Research has demonstrated that school-based problem-solving teams (SB PSTs), a term describing teams engaging in efforts to remediate problems in school settings, can effectively improve student functioning while reducing special education referrals and disproportionality. Unfortunately, questions remain as to the effectiveness of SB PSTs in the absence of research oversight. Additionally, despite widespread use, little is known about how research and best-practice guidance have translated to applied SB PST implementation. Survey responses from 3233 educators were used to begin this exploration. Study results provide insight into SB PST prevalence, processes, procedures, composition, and targeted outcomes, as well as educator perceptions of team efficiency and effectiveness. Study findings suggest SB PST implementation varies widely across team name, activities, membership, roles, and functions. Stakeholder reports suggest poor alignment with practices endorsed in SB PST literature, including an apparent underutilization of school psychologists, well-qualified to contribute to, if not lead, SB PSTs. Overall, administrators, teachers, and school mental health service providers indicated favorable perceptions of the efficiency and effectiveness of their SB PSTs. Administrator ratings appeared slightly more favorable generally across these SB PST outcomes, and were significantly more favorable than ratings provided by teachers. However, ratings of perceived efficiency and effectiveness seemed inconsistent with prior empirical SB PST research, leaving clear room for improvement. Furthermore, when compared to other survey item responses, perceptions of efficiency and effectiveness appeared inconsistent, if not contrary to the widely espoused goals of SB PSTs, to remediate student challenges. These findings may be related to an apparent infrequent alignment of reported practices with evidence-based guidance, as indicated by participant responses. Collectively, this study suggests the need for (1) continued research related to SB PSTs, particularly applied SB PST practices, and (2) increased support for SB PST implementation through more explicit, prescriptive guidance, as well as initial and ongoing training and performance feedback for stakeholders.