Our approach

Somatic Model of Care

Our ‘Somatic Model of Care’ is a unique, evidence-informed framework that integrates movement, mindfulness, community connection and nervous system education. Grounded in body-based, community-centred, and trauma-informed practice, this model supports people navigating stress, trauma, and disconnection.

Underpinned by our commitments to community wellbeing, our approach isn’t just about individual recovery and care. It’s about reimagining how wellbeing is shared, sustained, and embedded across communities, services, and systems.

Why somatics?

We focus on the body because that’s where the effects of both stress and trauma are often stored.

Many responses to stress and overwhelm are held below conscious awareness, which means that talk therapy alone may not be enough to create meaningful change.

Evidence shows that body-based, trauma-informed approaches can reduce symptoms of stress, anxiety, and PTSD, while improving emotional regulation and interoceptive awareness. They also support neuroplasticity, helping the brain learn new, more adaptive responses to ongoing pressure and challenge. 

Through movement, mindfulness, and nervous system education, our programs support people to notice what's happening in their bodies, understand how stress and trauma affect their systems, and learn simple practices to reconnect with safety, agency, and relationship. 

What makes our approach powerful is its sustainability. Once learned, these tools become internal resources people can return to in their own time and in ways that suit their lives—building skills that are simple, effective, and not dependent on ongoing services or clinical systems.

Why it matters

Many people are living with the impacts of stress and trauma, but can’t access care that feels safe, appropriate, or ongoing, particularly those facing systemic barriers.

Traditional cognitive approaches often fall short when someone is dysregulated or disconnected from a felt sense of internal safety. Research demonstrates that regulation is a prerequisite for reflection, relationship, and healing, and that somatic techniques are one of the most effective pathways from dysregulation to connection. 

Evidence also shows that social connection and a sense of belonging are powerful protectors against the long-term impacts of stress and trauma. In addition to fostering enduring skills and strategies for individuals, our group programs centre the role of connection. In doing so, we aim to contribute to a more community-centred and accessible mental health ecosystem.

We put our approach into practice by partnering with community services to co-design and deliver group programs, build practical skills, and embed trauma-informed, nervous-system-aware care into everyday environments.

Programs in clinical, carceral, educational, and community settings

Education for professionals, carers, and community workers

Public events that offer inclusive, accessible experiences of care

Advocacy and systems work informed by practice and evaluation.

How we use this approach

    1. Cook, K., & Price, C. (2021). “Integrating interoceptive awareness and trauma-informed care in community mental health services: A model for embedding somatic practices.” Frontiers in Psychology, 12, 665865. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.665865

    1. Fisher, J., & Ogden, P. (2020). “Neuroscience-informed somatic approaches to complex trauma: An evolving evidence base.” Journal of Trauma & Dissociation, 21(2), 123–136. https://doi.org/10.1080/15299732.2020.1721048

    2. Balasubramanian, B.A., et al. (2022). “Embedding trauma-informed care in primary care practice: A qualitative implementation study.” BMC Health Services Research, 22, 177. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12913-022-07528-0

    3. Payne, P., Levine, P.A., & Crane-Godreau, M.A. (2015). “Somatic experiencing: using interoception and proprioception as core elements of trauma therapy.” Frontiers in Psychology, 6, 93.https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2015.00093

    4. Lang, A.J., et al. (2021). “A mindfulness-based group intervention for women with PTSD in community health settings: Feasibility and outcomes.” Journal of Traumatic Stress, 34(4), 788–798. https://doi.org/10.1002/jts.22709

    5. McEwen, B.S., & Morrison, J.H. (2013). “The brain on stress: vulnerability and plasticity of the prefrontal cortex over the life course.” Neuron, 79(1), 16–29.https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuron.2013.06.028

    6. Mehling, W.E., Wrubel, J., Daubenmier, J.J., Price, C.J., Kerr, C.E., Silow, T., Gopisetty, V., & Stewart, A.L. (2011). “Body awareness: a phenomenological inquiry into the common ground of mind-body therapies.” Philosophy, Ethics, and Humanities in Medicine, 6(1), 6.https://doi.org/10.1186/1747-5341-6-6

    7. Rhodes, A.M. (2015). “Claiming peaceful embodiment through yoga in the aftermath of trauma.” Complementary Therapies in Clinical Practice, 21(4), 247–256.https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ctcp.2015.09.004

    8. Teicher, M.H., & Samson, J.A. (2016). “Annual Research Review: Enduring neurobiological effects of childhood abuse and neglect.” Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 57(3), 241–266. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcpp.12507

Stay in touch with our activities and events.