Understanding the RRN and Bild ACT
For decades, physical intervention training in the UK’s health and social care sectors operated with significant inconsistency. While the intention was often safety, the lack of standardised regulation meant that training quality varied wildly between providers. Historically, many programmes placed a heavy emphasis on reactive techniques—the mechanics of physical restraint—often at the expense of preventative strategies and human rights.
This inconsistency contributed to a reliance on restrictive practices, which evidence shows can cause significant physical and psychological trauma to both those being supported and the staff involved.
Today, the landscape has fundamentally changed. Following high-profile inquiries and legislative updates, specifically the Mental Health Units (Use of Force) Act 2018, training is now governed by a rigorous ethical framework. For providers and commissioners, understanding this hierarchy of standards is no longer optional—it is a critical component of compliance and safeguarding.
The Problem: Why Regulation Was Necessary
The introduction of the Restraint Reduction Network (RRN) Training Standards was driven by a need to protect human rights and minimise the use of force. Prior to these standards, there was no consistent benchmark for training quality or content.
This lack of regulation led to several issues:
- Focus on Reaction over Prevention: Training often prioritised technical competence in holding someone, rather than the skills needed to avoid reaching that crisis point.
- Generic Delivery: Courses were frequently delivered as a “one size fits all” package, failing to account for specific population needs such as trauma histories, autism, or learning disabilities.
- Lack of Accountability: There was insufficient external scrutiny of training providers to ensure they were teaching safe, ethically sound techniques.
The Regulatory Ecosystem: How It Works
To solve these problems, a structured ecosystem was established to separate the standard setters from the auditors and the providers.
The Standard Setter: The RRN
The Restraint Reduction Network acts as the ethical compass. They do not certify training themselves; rather, they authored the Standards that define what good training looks like. Their primary goal is the reduction of restrictive practices, ensuring they are only ever used as a last resort.
The Auditor: Bild ACT
To ensure these standards are met, the Bild Association of Certified Training (Bild ACT) was established. Licensed by the United Kingdom Accreditation Service (UKAS), Bild ACT acts as the regulator. They rigorously audit training providers to ensure compliance. If a curriculum or provider does not meet the strict human rights and safety criteria, they cannot be certified.
The Structure of Delivery: The Senior Trainer Model
Under this new regime, the delivery of training is heavily regulated. It is no longer sufficient for a trainer to simply “know the moves”. They must operate within a certified governance structure.
This structure typically involves a Certified Training Service (such as Timian Learning & Development), which owns the approved curriculum and holds the primary certification. This organisation is responsible for ensuring the materials are evidence-based and trauma-informed.
However, the training itself is often delivered through licensed academies by a Senior Trainer.
The Role of the Senior Trainer
In this framework, a “Senior Trainer” is a specific regulatory designation. For example, when James Hourihan delivers training through JL Academy (a licensed Timian Academy), he does so as a Senior Trainer registered directly with Bild ACT.
This registration ensures that the individual delivering the training:
- Maintains Competence: They are subject to rigorous assessment and must maintain annual Continuing Professional Development (CPD).
- Adheres to Safety Ratios: To ensure safety and effective learning, the Standards mandate a maximum ratio of 1 trainer to 12 learners for practical skills.
- Delivers an Approved Curriculum: They cannot “go rogue” or teach unauthorised techniques; they must deliver the specific curriculum that has passed the Bild ACT audit.
The Practical Impact on Services
For NHS-commissioned services, commissioning certified training is now mandatory. For social care providers regulated by the CQC, it is the expected standard, with absence of certified training potentially viewed as a breach of regulations regarding staff competence.
Moving to this framework ensures that training is no longer a generic box-ticking exercise. It requires a comprehensive Training Needs Analysis (TNA) before a trainer even steps into the room. This analysis ensures the training is tailored to the specific vulnerabilities of the people being supported, shifting the focus from “controlling behaviour” to understanding distress and preserving dignity.
By adhering to the RRN Standards and utilising Senior Trainers registered with Bild ACT, the sector is moving towards a culture where safety is defined not by the ability to restrain, but by the ability to prevent the need for it.
References
Bild Association of Certified Training (2023) 10 Things You Need to Know About Certification Against the RRN Training Standards. Birmingham: Bild ACT.
Haines-Delmont, A., Goodall, K. and Duxbury, J. (2022) An evaluation of the implementation of the ‘Restraint Reduction Network (RRN) Training Standards’ in mental health and learning disability settings. Manchester: Manchester Metropolitan University.
Ridley, J. and Leitch, S. (2019) Restraint Reduction Network (RRN) Training Standards. 1st edn. Birmingham: Restraint Reduction Network.
