Review desk · source atlas

BiasgateHiringLedger

Build a source-linked review file for Multi-State AI-Hiring Bias Audit & Compliance.

employers who use AI in hiring have gone from operating under a single (if thin) federal EEOC guidance framework to operating under no federal guidance at all and a rapidly multiplying set of independent state and city rules that do not track each other.

biasgatemultistatehiringbiasaudit

Who this is for

A precise operating owner, not a generic audience.

Responsible buyer

Workday ruling in a board or risk-committee briefing

Cost of the gap

The Painful Problem A mid-market employer operating in New York City, California, Illinois, and preparing for Colorado does not face one compliance obligation; it faces four independently drafted, non-uniform ones, layered onto a federal backdrop that got materially less clear in 2025 when the EEOC's own AI-hiring guidance was removed.

Outcome

If a regulator inquiry, EEOC charge, or plaintiff's demand letter ever arrives, the client receives a pre-assembled, counsel-ready evidence packet rather than starting from a blank page under time pressure.

Decision rule

Proceed only when the source record, service boundary, responsible reviewer, and release criteria can be named before work begins.

Method

The work moves through visible states.

  1. ScopeService Delivery Workflow Intake (HR-tech stack, states, hiring volume, demographic data availability) → jurisdiction and tool-coverage mapping → vendor data collection (scoring outputs, applicant demographics where available) → AI-assisted data normalization → four-fifths-rule adverse-impact-ratio calculation → draft audit report, notices, and postings → independent credentialed reviewer sign-off → QA completeness check → client delivery via secure portal → renewal-calendar entry created for next required action.
  2. CollectCollect only the source records required for the agreed work.
  3. NormalizeNormalize records and preserve file-level provenance.
  4. ValidateRun deterministic completeness and consistency checks.
  5. ResolveRoute missing, conflicting, or unsupported items to an exception queue.
  6. ReviewHave a qualified human review the release candidate.
  7. ReleaseRelease the final pack with an audit trail and correction path.

Engagement

Buy the reviewed outcome, with boundaries written down.

Pricing Evidence and Proposed Pricing Direct competitor pricing is largely demo-gated and not publicly disclosed (labeled Unverified in the Claim Table); the closest public signal is qualitative "flat-fee" or "transparent flat-fee pricing" language from BiasAuditUSA, without dollar figures. Proposed pricing here is therefore Inferred, benchmarked against comparable B2B compliance-audit price points documented elsewhere in this factory's own manifest (compliance "completeness desk" services generally price $2,000–$15,000 per unit/engagement) and against general market comparables such as SOC 2 Type I/II audit engagements, which commonly run $15,000–$60,000.

Release package

  • The Outcome We Sell BiasGate Clear sells a completed, evidence-ready compliance posture, not a dashboard the client must operate: a documented inventory of every AI-enabled hiring tool in use mapped against every jurisdiction the employer operates in; a signed, independent bias-audit report for each covered tool, calculated using the EEOC four-fifths adverse-impact-ratio methodology against vendor-supplied scoring and applicant demographic data; drafted, ready-to-publish or ready-to-send jurisdiction-specific notices and public postings; and a maintained renewal calendar that automatically resurfaces the client's obligations as new state laws take effect or existing ones change (as Colorado's did).
  • If a regulator inquiry, EEOC charge, or plaintiff's demand letter ever arrives, the client receives a pre-assembled, counsel-ready evidence packet rather than starting from a blank page under time pressure.
  • An exception queue with owner, next action, due state, and resolution evidence.
  • A human-released operating pack with version history and a correction channel.

Proof standard

Operating evidence: No verified cycle-time result is published yet. The first result will be calculated from accepted intake through qualified-human release.

Client evidence: No client identity or case narrative is published. A reference may appear only after written permission and factual review.

Volume evidence: No completed-client count is claimed. Counts will be published only after the delivery ledger and provider records reconcile.

Evidence room

Authority comes from traceable sources, not decorative claims.

Open the full canonical blueprint dossier

  • VerifyWise LL144 checklistSource identified in the canonical blueprint; verify currency before client reliance.
  • NY State Comptroller auditSource identified in the canonical blueprint; verify currency before client reliance.
  • Jackson LewisSource identified in the canonical blueprint; verify currency before client reliance.
  • NatLawReviewSource identified in the canonical blueprint; verify currency before client reliance.
  • LittlerSource identified in the canonical blueprint; verify currency before client reliance.
  • K&L GatesSource identified in the canonical blueprint; verify currency before client reliance.
  • NatLawReviewSource identified in the canonical blueprint; verify currency before client reliance.
  • ForbesSource identified in the canonical blueprint; verify currency before client reliance.

Service boundary

Automation prepares. A qualified human releases.

BiasgateHiringLedger is an operational documentation and processing service operated by Your Deputy, Obuke LLC. It is not a law firm and does not provide legal, tax, medical, financial, or other licensed professional advice. Consumer and personal debt matters are not accepted. The client retains its licensed professionals and decision authority. Automation may organize and check records, but a qualified human must review and release every client deliverable.

  • Unsupported facts remain unresolved, never inferred into a client deliverable.
  • Jurisdiction-specific or licensed questions are routed to the client's professional.
  • Every correction retains the source, reviewer, version, and reason for change.

Questions

Know the limits before intake.

Is this legal or professional advice?

No. This is bounded operational documentation and processing support. Licensed judgment remains with the client and its professionals.

Does automation make the final decision?

No. It can organize records, run declared checks, and prepare an exception queue. A qualified human reviews and releases every deliverable.

Is a client portal or CRM already active?

This public site does not claim an active portal integration. Portal access is provisioned only after the relevant backend is configured and independently verified.

What happens when evidence conflicts?

The item is placed in an exception state with its sources and owner. It is not silently resolved or presented as verified.

Fit diagnostic

Send enough context to scope the next conversation—no sensitive files.

Do not submit protected health information, personal financial data, credentials, or confidential client records through this public page.