AI Policy Generator
Comprehensive frameworks for creating organizational AI governance policies covering acceptable use, risk management, ethical guidelines, data handling, and compliance requirements.
AI Policy Structure
Standard AI Policy Template
AI GOVERNANCE POLICY — [ORGANIZATION NAME]
1. PURPOSE AND SCOPE
- Why this policy exists
- Who it applies to (employees, contractors, vendors)
- What AI systems are covered
- Effective date and review cadence
2. DEFINITIONS
- AI / Machine Learning
- Generative AI
- Automated decision-making
- Personal data / Sensitive data
- High-risk AI use cases
3. ACCEPTABLE USE
- Approved AI tools and platforms
- Permitted use cases by department
- Prohibited uses (explicit list)
- Approval process for new AI tools
4. DATA AND PRIVACY
- Data classification for AI inputs
- Prohibited data types (PII, PHI, confidential)
- Data retention and deletion
- Third-party data sharing restrictions
5. RISK ASSESSMENT
- Risk classification framework (low/medium/high/critical)
- Required assessments by risk level
- Approval chain for high-risk deployments
- Ongoing monitoring requirements
6. TRANSPARENCY AND DISCLOSURE
- When to disclose AI use to stakeholders
- Labeling AI-generated content
- Customer/client notification requirements
- Internal documentation standards
7. HUMAN OVERSIGHT
- Human-in-the-loop requirements
- Decision review thresholds
- Escalation procedures
- Override authority
8. BIAS AND FAIRNESS
- Bias testing requirements
- Fairness metrics and thresholds
- Protected class considerations
- Remediation procedures
9. SECURITY
- AI-specific security controls
- Prompt injection prevention
- Model access controls
- Incident response for AI failures
10. COMPLIANCE
- Applicable regulations (EU AI Act, state laws, industry)
- Audit requirements
- Record-keeping obligations
- Reporting requirements
11. TRAINING AND AWARENESS
- Required training by role
- Training frequency
- Competency assessment
12. ENFORCEMENT
- Violation reporting
- Consequences framework
- Appeal process
13. GOVERNANCE
- AI governance committee composition
- Review and update cadence
- Policy exception process
- Version control
Risk Classification Framework
AI Use Case Risk Levels
| Risk Level |
Description |
Examples |
Requirements |
| Low |
Minimal impact on individuals or operations |
Summarizing meeting notes, drafting internal emails, code formatting |
Self-service, basic training |
| Medium |
Moderate impact, reversible decisions |
Customer service drafts, content generation, data analysis |
Manager approval, human review |
| High |
Significant impact on individuals or finances |
Hiring screening, credit decisions, medical triage |
Committee approval, bias audit, monitoring |
| Critical |
Potential for serious harm, legal liability |
Autonomous decisions affecting rights, safety-critical systems |
Board approval, external audit, ongoing review |
Risk Assessment Checklist
AI USE CASE RISK ASSESSMENT
Use Case: _____________________
Department: ___________________
Requested By: _________________
Date: ________________________
IMPACT ASSESSMENT:
[ ] Affects individual rights or opportunities?
[ ] Involves personal or sensitive data?
[ ] Makes or influences financial decisions?
[ ] Affects health, safety, or welfare?
[ ] Has legal or regulatory implications?
[ ] Could cause reputational harm?
[ ] Involves vulnerable populations?
DATA ASSESSMENT:
[ ] What data types are used as inputs?
[ ] Is PII/PHI/confidential data involved?
[ ] Where is data stored and processed?
[ ] What third parties receive data?
[ ] Is data retention compliant with policy?
TRANSPARENCY ASSESSMENT:
[ ] Are affected parties informed of AI use?
[ ] Is the AI's role in decisions clear?
[ ] Can decisions be explained?
[ ] Is there an appeal/override mechanism?
RISK LEVEL: [ ] Low [ ] Medium [ ] High [ ] Critical
REQUIRED APPROVALS:
[ ] Manager (all levels)
[ ] AI Governance Committee (medium+)
[ ] Legal review (high+)
[ ] Board approval (critical)
[ ] External audit (critical)
Acceptable Use Guidelines
Approved vs Prohibited Uses
APPROVED USES (with appropriate safeguards):
CONTENT AND COMMUNICATION:
+ Drafting internal communications
+ Summarizing documents and meetings
+ Translating content between languages
+ Brainstorming and ideation
+ Editing and proofreading
RESEARCH AND ANALYSIS:
+ Market research synthesis
+ Data analysis and visualization
+ Literature review assistance
+ Trend identification
+ Competitive analysis
PRODUCTIVITY:
+ Code generation and review
+ Template creation
+ Process documentation
+ FAQ and knowledge base content
+ Scheduling optimization
PROHIBITED USES:
- Inputting confidential business data into public AI tools
- Uploading PII, PHI, or financial records to unapproved platforms
- Using AI for final hiring, firing, or disciplinary decisions
- Generating content that impersonates real individuals
- Making autonomous decisions that affect individual rights
- Bypassing security controls or access restrictions
- Generating misleading, deceptive, or fraudulent content
- Using AI to surveil employees without disclosure
- Submitting AI-generated work as original without disclosure
- Using AI for any illegal purpose
Regulatory Landscape
Key Regulations by Jurisdiction
| Regulation |
Jurisdiction |
Key Requirements |
Effective |
| EU AI Act |
European Union |
Risk-based classification, prohibited uses, transparency |
2024-2027 (phased) |
| Colorado AI Act |
Colorado, USA |
Algorithmic discrimination prevention, impact assessments |
2026 |
| NYC Local Law 144 |
New York City |
Bias audits for automated employment decisions |
2023 |
| CPRA |
California, USA |
Right to opt out of automated decision-making |
2023 |
| GDPR Art. 22 |
EU/EEA |
Right not to be subject to solely automated decisions |
2018 |
| Executive Order 14110 |
US Federal |
AI safety standards, risk management |
2023 |
| NIST AI RMF |
US (voluntary) |
Risk management framework for AI systems |
2023 |
| ISO/IEC 42001 |
International |
AI management system standard |
2023 |
Compliance Mapping Template
COMPLIANCE MAPPING:
Regulation: [Name]
Applicable: [ ] Yes [ ] No [ ] Partially
Scope: [Which AI uses fall under this regulation]
REQUIREMENT | STATUS | OWNER | DUE DATE
Risk assessment completed | [ ] | [Name] | [Date]
Transparency notices deployed | [ ] | [Name] | [Date]
Bias audit conducted | [ ] | [Name] | [Date]
Data protection measures in place | [ ] | [Name] | [Date]
Human oversight mechanism active | [ ] | [Name] | [Date]
Documentation/records maintained | [ ] | [Name] | [Date]
Training completed for staff | [ ] | [Name] | [Date]
Incident response plan updated | [ ] | [Name] | [Date]
Ethical AI Framework
Principles-Based Approach
| Principle |
Definition |
Implementation |
| Fairness |
AI should not discriminate or create disparate impact |
Regular bias audits, diverse training data review |
| Transparency |
AI use and decision-making should be understandable |
Explainability requirements, disclosure policies |
| Accountability |
Clear ownership of AI decisions and outcomes |
Governance structure, audit trails |
| Privacy |
Respect for data rights and minimization |
Data classification, consent frameworks |
| Safety |
AI should not cause harm to individuals or groups |
Testing protocols, human oversight, kill switches |
| Beneficence |
AI should benefit the organization and society |
Impact assessment, stakeholder engagement |
Bias Testing Protocol
BIAS TESTING PROTOCOL:
PRE-DEPLOYMENT:
1. Define protected characteristics relevant to use case
2. Prepare representative test datasets
3. Run model outputs across demographic groups
4. Calculate disparate impact ratios
5. Document results and remediation if needed
ONGOING MONITORING:
Frequency: [Monthly / Quarterly / per regulation]
Metrics:
- Demographic parity: Equal selection rates across groups
- Equalized odds: Equal error rates across groups
- Calibration: Equal accuracy across groups
Threshold: Disparate impact ratio < 0.8 triggers review
REMEDIATION:
1. Identify root cause (data, model, process)
2. Document corrective action plan
3. Implement fix and retest
4. Report to governance committee
Data Handling Guidelines
Data Classification for AI
| Classification |
AI Input Allowed? |
Conditions |
Examples |
| Public |
Yes, any approved tool |
Standard use policy |
Published reports, press releases |
| Internal |
Yes, approved enterprise tools only |
No public AI tools |
Internal memos, strategy docs |
| Confidential |
Limited, with approval |
Approved tools + DPA in place |
Financial data, customer info |
| Restricted |
No (or extreme controls) |
CTO/CISO approval + encryption |
PII, PHI, trade secrets, credentials |
Vendor Assessment Checklist
AI VENDOR ASSESSMENT:
Vendor: _____________________
Tool/Service: _______________
Assessment Date: _____________
DATA HANDLING:
[ ] Data processing agreement (DPA) in place?
[ ] Where is data processed and stored?
[ ] Is data used to train vendor's models?
[ ] Can training opt-out be enforced?
[ ] Data retention and deletion policies?
[ ] Encryption at rest and in transit?
[ ] SOC 2 Type II or equivalent certification?
SECURITY:
[ ] Access controls and authentication?
[ ] Audit logging available?
[ ] Incident response procedures?
[ ] Penetration testing conducted?
[ ] Vulnerability management program?
COMPLIANCE:
[ ] GDPR compliance (if applicable)?
[ ] HIPAA compliance (if applicable)?
[ ] Sector-specific certifications?
[ ] Subprocessor transparency?
RECOMMENDATION: [ ] Approve [ ] Conditional [ ] Reject
Training Program Design
Role-Based Training Requirements
| Role |
Training Topics |
Frequency |
Assessment |
| All employees |
AI policy overview, acceptable use, data handling |
Annual |
Quiz (80% pass) |
| Managers |
Risk assessment, approval workflows, oversight |
Annual + refresher |
Scenario-based |
| IT/Engineering |
Security controls, prompt injection, model management |
Semi-annual |
Technical assessment |
| Legal/Compliance |
Regulatory landscape, audit procedures, incident response |
Semi-annual |
Case study review |
| AI Governance Committee |
Full policy, emerging regulations, industry best practices |
Quarterly |
Participation-based |
| Executives |
Strategic implications, liability, governance |
Annual |
Briefing attendance |
Policy Maintenance
Review and Update Cadence
POLICY REVIEW SCHEDULE:
ANNUAL REVIEW (minimum):
- Full policy review by governance committee
- Regulatory landscape update
- Incident review and lessons learned
- Stakeholder feedback incorporation
TRIGGERED REVIEWS:
- New regulation enacted affecting AI use
- Significant AI incident (internal or industry)
- Major new AI tool adoption
- Organizational restructure
- Merger/acquisition
- Audit finding requiring policy change
VERSION CONTROL:
Version: [X.X]
Last Updated: [Date]
Approved By: [Name/Committee]
Next Review: [Date]
Change Log: [Summary of changes per version]
See Also
1---2name: ai-policy-generator3description: AI governance policy creation for nonprofits and enterprises with frameworks, risk assessment, ethical guidelines, and compliance templates. Use when drafting AI usage policies, responsible AI frameworks, or organizational AI governance documents.4---5
6# AI Policy Generator
7
8Comprehensive frameworks for creating organizational AI governance policies covering acceptable use, risk management, ethical guidelines, data handling, and compliance requirements.
9
10## AI Policy Structure
11
12### Standard AI Policy Template
13
14```
15AI GOVERNANCE POLICY — [ORGANIZATION NAME]
16
171. PURPOSE AND SCOPE
18 - Why this policy exists
19 - Who it applies to (employees, contractors, vendors)
20 - What AI systems are covered
21 - Effective date and review cadence
22
232. DEFINITIONS
24 - AI / Machine Learning
25 - Generative AI
26 - Automated decision-making
27 - Personal data / Sensitive data
28 - High-risk AI use cases
29
303. ACCEPTABLE USE
31 - Approved AI tools and platforms
32 - Permitted use cases by department
33 - Prohibited uses (explicit list)
34 - Approval process for new AI tools
35
364. DATA AND PRIVACY
37 - Data classification for AI inputs
38 - Prohibited data types (PII, PHI, confidential)
39 - Data retention and deletion
40 - Third-party data sharing restrictions
41
425. RISK ASSESSMENT
43 - Risk classification framework (low/medium/high/critical)
44 - Required assessments by risk level
45 - Approval chain for high-risk deployments
46 - Ongoing monitoring requirements
47
486. TRANSPARENCY AND DISCLOSURE
49 - When to disclose AI use to stakeholders
50 - Labeling AI-generated content
51 - Customer/client notification requirements
52 - Internal documentation standards
53
547. HUMAN OVERSIGHT
55 - Human-in-the-loop requirements
56 - Decision review thresholds
57 - Escalation procedures
58 - Override authority
59
608. BIAS AND FAIRNESS
61 - Bias testing requirements
62 - Fairness metrics and thresholds
63 - Protected class considerations
64 - Remediation procedures
65
669. SECURITY
67 - AI-specific security controls
68 - Prompt injection prevention
69 - Model access controls
70 - Incident response for AI failures
71
7210. COMPLIANCE
73 - Applicable regulations (EU AI Act, state laws, industry)
74 - Audit requirements
75 - Record-keeping obligations
76 - Reporting requirements
77
7811. TRAINING AND AWARENESS
79 - Required training by role
80 - Training frequency
81 - Competency assessment
82
8312. ENFORCEMENT
84 - Violation reporting
85 - Consequences framework
86 - Appeal process
87
8813. GOVERNANCE
89 - AI governance committee composition
90 - Review and update cadence
91 - Policy exception process
92 - Version control
93```
94
95## Risk Classification Framework
96
97### AI Use Case Risk Levels
98
99| Risk Level | Description | Examples | Requirements |
100|-----------|-------------|----------|-------------|
101| **Low** | Minimal impact on individuals or operations | Summarizing meeting notes, drafting internal emails, code formatting | Self-service, basic training |
102| **Medium** | Moderate impact, reversible decisions | Customer service drafts, content generation, data analysis | Manager approval, human review |
103| **High** | Significant impact on individuals or finances | Hiring screening, credit decisions, medical triage | Committee approval, bias audit, monitoring |
104| **Critical** | Potential for serious harm, legal liability | Autonomous decisions affecting rights, safety-critical systems | Board approval, external audit, ongoing review |
105
106### Risk Assessment Checklist
107
108```
109AI USE CASE RISK ASSESSMENT
110
111Use Case: _____________________
112Department: ___________________
113Requested By: _________________
114Date: ________________________
115
116IMPACT ASSESSMENT:
117 [ ] Affects individual rights or opportunities?
118 [ ] Involves personal or sensitive data?
119 [ ] Makes or influences financial decisions?
120 [ ] Affects health, safety, or welfare?
121 [ ] Has legal or regulatory implications?
122 [ ] Could cause reputational harm?
123 [ ] Involves vulnerable populations?
124
125DATA ASSESSMENT:
126 [ ] What data types are used as inputs?
127 [ ] Is PII/PHI/confidential data involved?
128 [ ] Where is data stored and processed?
129 [ ] What third parties receive data?
130 [ ] Is data retention compliant with policy?
131
132TRANSPARENCY ASSESSMENT:
133 [ ] Are affected parties informed of AI use?
134 [ ] Is the AI's role in decisions clear?
135 [ ] Can decisions be explained?
136 [ ] Is there an appeal/override mechanism?
137
138RISK LEVEL: [ ] Low [ ] Medium [ ] High [ ] Critical
139
140REQUIRED APPROVALS:
141 [ ] Manager (all levels)
142 [ ] AI Governance Committee (medium+)
143 [ ] Legal review (high+)
144 [ ] Board approval (critical)
145 [ ] External audit (critical)
146```
147
148## Acceptable Use Guidelines
149
150### Approved vs Prohibited Uses
151
152```
153APPROVED USES (with appropriate safeguards):
154
155CONTENT AND COMMUNICATION:
156 + Drafting internal communications
157 + Summarizing documents and meetings
158 + Translating content between languages
159 + Brainstorming and ideation
160 + Editing and proofreading
161
162RESEARCH AND ANALYSIS:
163 + Market research synthesis
164 + Data analysis and visualization
165 + Literature review assistance
166 + Trend identification
167 + Competitive analysis
168
169PRODUCTIVITY:
170 + Code generation and review
171 + Template creation
172 + Process documentation
173 + FAQ and knowledge base content
174 + Scheduling optimization
175
176PROHIBITED USES:
177
178 - Inputting confidential business data into public AI tools
179 - Uploading PII, PHI, or financial records to unapproved platforms
180 - Using AI for final hiring, firing, or disciplinary decisions
181 - Generating content that impersonates real individuals
182 - Making autonomous decisions that affect individual rights
183 - Bypassing security controls or access restrictions
184 - Generating misleading, deceptive, or fraudulent content
185 - Using AI to surveil employees without disclosure
186 - Submitting AI-generated work as original without disclosure
187 - Using AI for any illegal purpose
188```
189
190## Regulatory Landscape
191
192### Key Regulations by Jurisdiction
193
194| Regulation | Jurisdiction | Key Requirements | Effective |
195|-----------|-------------|-----------------|-----------|
196| **EU AI Act** | European Union | Risk-based classification, prohibited uses, transparency | 2024-2027 (phased) |
197| **Colorado AI Act** | Colorado, USA | Algorithmic discrimination prevention, impact assessments | 2026 |
198| **NYC Local Law 144** | New York City | Bias audits for automated employment decisions | 2023 |
199| **CPRA** | California, USA | Right to opt out of automated decision-making | 2023 |
200| **GDPR Art. 22** | EU/EEA | Right not to be subject to solely automated decisions | 2018 |
201| **Executive Order 14110** | US Federal | AI safety standards, risk management | 2023 |
202| **NIST AI RMF** | US (voluntary) | Risk management framework for AI systems | 2023 |
203| **ISO/IEC 42001** | International | AI management system standard | 2023 |
204
205### Compliance Mapping Template
206
207```
208COMPLIANCE MAPPING:
209
210Regulation: [Name]
211Applicable: [ ] Yes [ ] No [ ] Partially
212Scope: [Which AI uses fall under this regulation]
213
214REQUIREMENT | STATUS | OWNER | DUE DATE
215Risk assessment completed | [ ] | [Name] | [Date]
216Transparency notices deployed | [ ] | [Name] | [Date]
217Bias audit conducted | [ ] | [Name] | [Date]
218Data protection measures in place | [ ] | [Name] | [Date]
219Human oversight mechanism active | [ ] | [Name] | [Date]
220Documentation/records maintained | [ ] | [Name] | [Date]
221Training completed for staff | [ ] | [Name] | [Date]
222Incident response plan updated | [ ] | [Name] | [Date]
223```
224
225## Ethical AI Framework
226
227### Principles-Based Approach
228
229| Principle | Definition | Implementation |
230|-----------|-----------|---------------|
231| **Fairness** | AI should not discriminate or create disparate impact | Regular bias audits, diverse training data review |
232| **Transparency** | AI use and decision-making should be understandable | Explainability requirements, disclosure policies |
233| **Accountability** | Clear ownership of AI decisions and outcomes | Governance structure, audit trails |
234| **Privacy** | Respect for data rights and minimization | Data classification, consent frameworks |
235| **Safety** | AI should not cause harm to individuals or groups | Testing protocols, human oversight, kill switches |
236| **Beneficence** | AI should benefit the organization and society | Impact assessment, stakeholder engagement |
237
238### Bias Testing Protocol
239
240```
241BIAS TESTING PROTOCOL:
242
243PRE-DEPLOYMENT:
244 1. Define protected characteristics relevant to use case
245 2. Prepare representative test datasets
246 3. Run model outputs across demographic groups
247 4. Calculate disparate impact ratios
248 5. Document results and remediation if needed
249
250ONGOING MONITORING:
251 Frequency: [Monthly / Quarterly / per regulation]
252 Metrics:
253 - Demographic parity: Equal selection rates across groups
254 - Equalized odds: Equal error rates across groups
255 - Calibration: Equal accuracy across groups
256 Threshold: Disparate impact ratio < 0.8 triggers review
257
258REMEDIATION:
259 1. Identify root cause (data, model, process)
260 2. Document corrective action plan
261 3. Implement fix and retest
262 4. Report to governance committee
263```
264
265## Data Handling Guidelines
266
267### Data Classification for AI
268
269| Classification | AI Input Allowed? | Conditions | Examples |
270|---------------|------------------|-----------|---------|
271| **Public** | Yes, any approved tool | Standard use policy | Published reports, press releases |
272| **Internal** | Yes, approved enterprise tools only | No public AI tools | Internal memos, strategy docs |
273| **Confidential** | Limited, with approval | Approved tools + DPA in place | Financial data, customer info |
274| **Restricted** | No (or extreme controls) | CTO/CISO approval + encryption | PII, PHI, trade secrets, credentials |
275
276### Vendor Assessment Checklist
277
278```
279AI VENDOR ASSESSMENT:
280
281Vendor: _____________________
282Tool/Service: _______________
283Assessment Date: _____________
284
285DATA HANDLING:
286 [ ] Data processing agreement (DPA) in place?
287 [ ] Where is data processed and stored?
288 [ ] Is data used to train vendor's models?
289 [ ] Can training opt-out be enforced?
290 [ ] Data retention and deletion policies?
291 [ ] Encryption at rest and in transit?
292 [ ] SOC 2 Type II or equivalent certification?
293
294SECURITY:
295 [ ] Access controls and authentication?
296 [ ] Audit logging available?
297 [ ] Incident response procedures?
298 [ ] Penetration testing conducted?
299 [ ] Vulnerability management program?
300
301COMPLIANCE:
302 [ ] GDPR compliance (if applicable)?
303 [ ] HIPAA compliance (if applicable)?
304 [ ] Sector-specific certifications?
305 [ ] Subprocessor transparency?
306
307RECOMMENDATION: [ ] Approve [ ] Conditional [ ] Reject
308```
309
310## Training Program Design
311
312### Role-Based Training Requirements
313
314| Role | Training Topics | Frequency | Assessment |
315|------|----------------|-----------|-----------|
316| **All employees** | AI policy overview, acceptable use, data handling | Annual | Quiz (80% pass) |
317| **Managers** | Risk assessment, approval workflows, oversight | Annual + refresher | Scenario-based |
318| **IT/Engineering** | Security controls, prompt injection, model management | Semi-annual | Technical assessment |
319| **Legal/Compliance** | Regulatory landscape, audit procedures, incident response | Semi-annual | Case study review |
320| **AI Governance Committee** | Full policy, emerging regulations, industry best practices | Quarterly | Participation-based |
321| **Executives** | Strategic implications, liability, governance | Annual | Briefing attendance |
322
323## Policy Maintenance
324
325### Review and Update Cadence
326
327```
328POLICY REVIEW SCHEDULE:
329
330ANNUAL REVIEW (minimum):
331 - Full policy review by governance committee
332 - Regulatory landscape update
333 - Incident review and lessons learned
334 - Stakeholder feedback incorporation
335
336TRIGGERED REVIEWS:
337 - New regulation enacted affecting AI use
338 - Significant AI incident (internal or industry)
339 - Major new AI tool adoption
340 - Organizational restructure
341 - Merger/acquisition
342 - Audit finding requiring policy change
343
344VERSION CONTROL:
345 Version: [X.X]
346 Last Updated: [Date]
347 Approved By: [Name/Committee]
348 Next Review: [Date]
349 Change Log: [Summary of changes per version]
350```
351
352## See Also
353
354- [Legal Compliance](../legal-compliance/SKILL.md)
355- [Risk Management](../risk-management/SKILL.md)
356- [Security](../security/SKILL.md)