Peter - SentioU

I work as Clinic Director at Sentio and went through Sentio training before that, so I see this from both the trainee and supervisor sides. The framing this thread uses treats a brand name or an accreditor logo as a proxy for whether a program can train you to do therapy, and it is not one. Reputation and accreditation are easy to see, so applicants anchor on them, but neither measures skill development. Multiple studies have found problems with COAMFTE training; in one, only about a third of students at COAMFTE-accredited programs felt prepared by their training at graduation. Accreditation is a floor, not a predictor of clinical competence, and in California the BBS does not require COAMFTE at all to license. The questions worth asking any program: how many hours of observed, video-reviewed practice will I get before sitting with a real client, do you track client outcomes and will I see my own outcome data, can I sit in on and observe a class before I enroll, and what is the class size? Those four questions filter the field faster than any reputation ranking. Detailed walk-through of the accreditation gap: https://sentio.org/blog/study-coamfte-mft-programs-not-preparing-students-for-clinical-practice