One intake, many channels
Mobile app, citizen web, QR at events, call centre, surveys, community channels and manual control-room entry all land in the same queue.
Civiq.plus treats resolution as something that has to be demonstrated. Where it is relevant, closing an issue requires documentary evidence plus an independent field or citizen verification — and reopened issues preserve their entire history.
8 states
In the corrective action machine
4 levels
Severity classification
7 sources
Feedback intake channels
Immutable
Audit of every status change
Monitoring
Aggregate indices tell you a district is underperforming. The drill-down tells you which category, which team, at which step, and whether the same cluster has reopened before. That difference is what makes a dashboard actionable rather than accusatory.
Overall Performance
Feedback Received
2.34M
↑ 14% vs last 30 daysIssues Resolved
1.24M
↑ 19% vs last 30 daysActive Alerts
320
↓ 12% vs last 30 daysCapabilities
Mobile app, citizen web, QR at events, call centre, surveys, community channels and manual control-room entry all land in the same queue.
Individual reports stay traceable to the person who made them, while duplicates cluster into a single operational issue.
Acknowledgement, assignment and resolution targets are set per issue category and severity, then tracked and escalated automatically.
Where it matters, closure requires evidence plus an independent field or citizen check. Reopened issues keep their complete history.
A cluster that reopens in the same place is a different signal from a new one. Recurrence is measured, not reset.
On-time delivery, quality of service, resolution rate and reach, tracked per department, team and geography.
Lifecycle
The platform explicitly supports corrective actions that are not communication — service escalation, field verification, a local meeting, administrative follow-up. Communication describes verified action; it is never the default substitute for solving the problem.
A signal arrives from any channel and is normalised into the unified feedback intake.
The report is checked against other signals and, where needed, confirmed in the field.
Corrective options are scored on predicted impact, risk, required resources and cost.
An approved option gets an owning team, a named owner and an SLA-derived due date.
The resolving team submits photos, documents and notes as proof of what was done.
An independent check confirms the work before the issue is allowed to close.
Citizens who reported it are updated — describing verified action, not intention.
The twin is compared before and after to see whether the underlying condition improved.
Issue cluster
| Field | Meaning |
|---|---|
| Issue cluster ID | The canonical deduplicated issue behind many individual reports |
| Geographic scope | Affected units and geometry |
| First seen / last seen | The temporal window the cluster spans |
| Report count | How many individual feedback items are linked |
| Velocity | Whether the cluster is growing or declining |
| Severity | Low, medium, high or critical |
| Owner | The team or person responsible right now |
| SLA policy | Acknowledgement, assignment and resolution targets |
| Resolution evidence | Photos, documents, notes and verification records |
See how Civiq.plus can help your teams make better decisions, faster.