Assess against the standard public information is actually held to.
Where does my organization actually stand?
Draft pathway. This content was written for the site and is awaiting content-owner review. The learning material in Learn with AI and Build Responsible AI has already been reviewed; this pathway has not.
Public-facing service information carries obligations most internal work does not: accessibility, accuracy people rely on to access services, equitable treatment, and the ability to explain how something was produced.
- People act on this information
A wrong opening time or eligibility statement sends someone on a wasted journey.
- Equity is a readiness dimension
Ask who is least well served by the change, not only whether it works on average.
- Explainability is an obligation
Being able to say how public information was produced is part of being ready.
Amina coordinates a community facility. She is considering AI assistance for drafting service updates — opening times, programme changes, resource availability — from confirmed internal notes. Residents rely on these to plan.
Amina and every example here are prepared learning material, not a real case or an AI-generated result.
My readiness assessment
- Identify who relies on it
Name who uses this information and what it costs them if it is wrong.
- Check accessibility obligations
Confirm the accessibility, plain-language and format requirements this information must meet.
- Assess the seven dimensions
Rate all seven, weighing governance and ethics heavily — this is public information.
- Test explainability
Take one drafted update and try to explain exactly how it was produced and from what.
An unsupported causal claim.
A drafted sustainability update states: 'New equipment caused the reduction and guarantees future savings.' The source shows only a lower reading.
What is wrong with it?
Every option has an explanation. Open as many as you like — nothing is recorded or scored.
Next: Decide how we govern it
Who decides, who reviews, and who is accountable?