Is positive handling training mandatory for school staff? What leaders in England need to know

"Is positive handling training mandatory?" is one of the questions school leaders ask us most often, and since April 2026 the honest answer has become more nuanced. No law requires every member of staff to hold a particular certificate. But the new DfE guidance expects staff who are likely to need restrictive interventions to be adequately trained, the recording duties now make poor practice far more visible, and Ofsted's inspection toolkit treats excessive or unsafe use of force as an urgent improvement issue.

Before answering in detail, it is worth saying where we stand. At ProActive Approaches our position since 2016, set out by our founder Simon Gower, has been #AimingForZero. A reduction target implies there is an acceptable number of restraints, and zero removes that permission. Training that exists to make holds legally defensible is aiming at the floor. Training that exists to make holds unnecessary is aiming at the goal. That distinction matters more than whether the training is mandatory.

What the law says

The power to use reasonable force comes from section 93 of the Education and Inspections Act 2006. It applies to all members of school staff and allows them to use reasonable force to prevent a pupil from causing injury, committing an offence, damaging property or causing disorder. The power does not depend on training. An untrained member of staff who uses reasonable force lawfully is still acting within the law.

So in the narrowest sense, training is not a legal precondition for using force. But that is not the question most leaders are really asking. They want to know what they are expected to provide, and what happens if something goes wrong.

What the April 2026 guidance expects

The DfE guidance Restrictive interventions, including use of reasonable force, in schools replaced the 2013 advice on 1 April 2026. On training, it says:

• Staff likely to need to use reasonable force or other restrictive interventions should be adequately trained in its safe and lawful use and in preventative strategies.
• School leaders are trusted to decide on training according to their school's context and needs, and should make sure any formal training reflects the principles in the guidance.
• Training should equip staff to judge when an intervention is appropriate, including when they need to make quick decisions, and to assess whether their response is reasonable under pressure.
• Schools should train staff in effective communication, including tone of voice and empathy, to help de-escalate situations.

"Should" in the guidance means schools are expected to follow it unless they have good reason not to. In practice, a school that has identified staff likely to intervene and has not trained them would find that hard to justify.

Where training becomes effectively required

When a risk assessment identifies it

The guidance says that where there is an identified risk, such as an increased likelihood that force will be needed with a pupil, schools must have risk assessments in place and, where possible, mitigate the risk through measures such as training and prevention strategies. Once a school has identified that risk, training the staff who work with that pupil is one of the most obvious controls.

Under health and safety law

Employers must ensure, so far as is reasonably practicable, the health, safety and welfare of their employees. The guidance links this to restrictive interventions, saying schools should conduct risk assessments so that staff who regularly work with pupils where interventions may be needed can do so as safely as possible.

Under equality law

For disabled pupils, schools must make reasonable adjustments. Staff who do not understand a pupil's needs, or who have not been trained in de-escalation, are more likely to use force that might have been avoided. The guidance notes that pupils with SEND are disproportionately subject to restrictive interventions.

What Ofsted looks for

The school inspection toolkit used from September 2026 does not name a training provider or require a specific certificate. It expects restrictive physical intervention to be a last resort, with incidents analysed to minimise the use of force, and it lists excessive or unsafe use of force or restrictive intervention as an urgent improvement indicator for attendance and behaviour. It also expects staff to receive suitable training and support to meet pupils' needs. Training is one of the ways a school shows it is meeting those expectations.

Who should be trained

A targeted approach is usually the most defensible. Start with a training needs analysis:

• Which pupils are most likely to need support when distressed, and what do their plans and risk assessments say?
• Which staff are most likely to be present: class teams, pastoral staff, SEN teams, lunchtime supervisors, transport escorts?
• Where and when do incidents happen? Corridors, playgrounds, transitions, the end of the day?
• What level of skill does each group need? Most staff need prevention and de-escalation. Fewer need physical skills, and those should be limited to what the risk assessments show is necessary.

Do not forget the adults who are often present at the hardest moments and least likely to be trained, such as lunchtime staff and supply staff. In many schools the playground at lunchtime is where incidents cluster, and the adults on duty there have had the least preparation. Even a short session on early signs, de-escalation and who to call can change what happens in those moments, and costs far less than the time spent managing incidents that could have been prevented.

What good training looks like

The guidance does not set a standard, but the Restraint Reduction Network Training Standards are the national benchmark for training that involves restrictive interventions. Programmes certified against them must be based on a training needs analysis, put prevention first, teach only the restrictive techniques that are needed, and include annual refreshers with competence testing.

Whatever provider you use, look for training that:

• spends most of its time on understanding behaviour, prevention and de-escalation;
• teaches only the physical skills your risk assessments show are needed;
• covers the April 2026 recording and reporting duties;
• covers SEND, communication and trauma;
• includes post-incident support and repair;
• is refreshed regularly. Our guide on how often positive handling and de-escalation training should be refreshed explains the options.

Our guide to physical intervention training for schools explains what to ask a provider, and ProActive Schools is our prevention-led programme for school staff.

A worked example: a two-form entry primary school

Consider a primary school with 420 pupils. Incident records show 14 significant incidents last year, involving four pupils. Most happened at lunchtime or during the transition back to class, and two involved a pupil leaving the building.

A training plan based on that picture might look like this:

• All staff, including lunchtime supervisors: a half-day on understanding distressed behaviour, early warning signs, de-escalation, and the school's recording and reporting procedure.
• The class teams for the four pupils, the pastoral lead and the SENCo: a full programme including prevention, de-escalation, safe guiding and the specific physical skills identified in the pupils' risk assessments, with an annual refresher.
• The senior leadership team and governors: a briefing on the April 2026 duties, analysing the data and reviewing plans.
• New staff and supply staff: an induction briefing on the school's approach, the four pupils' early signs and who to call.

The aim of the plan is that next year's data shows fewer incidents, not just better-recorded ones. If it does not, the training plan should change.

Questions to ask a training provider

1. Is your programme certified against the Restraint Reduction Network Training Standards?
2. Will you carry out a training needs analysis before recommending a course?
3. How much of the programme is prevention and de-escalation, and how much is physical skills?
4. Will you teach only the techniques our risk assessments show are needed?
5. Does the course cover the April 2026 recording and reporting duties?
6. How do you cover SEND, communication needs and trauma?
7. How are staff assessed, and how often must they refresh?
8. What evidence do you have that your training reduces restrictive interventions?

A provider that cannot answer these clearly is unlikely to help you reduce restraint.

Common misunderstandings about training

• "Only trained staff are allowed to restrain." Not so. The legal power applies to all staff. Training affects how safely and appropriately the power is used, not whether it exists.
• "Once trained, always trained." Physical skills fade quickly. Staff trained in restrictive techniques need regular refreshers with competence checks.
• "Training is about holds." Good training spends most of its time on understanding behaviour, prevention and de-escalation. The guidance says training should cover preventative strategies as well as safe and lawful use.
• "A certificate protects the school." A certificate shows that training took place. What protects pupils, staff and the school is practice that matches the training, records that show it, and a falling number of incidents.
• "We have no incidents, so we do not need training." Training in prevention and de-escalation benefits every school. Physical skills training should follow identified need, but every school should know what it would do if a need arose.

What to record about training

Keep a record of who has been trained, when, to what level and when they are due for a refresher. Link it to your training needs analysis and to the risk assessments for individual pupils. Inspectors may look at training records as part of the key records they review, and governors should be able to see that training is matched to need.

FAQ

Is positive handling training a legal requirement for teachers?

No law requires every teacher to hold a specific certificate. The DfE guidance says staff likely to need restrictive interventions should be adequately trained, and leaves leaders to decide what their context needs.

Can untrained staff use reasonable force?

Yes. The section 93 power applies to all staff. But untrained staff are more likely to use force that could have been avoided or to use it unsafely, and the school may struggle to show it met its duties.

Does the training have to be certified?

The guidance does not require certified training. Training certified against the Restraint Reduction Network Training Standards gives leaders independent assurance that it is prevention-led and proportionate.

How often should staff be retrained?

The guidance does not set an interval. Programmes certified against the RRN Training Standards include refresher training at least annually, with competence testing.

Does this apply outside England?

No. This article covers schools in England. Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland have their own legislation and guidance.