The current survey was answered primarily by dietitians (73.9%). The percent response rate received from each clinical discipline (dietitian, pharmacist, nurse, and physician) mirrored the membership of A.S.P.E.N. The majority of respondents had been A.S.P.E.N. members (70%) for less than 5 years (60%). Most of the respondents worked clinically at acute care hospitals (87%). NSTs were the model for providing nutrition support therapy 42% of the time. This percentage has remained relatively stable over the past 3 decades. However, 23% of institutions with no current NST formerly had one. The most common reasons for not having an NST included decentralized nutrition support services (24%), lack of physician leadership interest (23%), finances (17%), lack of administrative support (12%), and lack of time (10%). Twenty-two percent of institutions without an NST that formerly had one felt that patient outcomes had been adversely affected by this change. Those institutions without an NST had multiple individual cl nicians writing nutrition orders 43% of the time. Respondents planning to start an NST reported that they would require the following to be successful: evidence- based guidelines (34%), financial support (22%), and interdisciplinary cooperation (22%). In conclusion some distinct findings in this current survey capture current trends in relation to NSTs and how nutrition support therapy is managed at various institutions (Table 2). There does not appear to be one "best practice" model for providing optimal nutrition support therapy to patients. Whether an institution has a thriving NST, formerly had one, is now functioning in a decentralized interdisciplinary model or is gearing up to create an NST, it is clear that dietitians, pharmacists, physicians, and nurses each play important roles in improving the nutrition status of patients, but the safety and efficacy of care are enhanced when they collaborate as a team. © 2010 American Society for Parenteral and Enteral Nutrition.