concern about a colleague or service, can be serious in social work and social care. Show that you know the reporting routes, your duties, and how you would act differently now.

CPD audit non-compliance

Under CORU's CPD Audit Policy, a registrant found non-compliant in more than one audit may face a fitness to practise complaint of professional misconduct. If CPD is the issue, rebuild a complete four-part CPD record and a forward plan, not just a stack of certificates.

How the CORU fitness to practise process works

CORU's own guidance divides the process into three stages: a preliminary stage, a hearing stage and a sanction stage. The Regulated Professions (Health and Social Care) (Amendment) Act 2020 simplified the sanction stage, so the Council now decides sanction directly.

1
Complaint received and you are notified
CORU writes to the complainant to acknowledge the complaint and writes to you to explain its nature. Your registration does not change at this point: CORU states that you remain on the Register unless the High Court makes an immediate suspension order. Before you reply to anything, contact your indemnity provider, union or professional body, or a solicitor.
2
Preliminary Proceedings Committee
The Preliminary Proceedings Committee has at least five members: two non-registrants, one of whom chairs it, and three registrants. It may ask you and the complainant for information, and it considers whether the complaint is trivial, vexatious, made in bad faith or without substance. It then decides whether the matter warrants further action. Your written response is read at this stage, so it is your first opportunity to show insight.
3
Mediation, where both sides agree
The Preliminary Proceedings Committee may refer a complaint to mediation, a process in which you and the complainant meet a neutral mediator to try to resolve it. CORU is clear that no attempt can be made to resolve a complaint by mediation unless both you and the person who complained consent.
4
Immediate suspension (section 60)
If there is a serious risk to the public, section 60 of the Act allows the High Court to order the immediate suspension of a registrant's registration while a complaint is dealt with. This is a decision for the High Court, not for a CORU committee.
5
Committee of inquiry
If the complaint goes forward, it is heard by a Professional Conduct Committee (conduct or competence) or a Health Committee (a relevant medical disability). Each committee of inquiry has three members: a registrant from your profession, a registrant from a different profession and a non-registrant. A Legal Assessor sits with the committee, and the Health Committee is also advised by a registered medical practitioner. The committee decides whether the complaint is proven and reports to Council.
6
Council decides the sanction
If a complaint is proven, the CORU Council decides on the sanction, and you have the right to make a submission to Council before it does. The sanctions are admonishment or censure, attaching conditions to your registration, suspension for a specified period, cancellation, and prohibition from applying for restoration for a specified period.
7
High Court confirmation and appeal
Since the 2020 changes there is a right of appeal to the High Court if any sanction is imposed following an inquiry. For sanctions beyond admonishment or censure, CORU applies to the High Court to confirm the Council's direction unless you have already challenged it there. CORU must advise the public of outcomes and publishes findings and decisions on its website.

What CORU committees and Council will be weighing

CORU does not publish a detailed sanctions guidance document of the kind used by some UK regulators, so be careful with advice built on UK concepts such as current impairment. These are the points the Irish process itself puts in play.

Your Registration Board's Code

Every complaint is assessed against the Code of Professional Conduct and Ethics for your profession. Your reflection and your choice of learning should name the specific parts of the Code engaged. A social worker's case about record keeping and a physiotherapist's case about consent engage different provisions, even if the underlying theme looks similar.

Whether further action is warranted

At the Preliminary Proceedings Committee stage the question is whether the complaint warrants further action, not whether it is proven. A clear, factual response that shows you have understood the concern and acted on it is the evidence you control at this stage. Avoid arguing with the complainant or minimising what happened.

Insight and changed practice

If a complaint is proven, you can make a submission to Council on sanction. That submission is far stronger when it shows genuine understanding of the effect on people who use services and on trust in your profession, plus evidence that your practice has changed since: training, supervision, audits of your work and references from people who know about the complaint.

Consent to censure or remedial action

Section 61 of the Act provides for the situation where a registrant consents to censure or remedial action during an inquiry. Failing to keep an undertaking or a consent given to a committee of inquiry is itself a ground of complaint, so only agree to what you can deliver, and take advice before you do.

Recommended CORU remediation courses

All 38

Each course is self-paced and online. You get scenario-based questions with an 80% pass mark, reflection prompts and a certificate of completion showing your name, the course title and the estimated learning time.

Complaints & fitness to practise4hrs est. learning