BTAM practice has grown significantly since data began in 2015–2016
the practice of BTAM has experienced significant growth at schools around the country since data on the topic first became available for the 2015–2016 school year
NCIER®
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).
Claims in this section
Timing analysis focuses on roughly 1,600 schools with official or BTAM-like team
we focus on the subset of roughly 1,600 schools in our survey sample that reported having an official BTAM team or a BTAM-like team.
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 asked in January 2025 when their BTAM or similar team was formed
We asked principals in January 2025 when their school’s BTAM team (or alternative school-based team that functions similarly to a BTAM team) was formed.
Mid-year asking makes team-duration responses slightly difficult to interpret
Note that we asked principals this question midway through the 2024–2025 school year, making it slightly difficult to interpret principals’ responses about how long their BTAM team had been in place.
A minority of principals reported teams formed five to eight years ago or earlier
As shown in Figure 3.1, a minority of principals reported having BTAM teams that were formed five to eight years ago, or even earlier.
53 percent of principals reported teams formed in the past two to four school years
Sample (N = 1505) · Schools with BTAM team, excluding principals who did not know how long the team had been in place
Most principals (53 percent) reported that their BTAM teams were formed in the past two to four school years.
Timing corresponds with post-COVID behavior spikes and high-profile school shootings
This timing corresponds with at least two notable trends: (1) the return to in-person schooling after the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic and associated spikes in student behavior problems, such as minor classroom disruptions and student fights (NCES, 2022; Peetz, 2025); and (2) high-profile school shootings throughout the country, which spurred renewed attention to behavioral threat assessment in schools and led directly to changes in state policy (WFTS Webteam, 2018; Higgins, 2025).
Principal-recalled start dates largely align with federal trend data in Figure 1.1
results from our nationally representative sample of principals who were asked to recall when their BTAM programs began largely to align with federal trend data presented in Figure 1.1.
Both data sources suggest a significant increase in BTAM implementation in the past five years
Specifically, both data sources suggest a significant increase in BTAM implementation in approximately the past five years.
Figure 3.1 displays timing of BTAM team formation at all public schools
Nevertheless, Figure 3.1 uses principals’ responses to this question to display a representation of the timing of the formation of BTAM teams at all public schools across the country.
Figure 3.1: 9 or more years ago: 12 percent of teams formed
Sample (N = 1505) · Schools with BTAM team, excluding principals who did not know how long the team had been in place
9 or more years ago | 12 percent
Figure 3.1: 5 to 8 years ago: 21 percent of teams formed
Sample (N = 1505) · Schools with BTAM team, excluding principals who did not know how long the team had been in place
5 to 8 years ago | 21 percent
Figure 3.1: 2 to 4 years ago: 53 percent of teams formed
Sample (N = 1505) · Schools with BTAM team, excluding principals who did not know how long the team had been in place
2 to 4 years ago | 53 percent
Figure 3.1: in the past year: 14 percent of teams formed
Sample (N = 1505) · Schools with BTAM team, excluding principals who did not know how long the team had been in place
in the past year | 14 percent
Figure 3.1 survey question: how many school years the BTAM team has been in place (n = 1,505)
This figure depicts response data from the following survey question: “Approximately how many school years has this BTAM team been in place?” (n = 1,505).
Only principals with a school- or district-level BTAM or equivalent team received the question
Only those who said their school has a school- or district-level BTAM team (or another team not called a BTAM team that functions as a BTAM team) received this question.
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.
Effective long-term program management requires processes to adjust the program over time
Because almost no program is implemented perfectly from the start, and local contexts often change over time in response to shifting circumstances and student needs, effective long-term program management requires integrating processes and activities designed to adjust the program over time to maintain or to improve performance (see discussion in Cook et al., 2019).
"Adaptation" means adjusting a named model to match local needs
During implementation efforts, such changes are often labeled “adaptation”—adjusting a named model to match local needs.
Survey asked how schools adjusted their selected BTAM models during initial implementation
We probed this process of adaptation in survey questions that asked about how schools had adjusted their selected BTAM models during the initial implementation phase.
Schools can encounter challenges running BTAM early and later
Schools can also encounter other challenges when running their BTAM programs, both early during initial implementation and also later on.
Effective implementation requires processes to identify issues and opportunities
Effective implementation requires processes and activities that can help identify issues and opportunities to improve program performance as they arise.
Teams must identify specific actions and have processes to implement change
It also requires teams to identify specific actions in response to these identified issues or opportunities and have processes in place to implement change.
Example: school may find BTAM not serving a specific student population effectively
For example, a school might conclude that its BTAM program is not serving a specific population of students effectively: An example of such a situation could be students in special education programs being assessed as posing significantly different levels of threat compared with general education students exhibiting similar concerning behavior.
School might add a special education professional, collect data, or create decision aids
In this case, a school might determine that changes need to be made to their threat assessment process, for instance, by adding a special education professional to the BTAM team; collecting additional data to support assessments; or creating new decision aids that can help the BTAM team be more consistent, fair, and effective across all referred cases.
Most schools have already implemented BTAM (see Figure 2.1)
Although most schools around the country have already implemented a BTAM program (see Figure 2.1), we present data on initial implementation for two reasons.
Data could help the roughly one in five schools that might still adopt avoid past challenges
First, these data could help the roughly one in five schools that might still adopt and implement an official BTAM program avoid challenges schools have experienced in the past.
Early-challenge data alongside later challenges can show how struggles change as programs mature
Second, presenting data about early implementation challenges alongside data on later challenges can shed light on how schools’ struggles with BTAM might change over time as programs become more established.
Later discussion covers changes since implementation, current challenges, continuous improvement
The discussion then shifts to the changes that schools have made to their BTAM efforts since implementation, challenges they told us they are facing, and the processes they have built into their programs to support continuous improvement efforts.
Schools typically had positive experiences when first implementing their chosen BTAM approach
Schools typically had positive experiences when first implementing their chosen BTAM approach.
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).
Data suggest schools can implement a BTAM model successfully with modest support
These data suggest that schools can successfully implement a BTAM model with modest support—even when adapting it to local contexts.
52 percent of schools noted one or more initial implementation challenges
Sample (N = 450) · Principals answering the implementation experience agreement statements
That said, 52 percent of schools did note one or more challenges related to initial implementation.
Among schools with challenges, most reported only one or two
Among those schools that did experience challenges in this phase, most only reported one or two.
Three specific challenges rose to the top, yet relatively few schools experienced them
In reviewing principals’ responses, three specific challenges did rise to the top—even so, relatively few schools experienced them during the initial implementation stage.
A quarter of schools lacked staff time; one-fifth could not find service providers with capacity
Sample (N = 450) · Principals answering the implementation experience agreement statements
A quarter of schools struggled to find the staff time required to implement BTAM, and one-fifth could not identify school and local service providers that had enough capacity to support BTAM efforts (e.g., counselors, mental health treatment providers).
One-sixth of schools could not identify readily available training options
Sample (N = 450) · Principals answering the implementation experience agreement statements
One-sixth of schools could also not identify readily available training options.
Survey suggests most principals believe implementation proceeded smoothly
Overall, our survey suggests that most principals believe that implementation of their school BTAM program proceeded smoothly.
Smooth implementation could help explain the increase in BTAM adoption over the past decade
The trend could help explain the significant increase in BTAM adoption witnessed over the past decade.
"Working well" question asked of principals present at implementation who saw program as effective
We asked those principals involved in the initial implementation of a specific BTAM program and who perceived that the BTAM program was working effectively at their schools how long it took them to get the BTAM program to the point of “working well.”
Most said one to two years: 38 percent one year, 40 percent two, 11 percent three or four
Sample (N = 439) · Appendix A table base (respondents answering the table question; see note for tables)
Most principals said it took between one and two school years to get to that point, while 38 percent said it took one school year, 40 percent said it took two school years, and 11 percent said it took three or four school years.
Footnote: challenge questions asked only of those using a model and present at implementation
The questions on challenges experienced during the initial implementation phase were only asked to principals who said their team was using a named model that we listed, an “Other” model, or a locally created one and who said they were around for the initial implementation of this model.
Footnote: schools designed their own approaches, so positive experiences are not surprising
Because schools tended to design their own approaches to BTAM, it is not surprising that many typically had positive experiences implementing a program that met their needs (see also Chapter 6 for more details on initial program adoption).
Footnote: 11 percent were not sure how long it took their teams to become effective
Sample (N = 439) · Appendix A table base (respondents answering the table question; see note for tables)
Eleven percent were not sure how long it took for their teams to become effective.
Section discusses schools' challenges when first implementing their chosen BTAM program
In this section, we discuss the extent to which schools told us that they experienced challenges when first implementing their chosen BTAM program.
Table 3.1: Enough staff time to implement BTAM: 24 / 20 / 55
Sample (N = 450) · Principals answering the implementation experience agreement statements
We had enough staff time to implement BTAM. | 24 | 20 | 55
Table 3.1: Service providers had enough capacity: 21 / 13 / 67
Sample (N = 450) · Principals answering the implementation experience agreement statements
Our school and local service providers had enough capacity to support our BTAM efforts (e.g., counselors, mental health treatment providers). | 21 | 13 | 67
Table 3.1: Training opportunities readily available: 16 / 19 / 66
Sample (N = 450) · Principals answering the implementation experience agreement statements
Training opportunities for BTAM team members were readily available. | 16 | 19 | 66
Table 3.1: Staged process integrated smoothly into school systems: 12 / 26 / 62
Sample (N = 450) · Principals answering the implementation experience agreement statements
We were able to use a staged process to implement BTAM so that it integrated smoothly into school systems broadly speaking. | 12 | 26 | 62
Table 3.1: Financial costs did not create any issues: 11 / 15 / 74
Sample (N = 450) · Principals answering the implementation experience agreement statements
The financial costs of implementing BTAM did not create any issues. | 11 | 15 | 74
Table 3.1: No issues sharing information among partners: 10 / 26 / 64
Sample (N = 450) · Principals answering the implementation experience agreement statements
We had no issues sharing information among partners for BTAM purposes (e.g., FERPA or HIPAA did not hinder information-sharing). | 10 | 26 | 64
Table 3.1: Easy to pick the BTAM program from options available: 10 / 40 / 50
Sample (N = 450) · Principals answering the implementation experience agreement statements
It was easy for us to pick the BTAM program we wanted to use from the options available. | 10 | 40 | 50
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
Table 3.1: Existing records and systems easy to use for BTAM: 9 / 17 / 74
Sample (N = 450) · Principals answering the implementation experience agreement statements
Our existing school records and other systems were easy to use in support of BTAM. | 9 | 17 | 74
Table 3.1: Easy to coordinate with outside partners: 8 / 16 / 75
Sample (N = 450) · Principals answering the implementation experience agreement statements
It was easy to coordinate with relevant outside partners while implementing BTAM (e.g., police, service providers). | 8 | 16 | 75
Table 3.1: Easy to adjust school procedures to integrate BTAM: 7 / 17 / 76
Sample (N = 450) · Principals answering the implementation experience agreement statements
It was easy to adjust school procedures to integrate BTAM into the way we dealt with student behavior and discipline issues previously. | 7 | 17 | 76
Table 3.1: BTAM program easy to adapt to local needs: 5 / 17 / 78
Sample (N = 450) · Principals answering the implementation experience agreement statements
The BTAM program we chose was easy to adapt to our local needs. | 5 | 17 | 78
Table 3.1: Clear BTAM was a better approach than previous ones: 3 / 21 / 76
Sample (N = 450) · Principals answering the implementation experience agreement statements
It was clear BTAM was a better approach to managing student behavior concerns relative to our previous approaches. | 3 | 21 | 76
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
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
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
Table 3.1 survey question: agreement with positive BTAM implementation statements (n = 450)
This table depicts response data from the following survey question: “The following table includes a number of positive statements that could describe the implementation of behavioral threat assessment and management (BTAM) in a school. Indicate the extent to which you agree or disagree with each statement as a descriptor of your experience implementing BTAM in your school” (n = 450).
Table 3.1 includes only schools with a BTAM team using a model and present at initial implementation
The table includes only those who said that their school has a school- or district-level BTAM team; their team was using a named model that we listed, an “Other” model, or a locally created one; and they were around for the initial implementation of this model.
FERPA = Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act; HIPAA = Health Insurance Portability Act
FERPA = Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act; HIPAA = Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act.
Time to effectiveness examined for cohorts of adopters, as shown in Figure 3.2
That is, we examined the time to effectiveness for the different cohorts of BTAM adopters as shown in Figure 3.2.
93 percent of earliest adopters (9+ years ago) perceive their teams as somewhat or very effective
Sample (column N undeterminable) · Earliest adopters (BTAM team in place 9+ years)
Looking at the earliest adopters (those schools that adopted BTAM teams nine or more years ago), 93 percent perceive that their BTAM teams are at the point where they are somewhat or very effective at maintaining school safety.
Only 23 percent of earliest adopters reached effectiveness within the first school year
Sample (column N undeterminable) · Earliest adopters (BTAM team in place 9+ years)
Only 23 percent of these earliest adopters report that they had reached effectiveness within the first school year.
Within two school years, most early adopters felt teams were somewhat or very effective
Within two school years, most early adopters said they feel that their BTAM teams were somewhat or very effective at main-
Figure 3.2: Earliest adopters: [unlabeled] / 52 / 75 / 81
Sample (column N undeterminable) · Earliest adopters (BTAM team in place 9+ years)
Earliest adopters (9+ school years ago) | [unlabeled] | 52 | 75 | 81
Figure 3.2: Midtime adopters: 22 / 66 / 87 / 89
Sample (column N undeterminable) · Midtime adopters
Midtime adopters (5 to 8 school years ago) | 22 | 66 | 87 | 89
Figure 3.2: Recent adopters: 40 / 82 / 88 / N/A
Sample (column N undeterminable) · Recent adopters
Recent adopters (2 to 4 school years ago) | 40 | 82 | 88 | N/A
Figure 3.2: New adopters: 46 / 60 / N/A / N/A
Sample (column N undeterminable) · New adopters
New adopters (0 to 1 school years ago) | 46 | 60 | N/A | N/A
Figure 3.2 survey questions on effectiveness, time in place, and program use (n = 441)
This figure depicts response data from the following survey questions: “How effective do you believe this BTAM team is at maintaining school safety?” “Approximately how many school years has this BTAM team been in place?” and “How long has your school used [AUTOFILL] program?” (n = 441).
Only principals with a BTAM team who were present at initial implementation saw the question
Only those who said their school has a school- or district-level BTAM team and said they were around for the initial implementation of the BTAM program saw this question.
Within four school years, three-quarters of early adopters felt they had reached effectiveness
Sample (column N undeterminable) · Earliest adopters (BTAM team in place 9+ years)
taining school safety; within four school years, three-quarters said they feel they have reached effectiveness.
12 percent of early-adopter principals said team was effective but were not sure how long it took
Sample (column N undeterminable) · Earliest adopters (BTAM team in place 9+ years)
Among these early adopters, 12 percent of principals said they feel that their schools had reached the point where the BTAM team was somewhat or very effective at maintaining school safety but were not sure how long it took the team to get there.
For recent adopters, enough time may not have passed to overcome initial challenges
For schools that adopted BTAM more recently, enough time may not have passed yet for schools to overcome any initial implementation challenges such that their teams are functioning effectively.
60 percent of newest adopters perceive their teams as somewhat or very effective
Sample (column N undeterminable) · New adopters
Among the newest adopters, 60 percent of principals perceive that their BTAM teams have become somewhat or very effective at maintaining school safety.
Among remaining newest adopters, 15 percent feel teams not effective and 25 percent were not sure
Sample (column N undeterminable) · New adopters
Among the balance, 15 percent feel their teams are not currently effective, and 25 percent were not sure whether their BTAM teams were effective.
Authors examined time to perceived effectiveness based on when BTAM program was implemented
We also examined how long it took for principals to perceive that their schools’ BTAM teams were effective based on when their BTAM program was implemented.
Top
Find the Perfect Training Class For You