Survey fielded to a nationally representative sample of school administrators in January 2025
To do so, we drew on data collected via a survey fielded to a nationally representative sample of school administrators in January 2025.
NCIER®
Ch 14: Discussion and Implications
Report pages 108–111: 64 claims on pp. 108–110 (fact 33, statement 5, conclusion 14, conjecture 12).
Claims in this section
Survey sought to understand how BTAM works on the ground and revealed key bright spots
The survey sought to understand how BTAM is working on the ground at K–12 schools and revealed the following key bright spots:
BTAM adoption or an alternative BTAM-like team is nearly ubiquitous across U.S. schools
Adoption of BTAM as part of school safety efforts—or the existence of an alternative BTAM-like team—has become a nearly ubiquitous practice across U.S. schools.
Ten years ago, fewer than half of schools had BTAM teams in place
This is a significant shift relative to ten years ago, when fewer than half of schools had BTAM teams in place.
Schools should shift focus from BTAM adoption to implementation fidelity and refining practices
The rapid growth in schools’ use of BTAM and widespread adoption suggest that schools should shift their focus from BTAM adoption to implementation fidelity and refining practices to ensure consistent and effective implementation.
Ongoing support will be critical for institutionalizing best practices and sustainability
As schools move beyond establishing BTAM programs, ongoing support will be critical for institutionalizing best practices and building capacity for program sustainability.
Foremost challenge is not schools’ initial adoption of BTAM
Even for the few schools that have not yet adopted BTAM—or that might move from using an alternative team to a dedicated multidisciplinary BTAM team—our results indicate that the foremost challenge is not schools’ initial adoption of BTAM.
Most principals said initial implementation was relatively smooth and became effective quickly
When we asked principals who had played a role in establishing their school’s BTAM program questions about the initial implementation phase, most indicated it was relatively smooth and that their program became an effective contributor to safety at their school relatively quickly.
New adopters may need more help sustaining BTAM team function than help getting started
As a result, new adopters of BTAM may need more help to support the continued function of their BTAM team and improve the program’s effectiveness and outcomes over time, as opposed to support from the local community to get a program off the ground.
Discussion: state-level BTAM policies are likely helping schools implement BTAM
State-level policies related to BTAM, whether through legislation or non-codified policy, are likely helping schools implement BTAM.
Schools in states with 2019 mandate or encouragement via non-codified policy are ahead
Our analyses show that schools in states that mandated or otherwise encouraged BTAM implementation at K–12 schools through non-codified policy in 2019 are ahead in terms of their BTAM implementation.
Those states’ schools more likely to have standard meeting schedules, written SOPs and policies
Today, schools in these states are more likely to have standardized meeting schedules for their BTAM teams, as well as written SOPs and defining policy documents for their BTAM programs.
This could be because schools in these states received earlier training and/or funding
This could be because schools in these states received earlier support in the form of training and/or funding for their BTAM programs.
Schools appear to be appropriately scoping BTAM to the most severe, high-risk cases
Responses suggest that schools are appropriately scoping their BTAM programs to focus on the most severe and high-risk cases of student behavior.
A main concern is that schools may cast an overly wide net to low-level incidents
One of the main concerns about BTAM is the possibility that schools may cast an overly wide net, such that their BTAM program addresses low-level behavioral incidents (e.g., talking back to a teacher or other disruptive classroom behavior) best suited for other school behavioral management and student support systems.
Principals’ reports largely suggest the overly-wide-net concern has not played out
Reports from school principals largely suggest this concern has not played out.
Survey results suggest BTAM teams stayed focused on potentially serious safety concerns
Instead, our survey results suggest schools’ BTAM teams have maintained a focus on those incidents that align with their core mission of identifying and intervening in potentially serious school safety concerns.
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.
Report took an in-depth look at the state of BTAM in K–12 public schools
In this report, we took an in-depth look at the state of BTAM in K–12 public schools across the country.
Schools mostly use distinct thresholds to decide which incidents are referred to BTAM teams
distinct thresholds to determine which incidents warrant referral to BTAM teams, particularly in cases of significant concern.
Why inferred The sentence crosses a page break: this quote is the page 109 part and the sentence begins on page 108. Full sentence (pages 108–109): “Both analyses revealed that schools mostly use distinct thresholds to determine which incidents warrant referral to BTAM teams, particularly in cases of significant concern.”
Schools are successfully focusing BTAM on situations most likely to affect safety
Taken together, our results suggest schools are successfully focusing BTAM on situations most likely to affect student and school safety while relying on other behavioral teams or processes for less severe cases—a critical balance that helps maintain the integrity of the behavioral threat assessment process.
Most schools incorporate individualized interventions, tailoring supports to student needs
Most schools are incorporating individualized interventions into plans developed as part of the threat management process, often tailoring supports to meet the specific needs and circumstances of students.
Principals’ responses show schools use a variety of interventions addressing root causes
Principals’ responses demonstrate that schools are using a variety of interventions to address the root cause of student behaviors and treat a broad range of student needs.
Scenario responses reveal schools are not overly relying on any single intervention
Responses to scenario-based questions in particular reveal that schools are not overly relying on any single intervention to address student needs, which is appropriate for the types of complex cases often referred to BTAM teams.
BTAM efforts reflect commitment to supportive measures over exclusionary discipline or police
School BTAM efforts generally reflect a commitment to using supportive measures that address root causes of concerning behaviors, rather than relying primarily on exclusionary discipline practices or referrals to law enforcement.
Discussion: schools prioritize counseling, trusted relationships, skill-building over restriction
Survey results show that schools prioritize interventions, such as counseling with mental health professionals, building trusted relationships with adults, and skill-building services over restrictive measures.
Discussion: even in the most severe scenarios, supportive interventions were the largest share
Even in the most severe scenarios presented to principals, supportive interventions consistently composed the largest share of response strategies.
Over 75 percent rarely or never use exclusionary discipline; 80 percent rarely or never arrest
Sample (N = 1379) · Teams answering exclusionary discipline and arrest/prosecution questions (Figure 9.2)
Over 75 percent said they rarely or never use exclusionary discipline, and 80 percent rarely or never arrest or prosecute students referred to BTAM teams.
Pattern shows BTAM teams function as a preventative approach of early intervention and support
This pattern demonstrates that BTAM teams function as intended—as a preventative approach focused on early intervention and support rather than punishment, helping students address underlying issues while keeping them connected to school.
Parents are a key part of schools’ behavioral threat management processes
Parents are a key part of schools’ behavioral threat management processes.
Only 20 percent of schools directly involve parents in planning; most consult them
Sample (n = undeterminable of 1384) · Teams answering intervention/safety plan components question
Though our survey results show that only 20 percent of schools directly involve parents in the intervention and support planning process, an overwhelming majority consult parents as part of this process.
Schools are not planning interventions in isolation; parent buy-in is key to success
This suggests that schools are not conducting intervention planning in isolation and that parent buy-in is key to the success of an intervention plan.
One-third of schools believe parents’ unwillingness to implement or participate is a key challenge
In fact, one-third of schools believe that parents’ unwillingness to implement or participate in recommended interventions is a key challenge to operating their BTAM program.
Discussion: principals believe BTAM has a net positive impact on safety and school climate
Principals around the country believe that BTAM is having a net positive impact on improving safety at their schools and also helping to create more positive school climates.
Principals think BTAM is decreasing rates of crime, violence and self-harm
Survey responses show that principals think BTAM is decreasing rates of crime and violence at school, as well as rates of self-harm.
Many principals strongly agree BTM is preferred over exclusionary discipline approaches
Many also strongly agree that BTM is a preferred approach to managing student behavior concerns, compared with previous approaches that relied primarily on exclusionary discipline measures.
Survey results identified opportunities for future focus: five continuing challenges
Despite these strong overarching messages, our survey results also identified opportunities for future focus. In particular, principals identified five key continuing challenges:
Even though most schools adopted BTAM, there is considerable variability in approaches
Even though most schools have adopted BTAM, there is still considerable variability in the approaches they use.
Schools often borrow selectively from named programs and blend them with local practices
According to principals’ reports, schools often borrow selectively from nationally recognized, named programs and blend elements from these programs with locally developed practices.
Some schools rely on modified named programs while others opt for fully localized approaches
Schools rely on named programs with modifications tailored to their specific needs, while others opt for fully localized approaches.
Variability shows the importance of flexibility but also presents risks
While the variability highlights the importance of schools’ flexibility to choose and adapt models to be appropriate to their school context, it also presents risks.
Inconsistent implementation may lead to uneven outcomes and hard-to-measure effectiveness at scale
In particular, inconsistencies in implementation across schools may lead to uneven outcomes and challenges in measuring program effectiveness at scale.
Talking about BTAM outcomes is talking about outcomes of individual, differently used approaches
It also means that talking about BTAM outcomes is really talking about the outcomes of individual approaches that schools are using somewhat differently from place to
Why inferred The sentence crosses a page break: this quote is the page 109 part and the sentence continues on page 110. Full sentence (pages 109–110): “It also means that talking about BTAM outcomes is really talking about the outcomes of individual approaches that schools are using somewhat differently from place to place.”
Observing outcomes across BTAM programs will internalize and reflect that variability
Observing outcomes across BTAM programs will internalize and reflect that variability.
Need for greater coherence guiding schools to evidence-based practices with fidelity
In this sense, our results highlight the need for greater coherence in guiding schools toward evidence-based practices that are adaptable to local contexts but maintain fidelity to proven frameworks.
There is considerable variability in training for BTAM members across schools
There is considerable variability in training for BTAM members across schools.
Fewer than half of schools provide annual training; about one-quarter only as needed
Fewer than half of schools provide BTAM team members with annual training, and approximately one-quarter of schools only provide training on an as-needed basis.
Inconsistent training may hinder competencies in risk assessment, bias and intervention matching
This inconsistency in training may hinder the ability of BTAM teams to develop critical competencies, for instance related to assessing risk, mitigating biases, and appropriately matching interventions and supports to individual student needs—all of which are foundational to effective violence prevention.
Urban and high-poverty schools particularly likely to report challenges accessing training
Schools located in urban and high-poverty areas are particularly likely to report challenges accessing training, highlighting obstacles that additional funding sources and support could help address.
A related challenge is lack of standardization across critical BTAM team functions
A related challenge is the lack of standardization across critical BTAM team functions and operations.
Little standardization in team structure, meetings, information gathering, case review, evaluation
There is little standardization in the way of BTAM team structure and meeting frequency, information-gathering and case review processes, and program evaluation.
Principals presented a mixed picture: some structured processes, most less formalized deliberations
Principals presented a mixed picture of how their BTAM teams approach these various elements, with some schools following structured processes but most relying on less formalized deliberations.
Half of schools do not have formal policies guiding their BTAM program and half do not have SOPs
The reality is that half of schools do not have formal policies guiding their BTAM program and half do not have SOPs.
Though many schools may have implemented BTAM, it is not fully integrated and institutionalized
This means that while many schools may have implemented a BTAM program, it is not fully integrated and institutionalized in their school or school district.
Inconsistency underscores need for clearer tools and resources for systematic team operations
This inconsistency underscores the need for clearer tools and resources to help schools establish systematic and effective team operations.
Discussion: considerable variation in how teams deliver interventions and management plans
There is also considerable variation in how BTAM teams deliver interventions and develop management plans for students.
Most teams emphasize individualized interventions but differ in decisionmaking and tools
Although most teams emphasize individualized interventions tailored to student needs, there are wide differences in how teams structure their decisionmaking, draw on inventory resources, and use decision support tools.
Lack of consistency can affect the quality and effectiveness of interventions
This lack of consistency can affect the quality and effectiveness of interventions.
Schools would benefit from clearer guidance and best practices for effective, fair interventions
Schools would benefit from clearer guidance and best practices to ensure that interventions are implemented effectively and fairly.
Need may be driven by strong recent adoption, with many schools adopting in the past five years
The need may be driven by the strong recent adoption of BTAM, with a large percentage of schools adopting the practice in the past five years.
Most schools conduct some review or reflection, but many lack systematic continuous improvement
Although most schools conduct some form of review or reflection process to understand the impact that BTAM is having on student- and school-level outcomes, many lack deep or systematic approaches to continuous improvement.
Only a small percentage used systematic data analysis or validation of intervention delivery
Only a small percentage of schools reported that they engaged in review processes that included systematic data analysis or validation of intervention delivery by appropriately trained staff.
Relying on a single continuous-improvement method is unlikely to yield needed information
Similarly, although many schools are engaging in one activity related to continuous improvement within their BTAM program, relying on a single method is unlikely to yield the kind and quantity of information schools need to ensure that their BTAM program is working well and will continue to do so into the future.
Without multiple robust feedback mechanisms, schools risk missing opportunities to improve BTAM
Without multiple robust mechanisms for gathering feedback and assessing outcomes across cases, schools risk missing opportunities to improve the effectiveness of their BTAM programs and ensure that both specific interventions and the program as a whole are yielding the intended impact.
Top
Find the Perfect Training Class For You