Talk to us
Bring the last document that left your network
There is no form on this site, no trial to start and nothing to buy. What there is, is a conversation, and the most useful starting point is something real that went to an authoriser, a partner or a requester.
Bring one of these
Your last authoriser submission. What imagery went into it, where each piece came from, and what your team believed they had agreement for. That single walkthrough establishes more than a feature discussion.
What your central-office accounts can currently see. Not what your policy says — what the systems actually permit. Most operators have never checked, and the answer is frequently wider than anybody intended.
Your family-facing agreement, as it reads. One network-level document is an advantage over four inherited ones, and it is worth confirming that every campus is actually using the current version.
Any records request you have received. Even one. How long it took, who assembled the answer, and whether anybody was confident it was complete.
Three things we will say before you ask
One. Public funding does not lift the age floor. If your recruitment plan depends on public imagery of under-thirteen students, this will not do it and nothing will.
Two. We will not tell you what a public-records request reaches. That is your counsel’s call and it varies by state.
Three. There is nothing to buy. The platform is free to the school and live payment is not turned on, so there is no procurement step.
Any of the three is a legitimate reason to stop, and the first meeting is a much better place to reach it than the second term.
What a second conversation usually is
A role-design session more than a software demonstration, which surprises people and is where the value actually sits for a network.
The question it works through is what each of your roles genuinely needs in order to do its job. Campus staff need their campus. A network operations lead usually needs counts and states rather than photographs, and discovering that is worth more than any feature, because access nobody needed is the cheapest risk to remove.
The second half is the reporting path: what has left your network in the last year, how it was assembled, and what would change if the material were governed before somebody built the document rather than checked afterwards.
If a network wants a demonstration first, we will do one. We would just rather spend the hour on the thing that is actually different about running four campuses.
About the conversation itself
Is there a trial?
Not a self-serve one. Setting this up against real rosters across several campuses is work rather than a signup, and a demonstration on invented data would tell you nothing about the thing that matters, which is what your central office can see.
Should it be one campus first or the whole network?
One campus, in almost every case. A network that changes everything at once has no control group and no way to tell whether a problem is the system or the campus. It is also the only version that a small operations team can actually staff.
Does our authoriser need to know?
That is your judgement and depends on your relationship and your state. Nothing about adopting this requires an authoriser's approval, and nothing about it changes what you owe them. If it helps your position at renewal that you can describe your imagery holdings precisely, that is a consequence rather than a selling point.
Do we have to decide anything at the end?
Only whether there is a second conversation. There is no purchase at the end of this and no procurement step to prepare for.
Where it happens
Through the platform’s own front door at homeroom.software, where a person at Stanley Studios picks it up. This site collects nothing from you: no form, no address to hand over before you can read anything.
What follows is a conversation rather than a sequence, and there is nothing to buy at the end of it. That is the actual state of the product, not a soft close.