This pilot evaluated two new‘trauma-informed short-term Managed Intervention Centres’ (MICs) set up by Ormiston Academies Trust. The centres aimed to provide individually tailored, trauma-informed support to young people in mainstream secondary schools who were at risk of permanent exclusion.
Each site offered full-time, five-week placements for up to 15 pupils from years 7 – 10 whose schools had exhausted internal behaviour management strategies. Each centre was staffed by two teachers and two higher-level teaching assistants, led by a lead teacher.
The project aimed to prevent these pupils from entering alternative provision by offering early, off-site intervention within a mainstream framework. Pupils received a basic academic curriculum alongside a tailored PSHE programme, support to develop self-regulationHow children monitor their emotions and thoughts, and adapt their behaviour in different circumstances. strategies, and a structured reintegration plan for returning to their mainstream school.
The approach was based on the Attachment, Regulation and Competency (ARC) framework, which is designed to support children and families experiencing trauma. Staff received training to apply the ARC model, understand how trauma influences behaviour, implement and review appropriate support strategies, and adapt school policies to embed a trauma-informed approach. At the end of each placement, staff produced a reintegration plan with the pupil to support their return to the referring schools.
The centres built on an existing model developed by the Westminster Education Centre (WEC), part of Ormiston Academies Trust. This pilot project was an opportunity to refine the model, adapt it for other settings and Multi-Academy Trusts (MATs), and develop more robust evidence on the approach.
Education Endowment Foundation:Trauma Informed Short Term Managed Intervention Centres – pilot
Trauma Informed Short Term Managed Intervention Centres – pilot
Independent Evaluator
A pilot to evaluate ‘trauma-informed short-term Managed Intervention Centres’, offsite centres where young people at risk of permanent exclusion have 5‑week placements where they receive behaviour management support.
The Education Endowment Foundation (EEF) partnered with the Youth Endowment Fund (YEF) to commission a series of research projects to identify effective approaches for supporting pupils at high risk of absenteeism and/or exclusion and reduce their risk of involvement in violence. This study was funded through that programme.
This pilot evaluation was led by a team from the Centre for Evidence and Implementation. It involved:
- Programme delivery within the 2024 – 25 academic year
- 12 referring secondary schools across two geographical locations
- Two Managed Intervention Centres (MICs)
- 164 pupils referred (70% eligible for Free School Meals (FSM))
- Pupils self-assessing their emotional and behavioural outcomes using the Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire (SDQ).
- Collation of attendance data and information on pupils’ post-placement school status
Overall, the evaluation findings suggest that the MIC model was broadly feasible to implement and reached the intended pupils.
- Most pupils who completed a placement reintegrated into mainstream education.
- Pupil attendance and engagement at the MICs were generally high, and pupils showed improved self-awareness and engagement.
- However, mainstream staff had mixed views on the success of reintegration plans, as well the model’s impact on behaviour and longer-term outcomes.
- Some perceived negative effects for their pupils, including worsening behaviour, increased anxiety, and concerns about pupils falling behind academically.
The short duration of the intervention, combined with the need to maintain access to the curriculum, made the effective implementation of a trauma-informed approach more challenging. In addition, the small sample size meant that it was not possible to examine differences among equity groups. The evaluation also highlighted some practical challenges, including issues with site accessibility, transport and the physical environment of the centres.
Staff considered the MIC staffing structure broadly appropriate but highlighted the need for additional capacity, clearer roles, and further training. While training introduced trauma-informed principles, staff questioned whether mainstream schools could replicate this practice. Although the ARC training aligned with trauma-informed principles, the MICs operated more as trauma-aware than fully trauma-informed settings. Schools engaged only minimally with ARC training, and staff found it difficult to sustain progress within systems that were not trauma informed.
Although most pupils returned to mainstream schools, the quality of reintegration plans varied, and staff often viewed them as having limited value. Schools generally didn’t make sustained changes to policies and practices in response, and some found the recommendations difficult to align with mainstream expectations.
Overall, while the MIC model was broadly feasible to implement, the intervention requires further refinement before progressing to a further evaluation or efficacy trial. This includes
- further development of monitoring strategies
- strengthening of the trauma-informed training principles
- whole school engagement to support sustained reintegration for pupils
- and identification of a viable funding model.