Prohibits the department of corrections and community supervision from using artificial intelligence in parole determinations

Showing the cosponsors who are on Agora, A to Z. The official record may list more.

• Democratic2

Shown in neutral colors by design; Agora is non-partisan.

◆ The sponsor's argument

Why Shelley Mayer says this is needed

The "Correction Offender Management Profiling for Alternative Sanctions" (COMPAS) program, an early artificial intelligence application, has been used by the Department of Corrections and Community Supervision (DOCCS) for over a decade. This program is used upon the intake of an incarcerated individual to develop a transitional accountability plan; to prioritize treatment options; and to facilitate successful reentry back into the community upon release. This program is also used to evaluate the "risk and needs" of the incarcerated individual by the parole board to measure rehabili- tation, to determine if an incarcerated individual should be released on parole, and the level of supervision for a parolee back in the communi- ty. COMPAS is a proprietary application that has never undergone peer review or algorithmic testing for explicit or implicit biases or other flaws in the methodology employed. The COMPAS system collects data on incarcerat- ed individuals and makes assumptions from that data to generate appro- priate treatment plans, parole determinations and the level of oversight based on a limited menu of inputs provided by incarcerated individuals and representatives of DOCCS. Part of the current process entails incarcerated individuals taking a written assessment that is loaded into COMPAS. This assessment has not been reviewed or updated since implementation leading to concerns over the security of the assessment tool and the ability of individuals to manipulate the system. Additionally, due to the lack of periodic assess- ment, there is no known nuance or accommodation in the algorithmic func- tioning for factors that lie outside of the limited inputs provided. This lack of periodic review and updating brings into question the validity and appropriateness of the rehabilitation plan developed, the process for determining eligibility for parole and the appropriateness of the level of parole supervision for incarcerated individuals deter- mined by COMPAS. This legislation would prohibit the use of AI for these purposes and require the parole board to do its due diligence as a body regarding eligibility for parole and the determining the level of oversight needed to foster success for parolees.

This is the sponsor's own case for the bill, quoted from their memorandum. It is not Agora's description of what the bill does.