Initial Decisionmaker

Analysis also considers who makes the initial decision when it is not the BTAM team

We also consider when the BTAM team is identified as most likely to make the initial decision about how to respond to a student’s behavior in response to an incident and, if not the BTAM team, who else in the school makes initial decisions about how to respond to that type of incident.

• Initial Decisionmaker

cite page 75 Ch 11: How Are Schools Using BTAM to Respond to Student Behavior?

After each scenario, respondents were asked who would make the initial response decision

After presenting each behavioral scenario, we asked respondents who would make the initial decision about how to respond to the behavior.

• Initial Decisionmaker
• Survey Methodology

cite page 75 Ch 11: How Are Schools Using BTAM to Respond to Student Behavior?

Initial decisionmaker was expected to differ by scenario and school

Given different circumstances across the schools in our sample, we expected that the person or group making that initial decision could differ from scenario to scenario and school to school.

• Initial Decisionmaker

cite page 75 Ch 11: How Are Schools Using BTAM to Respond to Student Behavior?

Up to 12 options listed for initial decisionmaker, including BTAM team and administrators

Therefore, we listed up to 12 options, including the BTAM team and a teacher or school administrator (e.g., principal or assistant principal); a counselor, nurse, social worker, or psychologist; an SRO (or other school-based law enforcement officer), non-school-based law enforcement officer, security officer or guard;

• Initial Decisionmaker
• Survey Methodology

cite page 75 Ch 11: How Are Schools Using BTAM to Respond to Student Behavior?

Existing guidance, including NTAC, does not expect BTAM teams to respond first to all incidents

Note that existing guidance around BTAM, including NTAC guidance, does not expect BTAM teams to be the first line of response for all incidents.

• Initial Decisionmaker
• NTAC Guidance

cite page 75 Ch 11: How Are Schools Using BTAM to Respond to Student Behavior?

Initial decisionmaker options also included an outside BTAM team and MTSS, PBIS or similar team

an outside BTAM team; or a MTSS, PBIS, or other behavioral support team.

• External Teams
• Initial Decisionmaker

cite page 77 Ch 11: How Are Schools Using BTAM to Respond to Student Behavior?

Principals could select only one initial-decisionmaker response option

Principals could select only one response option.

• Initial Decisionmaker
• Survey Methodology

cite page 77 Ch 11: How Are Schools Using BTAM to Respond to Student Behavior?

Principals rarely identified the BTAM team as initial decisionmaker, even for most serious incidents

Principals rarely identified the BTAM team as the party making the initial decision in response to an incident, even for the most serious types of incidents.

• Initial Decisionmaker

cite page 77 Ch 11: How Are Schools Using BTAM to Respond to Student Behavior?

Rare BTAM initial decisions were expected since teams typically receive reports then respond

This was expected, given that a BTAM team typically receives reports of behavior and then moves forward with response rather than making the initial decision in response to an incident.

• BTAM Team
• Initial Decisionmaker

cite page 77 Ch 11: How Are Schools Using BTAM to Respond to Student Behavior?

Principals identified teacher, principal or counselor as making initial judgments

Instead, principals identified three other individuals as making these initial judgments: a teacher, principal, or counselor.

• Initial Decisionmaker

cite page 77 Ch 11: How Are Schools Using BTAM to Respond to Student Behavior?

Figure 11.1 shows share of schools listing these personnel as first decisionmaker per scenario

Figure 11.1 shows the percentage of schools that listed these personnel as the first decisionmaker for each of the scenarios.

• Initial Decisionmaker

cite page 77 Ch 11: How Are Schools Using BTAM to Respond to Student Behavior?

Teachers typically first decide on lowest-level incidents, though administrators also play this role

As shown in Figure 11.1, teachers are typically the first to make decisions in response to the lowest-level incidents—although even in these cases, the principal or another school administrator also plays this role.

• Initial Decisionmaker
• Scenario Severity Levels

cite page 77 Ch 11: How Are Schools Using BTAM to Respond to Student Behavior?

Principals overwhelmingly identified a school administrator as first decisionmaker in most scenarios

Overall, however, principals overwhelmingly identified a school administrator as the first decisionmaker for most of the scenarios in the survey (see purple circles in Figure 11.1).

• Initial Decisionmaker

cite page 77 Ch 11: How Are Schools Using BTAM to Respond to Student Behavior?

About a quarter of principals named counselors as first decisionmaker in elementary Scenarios D, E

Sample (N = 148 total; column N not printed) · Scenario D respondents (observations)

For certain scenarios (such as Scenario D [explicit threat, history of academic issues, withdrawal or depression] and Scenario E [violence fixation, history of academic issues, withdrawal or depression, concerning home context] at the elementary school level), about a quarter of principals identified school counselors as the first decisionmaker.

• Initial Decisionmaker
• Mental Health

cite page 77 Ch 11: How Are Schools Using BTAM to Respond to Student Behavior?

Secondary principals most often named an administrator, then a teacher (Scenarios I and K)

Secondary school principals most commonly identified a school administrator as the initial decisionmaker; the second most commonly selected option was a teacher (e.g., in Scenario I [history of misbehavior and academic issues] and Scenario K [physical altercation]).

• Grade Level Scope
• Initial Decisionmaker

cite page 77 Ch 11: How Are Schools Using BTAM to Respond to Student Behavior?

Only secondary scenario with counselor as initial decisionmaker was Scenario N (22 percent)

Sample (n = 126 of 126) · Scenario N respondents (observations)

The only secondary school scenario where principals selected the school counselor as the initial decisionmaker (22 percent of respondents) was Scenario N (violence fixation, withdrawal or depression).

• Initial Decisionmaker
• Scenario Violence Fixation

cite page 77 Ch 11: How Are Schools Using BTAM to Respond to Student Behavior?

Respondents saw some initial-decisionmaker options only if their school had such personnel

With the exceptions of teacher; school administrator; non-school-based law enforcement; and MTSS, PBIS, or other behavioral support team, respondents only saw each potential initial decisionmaker if they responded previously that they had such personnel at their school.

• Initial Decisionmaker
• Survey Methodology

cite page 77 Ch 11: How Are Schools Using BTAM to Respond to Student Behavior?

Select initial-decisionmaker results presented; Tables A.14 and A.15 give additional information

We present select results here, but see Tables A.14 and A.15 in Appendix A for additional information.

• Initial Decisionmaker
• Survey Methodology

cite page 77 Ch 11: How Are Schools Using BTAM to Respond to Student Behavior?

Fig 11.1 Scenario A: Teacher 58*, Counselor 6, School administrator 29, BTAM team 0

Sample (n = 353 of 353) · Scenario A respondents (observations)

A | 58 (ringed) | 6 | 29 | 0

• Initial Decisionmaker
• Scenario Severity Levels

cite page 78 Ch 11: How Are Schools Using BTAM to Respond to Student Behavior?

Fig 11.1 Scenario B: Teacher 20, Counselor unlabeled, School administrator 64*, BTAM team 3

Sample (n = 335 of 335) · Scenario B respondents (observations)

B | 20 | [unlabeled] | 64 (ringed) | 3

• Initial Decisionmaker
• Scenario Severity Levels

cite page 78 Ch 11: How Are Schools Using BTAM to Respond to Student Behavior?

Fig 11.1 Scenario C: Teacher unlabeled, Counselor 2, School administrator 84*, BTAM team 4

Sample (n = 131 of 131) · Scenario C respondents (observations)

C | [unlabeled] | 2 | 84 (ringed) | 4

• Initial Decisionmaker
• Scenario Severity Levels

cite page 78 Ch 11: How Are Schools Using BTAM to Respond to Student Behavior?

Fig 11.1 Scenario D: Teacher 13, Counselor 22, School administrator 53*, BTAM team 4

Sample (n = 148 of 148) · Scenario D respondents (observations)

D | 13 | 22 | 53 (ringed) | 4

• Initial Decisionmaker
• Scenario Severity Levels

cite page 78 Ch 11: How Are Schools Using BTAM to Respond to Student Behavior?

Fig 11.1 Scenario E: Teacher 25, Counselor 27, School administrator 34*, BTAM team 5

Sample (n = 137 of 137) · Scenario E respondents (observations)

E | 25 | 27 | 34 (ringed) | 5

• Initial Decisionmaker
• Scenario Severity Levels

cite page 78 Ch 11: How Are Schools Using BTAM to Respond to Student Behavior?

Fig 11.1 Scenario F: Teacher 19, Counselor 3, School administrator 58*, BTAM team 15

Sample (n = 137 of 137) · Scenario F respondents (observations)

F | 19 | 3 | 58 (ringed) | 15

• Initial Decisionmaker
• Scenario Severity Levels

cite page 78 Ch 11: How Are Schools Using BTAM to Respond to Student Behavior?

Fig 11.1 Scenario G: Teacher 14, Counselor 5, School administrator 59*, BTAM team 12

Sample (n = 133 of 133) · Scenario G respondents (observations)

G | 14 | 5 | 59 (ringed) | 12

• Initial Decisionmaker
• Scenario Severity Levels

cite page 78 Ch 11: How Are Schools Using BTAM to Respond to Student Behavior?

Fig 11.1 Scenario H: Teacher 8, Counselor 0, School administrator 68*, BTAM team 15

Sample (n = 687 of 687) · Scenario H respondents (observations)

H | 8 | 0 | 68 (ringed) | 15

• Initial Decisionmaker
• Scenario Severity Levels

cite page 78 Ch 11: How Are Schools Using BTAM to Respond to Student Behavior?

Fig 11.1 Scenario I: Teacher 56*, Counselor 9, School administrator 23, BTAM team 1

Sample (n = 734 of 734) · Scenario I respondents (observations)

I | 56 (ringed) | 9 | 23 | 1

• Initial Decisionmaker
• Scenario Severity Levels

cite page 78 Ch 11: How Are Schools Using BTAM to Respond to Student Behavior?

Fig 11.1 Scenario J: Teacher 5, Counselor unlabeled, School administrator 85*, BTAM team 2

Sample (n = 139 of 139) · Scenario J respondents (observations)

J | 5 | [unlabeled] | 85 (ringed) | 2

• Initial Decisionmaker
• Scenario Severity Levels

cite page 78 Ch 11: How Are Schools Using BTAM to Respond to Student Behavior?

Fig 11.1 Scenario K: Teacher 51*, Counselor 9, School administrator 35, BTAM team 0

Sample (n = 128 of 128) · Scenario K respondents (observations)

K | 51 (ringed) | 9 | 35 | 0

• Initial Decisionmaker
• Scenario Severity Levels

cite page 78 Ch 11: How Are Schools Using BTAM to Respond to Student Behavior?

Fig 11.1 Scenario L: Teacher 15, Counselor 0, School administrator 76*, BTAM team 4

Sample (n = 103 of 103) · Scenario L respondents (observations)

L | 15 | 0 | 76 (ringed) | 4

• Initial Decisionmaker
• Scenario Severity Levels

cite page 78 Ch 11: How Are Schools Using BTAM to Respond to Student Behavior?

Fig 11.1 Scenario M: Teacher 11, Counselor 1, School administrator 80*, BTAM team 2

Sample (n = 134 of 134) · Scenario M respondents (observations)

M | 11 | 1 | 80 (ringed) | 2

• Initial Decisionmaker
• Scenario Severity Levels

cite page 78 Ch 11: How Are Schools Using BTAM to Respond to Student Behavior?

Fig 11.1 Scenario N: Teacher 18, Counselor 22, School administrator 44*, BTAM team 12

Sample (n = 126 of 126) · Scenario N respondents (observations)

N | 18 | 22 | 44 (ringed) | 12

• Initial Decisionmaker
• Scenario Severity Levels

cite page 78 Ch 11: How Are Schools Using BTAM to Respond to Student Behavior?

Fig 11.1 Scenario O: Teacher 0, Counselor unlabeled, School administrator 58*, BTAM team 13

Sample (n = 107 of 107) · Scenario O respondents (observations)

O | 0 | [unlabeled] | 58 (ringed) | 13

• Initial Decisionmaker
• Scenario Severity Levels

cite page 78 Ch 11: How Are Schools Using BTAM to Respond to Student Behavior?

Fig 11.1 Scenario P: Teacher unlabeled, Counselor 1, School administrator 77*, BTAM team 12

Sample (n = 734 of 734) · Scenario P respondents (observations)

P | [unlabeled] | 1 | 77 (ringed) | 12

• Initial Decisionmaker
• Scenario Severity Levels

cite page 78 Ch 11: How Are Schools Using BTAM to Respond to Student Behavior?

Fig 11.1 question wording; n = 1,422 low, 1,423 medium, 1,421 high-severity observations

NOTE: This figure depicts response data from the following survey question: “Which person or group is most likely to make the initial decision about how to respond to this student’s behavior?” (n = 1,422 observations for low-severity scenarios; n = 1,423 observations for medium-severity scenarios; n = 1,421 observations for high-severity scenarios).

• Initial Decisionmaker
• Sample

cite page 78 Ch 11: How Are Schools Using BTAM to Respond to Student Behavior?

Notification least likely where teachers decide first: Scenarios A, I and K

Scenarios where this was least likely to happen corresponded to those where teachers were identified as most likely to make the initial decision about how to respond (Scenario A [history of misbehavior] at the elementary school level, and Scenarios I [history of misbehavior and academic issues] and K [physical altercation] at the secondary school level).

• BTAM Awareness
• Initial Decisionmaker

cite page 79 Ch 11: How Are Schools Using BTAM to Respond to Student Behavior?

BTAM chosen as initial decisionmaker more often as scenarios get more serious

The likelihood that principals selected the BTAM team as the party responsible for making the initial decision about how to respond to an incident does increase as the scenarios get more serious.

• Initial Decisionmaker
• Scenario Severity Levels

cite page 79 Ch 11: How Are Schools Using BTAM to Respond to Student Behavior?

Under 1 percent of principals named BTAM team initial decisionmaker in Scenario I

Sample (n = 734 of 734) · Scenario I respondents (observations)

Less than 1 percent of principals identified the school BTAM team as the party making the initial decision about how to respond to behavior depicted in Scenario I (history of misbehavior and academic issues), our lowest-level scenario for secondary schools.

• Initial Decisionmaker
• Scenario Disruptive Behavior

cite page 79 Ch 11: How Are Schools Using BTAM to Respond to Student Behavior?

Scenario P: 12 percent of principals named BTAM team initial decisionmaker

Sample (n = 734 of 734) · Scenario P respondents (observations)

For Scenario P (physical altercation, explicit threat, bullying, weapon, concerning home context), however, the highest-level scenario set in a secondary school environment, 12 percent of principals identified the BTAM team as the party making the initial decision about how to respond to an incident.

• Initial Decisionmaker
• Scenario Severity Levels

cite page 79 Ch 11: How Are Schools Using BTAM to Respond to Student Behavior?

Even in very serious scenarios, principals rarely identified BTAM team as initial decisionmaker

Even in these very serious scenarios, principals still rarely identified their BTAM team as the entity making the initial response decision.

• Initial Decisionmaker

cite page 79 Ch 11: How Are Schools Using BTAM to Respond to Student Behavior?

Middle scenarios: administrator decides first; BTAM team much more likely to be made aware

In the middle are scenarios in which principals overwhelmingly identified a school administrator as the party making the initial decision about how to respond to an incident; in these situations, schools were much more likely to make their BTAM team aware of the incident, although they still did not reach the level

• BTAM Awareness
• Initial Decisionmaker

cite page 79 Ch 11: How Are Schools Using BTAM to Respond to Student Behavior?

Fig 11.2 Scenario A: total 27, be made aware 27, make initial decision unlabeled

Sample (n = 353 of 353) · Scenario A respondents (observations)

A | 27 | 27 | [unlabeled]

• BTAM Awareness
• Initial Decisionmaker

cite page 80 Ch 11: How Are Schools Using BTAM to Respond to Student Behavior?

Fig 11.2 Scenario B: total 56, be made aware 53, make initial decision unlabeled

Sample (n = 335 of 335) · Scenario B respondents (observations)

B | 56 | 53 | [unlabeled]

• BTAM Awareness
• Initial Decisionmaker

cite page 80 Ch 11: How Are Schools Using BTAM to Respond to Student Behavior?

Fig 11.2 Scenario C: total 57, be made aware 53, make initial decision unlabeled

Sample (n = 131 of 131) · Scenario C respondents (observations)

C | 57 | 53 | [unlabeled]

• BTAM Awareness
• Initial Decisionmaker

cite page 80 Ch 11: How Are Schools Using BTAM to Respond to Student Behavior?

Fig 11.2 Scenario D: total 79, be made aware 75, make initial decision unlabeled

Sample (n = 148 of 148) · Scenario D respondents (observations)

D | 79 | 75 | [unlabeled]

• BTAM Awareness
• Initial Decisionmaker

cite page 80 Ch 11: How Are Schools Using BTAM to Respond to Student Behavior?

Fig 11.2 Scenario E: total 86, be made aware 81, make initial decision unlabeled

Sample (n = 137 of 137) · Scenario E respondents (observations)

E | 86 | 81 | [unlabeled]

• BTAM Awareness
• Initial Decisionmaker

cite page 80 Ch 11: How Are Schools Using BTAM to Respond to Student Behavior?

Fig 11.2 Scenario F: total 93, be made aware 77, make initial decision 15

Sample (N = 137) · Scenario F respondents (observations)

| F | 93 | 77 | 15 |

• BTAM Awareness
• Initial Decisionmaker

cite page 80 Ch 11: How Are Schools Using BTAM to Respond to Student Behavior?

Fig 11.2 Scenario G: total 88, be made aware 76, make initial decision 12

Sample (N = 133) · Scenario G respondents (observations)

| G | 88 | 76 | 12 |

• BTAM Awareness
• Initial Decisionmaker

cite page 80 Ch 11: How Are Schools Using BTAM to Respond to Student Behavior?

Fig 11.2 Scenario H: total 96, be made aware 81, make initial decision 15

Sample (N = 687) · Scenario H respondents (observations)

| H | 96 | 81 | 15 |

• BTAM Awareness
• Initial Decisionmaker

cite page 80 Ch 11: How Are Schools Using BTAM to Respond to Student Behavior?

Fig 11.2 Scenario I: total 27, be made aware 26, make initial decision unlabeled

Sample (N = 734) · Scenario I respondents (observations)

| I | 27 | 26 | [unlabeled] |

• BTAM Awareness
• Initial Decisionmaker

cite page 80 Ch 11: How Are Schools Using BTAM to Respond to Student Behavior?

Fig 11.2 Scenario J: total 63, be made aware 62, make initial decision unlabeled

Sample (N = 139) · Scenario J respondents (observations)

| J | 63 | 62 | [unlabeled] |

• BTAM Awareness
• Initial Decisionmaker

cite page 80 Ch 11: How Are Schools Using BTAM to Respond to Student Behavior?

Fig 11.2 Scenario K: total 28, be made aware 28, make initial decision unlabeled

Sample (N = 128) · Scenario K respondents (observations)

| K | 28 | 28 | [unlabeled] |

• BTAM Awareness
• Initial Decisionmaker

cite page 80 Ch 11: How Are Schools Using BTAM to Respond to Student Behavior?

Fig 11.2 Scenario L: total 76, be made aware 72, make initial decision unlabeled

Sample (N = 103) · Scenario L respondents (observations)

| L | 76 | 72 | [unlabeled] |

• BTAM Awareness
• Initial Decisionmaker

cite page 80 Ch 11: How Are Schools Using BTAM to Respond to Student Behavior?

Fig 11.2 Scenario M: total 69, be made aware 67, make initial decision unlabeled

Sample (N = 134) · Scenario M respondents (observations)

| M | 69 | 67 | [unlabeled] |

• BTAM Awareness
• Initial Decisionmaker

cite page 80 Ch 11: How Are Schools Using BTAM to Respond to Student Behavior?

Fig 11.2 Scenario N: total 94, be made aware 83, make initial decision 12

Sample (N = 126) · Scenario N respondents (observations)

| N | 94 | 83 | 12 |

• BTAM Awareness
• Initial Decisionmaker

cite page 80 Ch 11: How Are Schools Using BTAM to Respond to Student Behavior?

Fig 11.2 Scenario O: total 95, be made aware 82, make initial decision 13

Sample (N = 107) · Scenario O respondents (observations)

| O | 95 | 82 | 13 |

• BTAM Awareness
• Initial Decisionmaker

cite page 80 Ch 11: How Are Schools Using BTAM to Respond to Student Behavior?

Fig 11.2 Scenario P: total 95, be made aware 84, make initial decision 12

Sample (N = 734) · Scenario P respondents (observations)

| P | 95 | 84 | 12 |

• BTAM Awareness
• Initial Decisionmaker

cite page 80 Ch 11: How Are Schools Using BTAM to Respond to Student Behavior?

High end: greater likelihood BTAM decides initially, across grade levels

At the high end of the spectrum are those scenarios in which there was a greater likelihood for principals to identify the BTAM team as the party making the initial decision about how to respond to an incident, across grade levels.

• Initial Decisionmaker
• Scenario Severity Levels

cite page 80 Ch 11: How Are Schools Using BTAM to Respond to Student Behavior?

High end: near-universal BTAM involvement when BTAM team was not initial decisionmaker

And in cases in which the BTAM team was not the initial decisionmaker, principals reported near-universal involvement of their BTAM team in response to the scenario.

• BTAM Awareness
• Initial Decisionmaker

cite page 80 Ch 11: How Are Schools Using BTAM to Respond to Student Behavior?

Share saying BTAM team makes the initial decision in high-end scenarios never exceeded 15 percent

Sample (N = 137 total; column N not printed) · Scenario F respondents (observations)

Nevertheless, the percentage of respondents who said that their BTAM team would make the initial decision about how to respond in these scenarios never exceeded 15 percent.

• Initial Decisionmaker

cite page 80 Ch 11: How Are Schools Using BTAM to Respond to Student Behavior?

Principals asked which interventions the primary decisionmaker would likely take or recommend

We acknowledged this in our instructions to principals and asked them to indicate which intervention(s) the primary decisionmaker (whether or not it is the BTAM team) would likely take or recommend in response to the behavior depicted in each scenario.

• Initial Decisionmaker
• Scenario Design

cite page 81 Ch 11: How Are Schools Using BTAM to Respond to Student Behavior?

Descriptive and scenario results show BTAM teams rarely made the initial decision on incidents

We saw this both in descriptive survey results and in principals’ responses to scenario-based survey items, where principals identified that BTAM teams rarely made the initial decision in response to incidents.

• Initial Decisionmaker
• Scenario Design

cite page 108 Ch 14: Discussion and Implications

Table A.14 Elementary, Classroom/di…: A 57.8, B 20.2, C 1.9, D 13.2, E 25.1, F 18.7, G 13.6, H 8.3

Sample (N = 353 | 335 | 131 | 148 | 137 | 137 | 133 | 687 by column) · Table A.14 scenario columns A-H (elementary), schools with a school- or district-level BTAM team

Classroom/direct contact teacher | 57.8 | 20.2 | 1.9 | 13.2 | 25.1 | 18.7 | 13.6 | 8.3

• Initial Decisionmaker
• Scenario Design

cite page 116 Appendix A: Survey Frequencies

Table A.14 Elementary, School admin…: A 29.4, B 63.5, C 84.2, D 53.1, E 33.8, F 57.8, G 58.9, H 67.8

Sample (N = 353 | 335 | 131 | 148 | 137 | 137 | 133 | 687 by column) · Table A.14 scenario columns A-H (elementary), schools with a school- or district-level BTAM team

School administrator (for example, principal or assistant principal) | 29.4 | 63.5 | 84.2 | 53.1 | 33.8 | 57.8 | 58.9 | 67.8

• Initial Decisionmaker
• Scenario Design

cite page 116 Appendix A: Survey Frequencies

Table A.14 Elementary, School counselor: A 6.3, B 3.5, C 1.9, D 21.6, E 26.6, F 2.6, G 4.7, H 0.3

Sample (N = 353 | 335 | 131 | 148 | 137 | 137 | 133 | 687 by column) · Table A.14 scenario columns A-H (elementary), schools with a school- or district-level BTAM team

School counselor[^a] | 6.3 | 3.5 | 1.9 | 21.6 | 26.6 | 2.6 | 4.7 | 0.3

• Initial Decisionmaker
• Scenario Design

cite page 116 Appendix A: Survey Frequencies

Table A.14 Elementary, School nurse: A 0.0, B 0.0, C 0.0, D 0.0, E 0.0, F 0.0, G 0.0, H 0.0

Sample (N = 353 | 335 | 131 | 148 | 137 | 137 | 133 | 687 by column) · Table A.14 scenario columns A-H (elementary), schools with a school- or district-level BTAM team

School nurse[^a] | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0

• Initial Decisionmaker
• Scenario Design

cite page 116 Appendix A: Survey Frequencies

Table A.14 Elementary, School social worker: A 0.5, B 0.3, C 0.0, D 4.1, E 6.3, F 0.4, G 1.9, H 0.7

Sample (N = 353 | 335 | 131 | 148 | 137 | 137 | 133 | 687 by column) · Table A.14 scenario columns A-H (elementary), schools with a school- or district-level BTAM team

School social worker[^a] | 0.5 | 0.3 | 0.0 | 4.1 | 6.3 | 0.4 | 1.9 | 0.7

• Initial Decisionmaker
• Scenario Design

cite page 116 Appendix A: Survey Frequencies

Table A.14 Elementary, School psychologist: A 0.1, B 0.4, C 0.0, D 0.4, E 0.7, F 1.6, G 1.7, H 0.2

Sample (N = 353 | 335 | 131 | 148 | 137 | 137 | 133 | 687 by column) · Table A.14 scenario columns A-H (elementary), schools with a school- or district-level BTAM team

School psychologist[^a] | 0.1 | 0.4 | 0.0 | 0.4 | 0.7 | 1.6 | 1.7 | 0.2

• Initial Decisionmaker
• Scenario Design

cite page 116 Appendix A: Survey Frequencies

Table A.14 Elementary, SRO or school-based…: A 0.0, B 0.1, C 0.5, D 0.0, E 0.8, F 0.0, G 0.0, H 3.1

Sample (N = 353 | 335 | 131 | 148 | 137 | 137 | 133 | 687 by column) · Table A.14 scenario columns A-H (elementary), schools with a school- or district-level BTAM team

SRO or school-based law enforcement officer[^a] | 0.0 | 0.1 | 0.5 | 0.0 | 0.8 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 3.1

• Initial Decisionmaker
• Scenario Design

cite page 116 Appendix A: Survey Frequencies

Table A.14 Elementary, Law enforcement: A 0.0, B 0.0, C 0.0, D 0.0, E 0.0, F 1.2, G 0.8, H 2.0

Sample (N = 353 | 335 | 131 | 148 | 137 | 137 | 133 | 687 by column) · Table A.14 scenario columns A-H (elementary), schools with a school- or district-level BTAM team

Law enforcement (not school-based) | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 1.2 | 0.8 | 2.0

• Initial Decisionmaker
• Scenario Design

cite page 116 Appendix A: Survey Frequencies

Table A.14 Elementary, Non-law enforcement…: A 0.0, B 0.0, C 0.0, D 0.0, E 0.0, F 0.0, G 0.0, H 0.1

Sample (N = 353 | 335 | 131 | 148 | 137 | 137 | 133 | 687 by column) · Table A.14 scenario columns A-H (elementary), schools with a school- or district-level BTAM team

Non-law enforcement security officer or guard[^a] | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.1

• Initial Decisionmaker
• Scenario Design

cite page 116 Appendix A: Survey Frequencies

Table A.14 Elementary, School- or distri…: A 0.3, B 2.6, C 4.2, D 3.9, E 4.8, F 15.3, G 11.8, H 14.6

Sample (N = 353 | 335 | 131 | 148 | 137 | 137 | 133 | 687 by column) · Table A.14 scenario columns A-H (elementary), schools with a school- or district-level BTAM team

School- or district-level multi-person BTAM team[^a] | 0.3 | 2.6 | 4.2 | 3.9 | 4.8 | 15.3 | 11.8 | 14.6

• Initial Decisionmaker
• Scenario Design

cite page 116 Appendix A: Survey Frequencies

Table A.14 Elementary, Outside BTAM team se…: A 0.0, B 0.0, C 0.0, D 0.0, E 0.0, F 0.0, G 0.0, H 0.0

Sample (N = 353 | 335 | 131 | 148 | 137 | 137 | 133 | 687 by column) · Table A.14 scenario columns A-H (elementary), schools with a school- or district-level BTAM team

Outside BTAM team serving our school[^a] | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0

• Initial Decisionmaker
• Scenario Design

cite page 116 Appendix A: Survey Frequencies

Table A.14 Elementary, MTSS, PBIS, or othe…: A 3.4, B 8.5, C 1.1, D 3.1, E 0.8, F 2.4, G 4.2, H 1.6

Sample (N = 353 | 335 | 131 | 148 | 137 | 137 | 133 | 687 by column) · Table A.14 scenario columns A-H (elementary), schools with a school- or district-level BTAM team

MTSS, PBIS, or other behavioral support team[^a] | 3.4 | 8.5 | 1.1 | 3.1 | 0.8 | 2.4 | 4.2 | 1.6

• Initial Decisionmaker
• Scenario Design

cite page 116 Appendix A: Survey Frequencies

Table A.14 Elementary, Other: A 2.1, B 0.7, C 6.1, D 0.8, E 1.1, F 0.0, G 2.3, H 1.3

Sample (N = 353 | 335 | 131 | 148 | 137 | 137 | 133 | 687 by column) · Table A.14 scenario columns A-H (elementary), schools with a school- or district-level BTAM team

Other (please specify) | 2.1 | 0.7 | 6.1 | 0.8 | 1.1 | 0.0 | 2.3 | 1.3

• Initial Decisionmaker
• Scenario Design

cite page 116 Appendix A: Survey Frequencies

Table A.14 Elementary: N by scenario: A 353, B 335, C 131, D 148, E 137, F 137, G 133, H 687

N | 353 | 335 | 131 | 148 | 137 | 137 | 133 | 687

• Initial Decisionmaker
• Scenario Design

cite page 116 Appendix A: Survey Frequencies

Table A.15 Secondary, Classroom/direct…: I 55.6, J 5.1, K 50.8, L 15.3, M 11.1, N 17.8, O 0.3, P 1.3

Sample (N = 734 | 139 | 128 | 103 | 134 | 126 | 107 | 734 by column) · Table A.15 scenario columns I-P (secondary), schools with a school- or district-level BTAM team

Classroom/direct contact teacher | 55.6 | 5.1 | 50.8 | 15.3 | 11.1 | 17.8 | 0.3 | 1.3

• Initial Decisionmaker
• Scenario Design

cite page 117 Appendix A: Survey Frequencies

Table A.15 Secondary, School admin…: I 23.0, J 85.1, K 35.4, L 76.5, M 80.3, N 44.0, O 58.1, P 77.1

Sample (N = 734 | 139 | 128 | 103 | 134 | 126 | 107 | 734 by column) · Table A.15 scenario columns I-P (secondary), schools with a school- or district-level BTAM team

School administrator (for example, principal or assistant principal) | 23.0 | 85.1 | 35.4 | 76.5 | 80.3 | 44.0 | 58.1 | 77.1

• Initial Decisionmaker
• Scenario Design

cite page 117 Appendix A: Survey Frequencies

Table A.15 Secondary, School counselor: I 8.8, J 3.9, K 9.3, L 0.0, M 0.9, N 21.9, O 11.3, P 0.8

Sample (N = 734 | 139 | 128 | 103 | 134 | 126 | 107 | 734 by column) · Table A.15 scenario columns I-P (secondary), schools with a school- or district-level BTAM team

School counselor[^a] | 8.8 | 3.9 | 9.3 | 0.0 | 0.9 | 21.9 | 11.3 | 0.8

• Initial Decisionmaker
• Scenario Design

cite page 117 Appendix A: Survey Frequencies

Table A.15 Secondary, School nurse: I 0.0, J 0.0, K 0.0, L 0.0, M 0.6, N 0.0, O 0.0, P 0.0

Sample (N = 734 | 139 | 128 | 103 | 134 | 126 | 107 | 734 by column) · Table A.15 scenario columns I-P (secondary), schools with a school- or district-level BTAM team

School nurse[^a] | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.6 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0

• Initial Decisionmaker
• Scenario Design

cite page 117 Appendix A: Survey Frequencies

Table A.15 Secondary, School social worker: I 0.4, J 0.0, K 0.0, L 0.0, M 0.0, N 2.1, O 3.0, P 0.0

Sample (N = 734 | 139 | 128 | 103 | 134 | 126 | 107 | 734 by column) · Table A.15 scenario columns I-P (secondary), schools with a school- or district-level BTAM team

School social worker[^a] | 0.4 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 2.1 | 3.0 | 0.0

• Initial Decisionmaker
• Scenario Design

cite page 117 Appendix A: Survey Frequencies

Table A.15 Secondary, School psychologist: I 0.1, J 0.0, K 0.0, L 0.0, M 0.0, N 1.1, O 0.0, P 0.0

Sample (N = 734 | 139 | 128 | 103 | 134 | 126 | 107 | 734 by column) · Table A.15 scenario columns I-P (secondary), schools with a school- or district-level BTAM team

School psychologist[^a] | 0.1 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 1.1 | 0.0 | 0.0

• Initial Decisionmaker
• Scenario Design

cite page 117 Appendix A: Survey Frequencies

Table A.15 Secondary, SRO or school-based…: I 0.1, J 0.0, K 0.0, L 0.6, M 0.0, N 0.0, O 6.3, P 4.5

Sample (N = 734 | 139 | 128 | 103 | 134 | 126 | 107 | 734 by column) · Table A.15 scenario columns I-P (secondary), schools with a school- or district-level BTAM team

SRO or school-based law enforcement officer[^a] | 0.1 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.6 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 6.3 | 4.5

• Initial Decisionmaker
• Scenario Design

cite page 117 Appendix A: Survey Frequencies

Table A.15 Secondary, Law enforcement: I 0.0, J 0.0, K 0.0, L 0.0, M 0.0, N 0.0, O 4.9, P 1.8

Sample (N = 734 | 139 | 128 | 103 | 134 | 126 | 107 | 734 by column) · Table A.15 scenario columns I-P (secondary), schools with a school- or district-level BTAM team

Law enforcement (not school-based) | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 4.9 | 1.8

• Initial Decisionmaker
• Scenario Design

cite page 117 Appendix A: Survey Frequencies

Table A.15 Secondary, Non-law enforcement…: I 0.2, J 1.7, K 0.0, L 0.0, M 0.0, N 0.0, O 0.0, P 0.5

Sample (N = 734 | 139 | 128 | 103 | 134 | 126 | 107 | 734 by column) · Table A.15 scenario columns I-P (secondary), schools with a school- or district-level BTAM team

Non-law enforcement security officer or guard[^a] | 0.2 | 1.7 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.5

• Initial Decisionmaker
• Scenario Design

cite page 117 Appendix A: Survey Frequencies

Table A.15 Secondary, School- or distri…: I 1.0, J 1.7, K 0.5, L 4.0, M 2.3, N 11.9, O 12.8, P 11.9

Sample (N = 734 | 139 | 128 | 103 | 134 | 126 | 107 | 734 by column) · Table A.15 scenario columns I-P (secondary), schools with a school- or district-level BTAM team

School- or district-level multi-person BTAM team[^a] | 1.0 | 1.7 | 0.5 | 4.0 | 2.3 | 11.9 | 12.8 | 11.9

• Initial Decisionmaker
• Scenario Design

cite page 117 Appendix A: Survey Frequencies

Table A.15 Secondary, Outside BTAM team se…: I 0.0, J 0.0, K 0.0, L 0.0, M 0.0, N 0.0, O 0.0, P 0.1

Sample (N = 734 | 139 | 128 | 103 | 134 | 126 | 107 | 734 by column) · Table A.15 scenario columns I-P (secondary), schools with a school- or district-level BTAM team

Outside BTAM team serving our school[^a] | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.1

• Initial Decisionmaker
• Scenario Design

cite page 117 Appendix A: Survey Frequencies

Table A.15 Secondary, MTSS, PBIS, or othe…: I 9.7, J 0.5, K 3.7, L 2.4, M 3.2, N 1.2, O 0.9, P 0.3

Sample (N = 734 | 139 | 128 | 103 | 134 | 126 | 107 | 734 by column) · Table A.15 scenario columns I-P (secondary), schools with a school- or district-level BTAM team

MTSS, PBIS, or other behavioral support team[^a] | 9.7 | 0.5 | 3.7 | 2.4 | 3.2 | 1.2 | 0.9 | 0.3

• Initial Decisionmaker
• Scenario Design

cite page 117 Appendix A: Survey Frequencies

Table A.15 Secondary, Other: I 1.1, J 1.9, K 0.4, L 1.3, M 1.6, N 0.0, O 2.5, P 1.8

Sample (N = 734 | 139 | 128 | 103 | 134 | 126 | 107 | 734 by column) · Table A.15 scenario columns I-P (secondary), schools with a school- or district-level BTAM team

Other (please specify) | 1.1 | 1.9 | 0.4 | 1.3 | 1.6 | 0.0 | 2.5 | 1.8

• Initial Decisionmaker
• Scenario Design

cite page 117 Appendix A: Survey Frequencies

Table A.15 Secondary: N by scenario: I 734, J 139, K 128, L 103, M 134, N 126, O 107, P 734

N | 734 | 139 | 128 | 103 | 134 | 126 | 107 | 734

• Initial Decisionmaker
• Scenario Design

cite page 117 Appendix A: Survey Frequencies

Table A.28: 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

No | 49.5 | 49.0

• BTAM Program
• Initial Decisionmaker

cite page 124 Appendix A: Survey Frequencies

Table A.28: Yes - 50.5 / 51.0

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

• BTAM Program
• Initial Decisionmaker

cite page 124 Appendix A: Survey Frequencies

Table A.28: N - 918 / 866

N | 918 | 866 NOTE: Only respo

• BTAM Program
• Initial Decisionmaker

cite page 124 Appendix A: Survey Frequencies