Slate has become the system of record for admissions at many institutions and for good reason. It gives prospects and applicants a consistent, self-service way to engage with admissions workflows without prematurely issuing full student credentials.

In many ways, Slate is doing exactly what it is supposed to do.

But for identity and access management (IAM) teams, Slate is often the first place where a deeper challenge quietly emerges: how applicants authenticate beyond Slate itself.

This challenge rarely shows up as a single breaking point. Instead, it surfaces gradually, usually around financial aid, housing, orientation, or compliance systems, long before an applicant officially becomes a student.

Slate as the applicant identity (and why that’s intentional)

Slate assigns applicants a unique internal identifier and credentials that work seamlessly within the Slate environment. This allows applicants to:

• Complete admissions workflows
  
• Self-serve access without IT involvement
  
• Avoid receiving full student credentials too early
  
  

That boundary, applicant first, student later, is intentional. It reduces friction for applicants and protects the integrity of the campus identity system.

For many institutions, Slate becomes the first system where identity boundaries are actively enforced, rather than assumed.

The complication arises not inside Slate, but at the point where applicant access must extend beyond it.

The CAS-SAML gap that forces dual identities

Many downstream university systems, particularly financial aid and housing platforms, authenticate using SAML (and increasingly OIDC).

In a common implementation, applicant authentication originating in Slate is CAS-based, which creates a technical mismatch IAM teams must resolve.

From an IAM perspective, this creates a familiar technical mismatch:

• Applicants can authenticate successfully in Slate
  
• But often cannot use those same credentials directly to access             SAML-based systems without translation or integration
  
  

When an applicant needs to log into a financial aid system during the application process, something has to give.

At many institutions, the workaround is straightforward: create a temporary campus account for the applicant.

It’s a practical solution. It keeps admissions moving. And it works.

But it also introduces a second identity for the same individual.

The hidden cost of temporary applicant accounts

Temporary campus accounts are rarely controversial in isolation. The problems appear at scale.

IAM teams supporting Slate environments often find themselves managing:

• One identity for the applicant in Slate
  
• Another identity in the campus directory for downstream access
  
• Manual provisioning during peak admissions cycles
  
• Manual deprovisioning for applicants who never enroll
  
  

From the applicant’s perspective, this means juggling multiple usernames and passwords during an already complex process. From IT’s perspective, it means increased overhead often without a clear owner once admissions decisions are finalized.

What begins as a reasonable workaround quietly becomes a standing process.

How identity complexity accumulates in Slate environments

Identity challenges in Slate environments rarely appear all at once. They accumulate gradually through everyday decisions.

A temporary account is created “just for financial aid.” Another is created for housing access. Cleanup is deferred until after the cycle ends.

Over time, IAM teams describe patterns like:

• Hundreds or thousands of short-lived applicant accounts each year
  
• Increased helpdesk tickets related to login confusion
  
• Uncertainty about which applicant accounts still need access
  
• Audit discomfort around incomplete deprovisioning
  
  

Individually, each decision makes sense. Together, they create identity complexity that is difficult to unwind.

Why Slate surfaces IAM issues earlier than other systems

Slate is deeply embedded in admissions and enrollment workflows. That makes it uniquely sensitive to questions of who needs access, when, and under what conditions.

As institutions rely more heavily on Slate credentials for applicant self-service, identity questions shift from:

“How do applicants log in?”

       to:

“How do we manage applicant access across multiple systems safely and consistently?”

At that point, IAM teams are no longer solving an authentication problem. They are managing identity architecture.

For many institutions, Slate becomes the forcing function the place where applicant-versus-student identity boundaries are first tested in practice.

The operational strain IAM teams feel most

The technical mismatch between CAS and SAML is only part of the issue. The real strain comes from the operational consequences.

IAM teams often cite:

• Time spent provisioning and cleaning up temporary accounts
  
• Identity licensing costs tied to non-student users
  
• Increased coordination with admissions and financial aid
  
• Security review pressure around applicant access
  
  

None of these are failures. They are the byproduct of growth.

As applicant volume increases, the cost of maintaining dual identities becomes harder to ignore.

The question institutions eventually ask

At a certain scale, many teams pause and ask a broader question:

Is there a way to let applicants use their Slate credentials to access SAML-based systems without issuing full campus identities too early?

This question is less about tooling and more about architecture. It reflects a desire to:

• Preserve Slate’s role as the applicant identity
  
• Keep applicants out of the core campus IdP
  
• Reduce manual provisioning and cleanup work
  
• Maintain clear identity boundaries and auditability
  
  

There is no single right answer. But the question itself marks an important shift.

A cleaner architectural pattern begins to emerge

Some institutions begin exploring ways to bridge CAS-based applicant authentication with SAML-based institutional services without duplicating identities.

In these models:

• Applicants authenticate using Slate-managed credentials
• Authentication is translated for downstream systems
• Access remains limited and time-bound
  
• Full student credentials are issued only when applicants intend to       register
  
  

This approach keeps Slate credentials focused on applicants while reducing the need for temporary campus accounts.

It also gives IAM teams a clearer lifecycle story to explain to auditors, to security teams, and to themselves.

Where Cirrus Identity fits

This is the stage where Cirrus Identity typically gets involved.

Cirrus works with institutions using Slate to support applicant access across SAML-based systems without forcing early issuance of student identities. By bridging CAS and SAML, institutions can reduce duplicate account creation while preserving the intentional boundaries Slate was designed to enforce.

The goal isn’t to replace Slate’s model, but to support it as applicant access scales.

Why this matters beyond admissions

Although these challenges often appear first in Slate environments, they rarely stay confined there.

Once institutions solve applicant access cleanly, similar questions tend to arise in:

• Orientation and onboarding platforms
  
• Health and compliance systems
  
• Post-enrollment workflows
  
  

How applicant access is handled in Slate often sets the tone for broader identity decisions across the institution.

Closing thought

If your IAM team spends significant time creating and cleaning up applicant accounts just so applicants can log into non-Slate systems, you’re not alone.

This is a common pattern in Slate environments and it’s not a sign that anything is broken.

It’s a sign that applicant access has grown beyond the boundaries it was originally designed for.

Understanding that transition is the first step toward managing it more intentionally.

If you are interested in comparting notes on your Slate environement, email us at sales@cirrusidentity.com