Assemble the record for an automated-decision impact assessment
Key facts
- Human involvement
- YellowClose supervision
- How AI is used
- From the system documents the lawyer identifies, list the stated purpose, the data categories, the decisions the output is used for, and any human-review step the documents describe. Do not write the assessment's conclusions.
- What the lawyer must review
- If the system is used to recruit, screen, hire, monitor, set pay, promote or fire, the EEOC's 29 April 2024 page says the federal employment-discrimination statutes apply to that use, including a neutral tool with an unjustified disparate impact. Colorado Senate Bill 26-189 was signed on 14 May 2026. The bill page's summary says that, starting 1 January 2027, a developer of covered automated decision-making technology that materially influences a consequential decision must give the deployer technical documentation, and that deployers must give consumers notice and keep compliance records for at least three years. Those dates are not yet in force on 22 October 2026. You read the signed act before treating a duty as applicable, and you write the assessment. Do not put personal data into a public tool. Formal Opinion 512 requires verification and, for a self-learning tool, the Rule 1.6 consent analysis.
- Written for / version
- United States versionUS
Who does what
| Role | What they do |
|---|---|
| Assistance | Potential support includes identifying points for review. Confirm the tool’s capability and permitted scope. |
| Lawyer | Set the scope, supervise the work closely, verify every part relied on, resolve omissions and exceptions, and approve the exact output. |
Checklist
- Confirm that the actual tool, feature and processing terms permit use of this information, including access, retention, training and disclosure conditions.
- Verify the applicable jurisdiction and the version of each relevant law, rule or instrument in force at the material time.
- Confirm the output against the client’s instructions and the complete relevant source material, including omissions or contradictions.
- Resolve exceptions and record the responsible lawyer’s approval of the exact output and intended use.
Forms and precedents for this task
| Form or precedent | Kind | AI use | Summary |
|---|---|---|---|
| Law firm generative AI use policy (United States) | Policy | AI use Yellow | An internal policy for a US law firm on which generative AI tools may be used, what may be put into them, who must review output, and when the client is told. |
| Approval and training record for a generative AI tool (United States) | Checklist | AI use Yellow | The record a US firm completes before a generative AI tool is put on the permitted list, covering confidentiality settings, retention, reliability, liability, notice of breach, and who has been trained. |
Signed-in accounts can read the full text of each one. All precedents.