AI use case impact assessment
This policy section outlines the requirements for Australian government agencies to assess the potential impacts and risks of AI use cases. It mandates conducting impact assessments for in-scope AI applications, maintaining an internal register, and applying appropriate oversight and risk treatments depending on whether the inherent risk is medium or high. Agencies must also continuously monitor, evaluate, and re-validate their AI systems throughout their operational lifecycle.
Summary and content fields are drawn from the document text and are pending editorial review.
Who issued it
Who it governs
Government agency officials and administrators responsible for deploying and managing artificial intelligence use cases in the Australian public sector.
What the document contains
The document covers the mandatory requirements for Australian government agencies to assess, categorize, govern, and monitor artificial intelligence use cases based on their risk level.
The text does not provide detailed technical specifications, penalties for non-compliance, or definitions outside the scope of government agency impact assessments.
- Agencies must assess all new AI use cases against in-scope criteria during the design phase.
- In-scope AI applications require a completed AI use case impact assessment and inclusion in an internal register before deployment.
- Medium-risk AI use cases should be governed through a designated board or senior executive.
- High-risk AI use cases require reporting to the agency accountable official and the Digital Transformation Agency (DTA), alongside regular 12-month reviews.
- Agencies must regularly monitor, evaluate, and re-validate AI use case impact assessments when material operational changes occur.
Principles Mandatory requirements All new AI use cases In-scope AI use cases Medium-risk AI use cases High-risk AI use cases Out-of-scope AI use cases
How it scores
Each score is backed by a quote verified against the document text. Editorial review has not yet confirmed them.
Accountability
4/5Clear responsibility for AI outcomes
Include risk rating and accountable use case owner changes.
In-scope AI use cases
screening score · 2026-10-24
Fairness
1/5Non-discrimination and equitable treatment
5. Fairness
AI impact assessment tool
screening score · 2026-10-24
Human Dignity
1/5Respect for the inherent worth of persons
AI use is lawful, ethical, responsible, transparent and explainable to the public.
Principles
screening score · 2026-10-24
Human Oversight
4/5Humans remain in control of consequential decisions
govern the use case through a designated board or a senior executive, whichever is appropriate for the size and scope of the agency.
High-risk AI use cases
screening score · 2026-10-24
Privacy
1/5Protection of personal data and private life
such as privacy and security.
Out-of-scope AI use cases
screening score · 2026-10-24
Transparency
3/5Openness about how AI systems work and are used
Statement 5: Provide explainability based on the use case
Technical standard for government’s use of artificial intelligence
screening score · 2026-10-24
Enforcement
4/5Consequences and compliance mechanisms with real force
Before the solution is deployed, agencies must finalise the assessment and apply any agreed risk treatments.
In-scope AI use cases
screening score · 2026-10-24
Impact Assessment
4/5Required assessment of an AI system's risks/impacts before or during use
For AI use cases that are in-scope, agencies must conduct an AI use case impact assessment.
In-scope AI use cases
screening score · 2026-10-24