T&T Compliance Shield / AegisReview

Sample AI Hiring Compliance File

A fictional, review-ready example showing how AegisReview turns hiring-tool facts, vendor evidence gaps, notice-readiness materials, assumptions, and next steps into one file for HR, legal, and counsel review.

Demo CompanyPrairie Talent Group, a fictional Illinois staffing and recruiting firm.
File PurposeOrganize the first review before legal judgment, vendor follow-up, or operational commitments.
BoundaryNot legal advice, not a bias audit, and not a compliance certification.
Sample file using synthetic facts only Version: June 2026
Section 1

Executive Snapshot

What a buyer sees first
Fictional company

Prairie Talent Group

Illinois staffing and recruiting firm supporting administrative, warehouse, light industrial, customer support, and clinical support hiring workflows.

The company uses multiple hiring systems and wants a clean first file before final HR/legal review.

Review purpose

Organize AI hiring-tool facts, vendor evidence gaps, notice-readiness status, assumptions, and open questions into one review-ready file.

The file is designed for HR, compliance, operations, and employment counsel. It does not decide the legal answer.

Summary metrics

4Tools under review
6Open evidence items
3Counsel review questions

Priority read

What is organized: company scope, tool inventory, public signals, internal intake notes, evidence labels, vendor request list, notice-readiness status, and review tracker.
What needs review: vendor AI feature documentation, active settings, human review controls, notice language, delivery records, and annual refresh owner.

Review boundary

This sample is workflow support. It is not legal advice, a legal opinion, a formal audit, a bias-audit certification, or a compliance certification. Final legal conclusions, notices, policy decisions, and customer commitments stay behind HR/legal/counsel approval.

Section 2

Scope And Data Boundaries

What is in and out

Included in this file

  • Free AI Hiring Exposure Check summary.
  • Employer-provided hiring-tool intake.
  • Tool inventory and use-case grouping.
  • Evidence labels and assumptions log.
  • Vendor evidence request checklist.
  • Notice-readiness matrix.
  • Internal workflow tracker.
  • Counsel/HR handoff questions.

Excluded from this file

  • Applicant resumes or employee personnel files.
  • Medical, payroll, bank, tax, SSN, or government ID data.
  • Protected-class demographic analysis.
  • Vendor model validation or statistical bias audit.
  • Final legal interpretation.
  • Final notice approval, publication, or delivery.
  • Legal communications unless separately approved.

Regulatory currency note

A live customer Snapshot should include a date-stamped regulatory note. Illinois AI employment rulemaking and agency guidance can change. This sample demonstrates file structure and review workflow, not final legal content.

Data handling posture

Data categorySample treatmentProduction rule before customer intake
Company website and public pagesAllowed for public-signal reviewRetain source URL, date, and confidence label
Hiring-tool names and vendor notesAllowed if customer-approvedStore in authenticated workspace with role-based access
Vendor documentsNot used in this synthetic sampleAccept only after DPA/SOW and retention scope are approved
Applicant or employee recordsExcludedDo not accept for first-pass Snapshot unless separately contracted
Section 3

Evidence Labels

Known vs signal vs unknown

AegisReview keeps findings separated by confidence. The goal is not to sound certain too early. The goal is to show exactly what is known, what is only a signal, what the client reported, and what needs attorney or HR approval.

LabelMeaningOperational use
ConfirmedEmployer or vendor documentation supports the tool, workflow, or fact.Can be included in the active file with source/date.
Public signalPublic website, careers page, vendor page, privacy language, or public materials suggest review is needed.Use for triage only until confirmed.
Client-reportedEmployer says the tool or workflow is used, but supporting evidence is not attached yet.Ask for documentation or internal confirmation.
UnknownThe tool exists or is suspected, but enabled features and legal relevance are unclear.Assign a fact-finding task.
Counsel reviewThe next decision involves legal interpretation, notice language, policy, or customer commitment.Hold behind HR/legal/counsel approval.
Rejected false positiveThe item was reviewed and removed because it is unsupported, stale, generic, or unrelated.Document why it was excluded.

Example assumptions log

AssumptionWhy it existsNext action
Assessment tool may affect candidate screeningIntake notes reference pre-employment assessment workflowConfirm vendor name, settings, scoring role, and human review step
Interview tool may support evaluation workflowInterview platform appears in recruiting processRequest vendor AI/automation feature documentation
Applicant notice may be neededIllinois hiring exposure plus automated workflow signalsReview final obligation and language with counsel
Section 4

Tool Inventory

Systems under review
ToolWorkflowEvidence labelOpen questionPriority
Workday RecruitingATS, applicant intake, workflow status, recruiter reviewClient-reportedAre AI, matching, summaries, or ranking features enabled?High
HireVueStructured interview workflow and evaluation supportClient-reportedWhat automated features are active and what vendor documentation exists?High
LinkedIn RecruiterSourcing, filtering, recommendations, outreach listsPublic signalHow are recommendations used in final recruiter decisions?Medium
Assessment vendorPre-employment role-fit assessmentUnknownVendor name, scoring role, validation documentation, and human review step need confirmation.High
ChatGPT or internal AI assistantJob description drafts, recruiter messaging, policy summariesClient-reportedDoes internal use touch candidate evaluation or only drafting support?Medium

Inventory insight

The employer has enough tool visibility to build a first review file without uploading applicant records.

The main issue is not whether every tool is illegal or risky. The issue is that enabled features, vendor evidence, and notice workflow are not yet documented.

Section 5

Vendor Evidence Gaps

What to request next
Evidence itemStatusAssigned toWhy it matters
Current vendor AI/automation feature descriptionMissingHR OpsShows whether the tool supports screening, scoring, ranking, summaries, recommendations, or prioritization.
Enabled feature list or admin settings exportMissingHRIS AdminSeparates tools purchased from features actually enabled.
Human review or override controlsPartialRecruiting LeadShows where people review, modify, approve, or reject automated support.
Bias testing, validation, or adverse-impact materialsMissingVendor OwnerUseful for counsel, HR, and procurement review; do not certify sufficiency without counsel.
Model or feature change notification processMissingVendor OwnerSupports future review when vendor features change.
Notice support language from vendorRequestedHR ComplianceMay help draft notice materials, but final wording stays behind review.

Vendor request summary

Send factual documentation requests first. Avoid asking the vendor to decide the employer's legal obligations. Ask what the product does, what features are enabled, what data is used, what human review exists, and what bias/validation materials are available.

Section 6

Notice Readiness

Template scaffold status
Notice componentStatusReviewerNotes
Applicant notice template scaffoldPrepared for reviewHR + counselUses confirmed/assumed tool categories only. Final language not approved.
Employee notice template scaffoldNot startedHR + counselNeeded only if employee-impacting tools are confirmed.
Delivery methodOpenHR OperationsDecide where notice appears and how delivery is retained.
Notice approval logInternal tracker onlyHR + counselOperational workflow aid, not represented as a legal record for submission.
Regulatory date stampRequiredFile ownerLive files should state the rule/guidance date used for review.

Template excerpt

Applicant AI Tool Notice - illustrative scaffold only

Prairie Talent Group uses hiring technology to support applicant intake, interview workflow, assessment review, sourcing, and recruiter decision support for selected roles.

Before using this notice, Prairie Talent Group should confirm each tool's role in the hiring process, attach vendor documentation, and approve final language through HR/legal/counsel review.

Do not send template scaffold language to applicants or employees until the customer confirms facts and HR/legal/counsel approves final wording, timing, delivery method, and retention process.

Section 7

Action Plan And Handoff

What happens next

Next 7 days

  1. Confirm which hiring tools are used for Illinois applicants, employees, or staffing candidates.
  2. Pull admin screenshots or exports showing enabled AI/automation features where available.
  3. Send vendor evidence requests for AI, ranking, matching, scoring, recommendation, screening, and validation materials.
  4. Assign HR/legal/counsel reviewers for notice template scaffolds.
  5. Decide whether any tool use should be limited, paused, or documented before expanded use.

Next 30 days

  1. Approve a repeatable notice review workflow.
  2. Add vendor change-review owner and recurring review cadence.
  3. Store approved vendor responses in the compliance file.
  4. Update labels from public signal or unknown to confirmed, not applicable, or counsel review.
  5. Review final notice or policy language with qualified counsel.

Counsel/HR handoff questions

QuestionWhy it matters
Which tools are actually enabled in Illinois hiring workflows?Determines scope of review and whether notice language is needed.
Do any tools rank, score, recommend, screen, summarize, or prioritize applicants?Separates ordinary recordkeeping from higher-risk decision support.
What vendor evidence should be retained?Defines what belongs in the file and what remains open.
Who approves final notice language?Creates an explicit approval gate before operational use.
What data should not be stored in AegisReview for this engagement?Protects applicant/employee data and keeps scope controlled.
Section 8

Final Packet Contents

What a customer receives

Included deliverables

  • Snapshot cover summary.
  • Tool inventory.
  • Evidence label guide.
  • Vendor evidence request list.
  • Notice-readiness matrix.
  • Priority action plan.
  • Template scaffold and internal workflow tracker.
  • Open counsel/HR questions.
  • Review boundary statement.

What makes it useful

  • It separates confirmed facts from signals.
  • It shows what is missing without pretending to certify sufficiency.
  • It gives counsel and HR a cleaner file to review.
  • It creates a repeatable process for vendor evidence and notice-readiness.
  • It avoids default collection of sensitive applicant or employee records.

Boundary statement

This file is workflow support. It is not legal advice, a legal opinion, a formal audit, a bias-audit certification, or a compliance certification. The employer is responsible for confirming facts, tool usage, vendor settings, applicant/employee notice obligations, and final use of any template materials with qualified counsel or responsible HR/compliance reviewers.

Bottom line

AegisReview is built to answer the practical first question: what tools are involved, what proof exists, what is missing, what needs review, and what should happen next?