Page 885

(iv) How to review, identify, and audit systems to ensure that 1 the system prior to procurement and after placed into service does 2 not discriminate against an individual, or treat an individual less 3 favorably than another, in whole or in part, on the basis of one or 4 more factors enumerated in RCW 49.60.010; 5 (v) How to provide public notice when an automated decision 6 system is in use and how to appeal such decisions; 7 (vi) How automated decision system data should be stored and 8 whether such data should be shared outside the system; and 9 (vii) Other issues determined by the office of chief information 10 officer or the department of enterprise services that are necessary 11 to govern state agency procurement and use of automated decision 12 systems. 13 (c) To demonstrate the impacts of its recommendations, the work 14 group must select one of following automated decision making systems 15 and describe how their implementation would affect the procurement of 16 a new system and the use the existing system: 17 (i) The department of children, youth, and families system used 18 to determine risk in the family child welfare system; 19 (ii) The department of corrections system used to determine risk 20 for purposes of evaluating early release and/or sentencing; or 21 (iii) The department of social and health services system used 22 for hospital admissions. 23 (d) The work group shall meet at least four times, or more 24 frequently to accomplish its work. The office of the chief 25 information officer must lead the work group. Each of the state 26 agencies identified in (a) of this subsection must provide staff 27 support to the work group and its activities. 28 (e) The work group must submit a report to the fiscal committees 29 of the legislature and the governor no later than December 1, 2021. 30 (f) For purposes of this subsection, "automated decision system" 31 or "system" means any algorithm, including one incorporating machine 32 learning or other artificial intelligence techniques, that uses data- 33 based analysis or calculations to make or support government 34 decisions, judgments, or conclusions that cause a Washington resident 35 to be treated differently than another Washington resident in the 36 nature or amount of governmental interaction with that individual 37 including, without limitation, benefits, protections, required 38 payments, penalties, regulations, timing, application, or process 39 requirements. 40 p. 884 ESSB 5187.SL