Valour, an IACET-accredited provider, was indicted for issuing fake training credentials without verifying learner identity. In response, IACET reinforced its standards, reminding all providers that accreditation doesn’t protect against legal action when compliance fails
Criminal Indictment of Accredited Provider Prompts IACET Reinforcement of Category 8 Standards
In a case that has sent shockwaves through the high risk industries and the continuing education sector, Valour—a previously IACET-accredited training provider—has been criminally indicted in New York for issuing health and safety training credentials without verifying learner identity or participation. The indictment centers not on the actions of learners, but on the provider itself, which issued certifications despite having no process in place to ensure the person who registered for the training was the one who completed it.
At the heart of the case are three key findings:
- Individuals received training credentials without completing, or even participating in, the required training.
- No identity verification or authentication measures were used to confirm the learner’s presence or engagement.
- These certifications were issued and sold in the absence of any credible assurance that learning had occurred.
The charges fall under criminal statutes related to falsification of business records and deceptive business practices. This indictment makes clear: accreditation does not insulate a provider from prosecution when it fails to uphold foundational standards of compliance and integrity.
In direct response, IACET—the standard-setting body responsible for accrediting providers of continuing education—took immediate action to reaffirm expectations outlined in Category 8 of the ANSI/IACET Standard. Specifically:
8.1 The Provider shall have a process verifying that the learner who registers and participates in the learning event is the same learner who receives the IACET CEU.
Following the indictment, IACET launched a coordinated communication effort across multiple channels to emphasize that compliance with Category 8.1 is not subject to interpretation: providers must have a demonstrable process to verify the identity of participants and ensure authentic engagement in training.
This case is a cautionary reminder to industry professionals that the legal and reputational consequences of noncompliance are real. The integrity of CEUs—and the broader trust in accredited training—depends on strict adherence to both the letter and the intent of the standard.
.svg)
