Authors (first line): Melissa Kay Diliberti, Pauline Moore, Brian A. Jackson
MELISSA KAY DILIBERTI, PAULINE MOORE, BRIAN A. JACKSON,
NCIER®
Methodology
138 claims on pp. 2–163 (fact 85, statement 22, definition 31).
Claims about Methodology
Authors (second line): Kelsey Morris, Wade Buckland, Lina Alathari
KELSEY MORRIS, WADE BUCKLAND, LINA ALATHARI,
Authors (third line): Steven Driscoll, Diana Drysdale, Jacquelyn Glidden
STEVEN DRISCOLL, DIANA DRYSDALE, JACQUELYN GLIDDEN
Approved for public release; distribution is unlimited
Approved for public release; distribution is unlimited.
RAND operates HSOAC for DHS under contract 70RSAT22D00000001
RAND operates the Homeland Security Operational Analysis Center (HSOAC) as an FFRDC for the U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS) under contract 70RSAT22D00000001.
HSOAC provides independent and objective analyses and advice to the government
The HSOAC FFRDC provides the government with independent and objective analyses and advice in core areas important to the department in support of policy development, decisionmaking, alternative approaches, and new ideas on issues of significance.
HSOAC also supports other federal, state, local, tribal, public and private organizations
HSOAC also works with and supports other federal, state, local, tribal, and public- and private-sector organizations that make up the homeland security enterprise.
HSOAC research is undertaken by mutual consent with DHS and organized as discrete tasks
HSOAC’s research is undertaken by mutual consent with DHS and organized as a set of discrete tasks.
Report presents research under task 70US0924F1DHS2132, BTAM Implementation Research
This report presents the results of research and analysis conducted under 70US0924F1DHS2132, “Behavioral Threat Assessment and Management Implementation Research.”
Publication URL: www.rand.org/t/RRA3658-1
For more information on this publication, see www.rand.org/t/RRA3658-1.
Footnote 1: the report focuses on BTAM implementation at school and district level
In this report, we focus on BTAM implementation at the level of K–12 schools and school districts.
Footnote continued: the report does not review how federal law or policy might affect BTAM
include a review of how federal law or policy, or any changes therein, might affect BTAM implementation at K–12 schools.
The report aims to answer 12 questions about BTAM in K–12 public schools as of 2024–2025
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:
Principals are assumed to have responded on behalf of their schools
Although survey invitations were directed solely to school principals, we assume that these principals responded to our survey on behalf of their schools and interpret their data accordingly.
Responses examined by six school characteristics and state policy context
To answer our research questions, we investigated national patterns in educators’ survey responses based on school characteristics and state policy context related to BTAM.
Six school characteristics: grade levels, locale, neighborhood poverty, race/ethnicity, school and d
More specifically, we examined differences in educators’ responses based on six school characteristics: (1) grade levels served, (2) school locale, (3) school neighborhood poverty status, (4) student racial/ethnic composition, (5) school enrollment size, and (6) district enrollment size.
States divided into three groups by their 2019 policy context
We used these data to divide states into three groups, roughly corresponding to their policy context at the time of the review (2019):
Footnote 4: principals' responses speak for their schools; school is the unit of analysis
We interpret principals’ responses as speaking on behalf of their schools and therefore often report results using the school as the unit of analysis (e.g., “percent of schools who said X”).
Footnote 4: perception items reported per principal; terms interchangeable
However, for survey items that ask about principals’ perceptions, we report using the principal (e.g., “percent of principals who said Y”). These terms can be interpreted interchangeably.
Footnote 6: 2019 compilation was the most up-to-date comprehensive source on BTAM requirements
The 2019 compilation of law and policy was the most up-to-date source of comprehensive information on BTAM requirements nationally at the time of survey sampling and planning.
2019 data used as a reference point for the existing BTAM implementation landscape
We used the 2019 data as a reference point for understanding the existing BTAM implementation landscape as reported through the eyes of our survey respondents.
Authors considered whether program aspects such as team size or school versus district housing matte
We also considered to what extent certain aspects of a BTAM program (e.g., the number of people on a BTAM team, whether BTAM is housed at the school or district level) matter for its operations.
Subgroup differences presented only where notable, interesting, or helpful context
As it is infeasible to consider all subgroup differences for all survey items in this report, we present subgroup differences in the text where they were particularly notable or interesting and where they provide helpful context to understand national patterns.
Only subgroup differences statistically significant at p < 0.05 are called out in the text
Unless otherwise noted, we only call out subgroup differences in the text that are statistically significant at the p < 0.05 level.
The report has 12 main chapters, each corresponding to one of the research questions
This report is organized such that each of its 12 main chapters corresponds to one of the research questions listed above.
Survey results used to investigate how many schools had BTAM programs as of 2024–2025
We first use our survey results to investigate how many schools nationally had BTAM programs in place as of the 2024–2025 school year
Figure 2.1 uses 100 boxes to represent the population of U.S. public schools
Figure 2.1 displays the national landscape of BTAM programs in K–12 schools, using 100 boxes to represent the population of U.S. public schools.
Footnote: data initially cover both program types, later narrowing to BTAM-identified programs
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.
Figure 2.1 note: principals answering Don’t know were counted as a no
For principals who responded to the above items with “Don’t know,” we counted their school as a “no.”
Figure 2.1 note: one hundred boxes represent the U.S. population of public schools
One hundred boxes are used to represent the U.S. population of public schools.
Figure 2.1 note: percentages and shading may not align or sum to 100 because of rounding
Percentages and shading may not align or sum to 100 because of rounding.
Authors explored how current BTAM landscape differed across the three 2019 state policy contexts
We explored to what extent the current (as of this writing) BTAM landscape in schools differed across these three early state policy contexts.
Prevalence investigated by level, locale, poverty, racial/ethnic composition, and enrollment
We also investigated the prevalence of BTAM teams (including BTAM-like teams) across different school demographics, including school level, locale, poverty level, student racial/ethnic composition, and student enrollment size.
Figure 2.2 note: principals answering Don’t know were counted as a no
For principals who responded to the above items, “Don’t know,” we counted their school as a “no.”
Figure 2.2 note: one hundred boxes represent the schools in each state policy context
One hundred boxes are used to represent the population of public schools in each state policy context.
Figure 2.2 note: percentages and shading may not align or sum to 100 because of rounding
Percentages and shading may not align or sum to 100 because of rounding.
Figure 2.3 note: bars may not sum to totals because of rounding
Bars may not sum to totals because of rounding.
Implementation analysis limited to principals present for initial implementation
We then focus in on what implementation looked like among the subset of principals who were around for the initial implementation of their school’s official BTAM program.
Principals who did not know how long the team had been in place were excluded
We excluded principals who did not know how long the BTAM team had been in place at their school.
Arrow width is correlated with the share of teams formed in each period
The width of the arrows is correlated with the share of teams formed during this period.
Figure 4.1 asterisk marks statistically significant official versus unofficial team differences
An asterisk (*) indicates that the percentage of principals in schools with official BTAM teams who reported their team responded to that type of student behavior was statistically significantly different from the percentage of principals in schools with unofficial BTAM teams who said similarly.
cite page 39 Ch 4: What Is the Scope of Schools' BTAM Programs?
BTAM operations compared by team size, team level and school characteristics
Throughout our analysis, we consider how and to what extent differences in the operation of BTAM programs may be related to factors such as BTAM team size, team level (school-level only, district-level only, or both), and other school characteristics.
Note: 71 percent of principals extremely familiar with BTAM
Sample (N = 1441) · Appendix A table base (respondents answering the table question; see note for tables)
The majority of principals (71 percent) said they are extremely familiar with BTAM (e.g., they are a member of the team or lead it or otherwise have detailed knowledge).
Note: another 25 percent of principals at least somewhat familiar with BTAM
Sample (N = 1441) · Appendix A table base (respondents answering the table question; see note for tables)
Another 25 percent said they were at least somewhat familiar (e.g., “you have referred students and/or have knowledge of the team’s processes”).
Figure 5.1 note: bars may not sum to totals because of rounding
Bars may not sum to totals because of rounding.
Note: principals were asked which staff they have at school (Table A.5)
In another survey item, we asked principals which types of staff members they have at their school, including counselors, nurses, social workers, psychologists, and law enforcement officers (see Appendix A, Table A.5).
Note: staff present at school assumed to be those serving on the BTAM team
If schools had these personnel on staff either part time or full time, we assumed that it was these internal personnel who would be those serving on the BTAM team.
Note: roles on team but not on staff presumed to be played by outside individuals
In cases where schools told us that they did not have these individuals at their school but did have that role represented on their BTAM team, we presumed that role was played by individuals from outside the school.
Note: administrators, instructional staff, education specialists assumed internal; non-school law en
We also assumed that some positions (e.g., school and district administrators, instructional staff, education specialists) are always internal to the school and that, by definition, non-school-based law enforcement personnel are always external to the school.
Team size inferred from roles selected by principals, assuming one person per role
We also used principals’ responses to our question about which personnel were represented on their school’s BTAM team to infer how many people were on the team overall, assuming one person per role.
Analysis examined likelihood of personnel types on BTAM teams given team size
To understand how BTAM team membership changes as these teams increase in size (i.e., which types of personnel are added as teams grow), we investigated the likelihood of various types of personnel being on a BTAM teams given team size.
Analysis focuses on schools with three to eight team members because few teams fall outside
We focus on schools with between three and eight team members because there are very few schools with BTAM teams that fall outside this range.
Figure 5.2 note: percentages may not sum to 100 percent because of rounding
Sample (no n: a percentage change, not a share of a sample) · a percentage that is not a share of a sample (e.g. a percentage-point change or a weighted estimate of the population)
Percentages may not sum to 100 percent because of rounding.
Figure 5.3 note: teams with fewer than three members omitted because results are not reliable
We omit results for teams with less than three members; very few schools had BTAM teams with fewer than three members, so results are not reliable.
Table 6.1 rows may not sum to 100 percent because of rounding
Sample (no n: a percentage change, not a share of a sample) · a percentage that is not a share of a sample (e.g. a percentage-point change or a weighted estimate of the population)
Rows may not sum to 100 percent because of rounding.
Rows may not sum to 100 percent because of rounding
Sample (no n: a percentage change, not a share of a sample) · a percentage that is not a share of a sample (e.g. a percentage-point change or a weighted estimate of the population)
Rows may not sum to 100 percent because of rounding.
Chapter focuses on the 82 percent of surveyed schools with an official BTAM team
Sample (n = 1408 of 1746) · All principals who completed the survey and received a weight (weighted to national K-12 public school principals/schools)
We focus on the 82 percent of schools in our survey that told us they had an official BTAM team.
cite page 62 Ch 9: How Do BTAM Teams Develop Intervention Plans?
Figure 9.1 includes only schools with a school- or district-level BTAM team
Includes only those who said their school has a school- or district-level BTAM team.
cite page 65 Ch 9: How Do BTAM Teams Develop Intervention Plans?
Figure 9.1 bars may not sum to totals because of rounding
Bars may not sum to totals because of rounding.
cite page 65 Ch 9: How Do BTAM Teams Develop Intervention Plans?
Figure 9.2 includes only schools with a school- or district-level BTAM team
Includes only those who said their school has a school- or district-level BTAM team.
cite page 67 Ch 9: How Do BTAM Teams Develop Intervention Plans?
Figure 9.2 bars may not sum to totals because of rounding; some labels removed
Bars may not sum to totals because of rounding. Some data labels have been removed for readability.
cite page 67 Ch 9: How Do BTAM Teams Develop Intervention Plans?
Chapter focuses on the 82 percent of schools with official BTAM teams
Sample (n = 1408 of 1746) · All principals who completed the survey and received a weight (weighted to national K-12 public school principals/schools)
We focus on the 82 percent of schools that stated in the survey they had official BTAM teams.
cite page 70 Ch 10: How Do BTAM Teams Monitor Intervention Plans?
Fig 10.1 includes only schools with a school- or district-level BTAM team
Includes only those who said their school has a school- or district-level BTAM team.
cite page 71 Ch 10: How Do BTAM Teams Monitor Intervention Plans?
Fig 10.1 bars may not sum to totals because of rounding
Bars may not sum to totals because of rounding.
cite page 71 Ch 10: How Do BTAM Teams Monitor Intervention Plans?
Fig 10.2 includes only schools whose teams actively monitor some or all students
Includes only those who said their school has a school- or district-level BTAM team and that their team engages in active monitoring of some or all students’ progress.
cite page 72 Ch 10: How Do BTAM Teams Monitor Intervention Plans?
Fig 10.2 response options have been truncated for readability
Response options have been truncated for readability.
cite page 72 Ch 10: How Do BTAM Teams Monitor Intervention Plans?
This chapter covers only schools with official BTAM teams
Note that this chapter also only presents results for schools that had official BTAM teams.
cite page 74 Ch 11: How Are Schools Using BTAM to Respond to Student Behavior?
Schools with other BTAM-like teams or none also answered scenarios but are omitted
Schools that had other school-based BTAM-like behavior teams or no BTAM teams also answered questions about these scenarios, as described in Appendix B.
cite page 74 Ch 11: How Are Schools Using BTAM to Respond to Student Behavior?
Schools with other BTAM-like teams or no teams are omitted from this chapter's analyses
These schools are omitted from our analyses here.
cite page 74 Ch 11: How Are Schools Using BTAM to Respond to Student Behavior?
Fig 11.1 includes only respondents whose school has a school- or district-level BTAM team
Includes only those who said their school has a school- or district-level BTAM team.
cite page 78 Ch 11: How Are Schools Using BTAM to Respond to Student Behavior?
Some data labels were removed from Fig 11.1 for readability
Some data labels have been removed for readability.
cite page 78 Ch 11: How Are Schools Using BTAM to Respond to Student Behavior?
Fig 11.2 includes only respondents whose school has a school- or district-level BTAM team
Includes only those who said their school has a school- or district-level BTAM team.
cite page 80 Ch 11: How Are Schools Using BTAM to Respond to Student Behavior?
Some data labels were removed from Fig 11.2 for readability
Some data labels have been removed for readability.
cite page 80 Ch 11: How Are Schools Using BTAM to Respond to Student Behavior?
Respondents selected all that apply; figure shows top three most commonly selected interventions
Respondents were instructed to select all that apply out of a list of interventions presented, and we display the top three most commonly selected interventions.
cite page 82 Ch 11: How Are Schools Using BTAM to Respond to Student Behavior?
Figure 11.4: respondents selected all that apply
Respondents were instructed to select all that apply.
cite page 85 Ch 11: How Are Schools Using BTAM to Respond to Student Behavior?
Figure 11.4: some data labels removed for readability
Some data labels have been removed for readability.
cite page 85 Ch 11: How Are Schools Using BTAM to Respond to Student Behavior?
Figure 11.4: some response options truncated for readability; full text in Table 11.2
Some response options have also been truncated for readability.
cite page 85 Ch 11: How Are Schools Using BTAM to Respond to Student Behavior?
Figure 11.5: respondents selected all that apply
Respondents were instructed to select all that apply.
cite page 87 Ch 11: How Are Schools Using BTAM to Respond to Student Behavior?
Figure 11.5: outliers were removed for readability
Outliers were removed for readability.
cite page 87 Ch 11: How Are Schools Using BTAM to Respond to Student Behavior?
Analysis examined distribution of interventions across categories, overall and by scenario
We then investigated what the distribution of interventions looks like across these categories and individually across each scenario.
cite page 87 Ch 11: How Are Schools Using BTAM to Respond to Student Behavior?
Chapter data focus on schools with official BTAM teams and continuous improvement
We present the data in this chapter with an eye toward continuous improvement, focusing again on those schools with official BTAM teams.
cite page 100 Ch 13: Sustaining and Improving BTAM Programs over Time
Figure 13.1 includes only principals whose school has a school- or district-level BTAM team
Includes only those who said their school has a school- or district-level BTAM team.
cite page 101 Ch 13: Sustaining and Improving BTAM Programs over Time
Figure 13.1 bars may not sum to totals because of rounding
Bars may not sum to totals because of rounding.
cite page 101 Ch 13: Sustaining and Improving BTAM Programs over Time
Figure 13.2 includes only principals whose school has a school- or district-level BTAM team
Includes only those who said their school has a school- or district-level BTAM team.
cite page 102 Ch 13: Sustaining and Improving BTAM Programs over Time
Figure 13.2 bars may not sum to totals because of rounding
Bars may not sum to totals because of rounding.
cite page 102 Ch 13: Sustaining and Improving BTAM Programs over Time
Figure 13.3 includes only principals whose school has a school- or district-level BTAM team
Includes only those who said their school has a school- or district-level BTAM team.
cite page 103 Ch 13: Sustaining and Improving BTAM Programs over Time
Figure 13.4 includes only principals whose school has a school- or district-level BTAM team
Includes only those who said their school has a school- or district-level BTAM team.
cite page 105 Ch 13: Sustaining and Improving BTAM Programs over Time
Figure 13.4 percentages do not sum to 100 percent because of rounding
Sample (no n: a percentage change, not a share of a sample) · a percentage that is not a share of a sample (e.g. a percentage-point change or a weighted estimate of the population)
Percentages do not sum to 100 percent because of rounding.
cite page 105 Ch 13: Sustaining and Improving BTAM Programs over Time
Figure 13.5 includes only principals whose school has a school- or district-level BTAM team
Includes only those who said their school has a school- or district-level BTAM team.
cite page 106 Ch 13: Sustaining and Improving BTAM Programs over Time
Figure 13.5 asterisk marks statistically significant small-team versus large-team differences
An asterisk (*) indicates that the percentage of principals in schools with small BTAM teams who said their team engages in a specific review and reflection process was statistically significantly different from the percentage of principals in schools with large BTAM teams who said similarly.
cite page 106 Ch 13: Sustaining and Improving BTAM Programs over Time
Table A.48 note: Only respondents who said their school has a school- or district-level BTAM team
Only respondents who said their school has a school- or district-level BTAM team (or an alternative team that performs BTAM-like functions) saw this question.
Table A.49 note: n = 1,377. Rows may not sum to 100 percent because of rounding.
Sample (no n: a percentage change, not a share of a sample) · a percentage that is not a share of a sample (e.g. a percentage-point change or a weighted estimate of the population)
n = 1,377. Rows may not sum to 100 percent because of rounding.
Table A.49 note: Only respondents who said their school has a school- or district-level BTAM team
Only respondents who said their school has a school- or district-level BTAM team (or an alternative team that performs BTAM-like functions) saw this question.
Table A.49 note: Table only includes data from respondents who said their school has a school- or
Table only includes data from respondents who said their school has a school- or district-level BTAM team, not respondents who said they have an alternative team that performs BTAM-like functions.
Table A.50 note: Columns may not sum to 100 percent because of rounding.
Sample (no n: a percentage change, not a share of a sample) · a percentage that is not a share of a sample (e.g. a percentage-point change or a weighted estimate of the population)
Columns may not sum to 100 percent because of rounding.
Table A.50 note: Only respondents who said their school has a school- or district-level BTAM team
Only respondents who said their school has a school- or district-level BTAM team (or an alternative team that performs BTAM-like functions) saw this question.
Table A.51 note: Respondents were instructed to select all that apply.
Respondents were instructed to select all that apply.
Table A.51 note: Only respondents who said their school has a school- or district-level BTAM team
Only respondents who said their school has a school- or district-level BTAM team (or an alternative team that performs BTAM-like functions) saw this question.
Table A.52 note: Columns may not sum to 100 percent because of rounding.
Sample (no n: a percentage change, not a share of a sample) · a percentage that is not a share of a sample (e.g. a percentage-point change or a weighted estimate of the population)
Columns may not sum to 100 percent because of rounding.
Table A.52 note: Only respondents who said their school has a school- or district-level BTAM team
Only respondents who said their school has a school- or district-level BTAM team (or an alternative team that performs BTAM-like functions) saw this question.
Table A.53 note: Columns may not sum to 100 percent because of rounding.
Sample (no n: a percentage change, not a share of a sample) · a percentage that is not a share of a sample (e.g. a percentage-point change or a weighted estimate of the population)
Columns may not sum to 100 percent because of rounding.
Table A.53 note: Only respondents who said their school has a school- or district-level BTAM team
Only respondents who said their school has a school- or district-level BTAM team (or an alternative team that performs BTAM-like functions) saw this question.
Table A.54 note: Columns may not sum to 100 percent because of rounding.
Sample (no n: a percentage change, not a share of a sample) · a percentage that is not a share of a sample (e.g. a percentage-point change or a weighted estimate of the population)
Columns may not sum to 100 percent because of rounding.
Table A.54 note: Only respondents who said their school has a school- or district-level BTAM team
Only respondents who said their school has a school- or district-level BTAM team (or an alternative team that performs BTAM-like functions) saw this question.
Table A.55 note: Columns may not sum to 100 percent because of rounding.
Sample (no n: a percentage change, not a share of a sample) · a percentage that is not a share of a sample (e.g. a percentage-point change or a weighted estimate of the population)
Columns may not sum to 100 percent because of rounding.
Table A.55 note: Only respondents who said their school has a school- or district-level BTAM team
Only respondents who said their school has a school- or district-level BTAM team (or an alternative team that performs BTAM-like functions) saw this question.
Table A.56 note: Respondents were instructed to select all that apply.
Respondents were instructed to select all that apply.
Table A.56 note: Only respondents who said their school has a school- or district-level BTAM team
Only respondents who said their school has a school- or district-level BTAM team (or an alternative team that performs BTAM-like functions) saw this question.
Methodology consistent across ASLP surveys; methods updated from Jackson et al., 2023
As our methodology for collecting and analyzing survey data remains relatively consistent across ASLP surveys, the description of our methods below is updated from a previous publication analyzing results from another ASLP survey focused on school safety (Jackson et al., 2023).
Samplewide and subgroup-specific means and proportions reported, weighted
We report samplewide and subgroup-specific means and proportions of variables of interest, weighted using the survey weights we describe in the previous section.
Principals' perceptions can vary by school context, so differences by school characteristics examine
Because principals’ perceptions and experiences can vary depending on their school context, we examined differences in educators’ responses by school characteristics (in addition to their state policy context).
Differences examined by grade level, school and district enrollment, locale, poverty, racial/ethnic
More specifically, we examined differences by school grade level, school and district enrollment size, locale, poverty status, and student racial/ethnic composition.
School and district demographics obtained by linking to CCD and EDGE poverty estimates
We obtained data on school and district demographics by linking survey data files to the Common Core of Data (CCD) and the Education Demographic and Geographic Estimates (EDGE) School Neighborhood Poverty Estimates, both issued by NCES.
Category: school grade level (elementary, middle, and high)
school grade level (elementary, middle, and high)
Category: school locale (urban, suburban, and rural)
school locale (urban, suburban, and rural)
Majority students of color: more than half Black, Hispanic, Asian, PI, AI/AN or two or more races
school student racial/ethnic composition (schools in which more than half of students were Black, Hispanic, Asian, Pacific Islander, American Indian/Alaska Native, or of two or more races were categorized as having majority students of color, with the remaining schools categorized as having majority White students.)
Locale aligns with NCES four-category definition, with towns collapsed into rural
Our definition of locale aligns with the four-category definition of locale used by NCES, with the exception that we collapsed those located in towns into the rural category.
School neighborhood poverty: low, middle, or high based on neighborhood income-to-poverty ratio (IPR
school neighborhood poverty (low, middle, or high poverty based on the income-to-poverty ratio [IPR] for the neighborhood surrounding the school.
IPR is percentage of family income above or below the poverty threshold; ranges from 0 to 999
IPR is the percentage of family income that is above or below the federal poverty threshold set for the family’s size and structure and ranges from 0 to 999.
Schools with an IPR of 200 or less categorized as high poverty
Schools with an IPR less than or equal to 200 were categorized as high poverty.
Schools with an IPR of 401 or more categorized as low poverty
Schools with an IPR of greater than or equal to 401 were categorized as low poverty.
Remaining schools categorized as middle poverty
Remaining schools were categorized as middle poverty.
School enrollment: fewer than 450 students small, the remainder large
school enrollment size (schools with fewer than 450 students were categorized as small, whereas the remainder were categorized as large.)
District enrollment: fewer than 10,000 students small; 10,000 or more large
district enrollment size (districts serving fewer than 10,000 students were categorized as small, whereas districts serving 10,000 students or more were categorized as large.)
Each principal's school belongs to multiple of the subgroup categories
It is important to keep in mind that each principal who took our survey is in a school that belongs to multiple of these categories—for example, a principal in a small, rural elementary school in a small district that serves majority White students in a relatively lower-income neighborhood in a state that does not address BTAM in state policy.
Only subgroup differences significant at the 5 percent level described, unless otherwise noted
Sample (no n: a percentage change, not a share of a sample) · a percentage that is not a share of a sample (e.g. a percentage-point change or a weighted estimate of the population)
In this report, we describe only those differences among principal subgroups that are statistically significant at the 5 percent level, unless otherwise noted.
No multiple hypothesis test corrections applied because the study is exploratory
Because of the exploratory nature of this study, we did not apply multiple hypothesis test corrections.
Back cover: survey was fielded in January 2025
The survey was fielded in January 2025.
Top
Find the Perfect Training Class For You