Find answers to common questions about our accredited courses, organisational delivery options, and training frameworks.

1. What does an “accredited course” mean, and how does it differ from a regulated qualification?

Veritas Training delivers accredited courses that have been independently reviewed by a recognised CPD or awarding body to confirm that the syllabus, delivery, and assessment meet defined industry standards.

Regulated qualifications, by contrast, sit on the Regulated Qualifications Framework (RQF) and are overseen by Ofqual. Non‑regulated accredited courses do not form part of the RQF, but they provide externally validated Continuing Professional Development (CPD) that carries substantial professional, commercial, and insurer recognition.

2. Why should individual trainees or our organisation invest in accredited training over unaccredited alternatives?

Accredited training provides clear, externally validated assurance of quality and competence. It offers:

• Verified compliance with statutory and professional standards

• Robust audit trails that reduce legal, operational, and regulatory risk

• Greater confidence from commissioning bodies, insurers, and inspectorates

• Demonstrable evidence of learning transfer and workforce capability

Accreditation ensures that both trainees and organisations benefit from training that meets recognised benchmarks, supports safer and more consistent practice, and strengthens overall professional credibility.

3. Can accredited courses be delivered in‑house, online, or via blended learning?

Yes. Veritas Training programmes can be delivered on‑site, fully online, or through a blended model, provided the delivery method maintains:

• Approved contact hours

• Assessment integrity

• Trainer‑competence requirements

• Quality‑assurance standards set by the accrediting body

This flexibility allows organisations to choose the format that best suits operational needs while maintaining accredited status.

4. What qualifications and experience do I need to train as a Family Group Conference Coordinator?

There is no single statutory qualification mandated by UK law to undertake Family Group Conference Coordinator (FGCC) training. However, to meet national practice benchmarks and ensure safe, independent facilitation, training providers and employers typically look for the following criteria:

1. Academic and Professional Background

• Minimum baseline: A relevant Level 3 or Level 4 qualification (such as an NVQ, BTEC, or Diploma) in health, social care, youth work, early years, or education.

• Alternative professional pathways: A degree or diploma in Social Work, Youth and Community Work, Nursing, Health Visiting, Teaching, Law, Mediation, or Counselling.

• Independence standard: You do not need to be a qualified social worker. Under Family Rights Group (FRG) practice standards, maintaining clear operational independence from statutory social work decision-making is essential.

2. Practice Experience and Direct Work

• Direct family engagement: Typically 2 to 3 years of direct experience supporting vulnerable children, young people, and families.

• Safeguarding knowledge: A clear, working understanding of child protection duties under the Children Act 1989/2004 and Working Together to Safeguard Children.

• Facilitation skills: Demonstrable competence in conflict resolution, de-escalation, active listening, or mediation within complex group settings.

3. Statutory and Governance Checks

• Enhanced DBS: A clear, up-to-date Enhanced Disclosure and Barring Service check, including a check against the Children's Barred List.

• Legal entitlement: Verified proof of the right to work in the UK.

5. Why does an FGC Coordinator guide independently rather than manage the FGC process?

An FGC Coordinator does not hold cases, deliver therapy, or manage statutory interventions. Their role is strictly to act as an independent guide for the child, their parents, and the wider family network through the structured conference stages, ensuring the meeting remains safe, transparent, and fair, so the family can create their own workable plan.

1. Process Guidance, Not Statutory Management

The coordinator holds no statutory case responsibility under the Children Act 1989. They do not assess parenting capacity, draft child protection plans, or decide legal outcomes. Their sole statutory-related duty is safeguarding: immediately reporting any child protection concerns or disclosures to the referrer, the Multi-Agency Safeguarding Hub (MASH), or the allocated social worker. Beyond that safeguarding duty, their role is to provide clear process guidelines, prepare all participants thoroughly, and maintain a neutral setting so the wider family network retains full ownership of identifying their own solutions.

2. Independent Facilitation, Not Therapy or Assessment

An FGC is a practical, task-focused decision-making model, not a counselling or family therapy session. The coordinator uses de-escalation and active listening solely to maintain emotional and physical safety—not to diagnose family dynamics or resolve past personal disputes. Their guidance keeps everyone focused on one specific task: agreeing a safe, realistic plan that meets the child's identified needs.

3. Distinct Operational Boundaries

Independent guidance ensures a transparent separation between process, family decision-making, and statutory authority:

• The Independent Coordinator: Guides the preparation, upholds meeting ground rules, ensures the child’s voice is heard, steps outside entirely for private family time, and escalates safeguarding disclosures directly to MASH or the allocated worker.

• The Wider Family Network: Deliberates in private and creates their own workable family plan, distributing care and support across immediate and extended members.

• The Statutory Social Worker: Defines the minimum safeguarding bottom lines, retains legal accountability, and formally agrees resources to support the family’s plan.

Guiding the framework independently rather than managing the outcome ensures the family plan is authentic, sustainable, and capable of withstanding statutory review and Family Court scrutiny.