School Community Support

At least three-quarters of schools cited community support, easy adaptation, and no cost issues

Sample (N = 450) · Principals answering the implementation experience agreement statements

For example, at least three-quarters of schools said they believe that their school community was supportive of BTAM adoption; that it was relatively easy to adapt their selected BTAM approach and adjust associated school procedures to meet their needs; and that the financial costs of BTAM did not create issues (see Table 3.1).

• Early Implementation Challenges
• School Community Support

cite page 34 Ch 3: When Did Schools Establish BTAM Teams?

Table 3.1: Staff clearly understood goals and reasons for BTAM: 9 / 21 / 70

Sample (N = 450) · Principals answering the implementation experience agreement statements

Our instructional and other school staff clearly understood the goals and reasons for implementing BTAM. | 9 | 21 | 70

• Early Implementation Challenges
• School Community Support

cite page 35 Ch 3: When Did Schools Establish BTAM Teams?

Table 3.1: BTAM well-matched to culture and leader-staff relationships: 2 / 15 / 82

Sample (N = 450) · Principals answering the implementation experience agreement statements

BTAM was well-matched to our culture and relationships between school leaders and staff. | 2 | 15 | 82

• Early Implementation Challenges
• School Community Support

cite page 35 Ch 3: When Did Schools Establish BTAM Teams?

Table 3.1: School community supportive of BTAM adoption: 2 / 35 / 63

Sample (N = 450) · Principals answering the implementation experience agreement statements

Our school community (e.g., parents, students) were supportive of our school’s adoption of BTAM. | 2 | 35 | 63

• Early Implementation Challenges
• School Community Support

cite page 35 Ch 3: When Did Schools Establish BTAM Teams?

Table 3.1: School staff supportive of BTAM adoption: 1 / 14 / 85

Sample (N = 450) · Principals answering the implementation experience agreement statements

Our school staff was supportive of our school’s adoption of BTAM. | 1 | 14 | 85

• Early Implementation Challenges
• School Community Support

cite page 35 Ch 3: When Did Schools Establish BTAM Teams?

Buy-in, ongoing support, belief the program works, and turnover resilience are especially critical

Buy-in and ongoing support from the school community, belief across multiple groups—leaders, staff, parents, and students—that the program is working to improve school safety, and resilience to staff turnover are especially critical.

• School Community Support
• Sustainability

cite page 100 Ch 13: Sustaining and Improving BTAM Programs over Time

71 percent of principals believe their school community is supportive of BTAM

Sample (N = 1376) · Teams answering community support / challenges / processes / training questions

As shown in Figure 13.1, 71 percent of principals overall, across all school characteristics, believe that their school community is supportive of BTAM.

• School Community Support

cite page 100 Ch 13: Sustaining and Improving BTAM Programs over Time

43 percent of principals perceive their school community as supportive; 27 percent as somewhat suppo

Sample (N = 1376) · Teams answering community support / challenges / processes / training questions

This includes 43 percent who perceive their school community as supportive and 27 percent who perceive their community as somewhat supportive.

• School Community Support

cite page 100 Ch 13: Sustaining and Improving BTAM Programs over Time

Large-school principals slightly likelier than small-school to see community supportive (74 vs 67%)

Sample (N = 1376 total; column N not printed) · Teams answering community support / challenges / processes / training questions

Principals of large schools were slightly more likely than principals of small schools to view their community as supportive of BTAM (74 versus 67 percent, respectively).

• School Community Support
• Subgroup Differences

cite page 100 Ch 13: Sustaining and Improving BTAM Programs over Time

Principals in varied school settings perceive their school community as supportive of BTAM

Principals who serve in a variety of school settings perceive that their school community is supportive of BTAM as a school safety approach.

• School Community Support

cite page 100 Ch 13: Sustaining and Improving BTAM Programs over Time

Only one statistically significant difference in community support by school characteristics

We observed only one statistically significant difference when it comes to school characteristics

• School Community Support
• Subgroup Differences

cite page 100 Ch 13: Sustaining and Improving BTAM Programs over Time

Total: supportive 43 percent, somewhat supportive 27 percent, total 71 percent

Sample (N = 1376) · Teams answering community support / challenges / processes / training questions

Total | 43 | 27 | 71

• School Community Support

cite page 101 Ch 13: Sustaining and Improving BTAM Programs over Time

Level: Elementary: supportive 44 percent, somewhat supportive 26 percent, total 70 percent

Sample (column N undeterminable) · Figure 13.1 subgroup bars (school level, locale, poverty, race/ethnicity, enrollment); each bar is a share of its own subgroup

Level | Elementary | 44 | 26 | 70

• School Community Support
• Subgroup Differences

cite page 101 Ch 13: Sustaining and Improving BTAM Programs over Time

Level: Middle: supportive 42 percent, somewhat supportive 29 percent, total 71 percent

Sample (column N undeterminable) · Figure 13.1 subgroup bars (school level, locale, poverty, race/ethnicity, enrollment); each bar is a share of its own subgroup

Level | Middle | 42 | 29 | 71

• School Community Support
• Subgroup Differences

cite page 101 Ch 13: Sustaining and Improving BTAM Programs over Time

Level: High: supportive 45 percent, somewhat supportive 28 percent, total 73 percent

Sample (column N undeterminable) · Figure 13.1 subgroup bars (school level, locale, poverty, race/ethnicity, enrollment); each bar is a share of its own subgroup

Level | High | 45 | 28 | 73

• School Community Support
• Subgroup Differences

cite page 101 Ch 13: Sustaining and Improving BTAM Programs over Time

Locale: Urban: supportive 42 percent, somewhat supportive 30 percent, total 71 percent

Sample (column N undeterminable) · Figure 13.1 subgroup bars (school level, locale, poverty, race/ethnicity, enrollment); each bar is a share of its own subgroup

Locale | Urban | 42 | 30 | 71

• School Community Support
• Subgroup Differences

cite page 101 Ch 13: Sustaining and Improving BTAM Programs over Time

Locale: Suburban: supportive 42 percent, somewhat supportive 26 percent, total 68 percent

Sample (column N undeterminable) · Figure 13.1 subgroup bars (school level, locale, poverty, race/ethnicity, enrollment); each bar is a share of its own subgroup

Locale | Suburban | 42 | 26 | 68

• School Community Support
• Subgroup Differences

cite page 101 Ch 13: Sustaining and Improving BTAM Programs over Time

Locale: Rural: supportive 46 percent, somewhat supportive 26 percent, total 72 percent

Sample (column N undeterminable) · Figure 13.1 subgroup bars (school level, locale, poverty, race/ethnicity, enrollment); each bar is a share of its own subgroup

Locale | Rural | 46 | 26 | 72

• School Community Support
• Subgroup Differences

cite page 101 Ch 13: Sustaining and Improving BTAM Programs over Time

Neighborhood poverty level: High: supportive 47 percent, somewhat supportive 25 percent, total 72 pe

Sample (column N undeterminable) · Figure 13.1 subgroup bars (school level, locale, poverty, race/ethnicity, enrollment); each bar is a share of its own subgroup

Neighborhood poverty level | High | 47 | 25 | 72

• School Community Support
• Subgroup Differences

cite page 101 Ch 13: Sustaining and Improving BTAM Programs over Time

Neighborhood poverty level: Middle: supportive 42 percent, somewhat supportive 28 percent, total 70

Sample (column N undeterminable) · Figure 13.1 subgroup bars (school level, locale, poverty, race/ethnicity, enrollment); each bar is a share of its own subgroup

Neighborhood poverty level | Middle | 42 | 28 | 70

• School Community Support
• Subgroup Differences

cite page 101 Ch 13: Sustaining and Improving BTAM Programs over Time

Neighborhood poverty level: Low: supportive 43 percent, somewhat supportive 27 percent, total 70 per

Sample (column N undeterminable) · Figure 13.1 subgroup bars (school level, locale, poverty, race/ethnicity, enrollment); each bar is a share of its own subgroup

Neighborhood poverty level | Low | 43 | 27 | 70

• School Community Support
• Subgroup Differences

cite page 101 Ch 13: Sustaining and Improving BTAM Programs over Time

Student racial/ethnic composition: Majority White students: supportive 46 percent, somewhat supporti

Sample (column N undeterminable) · Figure 13.1 subgroup bars (school level, locale, poverty, race/ethnicity, enrollment); each bar is a share of its own subgroup

Student racial/ethnic composition | Majority White students | 46 | 26 | 72

• School Community Support
• Subgroup Differences

cite page 101 Ch 13: Sustaining and Improving BTAM Programs over Time

Student racial/ethnic composition: Majority students of color: supportive 41 percent, somewhat suppo

Sample (column N undeterminable) · Figure 13.1 subgroup bars (school level, locale, poverty, race/ethnicity, enrollment); each bar is a share of its own subgroup

Student racial/ethnic composition | Majority students of color | 41 | 28 | 69

• School Community Support
• Subgroup Differences

cite page 101 Ch 13: Sustaining and Improving BTAM Programs over Time

Enrollment size: Small: supportive 44 percent, somewhat supportive 24 percent, total 67 percent

Sample (column N undeterminable) · Figure 13.1 subgroup bars (school level, locale, poverty, race/ethnicity, enrollment); each bar is a share of its own subgroup

Enrollment size | Small | 44 | 24 | 67

• School Community Support
• Subgroup Differences

cite page 101 Ch 13: Sustaining and Improving BTAM Programs over Time

Enrollment size: Large: supportive 43 percent, somewhat supportive 31 percent, total 74 percent

Sample (column N undeterminable) · Figure 13.1 subgroup bars (school level, locale, poverty, race/ethnicity, enrollment); each bar is a share of its own subgroup

Enrollment size | Large | 43 | 31 | 74

• School Community Support
• Subgroup Differences

cite page 101 Ch 13: Sustaining and Improving BTAM Programs over Time

Figure 13.1 survey item: How supportive is your school community of BTAM? (n = 1,376)

This figure depicts response data from the following survey question: “How supportive is your school community of BTAM as a school safety approach?” (n = 1,376).

• School Community Support
• Survey Methodology

cite page 101 Ch 13: Sustaining and Improving BTAM Programs over Time

Principals not seeing community as supportive said it was neutral

Principals who did not see their school communities as supportive of BTAM said they believe that their communities were neutral on the topic.

• School Community Support

cite page 101 Ch 13: Sustaining and Improving BTAM Programs over Time

Unknown what informs neutral views; communities may lack knowledge or BTAM may not be pervasive

We do not know what informs these perspectives—it could be that school communities do not know enough about school BTAM programs to have an opinion either way or that the application of BTAM is not pervasive enough to make an impression.

• Limitations
• School Community Support

cite page 101 Ch 13: Sustaining and Improving BTAM Programs over Time

Only 2 percent of principals said their school communities were not supportive of their BTAM program

Sample (N = 1376) · Teams answering community support / challenges / processes / training questions

Only 2 percent of principals said they perceive that their school communities were not supportive of their BTAM program.

• School Community Support

cite page 101 Ch 13: Sustaining and Improving BTAM Programs over Time

Reduction in school staff support for the BTAM program: 7 percent

Sample (N = 1376) · Teams answering community support / challenges / processes / training questions

Reduction in school staff support for the BTAM program | 7

• Current Challenges
• School Community Support

cite page 103 Ch 13: Sustaining and Improving BTAM Programs over Time

Reduction in community support for the BTAM program: 2 percent

Sample (N = 1376) · Teams answering community support / challenges / processes / training questions

Reduction in community support for the BTAM program | 2

• Current Challenges
• School Community Support

cite page 103 Ch 13: Sustaining and Improving BTAM Programs over Time

Table A.52, Not supportive: 0.4 / 0.4

Sample (N = 1603 | 1376 by column) · Tables A.52-A.54 columns: official+other school-based teams (1,603); official teams only (1,376)

Not supportive | 0.4 | 0.4

• School Community Support

cite page 138 Appendix A: Survey Frequencies

Table A.52, Somewhat not supportive: 1.6 / 1.3

Sample (N = 1603 | 1376 by column) · Tables A.52-A.54 columns: official+other school-based teams (1,603); official teams only (1,376)

Somewhat not supportive | 1.6 | 1.3

• School Community Support

cite page 138 Appendix A: Survey Frequencies

Table A.52, Neutral: 28.2 / 27.8

Sample (N = 1603 | 1376 by column) · Tables A.52-A.54 columns: official+other school-based teams (1,603); official teams only (1,376)

Neutral | 28.2 | 27.8

• School Community Support

cite page 138 Appendix A: Survey Frequencies

Table A.52, Somewhat supportive: 28.0 / 27.2

Sample (N = 1603 | 1376 by column) · Tables A.52-A.54 columns: official+other school-based teams (1,603); official teams only (1,376)

Somewhat supportive | 28.0 | 27.2

• School Community Support

cite page 138 Appendix A: Survey Frequencies

Table A.52, Supportive: 41.8 / 43.4

Sample (N = 1603 | 1376 by column) · Tables A.52-A.54 columns: official+other school-based teams (1,603); official teams only (1,376)

Supportive | 41.8 | 43.4

• School Community Support

cite page 138 Appendix A: Survey Frequencies

Table A.52 N: 1,603; 1,376

N | 1,603 | 1,376

• Methodology
• School Community Support

cite page 138 Appendix A: Survey Frequencies

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.

• Methodology
• School Community Support

cite page 138 Appendix A: Survey Frequencies

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.

• Methodology
• School Community Support

cite page 138 Appendix A: Survey Frequencies