The regulatory constraint
Every prompt, output and approval is retained to the agency records schedule and disclosable, with the determination and the appeal path held by a human adjudicator.
How we work in this industrySituation
A state human services agency carried a 19-week average time-to-determination on a benefits program, with roughly 40% of applications returning to applicants for missing documentation at least once.
A new state AI directive required an inventory, an impact assessment and named accountability for any system touching a constituent determination, on a deadline the agency had no capacity to meet.
Approach
Complete the required AI inventory and impact assessment first, and use that assessment to scope automation strictly to document assembly and completeness — never the determination itself.
Deploy inside the agency's authorized environment with full retention of prompts, retrieved records, outputs and approvals against the published records schedule.
Establish the sustaining loop: monthly accuracy benchmarking, a named approver in program operations for any change, a documented rollback, and a disclosure package a records officer can produce without engineering help.
What we built
- Completeness checking and deficiency notices generated at intake, in plain language and at a Section 508-conformant reading level.
- Adjudicator-facing case packet assembly with every included document traced to its source system.
- A disclosure-ready evidence store: any application's full AI interaction history exportable by records staff in minutes.
“The first records request came four months in. We produced the entire interaction history for that case the same afternoon, and that is the moment the program stopped being controversial internally.”
Deputy Commissioner, Program Operations — state human services agency