Headaches have been listed as 1 of the 10 most disabling conditions worldwide. (Stovner et al., 2007) and cervicogenic headaches (CeHs) comprise 15% of the individuals with these complaints. (Nillsson, 1995); (Fernandez de-las-penas et al., 2005) The current best approach to the conservative care of this condition has yet to be determined. Evidence suggests that manipulative therapy aimed at the cervical spine in combination with exercise is helpful in alleviating these symptoms. (Jull et al., 2002) The risk of injury from cervical spine manipulative techniques has been documented to be remote (Haldeman et al., 2002; DiFabio 1999), however the potential consequences can be severe. Therefore with inherently lower risks, thoracic spine manipulations may be a suitable alternative as the evidence is accumulating for its influence on the cervical spine. (Mintken et al., 2010; Boyles et al., 2009; Cleland et al., 2005 & 2007 A & B, 2010; Flynn et al., 2001; Fernandez-de-las-penas et al., 2004; Piva et al., 2000; Browder et al., 2004) The primary aim of this study is to determine whether individuals with CeHs will respond to a program of thoracic spine thrust manipulation in isolation. This may further the current body of evidence by offering an alternative, potentially safer approach to the conservative care of individuals with this condition. Additionally, results of this study may serve to drive a larger scale RCT by offering information regarding feasibility of recruitment of individuals with chronic CeHs as well as timing and dosing of the intervention.