Published on: October 5, 2026
A NABITA Tip of the Week by W. Scott Lewis, J.D.
When concerns arise about a K-12 or higher education student’s behavior, many Behavioral Intervention Teams (BITs) or Behavioral Threat Assessment and Management (BTAM) teams ask the same question: “Should we look at their social media?”
The answer can be yes, but only when there is a clear reason for doing so. Social media should never be a fishing expedition, particularly for mild or most moderate risk levels. Instead, it may serve as one source of information that helps teams conduct an accurate, individualized behavioral risk assessment.
Start With the Why
Before opening a browser or searching for an account, ask yourself why you’re looking.
- Has the student made statements suggesting self-harm, suicidality, or escalating mental health concerns?
- Have they made a threat or identified a potential target?
- Have you identified escalating behaviors that warrant additional information gathering?
Those circumstances may justify reviewing publicly available social media because the information could help to clarify whether concerns are increasing, decreasing, or require additional intervention. The goal is to answer questions relevant to the risk assessment.
Match the Search to the Risk
Not every situation requires the same level of review. For some individuals presenting mild or moderate risk levels, a quick review of publicly available information may be sufficient. If the review does not reveal additional concerning information, your team may have what it needs.
If concern increases, however, the scope of the assessment may appropriately expand. When an individual presents elevated or critical concern, teams will likely need additional information to assist in completing a violence risk assessment using either the Non-Clinical Assessment of Suicide (NAS) or the Structured Interview for Violence Risk Assessment (SIVRA). The social media search may help determine whether a target has been identified, planning behaviors are emerging, statements suggesting self-harm or violence are becoming more specific, or to better contextualize the behaviors that presented at the higher risk levels.
What you’re looking for may also differ depending on the nature of the concern. On the D Scale of the NABITA Risk Rubric, social media may provide additional context around self-injury, suicidality, or escalating mental health concerns. On the E Scale, teams may be looking for evidence of an identified target, planning behaviors, or other indicators that could affect the assessment.
The search should be driven by the behaviors that prompted the assessment. As in every aspect of behavioral intervention, the level of inquiry should remain proportional to the level of concern.
Transparency Matters
How you obtain information matters as much as the information itself. Reviewing publicly available content is fundamentally different from misrepresenting your identity to gain access to a private account, or using a third party with access to circumvent privacy settings. BITs should avoid deceptive practices, such as creating false identities or “catfishing” individuals to access private content.
A private account does not necessarily mean the information your team needs is unavailable. The behavior may have come to your attention because someone with legitimate access reported it. As part of your assessment, you may also speak with friends, classmates, colleagues, or others who have relevant information or access to that information.
The key distinction is how you obtain the information. There is a difference between gathering relevant information from people who already have legitimate access and misrepresenting yourself to access information the student chose not to provide or make public.
Better Information Leads to Better Decisions
Risk assessments depend on the quality of available information. Garbage in = garbage out. Incomplete information can lead teams to underestimate risk, while poorly interpreted information can lead to unnecessary escalation.
Social media should therefore be viewed as one piece of a larger information-gathering process that includes interviews, behavioral observations, prior reports, available documentation, and other relevant information. The purpose is never surveillance for its own sake.
Context matters, too. A screenshot or isolated post may look very different when viewed alongside the conversation that came before and after it. When possible and relevant, seek enough context to evaluate what the content actually communicates rather than assessing an isolated image, post, or message in a vacuum.
Remember, you’re not skimming through a student’s social media to get a general sense of who they are. You’re looking for specific information that can help your team to more accurately assess risk and make informed decisions about intervention, support, and safety.
Keep these five tips in mind when social media becomes relevant to an assessment:
- Start with a reason, not a search. Identify the behavior or concern you are trying to better understand before looking online.
- Let the risk level guide the depth. The greater the concern, the stronger the justification for gathering additional relevant information.
- Don’t misrepresent yourself to gain access. If information isn’t publicly available, consider legitimate alternative sources rather than creating a false identity.
- Look for context, not just concerning content. Consider what the information actually shows and whether it increases, decreases, or otherwise changes the assessment.
- Bring what you learn back to the assessment. Document relevant findings and consider them alongside interviews, behavioral observations, prior reports, and other available information.
Build Your Team’s Skills
Want to put these practices into action? Choose the NABITA training that best aligns with your role:
- For higher education BITs: BIT Standards and Best Practices provides the foundational practices teams use to assess risk, apply interventions, and operate effectively.
- For K-12 BTAM teams: K-12 Behavioral Threat Assessment and Management Standards and Best Practices focuses on the structures and practices that school-based teams use to identify, assess, and respond to concerning student behavior.
- For practitioners evaluating written or online content, the Screening Tool for Risk Assessment of Narrative Data (STRAND) provides a structured approach to analyzing written and narrative content, including social media, for behavioral risk indicators.
Explore NABITA’s training catalog to build the skills your team needs for more informed, consistent behavioral risk assessment.