The State of BTAM in K–12 Public Schools: Claim Map
Every claim from The State of Behavioral Threat Assessment and Management in K–12 Public Schools: Findings from a 2025 American School Leader Panel Survey (RAND Corporation, Homeland Security Operational Analysis Center (RR-A3658-1), 2025), each linked to the highlighted passage on its source page.
- 2,560 claims
- 25 sections
- 107 concepts
- 163 source pages
Sections
-
Title and Copyright
Report pages 1–3: 9 claims on pp. 1–3 (fact 9).
-
About This Report
Report pages 4–5: 30 claims on pp. 4–5 (fact 23, statement 2, evidence 2, conjecture 1, definition 2).
-
Summary
Report pages 6–9: 68 claims on pp. 6–8 (fact 36, statement 8, evidence 3, conclusion 13, conjecture 7, definition 1).
-
Contents
Report pages 10–13: no claims.
-
Figures and Tables
Report pages 14–19: no claims.
-
Ch 1: Introduction
Report pages 20–25: 98 claims on pp. 20–25 (fact 26, statement 33, evidence 18, conclusion 2, conjecture 7, definition 12).
-
Ch 2: Which Schools Have Implemented BTAM?
Report pages 26–31: 108 claims on pp. 26–31 (fact 66, statement 25, evidence 7, conclusion 1, conjecture 7, definition 2).
-
Ch 3: When Did Schools Establish BTAM Teams?
Report pages 32–37: 82 claims on pp. 32–36 (fact 58, statement 11, conclusion 2, conjecture 9, definition 2).
-
Ch 4: What Is the Scope of Schools' BTAM Programs?
Report pages 38–39: 35 claims on pp. 38–39 (fact 18, statement 7, evidence 2, conclusion 1, conjecture 3, definition 4).
-
Ch 5: How Are Schools Operationalizing BTAM?
Report pages 40–51: 207 claims on pp. 40–50 (fact 143, statement 24, evidence 10, conclusion 10, conjecture 14, definition 6).
-
Ch 6: What BTAM Models Do Schools Use?
Report pages 52–53: 33 claims on pp. 52–53 (fact 26, statement 3, evidence 2, conclusion 1, definition 1).
-
Ch 7: Why Did Schools Adopt Specific BTAM Models?
Report pages 54–57: 52 claims on pp. 54–57 (fact 37, statement 7, conclusion 1, conjecture 7).
-
Ch 8: How Do BTAM Teams Assess Risk of Harm?
Report pages 58–61: 71 claims on pp. 58–61 (fact 41, statement 10, evidence 4, conclusion 1, conjecture 6, definition 9).
-
Ch 9: How Do BTAM Teams Develop Intervention Plans?
Report pages 62–69: 105 claims on pp. 62–68 (fact 66, statement 9, evidence 6, conclusion 6, conjecture 12, definition 6).
-
Ch 10: How Do BTAM Teams Monitor Intervention Plans?
Report pages 70–73: 54 claims on pp. 70–72 (fact 32, statement 7, evidence 1, conclusion 4, conjecture 6, definition 4).
-
Ch 11: How Are Schools Using BTAM to Respond to Student Behavior?
Report pages 74–93: 444 claims on pp. 74–92 (fact 290, statement 45, evidence 11, conclusion 11, conjecture 20, definition 67).
-
Ch 12: What Do Principals Think Are the Effects of Their BTAM Programs?
Report pages 94–99: 90 claims on pp. 94–98 (fact 57, statement 5, evidence 3, conclusion 2, conjecture 7, definition 16).
-
Ch 13: Sustaining and Improving BTAM Programs over Time
Report pages 100–107: 147 claims on pp. 100–106 (fact 103, statement 4, evidence 4, conclusion 3, conjecture 12, definition 21).
-
Ch 14: Discussion and Implications
Report pages 108–111: 64 claims on pp. 108–110 (fact 33, statement 5, conclusion 14, conjecture 12).
-
Appendix A: Survey Frequencies
Report pages 112–145: 629 claims on pp. 112–144 (fact 626, statement 1, definition 2).
-
Appendix B: Survey Methods
Report pages 146–155: 143 claims on pp. 146–155 (fact 100, statement 19, evidence 1, conjecture 1, definition 22).
-
Abbreviations
Report pages 156–157: 17 claims on p. 156 (definition 17).
-
References
Report pages 158–161: 58 claims on pp. 158–160 (evidence 58).
-
About the Authors
Report pages 162–162: 9 claims on p. 162 (fact 9).
-
Back Cover
Report pages 163–163: 7 claims on p. 163 (fact 5, evidence 1, conclusion 1).
Concepts
Each concept page gathers every claim that mentions it, with the concepts it appears alongside.
- Survey Methodology 297
- Scenario Design 154
- Subgroup Differences 153
- Intervention Menu 145
- Methodology 138
- Scenario Severity Levels 135
- State Policy Mandates 117
- BTAM Adoption Prevalence 103
- Prior Research 103
- Sample 100
- Adoption Reasons 94
- Initial Decisionmaker 93
- Law Enforcement 89
- Exclusionary Discipline 79
- Team Composition 79
- Scope Severity Focus 76
- Monitoring 75
- BTAM Team 69
- Continuous Improvement 69
- External Teams 65
- Team Roles 63
- Response Restrictive 61
- Key Terms 60
- Intervention Count 58
- Early Implementation Challenges 57
- Named Models 57
- BTAM Program 54
- Limitations 54
- Adoption Timeline 53
- Current Challenges 53
- Intervention Planning 53
- Team Size 50
- Response Support Focused 47
- Information Gathering 43
- Intervention Tailoring 43
- Alternative Teams 41
- Effect School Safety 41
- Perceived Effects 41
- School Community Support 39
- Pre Implementation Planning 37
- District Level Team 36
- Funding 35
- Program Changes 35
- Weighting 35
- Parents Families 34
- Training Frequency 34
- Arrest Prosecution 33
- Mental Health 33
- BTAM Awareness 31
- Data And Records 31
- Leadership Turnover 30
- NTAC Guidance 30
- Effect School Climate 29
- Implications Recommendations 28
- Support Focused Interventions 27
- Assessment Process Types 26
- Standardization Gaps 26
- Effect Violence Suicide 25
- Time To Full Implementation 25
- Team Meetings 23
- Effect Exclusionary Discipline 22
- Implementation Fidelity 21
- Prevention 21
- Variability Of Approaches 21
- Intervention Tools 20
- Doing BTAM Right 19
- Free Mental Health Services 19
- Policy 18
- Threat Assessment Transparency 18
- Grade Level Scope 17
- Response Supportive Discipline 17
- SOPs Protocols 17
- American School Leader Panel 16
- Case Management Systems 16
- Sustainability 16
- Effect Student Staff Safety Feelings 15
- Outside Data Sources 15
- Monitoring Responsibility 14
- Response Notification 14
- Interviews 13
- Referral And Reporting 12
- Scenario Violence Fixation 12
- Locally Developed Models 11
- Response Rates 11
- Scenario Disruptive Behavior 10
- Service Provider Capacity 10
- Staffing Constraints 10
- Measurable Goals 9
- Risk Assessment 9
- Training Source 9
- Response Target Victim 8
- Scenario Physical Altercation 8
- Targeted Violence 8
- Parent Unwillingness 7
- Students With Disabilities 7
- Equity Disparities 6
- Community Partnerships 5
- Scenario Weapon Access 5
- Training Content 5
- No Defined Model 4
- Privacy Information Sharing 4
- State Models 4
- Scenario Explicit Threat 3
- Scenario Substance Use 3
- Training Recipients 2
- Cstag 1
- School Resource Officers 1
Browse by type
- Fact claims 1,804
- Statement claims 225
- Definition claims 194
- Evidence claims 133
- Conjecture claims 131
- Conclusion claims 73
- Inferred claims 22
Downloads
- claims.json Full dataset with absolute URLs
- claims.csv One row per claim: id, page, section, type, tag, title, quote, concepts, url, cite, license
- graph.json Nodes and links for the explorer
- llms.txt Plain-text guide for AI crawlers
How to cite
APA
NCIER. (2025). The State of BTAM in K–12 Public Schools: Claim Map [NCIER Claim Map of: The State of Behavioral Threat Assessment and Management in K–12 Public Schools: Findings from a 2025 American School Leader Panel Survey, RAND Corporation, Homeland Security Operational Analysis Center (RR-A3658-1)]. https://www.ncier.org/research/claim-maps/k12-btam-survey
HTML
<a href="https://www.ncier.org/research/claim-maps/k12-btam-survey">The State of BTAM in K–12 Public Schools: Claim Map</a> (NCIER Claim Map, 2025)
To cite a single claim, link to its page: every claim has its own address that opens the highlighted source passage.
License: CC BY 4.0. Free to reuse with attribution: credit NCIER Claim Map and link to the claim.
Top
Find the Perfect Training Class For You