Back to toolkit

Checklist 3: Risk Factor Assessment Framework for AI Interpreting Solutions

Use this interactive checklist to assess risk factors, document mitigations, and prepare a use-case analysis record.

Checklist 3: Risk Factor Assessment Framework for AI Interpreting Solutions

Progress is automatically saved in this browser.

Summary

Subtotal Ready
0
Subtotal Not Ready
0
Completion
0% (0/115)

3.1 Three Areas of Attention for Determining Risk Levels

Max score: 13

3.1.1 Attention Area: Basic Specs of the Technology

  1. Have you evaluated language pair accuracy, including directionality and low-resource language limitations?
  2. Have you assessed privacy and confidentiality sensitivity for the information being communicated?
  3. Have you identified applicable regulatory and legal compliance requirements for this use case?
  4. Have you verified accessibility requirements, including WCAG conformance and complexity of accommodations?
  5. Have you reviewed disability-related legal compliance obligations relevant to this scenario?

3.1.2 Attention Area: The Principal / Primary Communicators

  1. Have you assessed potential harm if misunderstandings or translation errors are not corrected?
  2. Have you evaluated communication and clarification skills of English-speaking participants?
  3. Have you assessed need for cultural mediation and contextual understanding?
  4. Have you evaluated emotional and psychological sensitivity in this use case?
  5. Have you evaluated vulnerability factors for participants (for example children, older adults, immigrants, or other at-risk groups)?

3.1.3 Attention Area: Environmental Context / Scenario

  1. Have you assessed communication complexity (participants, cross-talk, nuance, specialized vocabulary, escalation potential)?
  2. Have you assessed environmental conditions (acoustics, background noise, lighting, visual clutter, and related constraints)?
  3. Have you verified equipment and connectivity availability (devices, network quality, and bandwidth)?

Subtotal Ready: 0

Subtotal Not Ready: 0

Completion: 0%

3.2 Risk Factor Evaluation Matrix

Max score: 22

No Risk Profile and Recommendation

  1. Does the technology profile indicate balanced language pair accuracy for this scenario?
  2. Are primary communicators unlikely to experience harm from misunderstandings and sufficiently prepared to detect/repair issues?
  3. Is the scenario very simple and predictable, with no sensitive information and no significant consequences from errors?
  4. Is AI interpreting only appropriate for this use case under current conditions?

Low Risk Profile and Recommendation

  1. Does the technology satisfy required accessibility accommodations for this scenario?
  2. Are primary communicators likely able to recognize and address misunderstandings, with low expected emotional or psychological harm?
  3. Does the scenario involve minimal sensitive information with limited consequences from errors?
  4. Is AI interpreting with a clear rollover mechanism to a qualified human interpreter in place for any primary communicator?

Moderate Risk Profile and Recommendation

  1. Does the technology satisfy required accessibility accommodations for this scenario?
  2. Do primary communicators require some contextual/cultural mediation, without elevated vulnerability risk?
  3. Is the scenario somewhat complex, with consequences that can be managed without adverse effects on well-being or legal exposure?
  4. Is AI interpreting configured with qualified human backup and bi-directional rollover initiated by any primary communicator?

Significant Risk Profile and Recommendation

  1. Is there an increased likelihood of harm from errors or uncorrected misunderstandings, including vulnerability and emotional/psychological factors?
  2. Is the scenario complex, contains sensitive information, and carries significant consequences from errors?
  3. Are qualified human interpreters the default interpreting method for this use case?
  4. If AI or hybrid interpretation is considered, do all primary communicators explicitly opt in?
  5. If AI or hybrid interpretation is considered, do all primary communicators demonstrate native fluency and adequate literacy/education for the scenario?
  6. If AI or hybrid interpretation is considered, are algorithms fully balanced, bidirectional, and supported by relevant real-world evidence?

High Risk Profile and Recommendation

  1. Are consequences from errors and uncorrected misunderstandings very likely to cause harm in this use case?
  2. Is the scenario highly complex, sensitive, and likely to produce adverse well-being impacts or legal exposure?
  3. Are qualified human interpreters required for this use case?
  4. Are AI and hybrid solutions excluded for this use case?

Subtotal Ready: 0

Subtotal Not Ready: 0

Completion: 0%

3.3 Risk Mitigation Strategies by Risk Level

Max score: 44

Low Risk Level (AI Appropriate)

  1. Obtain explicit acceptance for solution use and consent for data use from all parties.
  2. Implement clear labeling of AI-interpreted communications.
  3. Provide simple feedback mechanisms for primary communicators.
  4. Conduct regular quality sampling.
  5. Prominently display a mechanism for human rollover initiated by any primary communicator.
  6. Train staff on system limitations.
  7. Use pre-programmed templates and scripts where possible.
  8. Prominently display confidence levels for low-resource languages.
  9. Implement monitoring for unexpected responses with immediate verification and possible human intervention.
  10. Ensure basic accessibility features are available (for example screen reader compatibility, adjustable text size, adjustable background color).
  11. Establish protocols for identifying when disability accommodations may be needed.
  12. Provide multiple communication modalities (text, audio, video).

Moderate Risk Level (Hybrid Approach Recommended)

  1. Obtain explicit acceptance for solution use and consent for data use from all parties.
  2. Require human oversight and real-time monitoring.
  3. Implement automatic confidence scoring with threshold alerts.
  4. Establish seamless rollover pathways initiated by primary communicators in both directions (AI-to-human and human-to-AI).
  5. Provide specialized training in context-specific terminology.
  6. Conduct regular audits of AI performance in these scenarios.
  7. Develop explicit systems that automatically transition from AI to human and vice versa upon request.
  8. Provide opt-out and automatic rollover to human interpreting services.
  9. Record and document sessions only when primary communicators consent.
  10. Perform post-session quality reviews by qualified interpreters when recording is consented to.
  11. Share notable errors and evident misunderstandings with primary communicators for remediation.
  12. Confirm processes for requested disability accommodations are enacted.
  13. Ensure matching/appropriate sign language interpreters are quickly available when needed.
  14. Train staff to recognize when accessibility needs require human interpretation.
  15. Develop protocols for handling requested reasonable accommodations.

High Risk Level (Human Interpreters Required)

  1. Obtain explicit acceptance for solution use and consent for data use from all parties.
  2. Use only certified or qualified human interpreters.
  3. Use AI only as a support tool for the interpreter (computer-assisted interpreting).
  4. Ensure interpreters have specialized training for the context.
  5. Implement cultural competency requirements.
  6. Provide trauma-informed interpreting where applicable.
  7. Establish clear documentation protocols.
  8. Maintain quality assurance processes.
  9. Use team interpreting approaches for complex scenarios when needed.
  10. Conduct regular professional development for interpreters.
  11. Do not use AI-only interpreting systems for high-risk scenarios.
  12. Provide qualified sign language interpreters for Deaf individuals.
  13. Make qualified Deaf Interpreters / CDIs available for complex situations or on request.
  14. Provide specialized interpreters for DeafBlind individuals when needed.
  15. Establish protocols for accommodation requests.
  16. Ensure compliance with applicable disability laws and regulations.
  17. Provide multiple-modality communication options based on individual preferences.

Subtotal Ready: 0

Subtotal Not Ready: 0

Completion: 0%

3.4 Documentation and Accountability

Max score: 16

Required Documentation and Accountability Measures

  1. Document the risk assessment process and scores.
  2. Record justification for each risk categorization.
  3. Identify who performed the assessment and when.
  4. Schedule regular re-evaluations (at least annually).
  5. Document incidents or errors that occur.
  6. Communicate identified errors/misunderstandings to all primary communicators immediately with specific detail.
  7. Track changes in risk categorization over time.
  8. Maintain records of mitigation strategies implemented.
  9. Document user feedback specific to each use case.
  10. Create a clear audit trail for compliance purposes.
  11. Include disability advocates in review processes.
  12. Establish formal review processes with stakeholder input.
  13. Document accessibility accommodations requested and provided.
  14. Maintain records of disability-related compliance measures.
  15. Track escalations related to accessibility needs.
  16. Document training provided on disability accommodation protocols.

Subtotal Ready: 0

Subtotal Not Ready: 0

Completion: 0%

3.5 Use Case Analysis Worksheet Template

Max score: 20

Use Case and Scenario Description

  1. Has the interpreting scenario/use case been clearly named?
  2. Is the purpose of the interaction documented?
  3. Is typical duration documented?
  4. Is the number of participants/primary communicators documented?
  5. Are communicator profiles documented (fluency, literacy/education, time in country, disability status)?
  6. Is physical or virtual setting documented?
  7. Is session moderation type documented?
  8. Are required languages/modalities documented?
  9. Is typical content and context documented?
  10. Are specific accessibility requirements documented?

Overall Risk and Key Risk Factors

  1. Has one overall risk level been assigned (No, Low, Moderate, Significant, or High)?
  2. Are key risk factors that drove the classification documented?
  3. Is the rationale for this risk level consistent with the section 3.2 matrix?

Recommended Approach and Operational Safeguards

  1. Has a recommended approach been selected (AI only, AI with safeguards, AI with human backup, or human only)?
  2. Are required safeguards documented for this scenario?
  3. Are opt-out and rollover triggers clearly documented (including who can initiate and under what conditions)?

Compliance, Accessibility, and Additional Notes

  1. Are relevant legal/regulatory compliance requirements documented (including disability accommodations)?
  2. Are accessibility considerations documented with concrete implementation requirements?
  3. Are additional notes, assumptions, and unresolved issues documented?
  4. Is the worksheet ready for audit and periodic re-evaluation?

Subtotal Ready: 0

Subtotal Not Ready: 0

Completion: 0%