Student Grievance Management

Yes. The system supports anonymous intake via the student portal and via staff-logged anonymous submissions. Anonymous cases receive a unique case token that allows the complainant to check the status of their complaint and receive updates at any time without entering identifying information. The institutional case record captures all handler actions, investigation steps, communications logged to the case, and the final resolution in the same audit-complete format as identified complaints. Anonymous complaints can be routed, escalated, SLA-tracked, and pattern-analyzed identically to identified complaints. If an anonymous complainant later chooses to identify themselves, the case record is updated and the prior anonymous interactions remain in the history.

Multi-department complaints can be assigned to simultaneous departmental queues with a shared case record. Both departments see the same case history, including each other's logged actions, status changes, and communication entries. Neither department can see or edit the other's private investigator notes unless permissions allow it, but the shared timeline gives both a complete picture of what actions have been taken. The case has a single final resolution record, and the routing assignment history shows which departments were involved throughout the lifecycle. This prevents the situation where one office believes another office is handling the matter while both are waiting for each other.

SLA timers begin at the verified intake timestamp. The institution configures the acknowledgment window, commonly 7 days for general complaints and shorter windows for Title IX or safety-related matters. The system sends an automated notification to the assigned handler at a configurable lead time before the deadline, then sends a second notification to both the handler and their supervisor if no acknowledgment action has been logged by the deadline. Missed SLA events are recorded in the case audit trail and visible in the administration dashboard as flagged cases. The institution can run reports on SLA compliance rates by department and by complaint type to identify where training or staffing adjustments are needed. Nothing about the SLA enforcement modifies the case record. It adds notification events to the timeline while leaving all substantive decisions to the assigned handler.

The reporting module generates export-ready summaries covering grievance volume by category, department, time period, and student population segment; intake-to-resolution timelines with average and median values; SLA compliance rates by department; outcome distributions by complaint type; and case-level detail with intake date, category, assigned handler, status history, and resolution type. Exports are available in PDF and CSV formats. Case-level exports can be configured to exclude direct identifiers for aggregate reporting while retaining the case metadata that accreditors typically request. The system does not require an IT request or data warehouse query to generate these reports. They run from the grievance management interface with date range and filter parameters.

Yes. When a resolution is issued on a case, the complainant can submit a formal appeal through the same portal. The appeal creates a linked sub-case that inherits the complete history of the original complaint and starts its own workflow with a separate assigned reviewer, SLA timer, and audit trail. The appeal reviewer sees the original case record, the original resolution, and the complainant's grounds for appeal in one view. All actions taken during the appeal, communications logged, documents reviewed, hearings scheduled, and the final appeal decision, are recorded in the sub-case with the same immutability as the original case. The final disposition report for the case covers both the original resolution and the appeal outcome, giving accreditors and legal reviewers a complete picture of the institution's handling of a multi-stage grievance.