How do we keep on top of mandatory training for care staff?

What does CQC actually ask for on training?

The starting point is Regulation 18 of the 2014 Regulations, which covers staffing. CQC's guidance says staff must receive the support, training, professional development, supervision and appraisals that are necessary for them to carry out their role and responsibilities.

The detail underneath that line is more useful than most people realise. Providers must have an induction programme that prepares staff for their role. Training needs for each member of staff must be looked at when they start and reviewed at appropriate intervals after that. Where appropriate, staff must be supervised until they can show they are competent to work unsupervised.

The guidance then splits training into kinds: statutory training, other mandatory training as defined by the provider for each role, any extra training a person needs for the people they support, and wider learning and development. That last group, the guidance says, includes first aid training for people working in adult social care.

That middle category matters most. CQC does not hand you a fixed list of mandatory courses. You decide what each role needs, and you have to be able to explain why.

Then comes the line that matters most for anyone with a matrix full of gaps. The guidance says all training completed should be monitored, and appropriate action taken quickly when training requirements are not being met. A gap is not the finding on its own. A gap nobody is acting on is.

What is the Oliver McGowan training requirement?

This is the one part of the matrix that comes from statute rather than from your own judgement. GOV.UK's page on mandatory training on learning disability and autism explains that the Health and Care Act 2022 introduced a statutory requirement for providers registered with CQC. Staff must receive learning disability and autism training appropriate to their role. The page says the code of practice became final on 6 September 2025.

CQC's Regulation 18 guidance now carries the same expectation. Providers must make sure all staff receive training in how to interact appropriately with people with a learning disability and autistic people, at a level appropriate to their role.

The Oliver McGowan code of practice describes the government's recommended package, which comes as Tier 1 and Tier 2. Tier 1 is for people who need a general awareness of the support autistic people or people with a learning disability may need. Tier 2 is for people who may need to provide care and support for them. The code also says providers are responsible for making sure staff take this training at least every 3 years, or more often if someone needs it, for example after a change of role.

Package	Who the code says it is for	What it involves
Tier 1	People who need a general awareness of the support autistic people or people with a learning disability may need	90 minutes of online learning with a handbook, and a one hour online interactive session
Tier 2	People who may need to provide care and support for autistic people or people with a learning disability	90 minutes of online learning with a handbook, and a one day face to face session

In most care homes and home care services, carers provide hands on support. In my view, that means many of your care staff will sit in Tier 2, not Tier 1. Check each role against the code rather than putting everyone on Tier 1 by default.

Why does the training matrix never seem to close?

Most managers will recognise at least one of these reasons.

The first is that the matrix measures attendance, not competence. A row of green cells tells you people sat through a course. It does not tell you whether the carer on nights can use the hoist safely or knows what to do when someone refuses their tablets.

The second is that every course runs on the same cycle. Often everything has been set to renew annually, so the whole team expires in the same month and the matrix turns red all at once. Nobody chose that cycle for a reason linked to risk.

Then nobody owns the gaps. The matrix is updated by whoever books the courses, read by the manager when CQC is due, and acted on by nobody in between. That is exactly the gap the Regulation 18 guidance warns about when it asks for action to be taken quickly.

The fourth is that the list was copied from somewhere else. A matrix inherited from another service carries courses you may not need, and misses the ones the people you support actually rely on, such as specific medicines techniques or a particular condition.

The cost of all this falls on the people receiving care. CQC's quality statement on safe and effective staffing says staff receive training appropriate and relevant to their role. One of its I statements puts the same idea in the person's words: "I have considerate support delivered by competent people."

How do I build a matrix that shows gaps at a glance?

Start from roles, not courses. List each role in your service and, for each one, write down what that person needs to do safely for the people you support. The training follows from that list.

Then group the training into the same kinds the Regulation 18 guidance uses: statutory, mandatory as you define it, extra training for the people you support, and wider development. Give every item a reason, a renewal period you have chosen on purpose, and a named owner.

Keep the view simple. One line per person, one column per item, and a date in each cell rather than a colour. Sort it by what expires next, not by surname. The matrix should answer one question at a glance: who is due soon, and who is overdue right now.

Finally, add a column most matrices leave out. Record when competence was last checked, separately from when the course was attended. For learning disability and autism training, the code says providers should keep using their existing staff record management systems to record and monitor completion, so this can sit in the same place as everything else.

How do I check training has actually changed practice?

Competence is checked on shift, by watching and talking, not by a certificate.

CQC's page on training and competence in medicines optimisation shows what this looks like in one area. It says you should have a formal process to assess staff competence, and you must not allow new staff to manage or administer medicines before assessing their competence. You must keep records of competency assessments and note when they are due for review. The same page notes that NICE guidelines recommend an annual review of the knowledge, skills and competencies of all staff who support people's medicines needs.

That pattern works well beyond medicines. After moving and handling training, watch a transfer. After infection control training, walk the service at the start of a shift and look. Ask a carer to talk you through one person's care plan and why it says what it says. Write down what you saw and what you did about anything that was not right.

Supervision is the natural home for this. Ask what someone learned and how they have used it since.

Is any of this changing with CQC's new frameworks?

The way CQC describes its expectations is changing. Its March update set out plans for moving away from a single assessment framework to separate frameworks for each sector, with structured questions replacing the current quality statements.

Regulation 18 is a different matter. It sits in the 2014 Regulations, and the learning disability and autism requirement sits in statute. Neither depends on the wording of an assessment framework. I would not wait for the new adult social care framework before fixing your matrix.

When is this not the answer?

If your gaps exist because there are not enough staff to release people for training, a better matrix will not fix them. That is a staffing problem, and it needs a staffing answer.

If a gap has already put someone at risk, deal with that first. Take the person off the task, arrange supervision or training, and record what you did.

If you have questions about whether a training provider meets the Oliver McGowan standards, read the code itself and speak to the training provider directly. And if training issues have turned into a disciplinary matter, take advice from HR or an employment solicitor.

It is also worth saying that CQC's guidance says it cannot prosecute for a breach of Regulation 18, although it can take regulatory action. Nobody should be frightened into buying courses. The aim is care that is safe because the people giving it know what they are doing.

And if your matrix already starts from roles, shows dates, has an owner and records competence checks, you may not need to change much at all.

Where should I start?

Pick one role, usually senior carer, and write down what that person must be able to do safely. Compare it with what your matrix says they are trained in. Then check whether each member of staff in that role is placed in the right Oliver McGowan tier.

If you would like help, my training and development work builds training around what each role needs, and my quality assurance audits test whether training is turning into safe practice. My post on why care audits never seem to change anything covers the same habit of following a finding through to the person. When you are ready, book some time with me and we can look at your matrix together.