“…Despite the important insights gleaned from prior qualitative research on SGMY and school staff, existing studies have several methodological limitations. These limitations include: (1) enrolling only SGMY or only school staff, but not both (de Jong, 2015; Eisenberg et al, 2017; Grossman et al, 2009; Halbrook et al, 2019; Higa et al, 2014; Ken, 2017; Laiti et al, 2021; Marshall et al, 2015; McCormick & Krieger, 2020; Newman et al, 2017; Porta et al, 2017; Preston, 2016; Steck & Perry, 2017; Valenti et al, 2017; Young et al, 2017), thereby constraining the ability to triangulate SGMY and staff perspectives; (2) recruiting and sampling participants from small geographical locations (Grossman et al, 2009; Newman et al, 2017; Marshall et al, 2015; Ken, 2017; Mayo, 2013; Valenti & Campbell, 2009; Steck & Perry, 2017; Reisner et al, 2020; McCormick & Krieger, 2020; Higa et al, 2014); (3) researching sexual minority youth but not gender minority youth (Marshall et al, 2015; Rutter & Leech, 2006); (4) primarily enrolling white SGMY (Marshall et al, 2015; Ken, 2017; Porta et al, 2017; Mayo, 2013; Reisner et al, 2020); (5) recruiting SGMY or school staff solely from GSAs (Mayo, 2013; Valenti & Campbell, 2009); and (6) restricting school staff samples to specific roles (e.g., only counselors) (de Jong, 2015; Halbrook et al, 2019; Preston, 2016; Valenti & Campbell, 2009; Steck & Perry, 2017). As a result, these limitations hamper our ability to identify qualitative themes across sociodemographically diverse groups of SGMY and school staff.…”