Published on: May 21, 2026
A NABITA Tip of the Week by Tim Cason, M.Ed., and Makenzie Schiemann, Ph.D., M.S.
School-based behavioral intervention teams (BITs) and behavioral threat assessment and management (BTAM) teams must make thoughtful decisions with the information they have. In today’s digital world, concerning behaviors often appear in written, digital, or creative content. Emails, social media posts, essays, and videos can all contain early indicators that an individual is in distress or has a propensity for violence. However, determining the actual meaning behind this content can be challenging.
To help teams continue to approach risk assessment in an objective, structured, and actionable way, NABITA has evolved its Violence Risk Assessment of the Written Word (VRAWW) tool into the Screening Tool for Risk Assessment of Narrative Data (STRAND).
Using the Right Risk Assessment Tool
VRAWW provided a strong foundation for assessing written content, but the landscape has since changed. STRAND represents the fourth revision of NABITA’s original tool since 2015, designed to align with today’s more complex, nuanced, and high-volume narrative data.
As practitioners, we have been seeing a deeper, more research-informed shift in how we understand risk in narrative content. In revising the tool, our team reviewed extensive research on targeted violence, including analyses from the U.S. Secret Service, Department of Homeland Security, and other leading studies. That research consistently shows that individuals who engage in targeted violence often communicate their thoughts, intentions, or grievances to others, referred to as “leakage,” through their writing or other forms of communication prior to an incident. STRAND was built to help teams identify and interpret that leakage with greater clarity and consistency.
What STRAND Measures
One of the most important updates in the transition from VRAWW to STRAND is moving from a longer list of indicators to a more focused set of ten items.
STRAND organizes its assessment into:
- 5 escalating items, which may increase concern
- 5 mitigating items, which may reduce concern
This is a deliberate shift, driven by practitioner feedback and practical application, from the more expansive structure used in earlier versions of the tool. As teams began applying VRAWW in real cases, a few consistent challenges emerged:
- Too many items made scoring feel cumbersome in fast-moving situations
- Overlapping indicators created confusion and inconsistency
- Teams needed clearer prioritization of what matters most
Through analysis of targeted violence cases, NABITA identified the most reliable and meaningful patterns in narrative content. These were then grouped into fewer, clearly defined categories that capture the same core concepts without unnecessary complexity.
Why STRAND Works for Today’s Cases
Teams often struggle with a key question: Is this a real concern, or is it individual expression? That distinction has become harder as communication styles evolve, as online communication mores become coarser and more adversarial, and as more behavior happens online. STRAND is designed to help teams navigate that gray area by:
- Grounding assessments in research, not assumptions
- Weighing both risk and mitigating elements, not just red flags
- Providing clearer, more consistent language for team decision-making
- Integrating directly with tools like the NABITA Risk Rubric for a more complete picture
The result is a more balanced, objective approach that reduces both overreaction and underreaction.
Escalating and Mitigating Items: A Balanced View of Risk
At the core of STRAND is a more focused and intentional approach to evaluating narrative content, emphasizing the most meaningful signals of concern and context. This streamlined framework helps teams to expediently identify what increases or reduces risk.
- Escalating Items (increase concern):
- Threatening Content
- Reference(s) to Past Attack(s)/Fixation on or Justification of Violence
- Grievances and Motivators (that justify hostility or violence)
- Suicidal Ideation, Desperation, or Hopelessness
- Planning Behaviors
- Mitigating Items (reduce concern):
- Produced in Context (e.g., coursework, artistic expression)
- Emotional Venting
- Performative Message
- Repair and Accountability
- Cultural or Developmental Factors
These items offer a balanced, research-informed lens for interpreting narrative content, helping teams to make proportionate decisions about risk. If your team has used VRAWW in the past, the transition to STRAND should feel like an evolution, not a reset. The core purpose remains the same: helping teams assess narrative data in a structured way. If you’ve never used VRAWW or STRAND, you’ll find the learning curve very approachable.
Comprehensive User Guide
STRAND includes updated and clarified language, reorganized scoring items, and a comprehensive user guide with examples and application strategies. The user guide is an added layer of support that helps teams integrate STRAND into their existing BIT/BTAM processes, allowing them to get up to speed quickly while improving the consistency and defensibility of their assessments.
Like any assessment tool, STRAND is most effective when teams are properly trained in how to apply it. NABITA offers multiple opportunities to build that competency, including in-person and virtual training, as well as private training with your organization, for more customization.
Strengthening Your Team’s Risk Assessment Approach
STRAND helps teams understand the context surrounding potential concerns involving narrative content. It allows them to focus on what matters most, apply the tool consistently, and make more confident, defensible decisions. This balanced evaluation is critical in today’s environment, where distinguishing between frustration and a genuine threat in written and digital communication can be difficult.
We recently explored this topic during a public Talking BITs event. Watch the recording for more details. Plus, explore STRAND training opportunities and registration details to strengthen your team’s expertise in narrative risk assessment.