Case Management Platform (CMP)

What it is

The Case Management Platform (CMP) is the Decision Desk of the Guardline Suite. It orchestrates the lifecycle of cases that require human analysis: fraud alerts, compliance reviews, KYC assessments, risk escalations, and committee deliberations.

The CMP centralizes backoffice work on a single platform, with configurable queues, regulatory SLAs, approval authorities, case distribution, and an immutable audit trail. It works both as an integrated module of the Guardline Suite and standalone, compatible with third-party decision engines.

Features

Work queues

Cases are organized into queues tied to areas of responsibility. Each queue operates independently, with its own analysts, SLAs, and distribution rules.

Queue	Area	Scope
Onboarding	Onboarding review	Document validation, profile data, biometrics
Compliance	AML/CFT	Restrictive lists, PEP, UBO, financial compatibility
Fraud	Fraud prevention	Adverse media, suspicious patterns, device intelligence
Committee	Collegiate decision	Cases escalated for formal deliberation
Commercial	Advisory opinion	Commercial context (advisory voice, no veto power)

The institution can configure additional queues to match its organizational structure.

Regulatory SLAs

Each queue and case type operates under configurable deadlines, with defaults based on BACEN/BCRA Circular 3.978:

Risk level	Resolution deadline	Reference
Low	4 hours	First response
Medium	24 hours	Standard resolution
High	48 hours	Mandatory collegiate decision
Critical	72 hours	Executive board or committee

Deadlines are configurable by the institution. The system monitors SLAs automatically:

SLA at risk: visual and email alert when the deadline is approaching
SLA breached: automatic escalation to the next tier
Breach rate metrics: real-time operational visibility

Decision authorities

Decision authorities define who can make which type of decision. Each authority has a configurable score range. Cases above the limit are automatically escalated to the higher authority. Escalation happens before the decision, not after: the system prevents an analyst from deciding outside their authority.

Risk level	Score range	Authority	Decision type
Auto	Defined by the institution	System	Automatic approval or rejection
Low	Defined by the institution	Analyst	Individual decision
Medium	Defined by the institution	Senior Analyst	Individual decision, may request joint analysis
High	Defined by the institution	Supervisor	Mandatory collegiate decision
Critical	Defined by the institution	Executive Board / Committee	Collegiate decision with executive board approval

Case distribution

The CMP offers four distribution modes, configurable per queue:

Mode	How it works	When to use
By risk	Routes automatically based on score	Default configuration, ensures regulatory compliance
Round-robin	Distributes sequentially among available analysts	Balances load within each tier
By availability	Distributes based on each analyst's real-time availability	Teams with varying schedules or seniorities
Manual	A manager assigns individually or an analyst self-assigns	Special cases and reassignments

The modes can be combined. The recommended configuration is by risk as the primary criterion, round-robin as secondary, and manual as an override available at any time.

Case dossier

When the analyst opens a case, they have access to the single-pane dossier:

Customer data (profile, score, segment)
Transaction history
Onboarding result (when the customer came in through the ONP)
Alerts and triggered rules
Behavioral baseline (UBA)
Counterparties involved
Position on restrictive lists
Prior decisions on the same customer
Audit timeline with every event recorded

Analyst actions

For each case, the analyst has six available actions:

Action	Description
Approve	Release the transaction or onboarding
Reject	Block with a recorded justification
Place pending	Request additional information from the customer or another area
Escalate	Forward to a higher decision authority
Request joint analysis	Request an opinion from another area (Compliance, Fraud, Commercial)
Convene the committee	Forward to a collegiate deliberation session

Every action requires a written justification and is recorded in the audit trail.

Joint analysis

When a case requires input from multiple areas, the analyst requests joint analysis. The case receives independent opinions from each consulted area. Until the opinions are recorded, the case stays locked.

If the opinions diverge (for example, Compliance recommends rejection and Onboarding recommends approval), the system automatically escalates the case to the committee.

Decision committee

For high-risk cases or those with divergence between areas, the CMP runs formal committee sessions with quorum, voting, and minutes.

Committee flow:

Committee rules:

Rule	Definition
Minimum quorum	3 members: Compliance/AML + Desk Manager + additional member
Voting	Simple majority. In a tie, Compliance/AML's vote prevails (tie-breaking vote)
Record	Each member records vote and justification. Minutes generated automatically
Deadline	48h for convocation and deliberation
Conflicts of interest	A member with a conflict of interest recuses themselves. The system convenes a substitute
Commercial	Advisory voice, no vote. May present context, no veto power

Automatic committee triggers

The system automatically forwards a case to the committee when:

Risk score reaches a critical level (per the configured threshold)
Joint analysis opinions diverge
The customer is a PEP or related to a PEP
The customer is classified as strategic or VIP (a flag set during onboarding)
The SLA is breached without a decision
A manager manually convenes the committee

Audit trail

Every action on the Decision Desk is recorded automatically and immutably:

Case creation and source (rules engine, manual, external system)
Calculated score and assigned risk
Analyst assignment and reassignment
Start and end of each analysis
Technical opinions from joint analysis
Escalations with reason, priority, and destination
Committee votes with individual justifications
Final decision with a written justification
Timestamp for every event

The record is directly accessible by the institution for export, serving as a regulatory dossier for COAF/UIF and internal audits, in compliance with BACEN/BCRA Circular 3.978.

COAF/UIF reporting

When a case results in a mandatory report, the CMP organizes and formats the data into XML compatible with SISCOAF, making submission easier for the institution.

Compatibility with third-party engines

The CMP does not require the use of Guardline's decision engine. Institutions that already have their own fraud or AML engine can adopt the Decision Desk independently, receiving cases through integration and operating queues, decision authorities, SLAs, and the committee on top of any alert source.

Access profiles

Profile	Access	Description
Analyst	Decision Desk	Analyzes cases within their decision authority
Manager	Operations, queues, settings, dashboards	Configures flows, monitors SLAs, reassigns cases
Director	Committee + everything from Manager	Participates in committees, creates sessions, approves high-authority decisions
Administrator	System management	Configuration of queues, decision authorities, SLAs, and access profiles