AI Governance and Responsible AI Leadership
AIB-C01 · 48 questions
- A city AI strategy office is under pressure to launch an automated benefits-eligibility screening tool by a publicized deadline, but disparate-impact fairness testing across demographic groups has not yet been completed. What should the office do?
- A county CIO is finalizing the launch plan for a GenAI chatbot that answers resident questions about permit requirements. A product manager argues that displaying a confidence or uncertainty disclosure to residents is a nice-to-have UX polish item that can be deprioritized to hit the launch date. How should the CIO respond?
- A public-health agency is setting explainability requirements for an AI model that prioritizes which neighborhoods receive door-to-door vaccine outreach. A data team proposes applying the same fixed explainability standard the agency uses for a low-stakes internal scheduling tool. What should the agency's leadership require instead?
- A transit authority is deploying an AI dispatch tool that can reassign vehicle capacity in real time, including bumping a previously scheduled paratransit trip to accommodate higher system-wide demand. At what point should a human-in-the-loop escalation rule apply?
- A school district is evaluating whether an AI-generated individualized learning plan should require teacher sign-off before being shared with parents. When should that human review occur?
- A housing authority is deploying an AI tool that flags potential lease violations by combining utility usage data with resident complaint records, two data sources that were previously kept and used separately. What should the authority's leadership recognize about this design?
- A courts and clerk's office is debating whether an AI system that drafts routine order language for judges to review needs a transparency notice for self-represented litigants who receive the resulting orders. What is the strongest argument for requiring the notice?
- A municipal utility is weighing safety guardrails for an AI system that recommends water-main shutoff sequencing during an emergency, where an incorrect sequence could cause pressure loss to a hospital or fire-suppression system. How should the utility's leadership treat these guardrails?
- A 311 program is deciding what counts as an adequate hallucination-detection safeguard for a GenAI assistant that answers resident questions about municipal services. A vendor argues that the underlying model's strong general accuracy reputation is sufficient assurance on its own. What should program leadership require instead?
- An emergency management agency is preparing to rely on an AI evacuation-routing tool during a live wildfire event. The tool has performed well in routine traffic-modeling tests. What should the agency require before trusting it with a life-safety decision during an actual event?
- A library system is deciding whether an AI content-recommendation tool that influences which titles are promoted on its public catalog homepage needs a transparency statement about how it filters or promotes titles. What consideration should most inform this decision?
- A parks department is weighing an AI tool that triages resident-submitted maintenance requests, such as broken playground equipment or downed tree limbs, for faster routing to crews. Adding a human-review step before each AI-triaged request is dispatched would slow response times but reduce misrouting errors. How should department leadership balance this tradeoff?
- A city AI strategy office is designing how to inform residents interacting with a benefits chatbot about AI's role in the conversation. A staff member argues that telling residents they're chatting with an AI system satisfies the office's full responsible-AI obligation. What distinction should the office's leadership raise in response?
- A county human-services agency is configuring a GenAI tool intended to help caseworkers draft summaries and identify relevant policy sections during benefits-eligibility reviews. What guardrail should leadership set regarding the tool's role in the eligibility process?
- A transit authority is establishing an escalation path for when an AI fare-fraud detection tool flags a rider's account for suspicious activity. What should that escalation path require before any penalty is applied to the rider?
- A regional emergency dispatch consortium is weighing an AI-assisted call-triage system that could dispatch responders faster by skipping a mandatory human confirmation step for cases the model scores as high-confidence. What should the consortium's leadership decide?
- A city has established a cross-functional AI governance board spanning legal, IT, and the equity office. Department heads are now asking who has the authority to approve a new AI use case before it launches. What should the city decide?
- A county CIO office has designed a low, medium, and high risk classification framework for AI use cases to determine which ones require governance board review. A department head argues every AI system, regardless of tier, should go through the same full review process to be safe. How should the CIO office respond?
- A public-health agency's new AI triage tool has drawn a public-records request from a resident seeking the underlying data used in its recommendations. What should agency leadership recognize about this situation?
- A school district is defining an access-control policy for who may query a student-data GenAI assistant that can surface information like grades, attendance, and behavioral notes. What access-control approach should the district's leadership adopt?
- A housing authority is establishing a data-sharing framework with health and social-service agencies feeding a shared AI risk model intended to identify residents at risk of housing instability. What should the authority require before the agencies begin pooling their data into the shared model?
- A courts and clerk's office is rolling out an AI tool that drafts public-facing case-status summaries for the clerk's website. Which body should own final approval of the tool before it goes live?
- A municipal utility is deploying an AI leak-detection tool and needs its incident reporting to satisfy state utility regulatory requirements. When should the leader address that regulatory-reporting alignment?
- A 311 program is preparing to select a GenAI vendor for resident-facing chat. Where should the program set vendor AI transparency documentation requirements?
- A transit authority is writing an AI governance charter and wants to prevent internal confusion the next time an AI output is disputed. What should the charter establish?
- An emergency management agency uses an AI resource-allocation tool during a state emergency declaration. What is the correct view of the agency's regulatory compliance obligations for that tool during the declared emergency?
- A city AI strategy office is setting requirements for AI-generated resident communications. How should accessibility compliance be treated in that governance process?
- A county procurement office is writing RFP language for a new AI vendor contract and wants public-records obligations to actually be enforceable. What approach best achieves that?
- A library system is establishing a governance structure for reviewing AI vendor tools before deployment. What should the structure include alongside the internal review step?
- A parks and recreation department is preparing to renew an AI vendor contract. What should the department establish before renewal to keep performance accountability intact?
- A city equity office is proposing an AI risk classification tier for facial-recognition-adjacent tools. What distinction should the risk framework draw between use cases?
- A regional transit consortium is establishing data-security access controls for AI-flagged rider records. How should access to those records be structured?
- A city AI strategy office is watching for bias drift in an automated code-enforcement prioritization tool as neighborhood demographics shift over time. How should the office treat bias monitoring for this tool?
- A county child-welfare agency's AI risk-scoring tool shows disparate flagging rates across geographic areas. How should the agency's leadership direct mitigation?
- A public-health agency's AI outbreak-prediction tool starts producing degraded predictions after case-report data patterns change. What risk is most likely responsible?
- A transit authority audits an AI predictive-maintenance tool for reliability risk after several missed failure predictions in a row. How should leadership treat this pattern?
- A school district is addressing intellectual-property risk from a GenAI tool used by students that may reproduce copyrighted material in its output. How should district leadership classify and respond to this risk?
- A housing authority's AI eligibility tool is producing unreliable eligibility determinations traced back to stale income-verification data. How should leadership frame this problem?
- A courts and clerk's office wants to mitigate hallucination risk in a GenAI legal-research summarization tool used by clerks. Which mitigation best addresses the risk?
- A municipal utility's AI billing-anomaly detector shows rising false-positive rates disproportionate to certain rate classes. How should leadership recognize this pattern?
- A 311 program is establishing a monitoring cadence for a GenAI assistant to catch harmful or inaccurate responses before they reach residents. What approach should the program adopt?
- An emergency management agency's AI resource-dispatch model underperforms specifically during unusual event types, even though its aggregate accuracy metrics look strong. How should the agency mitigate this reliability risk?
- A library system is addressing intellectual-property risk from a GenAI summarization tool that may reproduce copyrighted excerpts in resident-facing materials. Where should the mitigating review step sit in the workflow?
- A parks department discovers staff have been using an unapproved GenAI tool for public communications. What mitigation approach should the department direct for this shadow AI use?
- A city AI strategy office is classifying enterprise AI risk tiers across departments to decide where to focus monitoring resources. How should limited monitoring resources be allocated?
- A county CIO office is directing bias-drift monitoring for an AI-based case-prioritization tool shared across multiple county departments. What monitoring cadence best fits a shared, multi-department system like this?
- A regional transit authority's AI customer-service chatbot has started giving riders inaccurate answers about fare policy, including outdated senior-discount rules. Leadership convenes to decide how to mitigate the risk to riders. Which mitigation actually addresses the root cause of the chatbot's errors?
- A housing authority's internal audit finds that an AI tool used to screen rental applications has been operating for months without ever completing its required access-control review. Enterprise risk leadership must decide how to respond. What is the appropriate response?