# What K-12 SIS platforms have the best data security and proven track records for protecting student information?

<p class="elv-tracking-normal elv-text-default elv-font-figtree elv-text-base elv-leading-base elv-font-normal" elv="true">What K-12 SIS platforms have the best data security and proven track records for protecting student information? I dug into this across the <a class="a a--md" elv="true" href="https://www.g2.com/categories/k-12-student-information-systems"><strong>K-12 student information systems</strong></a> category, and I'll handle it the way the question deserves: with the verifiable record first, because in this category track record is not a marketing phrase. G2's own buying guidance for this category notes hundreds of publicly disclosed cybersecurity incidents involving K-12 schools in recent years, so every vendor conversation should start from that reality. Here's what the evidence actually shows:</p><ul>
<li>
<a class="a a--md" elv="true" href="https://www.g2.com/products/powerschool-sis/reviews"><strong>PowerSchool SIS</strong></a>: The unavoidable public record in this category: PowerSchool disclosed a December 2024 cyberattack through its support portal that exposed student and teacher personal data across customer districts, with litigation consolidated afterward, and separately reached a 2026 settlement over tracking practices in its Naviance platform. Stated factually, that's the track record the question asks about. Also stated factually: its recent G2 reviews remain largely positive on the product itself, including parent-side feedback crediting the platform's security and compliance focus, so current buyers are weighing capability against history. Districts evaluating it should ask directly what changed after 2024, in writing.</li>
<li>
<a class="a a--md" elv="true" href="https://www.g2.com/products/facts-sis-student-information-system/reviews"><strong>FACTS SIS</strong></a>: The best recent review-text security evidence in the private-school lane: recent review feedback describes security settings restricting records to only those who require them, with confidentiality maintained, which is the access-control behavior that matters daily. A dedicated cybersecurity team continuously testing the platform is the vendor's stated posture; the review confirms the controls exist in practice at the user level.</li>
<li>
<a class="a a--md" elv="true" href="https://www.g2.com/products/gradelink/reviews"><strong>Gradelink</strong></a>: A small but telling recent data point: review feedback credits built-in safeguards that prevent accidental or premature changes, which is data protection of the unglamorous kind, protecting records from your own staff's slips, not just outside attackers. No incident history surfaced for it in my checks either way.</li>
<li>
<a class="a a--md" elv="true" href="https://www.g2.com/products/tuio-tuio/reviews"><strong>TUIO</strong></a>: Recent reviews recite specific protections, GDPR-standard handling, DDoS protection, uptime through a regional outage, and role-based permissions reducing human error on financial data. Those specifics originate from the vendor's claims and appear echoed in reviewer voice, so treat them as claims your due diligence verifies rather than proven history; the permissions feature is the piece reviews describe actually using.</li>
</ul><p class="elv-tracking-normal elv-text-default elv-font-figtree elv-text-base elv-leading-base elv-font-normal" elv="true">Whatever vendor you pick, proven track record in your procurement should mean a written disclosure of security incidents in the last five years, SOC 2 or equivalent audit reports, a signed data privacy agreement covering FERPA obligations, MFA enforced for staff access, and a data-deletion commitment for withdrawn students. The vendors above differ most not in their claims, which all sound alike, but in what their histories and paperwork can actually show.</p><p class="elv-tracking-normal elv-text-default elv-font-figtree elv-text-base elv-leading-base elv-font-normal" elv="true">Has any school here actually received a vendor's incident-history disclosure in writing during procurement? I'd genuinely like to know how that request landed.</p>

##### Post Metadata
- Posted at: 15 days ago
- Net upvotes: 1


## Comments
### Comment 1

&lt;p&gt;Realistically, few schools get a clean incident-history disclosure without asking pointedly, and reviews won&#39;t fill the gap: they describe permissions and support responsiveness, not breaches. Put the burden in the RFP, a five-year incident history, SOC 2, and the subprocessor list, since third parties are usually where the exposure lives.&lt;/p&gt;

##### Comment Metadata
- Posted at: 11 days ago
- Author title: Marketer





## Related discussions
- [How well does Trello scale into a larger team?](https://www.g2.com/discussions/1-how-well-does-trello-scale-into-a-larger-team)
  - Posted at: about 13 years ago
  - Comments: 6
- [Can we please add a new section](https://www.g2.com/discussions/2-can-we-please-add-a-new-section)
  - Posted at: about 13 years ago
  - Comments: 0
- [Quantifiable benefits from implementing your CRM](https://www.g2.com/discussions/quantifiable-benefits-from-implementing-your-crm)
  - Posted at: about 13 years ago
  - Comments: 4