National Preventive Mechanism The Lower Austrian regional government recognised that the structures in homes per se hamper work in accordance with the insights that social pedagogy provides. When children and adolescents whose social behaviour is abnormal are supposed to acquire social and conflict competence in an environment with many other minors with asocial personality disorders, strong group pressure is created to participate in rule-breaking, selfdramatisation and demonstrations of power. Children and adolescents who – depending on their age and the intensity of aggressive acts against them – see themselves as subjected to either a kind of more or less uninhibited tyranny or a lack of personal space, react with aggression or become victims of marginalisation. The effect of negative group dynamics can be much stronger than that of pedagogical and therapeutic social and conflict training or additional mechanisms that are supposed to support development of the personality, behavioural changes, as well as school and occupational integration. If physical fear and overwhelm and/or sick days increase on the part of staff, while at the same time “bosses” among the adolescents secretly rule and manage entire groups or the facility itself, escalation is on the agenda. Risk factors for structural violence dynamics The first measure was to freeze acceptance of new residents, which decreased the number of minors under care. By overhauling all duty rosters and group compositions, resources were optimised and work conditions improved. Sick leave decreased (comparison to 2013: 1,056 sick days, 1–7/2014: 214 sick days), thus increasing the staff presence. The continuing education offerings (violence prevention according to PART, “New Authority”, various forms of coaching) utilised by all staff members have proven successful. This has an overall stabilising effect, because any impending escalations are countered earlier and more as a united front so that generally police intervention is no longer necessary when there are physical clashes. In the course of 2014, teams were formed among the children and a youth café was installed; since September 2014, there has been a house parliament. Holiday and recreational activities were expanded in coordination with the children and adolescents. House rules are also considered together with the children and juveniles and are jointly formulated. Measures were taken The majority of the interviewed social pedagogues unambiguously stated to technical supervision that they wanted the facility to be divided up into smaller socio-pedagogical or socio-therapeutic living units. The reason indicated for this wish was that it is possible to address the needs of the minors more individually in smaller units, thus enabling better prospects for the lives of the minors and improving chances of a return to their families of origin (quote by an affected minor: “We no longer want to live in a facility that looks like a Tax Office from the 19th century”.) At the same time, the necessity for an expansion of the currently sparse opportunities for continuing education in the area of trauma pedagogy was emphasised, because it is Best possible support remains a priority 115