54 claims on pp. 4–163 (fact 40, statement 10, conclusion 2, conjecture 1, definition 1).
In 2024, the U.S. Secret Service’s National Threat Assessment Center (NTAC) tasked the Homeland Security Operational Analysis Center (HSOAC) with conducting a study to advance the field’s understanding of behavioral threat assessment and management practices in K–12 schools.
The primary audiences for this research include school- and district-level administrators, school safety partners, and community-based organizations (such as local law enforcement).
School-related associations and stakeholder groups may also be interested in this report.
School violence and threats remain a significant concern in K–12 education.
The data collected in this survey are the first of their kind to look comprehensively at how BTAM is being operationalized in schools across the country.
Therefore, the primary goal of this report is to draw on a nationally representative sample of school administrators to understand how BTAM is being implemented and operationalized across the country.
When a student’s behavior raises alarms about potential harm to themselves or others, school leaders face the complex task of determining an appropriate response.
These teams are at the core of school- or district-level BTAM programs, which schools and districts often implement as part of their broader school safety efforts.
In this report, we focus on BTAM implementation at the level of K–12 schools and school districts.
Despite clear growth in schools’ adoption of BTAM programs, more than 20 years after the publication of findings from the joint U.S. Secret Service and U.S. Department of Education report on the Safe School Initiative (Fein et al., 2002; Vossekuil et al., 2004), we still have little systematic data on what BTAM actually looks like in schools across the United States.
Therefore, the primary goal of this report is to draw on a nationally representative sample of school administrators to understand how BTAM is being implemented and operationalized across the country.
More specifically, we aim to answer 12 questions about the state of BTAM in K–12 public schools as of the 2024–2025 school year:
What is the scope of schools’ BTAM programs?
How are schools operationalizing BTAM?
Participating principals received detailed questions about their school’s BTAM program—ranging from which school and outside personnel are on their BTAM team, what specific BTAM models they are using, and the steps they took during the initial program implementation phase to perceptions of BTAM’s impact
Sample (N = 1746) · All principals who completed the survey and received a weight (weighted to national K-12 public school principals/schools)
As shown and according to the principals who took our survey, virtually all public schools (97 percent) engaged in BTAM in some capacity during the 2024–2025 school year.
We initially present data that cover both types of programs but will later narrow to discuss only those programs that our respondents specifically identified as BTAM.
In this section, we discuss the extent to which schools told us that they experienced challenges when first implementing their chosen BTAM program.
We examine the policies and procedures schools have in place that are specific to BTAM, the membership structure of school BTAM teams, the training that team members receive, how often these teams meet, and how they are funded.
In this chapter, we investigate how public schools are operationalizing BTAM as part of their school safety efforts.
Sample (N = 1401) · Appendix A table base (respondents answering the table question; see note for tables)
A slight majority of schools (53 percent) with BTAM teams have an explicit policy document that establishes and defines their BTAM program.
schools in states that had already implemented legislation related to BTAM in 2019 appear to be ahead in terms of operating their BTAM programs in 2025, at least in some respects.
In this chapter, we analyze principals’ responses to questions about the assessment component of their BTAM programs (the management and support component is discussed in the next chapter).
Previous chapters have presented data that frame how BTAM teams and programs function at schools across the country.
cite page 74 Ch 11: How Are Schools Using BTAM to Respond to Student Behavior?
Sample (N = 1640 | 1404 by column) · Table A.24 columns: Official BTAM teams and other school-based teams | Official BTAM teams only
Salem-Kaiser | 1.8 | 2.0
Sample (N = 1640 | 1404 by column) · Table A.24 columns: Official BTAM teams and other school-based teams | Official BTAM teams only
USSS NTAC (U.S. Secret Service/National Threat Assessment Center) | 4.0 | 4.6
Sample (N = 1640 | 1404 by column) · Table A.24 columns: Official BTAM teams and other school-based teams | Official BTAM teams only
V/CSTAG (Virginia/Comprehensive School Threat Assessment Guidelines) | 7.5 | 8.5
Sample (N = 1640 | 1404 by column) · Table A.24 columns: Official BTAM teams and other school-based teams | Official BTAM teams only
VA DCJS (Virginia Department of Criminal Justice Services) | 1.2 | 1.4
Sample (N = 1640 | 1404 by column) · Table A.24 columns: Official BTAM teams and other school-based teams | Official BTAM teams only
VTRA (Violence Threat Risk Assessment) | 3.2 | 3.6
Sample (N = 1640 | 1404 by column) · Table A.24 columns: Official BTAM teams and other school-based teams | Official BTAM teams only
We use a named program not included here (please specify): | 10.2 | 10.6
Sample (N = 1640 | 1404 by column) · Table A.24 columns: Official BTAM teams and other school-based teams | Official BTAM teams only
We use a BTAM program developed locally, drawing on other models and resources to craft a process for our specific school or school district | 27.4 | 30.1
Sample (N = 1640 | 1404 by column) · Table A.24 columns: Official BTAM teams and other school-based teams | Official BTAM teams only
We do not use a defined program as part of our BTAM process | 24.0 | 17.6
Sample (N = 1640 | 1404 by column) · Table A.24 columns: Official BTAM teams and other school-based teams | Official BTAM teams only
Don’t know | 20.7 | 21.6
N | 1,640 | 1,404 |
Sample (N = 919 | 867 by column) · Table A.25 columns: Official BTAM teams and other school-based teams | Official BTAM teams only
0 to 1 school year(s) (newly implemented) | 13.0 | 12.8
Sample (N = 919 | 867 by column) · Table A.25 columns: Official BTAM teams and other school-based teams | Official BTAM teams only
2 to 4 school years | 52.9 | 53.8
Sample (N = 919 | 867 by column) · Table A.25 columns: Official BTAM teams and other school-based teams | Official BTAM teams only
5 to 8 school years | 21.4 | 21.5
Sample (N = 919 | 867 by column) · Table A.25 columns: Official BTAM teams and other school-based teams | Official BTAM teams only
9 to 12 school years | 6.5 | 5.7
Sample (N = 919 | 867 by column) · Table A.25 columns: Official BTAM teams and other school-based teams | Official BTAM teams only
Don’t know | 6.2 | 6.2
Sample (N = 918 | 866 by column) · Table A.28 columns: Official BTAM teams and other school-based teams | Official BTAM teams only
No | 49.5 | 49.0
Sample (N = 918 | 866 by column) · Table A.28 columns: Official BTAM teams and other school-based teams | Official BTAM teams only
Yes | 50.5 | 51.0
Sample (N = 1636 | 1401 by column) · Table A.33 columns: Official BTAM teams and other school-based teams | Official BTAM teams only
No | 29.5 | 24.1
Sample (N = 1636 | 1401 by column) · Table A.33 columns: Official BTAM teams and other school-based teams | Official BTAM teams only
Yes | 47.8 | 52.7
Sample (N = 1636 | 1401 by column) · Table A.33 columns: Official BTAM teams and other school-based teams | Official BTAM teams only
Don’t know | 22.7 | 23.2
N | 1,636 | 1,401
Sample (N = 1635 | 1400 by column) · Table A.34 columns: Official BTAM teams and other school-based teams | Official BTAM teams only
No | 35.6 | 31.0
Sample (N = 1635 | 1400 by column) · Table A.34 columns: Official BTAM teams and other school-based teams | Official BTAM teams only
Yes | 44.3 | 49.3
Sample (N = 1635 | 1400 by column) · Table A.34 columns: Official BTAM teams and other school-based teams | Official BTAM teams only
Don’t know | 20.1 | 19.7
N | 1,635 | 1,400
As part of a longstanding effort to improve and foster the adoption of behavioral threat assessment and management (BTAM) as a strategy to prevent targeted violence, the National Threat Assessment Center (NTAC) has sponsored a multi-year research effort carried out by the Homeland Security Operational Analysis Center (HSOAC) focused on BTAM practices and their implementation in K-12 schools.
This report takes an in-depth look at the results of that survey, providing a picture of the state of behavioral threat assessment and management (BTAM) in K–12 public schools across the country in 2025.
The survey sought to understand how BTAM is being implemented and operationalized at K–12 schools.
Find the Perfect Training Class For You
