NASM Calorie Calculator

The NASM Approach to Calorie Calculation

The National Academy of Sports Medicine (NASM) is one of the most recognized certifying bodies for personal trainers and fitness professionals worldwide. I hold a deep respect for their evidence-based approach to nutrition guidance, which is rooted in peer-reviewed research rather than fad diets or anecdotal claims.

NASM recommends the Mifflin-St Jeor equation as the preferred method for estimating Basal Metabolic Rate (BMR). This recommendation aligns with the position of the Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics, which in 2005 identified the Mifflin-St Jeor equation as the most precise predictive equation for estimating BMR in both normal weight and overweight individuals.

Understanding how many calories your body needs is the foundation of any nutrition strategy, whether the goal is fat loss, muscle gain, athletic performance, or general health maintenance. Without this baseline, all nutritional decisions are essentially guesswork.

The Mifflin-St Jeor Equation

Developed by Mifflin and St Jeor in 1990, this equation uses four variables to estimate BMR. Weight in kilograms, height in centimeters, age in years, and biological sex. The formulas are as follows.

For males, BMR equals 10 multiplied by weight in kilograms, plus 6.25 multiplied by height in centimeters, minus 5 multiplied by age in years, minus 5.

For females, BMR equals 10 multiplied by weight in kilograms, plus 6.25 multiplied by height in centimeters, minus 5 multiplied by age in years, minus 161.

The sex-specific constants (minus 5 for males, minus 161 for females) account for the average differences in body composition between biological sexes. Males typically carry more lean muscle mass relative to total body weight, which increases metabolic rate.

Why NASM Chose Mifflin-St Jeor Over Other Equations

Several BMR equations exist, and understanding why NASM prefers one over others provides context for the calculator's methodology.

The Harris-Benedict equation, developed in 1919 and revised in 1984, was the gold standard for decades. However, research has shown that it tends to overestimate BMR by 5% to 15% in the modern population, likely because body composition and activity patterns have changed significantly since the original study population was measured.

The Katch-McArdle formula uses lean body mass rather than total body weight, which makes it theoretically more precise for individuals who know their body fat percentage. However, most people do not have access to dependable body composition measurements, limiting its practical utility in the general population.

The Mifflin-St Jeor equation strikes the best balance between accuracy and accessibility. It requires only measurements that anyone can obtain (weight, height, age) and produces predictions that are precise within approximately 10% for the majority of the population.

Understanding Activity Factors

BMR represents the energy your body needs at absolute rest. To determine actual daily calorie needs, NASM multiplies BMR by an activity factor that accounts for physical activity throughout the day.

Activity Level	Factor	Description
Sedentary	1.2	Desk job, no planned exercise
Lightly Active	1.375	Light exercise 1-3 days per week
Moderately Active	1.55	Moderate exercise 3-5 days per week
Very Active	1.725	Intense exercise 6-7 days per week
Extra Active	1.9	Physically demanding job plus daily training

One of the most common mistakes I see is people overestimating their activity level. A person who works out three times per week but spends the remaining hours sitting at a desk is likely lightly active, not moderately active. The activity factor must account for the entire 24-hour period, not just the time spent exercising.

Consider that one hour of intense exercise burns perhaps 300 to 600 calories, but there are 23 other hours in the day. A sedentary job with three weekly gym sessions produces a very different metabolic picture than an active job like construction or nursing that involves standing and walking for 8 to 12 hours daily.

Setting Calorie Targets for Different Goals

Fat Loss

NASM teaches that a caloric deficit is required for fat loss, and the size of the deficit determines the rate of loss. A deficit of 500 calories per day produces approximately 1 pound of fat loss per week (since one pound of fat contains roughly 3,500 calories). A deficit of 250 calories per day produces approximately half a pound per week.

The advantage of a smaller deficit is better adherence, less muscle loss, less metabolic adaptation, and more sustainable behavior change. NASM-certified professionals generally recommend the 250 to 500 calorie deficit range and caution against extreme restriction below 1,200 calories for women or 1,500 calories for men without medical supervision.

I always encourage starting with the milder deficit. If progress stalls after several consistent weeks, the deficit can be increased slightly. Starting too aggressively often leads to rebound overeating, excessive muscle loss, and metabolic adaptation that makes further progress harder.

Muscle Gain

Building muscle requires a caloric surplus, but the excess does not need to be enormous. NASM recommends a surplus of 250 to 500 calories above TDEE combined with a progressive resistance training program. The surplus provides the raw materials (primarily protein and energy) that muscle protein synthesis requires.

A smaller surplus of 250 calories minimizes fat gain while still supporting muscle growth. This approach, sometimes called lean bulking, produces slower but cleaner gains with less body fat accumulation. The traditional approach of eating large surpluses (500+ calories) builds muscle slightly faster but simultaneously increases body fat, requiring a subsequent cutting phase.

Maintenance

Eating at TDEE maintains your current body weight. This target is appropriate during periods when body recomposition (simultaneously losing fat and gaining muscle) is the goal, which is most achievable in beginners, detrained individuals, and those returning from a deficit phase.

Macronutrient Guidance from NASM

NASM takes a adaptable approach to macronutrient distribution, recognizing that multiple splits can support different goals. The organization provides ranges rather than rigid prescriptions.

Protein Requirements

Protein is the most critical macronutrient for body composition goals. NASM recommends 1.4 to 2.0 grams of protein per kilogram of body weight per day for active individuals. During caloric deficits, protein needs increase to the higher end of this range to preserve lean muscle mass.

For practical macro calculation, the balanced split (30% protein) and high-protein split (40% protein) provided in this calculator translate these recommendations into gram targets based on your calorie needs. If your weight-based protein target (2.0 g/kg) differs significantly from the percentage-based target, prioritize the weight-based number.

Carbohydrate Requirements

Carbohydrates fuel high-intensity exercise, replenish glycogen stores, and support cognitive function. NASM does not demonize carbohydrates but recognizes that individual needs vary based on activity type, volume, and personal tolerance.

Endurance athletes and those performing high-volume training generally need 45% to 65% of calories from carbohydrates. Sedentary individuals or those following low-carb approaches may function well at 20% to 30% of calories from carbohydrates. The three macro splits provided in this calculator cover this range.

Fat Requirements

Dietary fat supports hormone production (including testosterone and estrogen), cell membrane integrity, vitamin absorption (A, D, E, K), and numerous other physiological functions. NASM recommends that fat constitute at least 20% of total calories to maintain hormonal health. Dropping below this threshold, particularly for extended periods, can disrupt endocrine function.

Metabolic Adaptation and Plateaus

One of the most important concepts NASM teaches regarding calorie balance is metabolic adaptation. When you eat in a deficit for extended periods, your body reduces energy expenditure below what the equations predict. This is an evolutionary survival mechanism that slows weight loss over time.

Metabolic adaptation manifests through several mechanisms. Non-exercise activity thermogenesis (NEAT) decreases as your body unconsciously reduces fidgeting, posture changes, and spontaneous physical activity. Hormonal changes reduce thyroid output and increase cortisol. The thermic effect of food decreases with lower calorie intake. These combined effects can reduce total daily expenditure by 10% to 15% below predicted values.

NASM addresses metabolic adaptation through several strategies. Periodic diet breaks (1 to 2 weeks at maintenance calories every 8 to 12 weeks of deficit) help restore metabolic rate. Reverse dieting after a cut gradually increases calories back toward maintenance, which helps prevent rapid fat regain. Maintaining a moderate deficit rather than an extreme one minimizes the adaptive response from the start.

NASM Certification and Nutrition Scope

The NASM Certified Personal Trainer (NASM-CPT) credential is one of the most widely recognized certifications in the fitness industry. NASM also offers specialized certifications including the Certified Nutrition Coach (NASM-CNC) for those who want deeper nutrition expertise.

It is important to understand the scope of practice distinction. NASM-CPTs can provide general nutrition information, help clients understand calorie and macronutrient targets, and support healthy eating habits. They cannot prescribe specific meal plans, diagnose eating disorders, or manage medical nutrition therapy. These services require a Registered Dietitian (RD) or licensed nutritionist depending on state regulations.

If you are working with a NASM-certified trainer and they use this type of calorie calculation with you, they are operating within their scope of practice. The numbers generated by this calculator align with the methodology taught in NASM's certification programs.

Limitations of Calorie Estimation

No equation perfectly predicts an individual's metabolic rate. The Mifflin-St Jeor equation provides an estimate, and actual needs may vary by 10% in either direction based on factors the equation cannot capture.

Genetics influence metabolic rate through variations in mitochondrial efficiency, brown fat tissue, and spontaneous physical activity patterns. Body composition matters because muscle tissue burns more calories at rest than fat tissue, and the equation does not distinguish between the two. Medical conditions including hypothyroidism, polycystic ovary syndrome, and insulin resistance can alter metabolic rate. Medications such as beta-blockers, corticosteroids, and antidepressants can influence weight and metabolism.

The calculator should be treated as a starting point, not an absolute answer. Use the numbers for two to four weeks while tracking body weight and adjusting based on actual results. If weight moves faster or slower than expected, modify calorie targets by 100 to 200 calories and reassess.

How to Track Calories Effectively

Calculating your calorie target is only useful if you can track your actual intake with reasonable accuracy. I have worked with many people over the years who get excellent numbers from a calculator but struggle with the tracking component. Several strategies make calorie tracking sustainable rather than burdensome.

Food tracking apps like MyFitnessPal, Cronometer, and Lose It provide databases of hundreds of thousands of foods with nutritional information. Scanning barcodes on packaged foods pulls up precise data instantly. For restaurant meals and homemade dishes, these apps allow you to search by name or build custom recipes from individual ingredients.

A kitchen scale is the single most important tracking tool. Measuring food by weight (in grams) is vastly more precise than measuring by volume (cups and tablespoons). A "serving" of peanut butter is 32 grams, but the amount that fits on a tablespoon varies dramatically depending on how you scoop it. Many people who think they are eating 2 tablespoons of peanut butter are actually consuming 3 to 4 tablespoons, adding 200+ untracked calories.

Precision does not require perfection. Tracking 5 out of 7 days per week still provides useful data. Estimating restaurant meals within a 10% to 15% margin is acceptable for most goals. The goal is awareness and trend management, not obsessive exactitude that becomes unsustainable.

The Importance of Consistency Over Precision

One principle NASM emphasizes in its nutrition coaching curriculum is that consistency matters more than precision. If your tracking method systematically underestimates intake by 10%, that bias is consistent across all days. What matters is the trend. If you eat a consistent "2,200 calories" by your tracking method and weight is stable, you know that reducing your tracked intake to "1,900 calories" will create a deficit regardless of whether the absolute numbers are perfectly precise.

This is why I recommend using the same tracking method, the same app, and ideally the same kitchen scale throughout your nutrition journey. Switching tools mid-process introduces new measurement biases that muddy the data.

Body Composition vs. Body Weight

The scale measures total body weight, which includes muscle, fat, water, bone, glycogen, and food in the digestive tract. Day-to-day weight fluctuations of 2 to 5 pounds are entirely normal and do not reflect changes in body fat.

Water retention fluctuates based on sodium intake, carbohydrate intake (each gram of glycogen binds approximately 3 grams of water), hydration status, hormonal cycles (particularly relevant for women), and stress levels. After a high-sodium restaurant meal, the scale may jump 3 to 4 pounds overnight. This is water, not fat. Fat gain requires a cumulative caloric surplus sustained over time.

For this reason, NASM-certified trainers recommend tracking weekly average weight rather than daily readings. Weigh yourself each morning under consistent conditions (after using the bathroom, before eating or drinking), record the number, and calculate the 7-day average at the end of each week. Comparing weekly averages eliminates the noise of daily fluctuations and reveals the true trend.

Body composition measurements provide additional context that the scale cannot. Methods include skinfold calipers (accessible but technique-dependent), bioelectrical impedance scales (convenient but affected by hydration), DEXA scans (highly precise but expensive), and waist circumference measurements (simple and dependable for tracking abdominal fat trends). NASM teaches multiple assessment methods in its certification programs.

Reverse Dieting After a Caloric Deficit

Reverse dieting is the process of gradually increasing calorie intake after a period of restriction. This concept is central to NASM's approach to sustainable nutrition coaching, and it addresses several practical and physiological challenges that arise when transitioning out of a deficit.

When you end a caloric deficit and immediately return to maintenance calories, several things happen. Glycogen stores replenish, causing a rapid increase in water weight (3 to 8 pounds over several days). Increased food volume adds digestive weight. These combined effects create an alarming scale spike that often triggers psychological distress and a return to restrictive eating, initiating a yo-yo dieting cycle.

A reverse diet adds 50 to 150 calories per week, typically from carbohydrates, until the calculated TDEE is reached. This gradual approach allows the body to adapt its metabolic rate upward, minimizes the psychological impact of scale fluctuations, and provides a controlled environment for monitoring how your body responds to increased intake.

A typical reverse diet timeline after a moderate deficit lasts 4 to 8 weeks. During this period, weight may increase slightly (1 to 3 pounds total), but much of this is water and glycogen, not fat. The end result is a higher calorie intake at weight stability compared to the restricted state, with improved energy levels, better training performance, and normalized hormonal function.

Nutritional Periodization

NASM applies the concept of periodization (originally from strength training programming) to nutrition. Rather than maintaining the same calorie intake indefinitely, nutritional periodization cycles through phases that align with training goals and physiological needs.

A typical periodized nutrition plan might include 8 to 12 weeks of caloric deficit (fat loss phase), followed by 1 to 2 weeks at maintenance (diet break), followed by 4 to 8 weeks of reverse dieting back to maintenance, followed by 8 to 12 weeks at maintenance or slight surplus (muscle building phase). The specific durations and calorie levels depend on individual goals, starting point, and response to each phase.

Diet breaks are a key component of periodized nutrition. Research has shown that incorporating 1 to 2 weeks at maintenance calories every 8 to 12 weeks during a prolonged deficit helps mitigate metabolic adaptation, improve hormonal status (particularly leptin and thyroid hormones), and improve adherence by providing psychological relief from restriction.

The MATADOR study (Minimizing Adaptive Thermogenesis And Deactivating Obesity Rebound) demonstrated that participants who alternated 2 weeks of dieting with 2 weeks at maintenance lost more fat and experienced less metabolic slowdown than those who dieted continuously for the same total number of restricted days. This research provides a strong evidence base for the periodization approach NASM promotes.

Common Calorie Calculation Mistakes

Several recurring errors cause people to misapply calorie calculator results. Being aware of these pitfalls improves the likelihood of achieving your nutrition goals.

Overestimating Activity Level

This is the most common mistake. People who exercise 3 to 4 times per week but work desk jobs frequently select "moderately active" or even "very active." In reality, those 3 to 4 hours of exercise per week represent a small fraction of the 168 hours available. The remaining hours spent sitting dramatically reduce the true activity factor. When in doubt, select one level lower than you think applies.

Not Adjusting Over Time

Your calorie needs change as your body weight changes. Someone who loses 20 pounds needs fewer calories than when they started, because a lighter body has a lower BMR and burns fewer calories during activity. Recalculate your targets every 10 to 15 pounds of weight change, or at minimum every 8 weeks.

Ignoring Non-Exercise Activity

NEAT (Non-Exercise Activity Thermogenesis) can vary by 500 to 2,000 calories per day between individuals. Fidgeting, walking to the mailbox, playing with children, cooking, and even the amount of gesturing during conversation all burn calories. People who are naturally fidgety may burn significantly more than a sedentary calculator prediction suggests.

Conversely, people in caloric deficits often unconsciously reduce NEAT by sitting more, taking elevators instead of stairs, and making fewer spontaneous movements. This invisible reduction in energy expenditure slows progress without any conscious dietary change. Wearing a step counter and maintaining a minimum daily step target (8,000 to 10,000 steps) can help preserve NEAT during a deficit.

Weekend Calorie Drift

Many people eat at their calculated deficit from Monday through Friday but significantly overeat on weekends. A 500-calorie daily deficit across five weekdays creates a 2,500-calorie weekly deficit. But consuming 1,000 extra calories on both Saturday and Sunday (common during social eating, dining out, and alcohol consumption) erases 2,000 of those calories, leaving a net weekly deficit of only 500. That is a rate of weight loss five times slower than expected.

I recommend tracking weekend eating with the same rigor as weekdays, at least for the first month while establishing habits. Many people are genuinely surprised by how many extra calories they consume during unstructured weekend hours.

NASM Perspective on Supplements

NASM takes a food-first approach to nutrition, emphasizing that supplements should fill gaps in an otherwise well-constructed diet rather than replace real food. The certification curriculum addresses common supplements and the evidence supporting (or not supporting) their use.

Protein supplements (whey, casein, plant-based powders) are useful when whole food protein intake falls short of targets. They are not superior to whole food protein sources but offer convenience and precise macronutrient control. A scoop of whey protein provides approximately 25 grams of protein at 120 to 140 calories, making it one of the most fast protein sources available.

Creatine monohydrate is the most researched performance supplement in sports nutrition history. It increases intracellular water and phosphocreatine stores, supporting high-intensity exercise performance and muscle growth. NASM acknowledges the strong evidence base for creatine, typically recommending 3 to 5 grams daily for active individuals.

Caffeine is the most widely used performance-enhancing supplement globally. Research supports its ability to improve endurance, strength, and cognitive performance at doses of 3 to 6 mg per kilogram of body weight consumed 30 to 60 minutes before exercise. NASM includes caffeine in its list of evidence-supported ergogenic aids.

Most other supplements marketed for fat loss, muscle gain, or performance enhancement lack sufficient evidence to justify their cost. NASM's evidence-based approach helps trainers separate scientifically supported supplements from marketing hype, which is particularly valuable in an industry where supplement companies spend billions on advertising.

Calorie Considerations for Special Populations

The Mifflin-St Jeor equation works well for the general adult population, but certain groups may need modified approaches to calorie estimation.

Older Adults

Adults over 65 experience a natural decline in BMR of approximately 1% to 2% per decade, primarily due to loss of lean muscle mass (sarcopenia). The Mifflin-St Jeor equation accounts for age, but the coefficient may underestimate the BMR reduction in very sedentary older adults who have lost significant muscle mass.

For older adults, preserving lean mass through resistance training and adequate protein intake (1.0 to 1.2 g/kg/day, higher than the general adult recommendation) becomes increasingly important. NASM's Senior Fitness Specialist certification addresses these nutritional considerations specifically for the aging population.

Athletes and Highly Active Individuals

Competitive athletes and individuals training more than 10 to 15 hours per week may find that the highest activity factor (1.9) still underestimates their calorie needs. Endurance athletes training 15 to 25 hours per week may need TDEE multipliers of 2.0 to 2.5 or higher, depending on the intensity and duration of their training.

For these populations, direct measurement of calorie expenditure through heart rate monitors, power meters (for cycling), or laboratory metabolic testing provides more precise data than any predictive equation. NASM's Performance Enhancement Specialist (PES) certification covers nutritional strategies for high-performance athletes.

Pregnant and Breastfeeding Women

Pregnancy increases calorie needs progressively across trimesters. The general guidelines suggest an additional 0 calories in the first trimester, approximately 340 extra calories in the second trimester, and approximately 450 extra calories in the third trimester above pre-pregnancy TDEE. Breastfeeding typically requires an additional 300 to 500 calories per day depending on the volume of milk production.

These are general guidelines, and individual needs vary based on pre-pregnancy weight, activity level, and the number of fetuses. NASM-certified trainers defer to obstetricians and registered dietitians for pregnancy-specific nutrition guidance, as this falls outside their scope of practice.

Individuals with Thyroid Conditions

Hypothyroidism (underactive thyroid) reduces BMR, sometimes significantly. Individuals with diagnosed thyroid conditions may find that their actual calorie needs are 10% to 15% below what the equation predicts. Conversely, hyperthyroidism (overactive thyroid) increases BMR above predicted values.

If you have a thyroid condition and find that your weight does not respond as expected to calculated calorie targets, discuss metabolic testing with your endocrinologist. Indirect calorimetry (breathing into a metabolic analyzer) can measure your actual resting metabolic rate and provide a personalized starting point for calorie planning.

NASM Perspective on Meal Timing and Frequency

Meal timing and frequency are topics of significant debate in the nutrition and fitness community. NASM takes an evidence-based position that total daily calorie and macronutrient intake matters more than the timing or distribution of meals throughout the day.

The old bodybuilding wisdom of eating every 2 to 3 hours to "stoke the metabolic fire" has been largely debunked by research. Studies comparing equal daily calorie intake distributed across 2, 3, or 6 meals per day show no significant difference in metabolic rate, fat loss, or muscle gain when total intake and macronutrient composition are held constant.

Intermittent fasting (IF) patterns, including 16:8 (16 hours fasting, 8 hours eating) and 5:2 (5 normal days, 2 reduced-calorie days), have gained popularity. Research shows that IF can be an effective tool for calorie reduction in some individuals, primarily because the restricted eating window naturally limits total intake. However, IF does not provide metabolic advantages beyond the calorie reduction itself. If you eat the same total calories in an 8-hour window or a 16-hour window, the outcomes are similar.

NASM recommends that trainers focus on helping clients find a meal timing pattern that supports adherence to their calorie targets. For some people, three regular meals works best. For others, two larger meals with a snack may be more sustainable. The pattern that the client will follow consistently is the right pattern, regardless of what any theoretical framework suggests.

Pre and Post-Workout Nutrition

While total daily intake is more important than timing, NASM does recognize that nutrient timing around exercise can improve performance and recovery. The pre-workout meal should provide accessible energy (primarily carbohydrates) and should be consumed 1 to 3 hours before training. A meal too close to exercise causes gastrointestinal discomfort. A meal too far before exercise leaves glycogen stores partially depleted.

The post-workout period is not the emergency "anabolic window" that supplement companies have marketed for decades. Research shows that the post-exercise window for protein synthesis is broader than previously thought, extending 4 to 6 hours rather than the claimed 30 to 60 minutes. As long as adequate protein and carbohydrates are consumed within a few hours of training, the precise timing has minimal impact on results.

That said, consuming 20 to 40 grams of protein and an adequate carbohydrate source within 2 to 3 hours after resistance training is a reasonable practice that supports recovery. This can come from a whole food meal or a protein shake, depending on appetite and convenience.

Breaking Through Weight Loss Plateaus

Weight loss plateaus are a predictable consequence of sustained caloric restriction, and understanding why they occur helps you respond appropriately rather than abandoning your plan.

The primary cause of plateaus is the metabolic adaptation discussed earlier. As you lose weight, your BMR decreases because a smaller body requires less energy. Your TDEE also decreases because you burn fewer calories moving a lighter body through the same activities. What started as a 500-calorie deficit gradually shrinks to a 200-calorie deficit without any change in behavior.

Water retention can also mask fat loss, creating an apparent plateau on the scale even when fat reduction is continuing. Cortisol (improved during stress and caloric restriction) promotes water retention. A sudden drop in cortisol (from a diet break, reduced stress, or improved sleep) often produces a rapid "whoosh" effect where several pounds of water weight are released overnight.

NASM recommends several strategies for managing plateaus. First, verify that your tracking is still precise. Portion sizes tend to creep upward over time as people become less vigilant about measuring. Second, recalculate your TDEE based on your current weight, since you may have been using outdated numbers. Third, consider a planned diet break of 1 to 2 weeks at maintenance calories to allow metabolic rate to recover before returning to the deficit. Fourth, increase physical activity through NEAT (walking more, taking stairs) rather than adding more formal exercise, which can increase appetite and cortisol.

Do not respond to a plateau by drastically reducing calories. Extreme restriction below safe minimums accelerates metabolic adaptation, increases muscle loss, improves cortisol further, and sets the stage for rebound weight gain. Patient, moderate adjustments produce better long-term outcomes than aggressive cuts.

The Psychology of Calorie Counting

NASM's behavior change model recognizes that nutrition is not purely a mathematical problem. The psychology of eating, including emotional eating, food relationships, social pressure, and habit formation, profoundly affects whether calorie targets translate into actual results.

Calorie counting can become counterproductive when it triggers obsessive behavior, food anxiety, or an unhealthy relationship with eating. Signs that tracking is becoming problematic include intense distress when you cannot log a meal precisely, avoiding social eating situations, selecting foods purely by calorie count without regard for enjoyment or nutritional quality, and binging after periods of strict restriction.

For individuals with a history of disordered eating, calorie counting may not be appropriate. NASM-certified trainers are trained to recognize signs of disordered eating and to refer clients to qualified mental health professionals when appropriate. Alternative approaches such as mindful eating, portion-based methods (using hand sizes rather than scales), and easy to use eating principles can support nutritional goals without the potential psychological pitfalls of numerical tracking.

For most people, calorie counting is a useful educational tool rather than a permanent practice. The value of tracking diminishes after several months because you develop an easy to use understanding of portion sizes, calorie-dense versus calorie-sparse foods, and how different meals affect your satiety and energy. Many successful clients track diligently for 3 to 6 months, then transition to a more easy to use approach informed by the knowledge they gained during the tracking phase.