Parent and Guardian Access

Integrating parent and guardian data is one of the most complex and high-risk aspects of edtech interoperability. It's not that the data itself is inherently difficult to sync—most Student Information Systems (SIS) provide APIs or OneRoster feeds that include parent/guardian relationships. However, the quality and legal implications of this data can vary widely.

Because most developers that are looking for this information are building applications that involve exposing student data to parents or guardians (one way or another), it's critical to understand the pitfalls and best practices around this data.

While Edlink provides the technical infrastructure to sync these relationships (via the Agents model), the quality and legal implications of this data vary significantly depending on the source system and the specific school district's data hygiene.

If your application involves student pickup, direct communication, or sharing academic records, you must understand the limitations and risks involved. We act as a conduit for the data as it exists in the source system. We normalize the data structure, but we cannot validate the legal standing of the relationships provided.

The "Garbage In" Problem

School districts often rely on manual data entry for family relationships. Consequently, Student Information Systems (SIS) frequently contain disorganized or outdated data.

• Inconsistent Labeling: One administrator might label a stepfather as "Father," while another labels him "Step-parent," and a third simply uses "Emergency Contact."
• Stale Data: Relationship statuses change (divorce, custody battles, restraining orders), but school records may not be updated immediately.
• Duplicate Records: Parents often exist as multiple distinct records in an SIS if they have multiple children, making it difficult to resolve them into a single identity.

Specification Limitations: OneRoster vs. Native

Not all integration methods yield the same depth of data.

• OneRoster Limitations: The OneRoster specification is designed for broad compatibility, which often results in a "lowest common denominator" approach. Many OneRoster implementations simply link a student to an adult with a generic "guardian" role. They frequently strip out critical metadata, such as whether that guardian lives with the student or has legal custody.
• Native Integrations: Edlink’s native API integrations (e.g., with PowerSchool, Skyward, or Infinite Campus) are built to extract granular data. However, we can only extract what the district has actually entered into the system.

The "Authorization" Trap

The presence of a relationship record in the API does not automatically imply legal authorization to access student data or pick up a child.

Critical flags often missing or unreliable in source data include:

• legal_guardian: Does this person have legal custody?
• access_to_records: Is this person allowed to see grades and attendance?
• pickup_rights: Is this person allowed to take the child from school?
• emergency_contact: Is this person only to be called in an emergency, or are they a primary caregiver?

Risk: If your application assumes that every "Parent" listed in the API has full rights to see student data, you risk exposing information to non-custodial parents or individuals with restraining orders.

Legal and Safety Implications

Mishandling parent data can lead to severe legal consequences and physical safety risks.

• FERPA Compliance: Under the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA), schools are prohibited from disclosing student education records to unauthorized parties. If your application inadvertently shares grades or location data with a parent who has lost legal access rights, you and the district may be in violation of federal law.
• Physical Safety: For applications managing dismissal or pickup, relying solely on SIS data without secondary verification can pose a physical safety risk to the student.

Best Practices

While the design of your product is up to you, here are some best practices to mitigate risks when handling parent and guardian data:

1. Default to Least Privilege: Do not assume a "Parent" role grants access to sensitive data unless explicitly confirmed.
2. Verify with Districts: If your app involves safety (pickup) or sensitive data (grades), build a workflow that requires school administrators to manually verify or "invite" parents, rather than relying 100% on the sync.
3. Check for Flags: When available, check the flags array on the Edlink Agent object. However, treat a null or missing flag as "Unknown," not as "True."
4. Display Disclaimers: Make it clear to district administrators that they are responsible for ensuring their SIS data accurately reflects current custody orders before enabling parent portals.