What it does
A goal review cycle runs a framework against a real institution or program for a defined period. It issues a review packet — a snapshot of the framework's questions, organized into sections — to a respondent, who answers and links evidence. A committee reviewer approves or returns each section, and an approved packet publishes as the final record.
Who it's for
Administrators who manage the framework prepare cycles and packets. Respondents — typically a program director or administrator answering for their unit — complete the packet. Committee reviewers, who may be faculty with no other admin permissions, review and approve sections. Everyone works in their own portal.
How it works
A cycle records its type: annual program evaluation, institutional report, accreditation review, strategic plan review, or custom. It also has a period — annual, semi-annual, quarterly, or custom — plus start and end dates and an optional due date. Status moves forward: draft, scheduled, open, locked, review, completed, archived.
Completing a packet. The respondent workspace presents the packet section by section. Answers save as drafts, and a progress meter tracks required questions. Submission is blocked by unanswered required questions, required evidence not yet linked, or unsaved drafts. Evidence can be linked from documents, resources, form responses, an external web address, or a manual note. Once everything required is complete, the respondent selects Submit packet.
Committee review. The reviewer opens the Section decision panel and records a decision per section: approved, needs revision, or returned. They can add an optional rating and comment, then select Save decision. Returning a section sends the whole packet back to the respondent with a reason. The respondent's workspace opens on that section, and the submit action becomes Resubmit packet. When every section is approved, the packet publishes, and the read-only final view becomes the record. Packets move through not started, in progress, submitted, returned, reviewed, and published states. Cycle-level dashboards roll these up into a readiness percentage.
Section assignments. Beyond the single respondent, sections can be assigned to people, groups, or roles with specific permissions: view, complete, upload evidence, comment, submit section, review, or approve. Each assignment has its own due date and status, so large packets split across contributors.
Before you start
You need management access on the cycle's scope to prepare a cycle or packet. Respondents can only write answers on packets assigned to them, and reviewers only see packets where they hold review or approve permission.
Pick the respondent institution or program and confirm they have a linked academic period, if the framework's period mode requires one.
Name the respondent and the committee reviewer before you prepare the packet — both are required to finish setup.
Do this
Open the review cycles area (
/organization/goals/reviews, or the institution equivalent) and start a new packet → the packet builder opens on 1. Select a goal set.Choose the framework to issue, then continue → you should see the 2. Choose outcomes screen, listing the framework's goals and outcomes as checkboxes.
Select the outcomes this packet should cover, then continue → you should see 3. Assign packet sources, with a Review subject field and standard, respondent, and reviewer columns.
Set the Review subject and select a respondent source and a reviewer source for each row that needs one → the packet summary panel on the side fills in with the goal set, outcomes, respondent, and reviewer.
Select Prepare packet → the packet, its sections, and a frozen copy of each question are created, and you return to the review cycle page with the new assignment listed.
Once the respondent submits and the reviewer records decisions on every section, open the assignment's final view → you should see the read-only published record.
You're done when
The packet builder's summary panel shows a goal set, outcomes, respondent, and reviewer with nothing marked Not selected.
The new assignment appears in the cycle's packet list after you select Prepare packet.
A completed review shows the packet in a published state with a read-only final view.
Boundaries and limits
Preparing cycles, packets, and section assignments needs management access on the cycle's scope. Respondents can only write answers on packets assigned to them, and reviewers only see packets where they hold review or approve permission.
The packet builder currently supports institution and program respondents; organization-level respondent packets cannot be prepared yet.
Cycle, packet, and answer statuses move forward only: a submitted answer cannot go back to draft, and a completed cycle can only be archived. The one exception is the return path, which reopens a submitted packet for rework.
Packet questions are a frozen snapshot. Changing the framework after preparation does not update packets already issued.
Linked evidence respects the source's own permissions. If a reviewer cannot see the underlying document, resource, form response, or report, the packet shows the evidence entry without its content or link.
Nothing in the review trail is hard-deleted; cycles, packets, answers, decisions, and evidence links are retired by soft deletion and archiving.
Common questions
Q: The respondent updated the framework's wording — will the open packet change? A: No. Packets carry their own copy of every question, snapshotted when the packet was prepared. A new packet is needed to pick up framework changes.
Q: Why can't the respondent submit the packet? A: The workspace lists the exact blockers: required questions without saved answers, required evidence not yet linked, or unsaved drafts. Clearing them enables Submit packet.
Q: What happens when a section is returned? A: The packet goes back to the respondent in a returned state with the reviewer's reason. Their workspace opens on that section, and they select Resubmit packet after making corrections.
Q: Can several people work on one packet? A: Yes. Sections can be assigned to additional people, groups, or roles with granular permissions — one person completes a section while another uploads evidence and a third reviews it.
Q: Can a reviewer see confidential evidence attached to a packet? A: Only if they already have access to the underlying source. Evidence links never widen access; without source access the reviewer sees that evidence exists but not its content.
Related articles