A machine decided.Did you tell them?

It grades whether each of your automated decision systems meets the transparency duties that every major automated-decision regime now converges on — system by system. For each one you mark six controls 0/1/2: whether the use of automation is disclosed to the person, whether there’s a meaningful-logic and adverse-reason explanation, whether there’s a human review/appeal with authority to overturn, whether there’s an opt-out or data-correction path where required, whether the decision’s scope and jurisdictions are mapped, and whether notices and decisions are retained. The six are weighted to a 0–100 score banded DISCLOSED, GAPS, or UNDISCLOSED, and the portfolio rolls up to ALL TRANSPARENT, CONDITIONS OUTSTANDING, or PULL FROM USE. It grades the deployer’s process, never a person.

Because of the told-and-recourse gate, which is the heart of the scorecard. A system is forced to UNDISCLOSED regardless of score when either non-tradeable failure is present: the person was never told an automated system made the decision, or there is no recourse of any kind — no human appeal AND no opt-out/correction. In the worked example, a tenant-screening score is fully disclosed and fully explained, with scope mapped and records kept, and still reads UNDISCLOSED because it offers the person no way to be heard at all; the next row adds a human appeal and it clears at 84. A decision the person didn’t know was automated, or can’t challenge in any way, isn’t defensible no matter how good the rest of the file is. The gate worsens only — it never promotes a verdict.

No — they’re siblings covering different lanes. The AEDT Deployer Compliance Dossier is locked to automated employment decisions and the specific duties there (an independent bias audit, candidate notice, NYC/Illinois/California employment rules). This scorecard covers automated decisions everywhere else — credit, insurance, housing, pricing, benefits, education, health care — and grades the transparency duties those decisions share: disclose, explain, allow recourse, honor opt-out. Run the AEDT dossier for hiring tools and this scorecard for the rest; together they cover your automated decisions about people.

A converging set of rules now demands the same four things whenever an automated system makes a significant decision about a person: the CCPA’s ADMT rules in California (pre-use notice, access to the logic, opt-out, appeal), Colorado’s SB 26-189 (consumer notice, adverse-outcome explanation, meaningful human review), the GDPR’s Article 22 right around solely-automated decisions, and US adverse-action duties under ECOA/FCRA. Those laws move constantly — Colorado rewrote its AI law twice within a year. So the engine encodes the convergent duties, not any single statute’s effective date or checklist, which keeps the verdict durable. The specific regimes and dates are named in the playbooks as planning references. Confirm which apply to you, and every deadline, with counsel.

No. It is a readiness aid that grades your transparency process from your own marks. It connects to nothing, files nothing, makes no decision, renders no compliance ruling, and cannot tell you whether a specific law applies to a specific decision. It is deliberately people-blind — it grades a decision system, never the person the decision is about, and ranks no one. It is not legal advice, a certification, an opinion of counsel, or a safe harbor. Use it to find and close the transparency gaps in your automated decisions, then confirm scope and obligations with qualified counsel.

A runnable zero-dependency Python engine, a workbook that reproduces it exactly (Start Here, Dashboard, and a Disclosure Scorecard with the mark definitions built into each column), a six-system worked example, and two playbooks: a Disclosure Mapping Playbook for inventorying your decision systems and marking honestly, and a Transparency-Remediation Runbook that maps the controls to the major regimes and walks the disclose / explain / recourse / opt-out steps. Pick the automated decisions that affect people — credit, insurance, housing, pricing, benefits — grade each one, and close the control the tool names first. Deterministic and offline; one-time purchase, lifetime access, 12 months of updates.