Skip to main content
Colorado ADMT: 1 Jan 2027 · EU high-risk: 2 Dec 2027 (Annex III); 2 Aug 2028 (Annex I)
Home › Tools › Consequential AI Trigger Check

Consequential AI Trigger Check

Regulatory status reviewed 10 September 2026: Colorado SB26-189 was signed on 14 May 2026. It repeals and reenacts the prior SB24-205 framework with revised automated decision-making technology (ADMT) requirements, which begin on 1 January 2027. The Colorado branch is a prompt for qualified review, not a statutory applicability calculation. Enacted bill.

A short triage tool for teams that need to know whether an AI use case has crossed the line from ordinary automation into consequential-decision risk.

3-4 minute run 10-question assessment Browser calculation
  • Checks whether your AI use case now needs stronger human review, documentation, and impact discipline.
  • Flags material risk factors around rights, outcomes, appeal, disclosure, and sensitive data.
  • Includes a Colorado-specific routing module without turning the tool into a pseudo-legal calculator.
Run the trigger check See ACT pricing
Free triage layer
Human oversight checkpoint before a consequential AI decision
Built for product, compliance, privacy, and risk leads reviewing higher-impact AI use cases.
Question 1 of 10

Informational only. Not legal advice. This tool does not determine compliance, legal applicability, safe harbor, or affirmative defense under any law or regulation.
Result state A

Low trigger likelihood

The current use case does not look structurally consequential based on the answers given, but this is still a governance assessment rather than a legal conclusion.

Final score
0
Out of 120
Critical triggers
0
Override conditions hit
Recommended state
Low trigger likelihood
Operational recommendation

Top reasons this result escalated

These are the main answers pushing the use case toward stronger review, documentation, or formal impact discipline.

Human-review warning

Human review status will appear here.

    Colorado mode

    Your answers suggest a Colorado-specific legal review may be useful. SB26-189 concerns covered ADMT and begins applying on 1 January 2027. This routing note does not determine coverage or statutory protection.

    Documented governance, meaningful human review, consumer-rights process, and alignment with recognized AI governance frameworks matter more than generic policy statements.

    Legal disclaimer: This tool is informational only and does not provide legal advice or a legal conclusion on Colorado AI Act applicability, compliance, or affirmative defense availability.

    Consequential AI needs documentation, not just confidence.

    Use this triage result to identify the use-case questions and evidence that need further review. ACT is one editable AI Controls Toolkit with eleven core files across eight workflow areas. It supports evidence collection and human decisions; it does not enforce controls or certify compliance.

    Enquire about ACT Browse available tools

    What a higher result usually means

    A higher result does not automatically mean the project should die. It usually means leadership is treating a consequential AI use case like ordinary automation when it now needs documented review, stronger human intervention points, clearer disclosure, and a rights-aware operating model.

    Where the real exposure sits

    The structural risk is rarely the model alone. It is the combination of consequential domain, material effect on people, weak override rights, limited appeal, no disclosure, and absent review. That is why this assessment weights human review and contestability heavily.

    From diagnostic to implementation

    This screen identifies questions for further review. It does not generate a statutory assessment, rights workflow, notice template or evidence pack. Define the required scope and evidence with the responsible owners and qualified advisers.

    Related Move78 resources

    Colorado AI Act guide

    See the directional compliance view and how framework-backed governance matters for higher-impact U.S. deployments.

    NIST AI RMF implementation

    Read the operational view of mapping governance, review, and evidence into a usable risk-management program.

    ISO 42001 implementation

    See how documented information, auditability, and management-system controls support the implementation pathway.

    Pricing

    Review the ACT inventory and discuss scope, licensing and pricing.

    Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs)

    What does this tool assess?

    This assessment screens whether an AI use case is moving into consequential territory by checking domain sensitivity, material effect on people, human review, appeal rights, disclosure, prior review, data sensitivity, third-party opacity, and likely Colorado exposure.

    Does this tool provide legal advice?

    No. It is a directional governance triage layer, not legal advice and not a legal determination on any law, regulation, safe harbor, or affirmative defense.

    Why is human review weighted so heavily?

    Because meaningful human review is one of the main structural controls that separates ordinary automation from consequential AI use. If humans cannot really review and override the outcome, governance risk rises quickly.

    Why does Colorado mode exist inside this tool?

    Because Colorado-specific consumer-rights and documented-governance questions matter for some U.S. deployments, but Move78 keeps that logic as a results branch instead of a separate free calculator to avoid tool sprawl and pseudo-legal outputs.

    Will this tool store my answers?

    No. The scoring runs entirely in the browser. Answers are not transmitted, synchronized, or stored by Move78.

    Source review dates are stated in the relevant guides. It provides operational implementation guidance and product information only; it is not legal advice, tax advice, audit assurance, certification assurance, conformity-assessment advice, buyer-approval assurance, or security assurance. Validate legal, regulatory, contractual, tax, audit, and security decisions with qualified professionals.