Most schools using behavioral threat assessment to try to spot and stop potential attackers

Integrating behavioral threat assessment and management (BTAM) into K-12 schools has become “nearly ubiquitous” in an effort to curb violence and threats but can vary widely, according to a new report from the U.S. Secret Service National Threat Assessment Center (NTAC) and Homeland Security Operational Analysis Center (HSOAC).

There were 336 shooting incidents in K-12 schools last year, according to the K-12 School Shooting Database. wounding or killing 276 people. In school shootings incidents tracked from 1966-2025, 46.2% of campus shooters have been current or former students. Comparatively, in 2015 there were 40 shooting incidents on campuses across the country.

The HSOAC-NTAC report noted that a student’s behavior can give off red flags before an incident of violence toward others or self-harm occurs, leaving school officials uncertain about how to handle the potential threat.

“Although it may seem that removing the student from school is the safest option, research has shown that exclusionary discipline, such as a suspension or an expulsion, can have lasting negative effects on students and may not effectively reduce risk,” HSOAC-NTAC said. “Most threats are ultimately found not to be credible, and removing students from the school environment can sometimes increase the risk of harm by severing connections to support and oversight.”

As of last year, as many as 85% of schools in the United States had put a BTAM team in place that can include school administrators, counselors and public safety professionals to assess and respond to student behavior that raises concerns. In spring 2016, just 42% of schools had BTAM teams; some states passed laws mandating them, to varying degrees. Currently, 49% of schools with BTAM teams include a psychologist.

HSOAC-NTAC surveyed 1,746 principals from RAND’s American School Leader Panel, who reported general community support of the BTAM approach while reporting implementation challenges such as staff availability or readily available training options.

NTAC guidance defines the types of behaviors that might be referred to a BTAM team as “threatening or engaging in violence, bringing a weapon to school, bullying or harassing others, and criminal behaviors,” or similar concerning behaviors such as obsession with previous mass shooters and indicators of stress or suicidal expressions.

“Early identification of these behaviors can make schools’ efforts to intervene and support students more effective,” HSOAC-NTAC said. “However, although BTAM as an approach is designed to give schools the capacity to respond early to behaviors indicative of potential violence, BTAM teams are not intended to be the primary vehicle for schools to respond to lower-level behavioral or mental health concerns, signals of change in a student’s well-being (e.g., depression, bullying, declining grades), or such routine school discipline issues as classroom disruption.”

The teams “rely first and foremost on interviews with the referred student to make decisions about potential risk of harm” while some include assessment of records such as law enforcement history, disciplinary records or academic records in gauging whether a student may pose a threat.

“Somewhat surprisingly, only 14 percent of principals said their BTAM teams review students’ publicly available social media accounts or online footprint for every case,” HSOAC-NTAC said. “The vast majority of schools check these accounts at least sometimes, though not in all cases. High school principals said they review a student’s publicly available social media or online footprint at roughly twice the rate of their elementary and middle school counterparts. This is somewhat surprising, given the rise of threats made against K–12 schools via social media.”

If the assessment indicates a need for intervention and safety planning, 91% of schools with BTAM teams typically involve the parents or guardians of the student in this step. The student of concern is involved in this process by 84% of BTAM teams. “Although parents provide added value to the intervention planning process thanks to their knowledge, awareness, and buy-in, principals confirmed that trained BTAM team members are responsible for ultimately selecting appropriate interventions and supports,” HSOAC-NTAC noted.

Interventions can include skill-building services, programs geared toward building relationships with trusted adults, special education supports, mental health counseling or temporary removal from school. Forty percent of schools reported that they never referred a student in the BTAM process to law enforcement. One percent said they always referred a student of concern to authorities for arrest or prosecution.

Most schools (96%) said they have some kind of monitoring for students of concern after a behavioral intervention or safety plan has been implemented — a responsibility that usually falls to the BTAM team, though a quarter of schools said they rely on teachers, counselors and others “to monitor progress and adjust interventions without directly involving the BTAM team.”

HSOAC-NTAC detailed some challenges faced by BTAM initiatives, including inconsistencies in models, training, operations and interventions across schools.

“Although most teams focus on individualized interventions, there are wide differences in decisionmaking processes, resource use, and application of decision support tools,” the report said. “This lack of consistency can affect the quality and effectiveness of interventions, especially as many schools have only recently adopted BTAM. Clearer guidance and best practices are needed to ensure that interventions are implemented effectively and fairly across schools.”