Every two years, NABITA administers a survey to assess the current state of the behavioral intervention and threat assessment field. The 2024 State of the Field Survey is NABITA’s seventh since 2012. This detailed assessment evaluates teams across three key sections, providing valuable insights into the field’s ongoing development:
- Structural Elements: The structure and formation of teams
- Process Elements: How teams function
- Quality Assurance and Assessment Elements: How teams assess their work
The survey also highlights how closely Behavioral Intervention Teams (BITs) align with NABITA’s Standards for Behavioral Intervention Teams, which reflect the field’s latest research and needs. These standards help practitioners improve BIT policies, processes, and procedures to serve their educational communities more effectively.
This three-part Tip of the Week series will explore the State of the Field findings. In part one, we take a closer look at the structural elements of BITs.
Structural Elements
Respondents were asked to evaluate the formation of their team, including team size, membership structure, leadership, and naming conventions. Additional elements assessed included written and formalized standard operating procedures, team training opportunities, methods of information sharing among members, budget allocation, and strategies for marketing the team’s role and educating the community about its purpose.
Team Mission and Scope
Most teams reported focusing solely on students, while only a small percentage handled referrals exclusively for faculty, staff, and employees (F/S/E). Interestingly, larger schools with populations of 15,000 to 50,000+ were likelier to have a separate team to address F/S/E referrals. Most respondents reported having one integrated team to oversee everything from minor concerns to serious threats of harm to self or others.
Why It Matters
The NABITA Standards recommend that teams serve all students, faculty, staff, and employees. Taking a broad approach ensures better campus well-being, fosters a culture of care, and builds an inclusive environment where everyone can thrive. By addressing the needs of all groups, BITs create stronger, more resilient communities, paving the way for healthier, safer, and more connected environments for all.
Having one cohesive team that receives and responds to referrals aligns with the Standards and offers a diffusion of benefits. First, addressing lower-level concerns increases opportunities for early intervention, prevention, and individual support while addressing community safety. It also streamlines operations—one manual, one set of meetings, one straightforward process—reducing duplicate work for staff. Plus, it avoids the often-messy task of transferring cases between teams as risks evolve and new information emerges.
Seventy-one percent of respondents shared that their team has a mission statement dedicated to supporting individuals in crisis. This aligns with the Standards, highlighting the value of a clear mission to drive purpose and direction. A strong mission statement does more than define the team’s role—who they serve and what referrals they accept—it also inspires trust from the community.
Institutional Authority
Over half of survey respondents reported that their schools, institutions, or organizations have clear, written policies or charters establishing their teams. These documents outline everything—who the team serves, its mission, membership, authority, and the behaviors it addresses. Most respondents also shared that these policies are accessible online, ensuring transparency and simplicity. By following this approach, institutions can build trust and clarity around their teams’ purpose and role.
Team Name, Leadership, and Membership
The survey explored team characteristics, such as names, leadership roles, and member composition. Common team names included CARE team and BIT since well-known names foster community support and referrals. CARE has surpassed BIT as the top name for the first time in the State of Field survey.
Deans of Students or Case Managers often held leadership positions, aligning with the Standards for resource coordination. Teams averaged eight members, typically from core departments like campus safety, counseling, student conduct, case management, and Dean of Students, with some variation to meet institutional needs.
Training and Information Sharing
Training is the backbone of any successful BIT, and most teams take this seriously, prioritizing comprehensive team training and new member onboarding, which aligns with the Standards. Yet the survey results revealed significant hurdles, such as limited budgets, time constraints, coordination challenges, and insufficient awareness of available resources. Recognizing these challenges, NABITA has introduced membership scholarships to assist BIT/CARE practitioners in accessing essential training regardless of financial limitations.
Most respondents aligned with the Standards related to FERPA and information sharing within BITs. When asked how those with privileged relationships, such as mental health counselors, share information with the team as applicable under state law and ethical standards, most respondents reported that they share information by speaking in hypotheticals, sharing general mental health expertise, and sharing more details only if a release of information is in place. Teams share information with non-team staff only when there is a legitimate educational interest, aligning with FERPA guidelines.
Budget/Community Education and Marketing
When it comes to budgets, most BITs face a troubling reality—over 75% lack a dedicated operating budget. Without sufficient funding, teams struggle to access necessary tools, training, and resources, which can result in gaps in their ability to assess and address urgent behavioral concerns. Teams with adequate funding are better equipped to access professional development opportunities, secure electronic recordkeeping platforms, and develop and purchase team marketing materials.
Despite challenges, BITs are making headway with education and marketing efforts. Most respondents reported training their communities, usually in person, focusing on recognizing concerning behaviors, making appropriate referrals, and engaging in bystander intervention. Community-wide training also included information on supporting an individual in distress, cultural competency related to BIT referrals/reports, and recognizing leakage.[1] Common training methods include in-person sessions, published content, and online tools, all aimed at fostering a proactive and informed community. Building awareness helps demystify the BIT process and enhance collaboration and confidence between teams, students, and staff.
What This Means
While many teams demonstrate alignment with established Standards in areas such as training, information sharing, and community education, significant gaps remain, particularly in funding. Addressing these challenges is crucial for enhancing the effectiveness of BITs, ensuring they can operate efficiently and foster safer, more supportive campus environments. By investing in resources, promoting ongoing education, and advocating for institutional support, BITs can continue to fulfill their vital role in prevention, intervention, and community well-being.
Stay tuned for parts two and three of this Tip of the Week series, exploring procedural, quality assurance, and assessment elements. For an in-depth analysis of the survey results, access to whitepapers, the members-only listserv, and preferred pricing, become a NABITA member today.
[1] Read our Tip of the Week on Standard 9 for a detailed explanation of leakage.