I think the best policies and procedures recognize that trauma informed practices are best for all students - not just the ones that have experienced adversity. If we focus just on students who have experienced adversity we run the risk of labelling again and don't foster the kind of resilient community where everyone benefits.
And, I think that more than the handbook or policy - or perhaps, importantly in addition to the handbook is the adaptive change of how educators see their students and their families and how their practices they use shift for all students.
Key are: understanding the brain, and the window of resilience (theirs and their students), regular practices of self-regulation (there are many forms), relationship building and the use of problem solving and restorative practices. This is very different than most schools currently. In our schema it means things like building the skills so that school is about collaboration instead of compliance and there is a focus on community (helpful not hurtful) instead of competition. It means re-thinking the use of external rewards (which increase stress levels and shrink the resilience window). It means replacing traditional pay and go consequences with real life repair and solutions (all solutions are consequences and not all consequences are solutions.) It means creating clear systems and structures - so that while educators connect well and build relationships, that the culture is not permissive, but rather firm and fair.
We think the cultural shift takes a minimum of three years....and then you can feel a difference in a school and see rather remarkable academic growth (but only if the pedagogy is shifting along with the SEL/discipline practices).