Automated Decision-Making (ADM)

In depth

Automated decision-making (ADM) refers to decisions made about individuals where the outcome is produced by algorithmic or AI processing with little or no human review. GDPR Article 22 grants EU residents the right not to be subject to solely automated decisions that produce legal or similarly significant effects, and requires meaningful human review, explanations, and the ability to contest decisions when ADM is permitted. In the United States, state consumer privacy laws increasingly include ADM provisions: Colorado, Virginia, Connecticut, Texas, and Montana require opt-out rights for ADM profiling that produces legal or similarly significant effects; Colorado SB 26-189, which repealed and reenacted SB 24-205 in May 2026, lets consumers request meaningful human review and reconsideration, to the extent commercially reasonable, of adverse consequential decisions materially influenced by automated decision-making technology in areas including employment, lending, housing, insurance, health care, and education, for decisions made on or after January 1, 2027. The New York City Local Law 144 (2023) requires independent bias audits of automated employment decision tools. 'Automated' in most regulatory contexts means the AI output has a significant influence on the decision, not that no human ever touches the result — so using ChatGPT or a fine-tuned LLM to score job applications, assess creditworthiness, or triage healthcare access likely qualifies as ADM even if a human reviews the output.

Examples

  • An ATS that uses an AI model to score résumés and automatically reject candidates below a threshold — ADM in employment, regulated by NYC LL144, EEOC guidance, and state privacy laws.
  • A lender using an LLM to generate credit risk assessments that are passed to an underwriter who rarely overrides them — functional ADM even with nominal human review.
  • A healthcare insurer using AI to pre-authorise or deny claims — high-risk ADM under the EU AI Act. Colorado SB 26-189 lists claims adjudication as a covered domain but largely carves out HIPAA covered entities (with limits, such as for providers operating outside Colorado) and insurers regulated under Colorado's insurance AI statute.

How Locke handles automated decision-making (adm)

Locke protects the data flowing into ADM systems at the prompt level — ensuring that personal data fed into AI scoring or decision models is not unnecessarily expanded beyond what the model needs to produce a useful output. For organisations subject to ADM regulations, keeping prompts to minimum-necessary data also reduces the risk of discriminatory proxy variables entering the model.

See the product

Reading on this topic