Focus area 03 · Governance

Agency AI Governance

A public agency that adopts an AI tool inherits accountability for what the tool does to the people it serves. The screener on this page tests a proposed use against the controls that have to exist first, and names the specific control missing behind each gap.

A clinician reviewing a chart in conversation with a patient
Professional judgment stays with the professional

The governance problem

VR agencies hold unusually sensitive records. Disability documentation, medical and psychological evaluations, and earnings history all sit in the case file, and federal rule restricts how that information may be used and disclosed 34 CFR 361.38. Sending that material to a vendor system is a disclosure decision, not merely a software decision, and it is frequently made by staff who were never told they were making one.

Accessibility of the tool itself is the gap agencies overlook most often. An AI interface procured by a state agency is subject to Section 508, so a system that a counselor with a disability or a client with a disability cannot operate with a screen reader is not deployable regardless of how well it performs 29 U.S.C. 794d. The screener below runs twelve items across seven control domains and returns a readiness tier with the required control for every gap it finds.

Answer twelve items about the AI use you are considering. Each is scored fully in place, partially in place, or not in place. The screener returns a readiness tier, every gap it finds, and the control required to close it.

Readiness result