Goddard calms fears over CII gap-fill tool
Share
Advisers should not be alarmed if the Chartered Insurance Institute’s gap-fill tool shows up a lot of holes in their learning, according to PFS chief executive Fay Goddard.
Speaking at the PFS annual conference in Coventry this week, Goddard told delegates the CII had created its gap-fill tool so that members could go online to identify the continuing professional development they need to meet the QCF level four qualification required under the RDR.
She said: “Do not panic - a lot of people are worried when they see they have got 40, 50 or 70 gaps. These are small gaps and a lot of people will have already done relevant CPD and will be able to declare that they have done it.
“It may appear a bit daunting and I have heard people say it means they have to do more exams. That is not the case. You can do exams if you choose to but you certainly do not have to.”
If you enjoyed this article, sign up here to receive daily email updates from Money Marketing and Follow @_moneymarketing
Readers' comments (1)
Nick Bamford | 23 Sep 2010 11:33 am
The CII Tool is a useful starting point for advisers to see where they currently sit in the run up to RDR qualification levels. It does however need to be used with caution.
For example this morning I have had an interesting conversation with an IFA who is both A Chartered Financial Planner as well as a Certified Financial Planner and like me he has a 60+ points gap.
Interestingly both of us have BA (Hons) Degrees in Financial Services and both completed modules in Financial Services Regulations and Macroeconomic theory to a standard well above the RO exam levels of the CII.
My points scores for these two subjects are .1/9 and 0/6 respectively. Feedback suggests that the BA (Hons) degree has scored some non specific points but has not been examined in depth by the CII.
Fay is quite correct relevant CPD may well close the gaps for many advisers. I wonder though if all the professional bodies might not work together to produce a joined up tool rather than working in isolation of each other?
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment