Module Learning Objective

configure alerts that support deadline compliance without exposing information

1. Regulatory Concept & Core Standards

This video focuses on how to configure alerts that support deadline compliance without exposing information. Follow the sequence of decisions in the example rather than simply memorising a list. Notice who is involved, what information is needed and the expected result. These points help turn the content into a practice that another person can verify. This course presents a configuration method, not an assertion about the functions of a particular UNOVOX account. Each setting should be linked to the procedure and tested with fictional information. A technical change can affect access, confidentiality or time calculations and therefore needs verification.

Configuration must represent the national rule: the starting event, duration, unit and any exceptions. Receipt and acknowledgement are different dates. Working-day deadlines require the relevant calendar; months must not automatically be converted into 90 days. An internal alert should precede expiry and identify who prepares, approves and sends the communication.

Apply the following rule: Internally, acknowledge within seven days of receipt and provide feedback within three months after acknowledgement, or expiry of the seven-day period if omitted; the no-contact-address exception applies. Externally, the public authority provides feedback within three months of accepting the report, or six months in justified cases after notifying the person before the initial period expires: article 41. Record the separate forwarding and acknowledgement stages; the final outcome is an additional communication.

2. Practical Implementation & Procedure

Record receipt, configure advance alerts and assign responsibility for responding. Separate system notifications from information actually provided to the reporting person. Use neutral subjects and messages without factual allegations. Test different receipt dates, absences and delivery failures. Where anonymity prevents external contact, use the available secure follow-up facility. Before moving on, turn this procedure into a sequence you could explain to a colleague. Identify the first check, the action that depends on its outcome and the record that allows the decision to be reconstructed. Follow the sequence on screen and identify the point where an error would change the result.

3. Case Study & Compliance Action

A report arrives on Friday evening and is opened on Monday. The system starts counting only on opening. The team corrects the trigger and checks other open cases. Now read the case carefully. Separate established facts from information you would still need to confirm. Do not add motives or events that have not been described. This distinction matters when choosing a response proportionate to the information available.

The exercise is as follows: Does changing the reading date change the date of receipt? Choose an answer and write one sentence explaining it. During the pause, compare your choice with the criteria we have just considered. Also think about the material you would retain to explain the decision later.

Not automatically. Apply the statutory starting event and document actual receipt. Later opening does not justify postponing the duty.

One mistake to avoid is: using an internal notification's status as proof of a reply to the reporting person.

Now apply the national rule to a second decision. The platform counts 90 days from opening the message in every country. Is that configuration correct?

No. In the Polish internal procedure, receipt is acknowledged within seven days. Feedback is provided within three months of acknowledgement, or expiry of seven days after submission if no acknowledgement was sent. Consider the exception where no contact address was supplied. Months are not a fixed 90 days, and opening does not replace the statutory trigger.

National Legal Framework: Ustawa z dnia 14 czerwca 2024 r. o sygnalistach, transposing Directive (EU) 2019/1937 of the European Parliament and of the Council on the protection of persons who report breaches of Union law.