Flint Inc (flintk12.com)
Flint Data Protection Impact Assessment (DPIA)
Description of processing
AI system data processing
Flint K12's platform handles educational information through its technology infrastructure with AI capabilities. The service relies on Anthropic, OpenAI, Replicate (image and video generation), E2B (code execution), and Exa (web search) as AI sub-processors, with data storage managed through Supabase (PostgreSQL database on AWS), application hosting through Vercel, and workflow automation through Fly.io.
The system develops interactive learning experiences using teacher materials and student engagement data while maintaining privacy safeguards.
Data handling happens via secure connections to Student Information Systems and Learning Management Systems through Edlink. AI tools work with this information exclusively for customizing learning experiences based on teacher and student input. No student data is used for AI model training or stored beyond its educational purpose.*
Purposes of processing
The platform handles personal information for several core functions:
-
User login management through Google, Microsoft, and Circle SSO authentication
-
Monitoring learning advancement
-
Enabling student-AI tool communication
-
Generating tailored educational material (text, images, videos, code visualizations)
-
Maintaining academic records
-
Supporting school administrative operations
Categories of personal data
The system collects multiple data types:
Identification Information
-
First and last names
-
Email addresses
-
Google/Microsoft profile pictures (when available)
-
Authentication credentials
Educational Information
-
Class enrollment records
-
Learning advancement metrics
-
Assessment outcomes
System Usage Data
-
Browser specifications and operating system details
-
Viewed pages and clicked links
-
Feature engagement duration
-
Language settings
-
Device identification
-
Internet protocol address
Geolocation Data (derived from IP address)
-
City-level location
-
Country
-
Region/state
Analytics Event Data
-
User interaction events
-
Feature usage patterns
-
Session data
Student-Generated Content
-
AI chatbot conversation logs
-
Work submissions
-
Written essays
-
Audio files (where applicable)
-
Code submissions
-
Generated images and videos
Data flows and storage
All operations occur within United States territory. Primary data storage uses Supabase (PostgreSQL on AWS) servers within the United States with redundancy across different U.S. regions.
Data movement begins with school system integration (via Edlink), moves through approved processors, and employs encrypted connections with controlled access privileges.
Retention periods
Active accounts maintain data indefinitely unless the user requests deletion. Upon deletion requests, all associated data is removed within 30 days. Backup systems preserve data according to redundancy requirements. Schools may request institution-wide data removal anytime.
Sub-Processors
The following third parties process personal data on behalf of Flint. Learn more about subprocessors here.
AI Processing Services
| Provider | Purpose | Data Processed |
|---|---|---|
| Anthropic | AI chat, content generation | User prompts, conversation context |
| OpenAI | AI chat, content generation | User prompts, conversation context |
| Replicate | Image/video generation | User prompts, uploaded images |
| E2B | Code execution sandbox | User-submitted code |
| Exa | Web search for AI | Search queries |
Infrastructure & Hosting
| Provider | Purpose | Data Processed |
|---|---|---|
| Supabase | Database hosting (AWS) | All application data |
| Vercel | Application hosting | Request logs, application data |
| Fly.io | Workflow automation | Operational data |
Third-Party Integrations
| Provider | Purpose | Data Processed |
|---|---|---|
| Edlink | SIS/LMS integration | Student rosters, class data |
| Sentry | Error tracking | Error logs, user context |
| SendGrid | Email delivery | Email addresses, message content |
| Intercom | Customer support | User profiles, support conversations |
| PostHog | Product analytics | Usage events, user properties |
| Mixpanel | Product analytics | Usage events, user properties |
| Slack | Internal notifications | Aggregated alerts |
| Google Workspace | Calendar/email integration | Meeting data, email content |
| Google Analytics | Web analytics | Page views, user sessions, anonymized events |
| Google Ads | Advertising | Anonymized conversion data |
| ConvertAPI | Document conversion | Uploaded documents |
| Datalab | Document processing | Uploaded documents |
| HubSpot | CRM | Contact names, emails, school associations |
| GitHub | Code repository | Issue/PR content (may reference user data) |
Necessity assessment
Justification for data collection
Authentication details create the foundation for account protection and access management. Educational information enables core service delivery and progress assessment. Usage data maintains system functionality and helps identify technical improvements. Geolocation data (city/country level, derived from IP) enables district-level analytics reporting.
Processing for proportionality
Data gathering stays strictly limited to educational purposes with no marketing or commercial use of student data. Collection scope aligns with school requirements and learning objectives.
Evaluation of less intrusive alternatives
The current method represents minimum data processing necessary to achieve the platform's educational objectives. Reducing data collection would undermine educational functionality. The approach follows data minimization principles while preserving service quality.
Risk assessment
Identification of potential risks to data subjects
For Student Users
-
Unauthorized access to records
-
Misuse of student-created materials
-
Privacy concerns regarding AI interaction records
-
Retention and cross-border transfer risks
For Teachers/Administrators
-
Access management vulnerabilities
-
Professional privacy exposure
-
Information accuracy concerns
-
System access challenges
Analysis of AI-specific risks
The platform monitors content appropriateness and safety, potential algorithmic bias, decision-making transparency, and maintains boundaries between AI services and student data.
Security measures assessment
Technical Controls
-
HTTPS encryption for data in transit
-
Encryption at rest for stored data
-
Role-based access restrictions
-
Routine security evaluations and upgrades
-
Redundant backup infrastructure
Organizational Controls
-
Privacy documentation and processes
-
Designated Data Protection Officer
-
Incident response frameworks
-
Security training programs
Special category data handling
Educational records receive FERPA guidelines protection. Users under 13 get enhanced protections in compliance with COPPA. Access restrictions include special handling procedures for any sensitive educational content.
Risk mitigation efforts
Technical safeguards
Data Protection Methods
-
HTTPS encryption during transmission
-
Encryption at rest for stored data
-
Controlled API connections to service providers
-
Recurring security patches
-
Role-based, multi-factor authentication options
-
Session controls and timeout features
-
Comprehensive activity logging
Organizational methods
Policy Framework
-
Detailed privacy documents
-
Ongoing team training
-
Emergency response procedures
-
Data management guidelines
Management Structure
-
Assigned Data Protection Officer
-
Security incident reporting pathways
-
Periodic policy revisions
-
Documented security procedures
Specific protections for children's data
COPPA Compliance:
-
Parental authorization requirements
-
Age-suitable privacy features
-
Limited information distribution
-
Strengthened security measures
Educational Privacy (FERPA):
-
School-based authorization systems
-
Minimal minor data collection
-
Strict access management
Data subject rights procedures
Users can submit access requests through a straightforward process with a 30-day response timeline.
AI-specific considerations
Model training data sources and quality
The platform enforces strict data usage limitations, ensuring no student data is used for AI model training.
Algorithm transparency and explainability
Transparency includes documented AI usage, interaction audits, teacher oversight of AI content, and explicit consent requirements for AI features.
Automated decision-making impacts
The system avoids autonomous determinations entirely. All personalization is based on explicit inputs with mandatory teacher review and documented AI influence.
Bias monitoring and mitigation
Regular audits assess content safety and detect bias. Teacher review processes and continuous monitoring protocols identify concerns.
Compliance Demonstration
Regulatory Compliance
The platform adheres to:
-
GDPR standards
-
FERPA guidelines
-
COPPA regulations
Data Sharing Agreements
Third-party relationships remain limited to essential providers with data processing agreements. No commercial data sharing occurs, and compliance receives periodic review.
Document History
| Date | Version | Change |
|---|---|---|
| April 14, 2026 | 2.0 | Added missing AI sub-processors (Replicate, E2B, Exa); Updated hosting providers (Vercel, Fly.io, Supabase); Added third-party integrations; Added Circle SSO; Clarified encryption (HTTPS + at-rest, not E2E); Added geolocation and analytics data categories |
| December 18, 2024 | 1.0 | Initial version |
