Developers must document high-risk systems and disclose known risks

Practical action

Prepare a deployer information pack and a public high-risk systems statement.

Who does it apply to?

Developers of high-risk AI systems doing business in Colorado.

Actors

Provider / developer

Sectors

Employment and HRFinancial services and creditHealthcare and life sciencesEducation and trainingPublic services and government

Use cases

AI in hiring and employmentAI in finance, credit and insurance

Which controls meet this duty?

Satisfies: the control, operated properly, does the work the duty asks for. Supports: it contributes but the duty needs more. Each control page lists every other duty it serves, so work done once can be counted once.

• satisfiesProcessProduct or model owner · at launch and on material change
  Technical documentation, model cards and instructions for use

  Serves 14 recorded duties · evidence: Technical documentation file, Model card or deployer information pack, Instructions for use

  Deployer information pack and public statement derived from the documentation set.

• supportsProcessModel development lead · at launch and on material change
  Training-data provenance and copyright register

  Serves 4 recorded duties · evidence: Training source register, Copyright and rights-reservation policy, Public summary of training content

  Training-data summaries.

Templates that cover this duty

Generated from the records. Free · no account · links emailed to your work address. This duty is cited in each file with its source reference and a link back here.

• AI System Inventory

  Register · XLSX and DOCX · v6

• NIST AI RMF ↔ EU AI Act ↔ ISO/IEC 42001 Crosswalk

  Crosswalk · XLSX · v3

• AI System Technical Documentation

  Kit · DOCX and XLSX · v3

• AI Model Card

  Kit · DOCX and XLSX · v4

All 6 templates that cover it →

What evidence would a reviewer expect?

Framework mappings

Original editorial crosswalks. They cite clause numbers only and reproduce no standard text; confidence reflects how direct the mapping is.

See every Colorado (United States) duty mapped this way →

Frequently asked questions

Cite this record

AIPolicyTracker (2026). “Developers must document high-risk systems and disclose known risks (Colorado AI Act)” [AIPT-OBL-0087, not yet verified]. https://aipolicytracker.org/id/AIPT-OBL-0087 (accessed 27 October 2026). Data licensed CC BY 4.0.

Permanent id AIPT-OBL-0087: it never changes or gets reused, and its address keeps working if this page moves.

Cite the official text alongside it: SB24-205 Consumer Protections for Artificial Intelligence, Colorado General Assembly, https://leg.colorado.gov/bills/sb24-205.

@misc{aipolicytracker2026_developersmustdocumenthi,
  author       = {{AIPolicyTracker}},
  title        = {{Developers must document high-risk systems and disclose known risks (Colorado AI Act)}},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://aipolicytracker.org/obligations/us-colorado-developer-documentation-and-disclosure}},
  url          = {https://aipolicytracker.org/obligations/us-colorado-developer-documentation-and-disclosure},
  urldate      = {2026-10-27},
  note         = {Data licensed CC BY 4.0. Accessed 27 October 2026}
}

Change history

Similar obligations in other instruments

• Draw up technical documentation before placing a high-risk system on the market — EU AI Act, European Union
• Providers must document and register a conclusion that an Annex III system is not high-risk — EU AI Act, European Union
• Providers of GPAI models must maintain technical documentation and inform downstream providers — EU AI Act, European Union
• Developers must supply deployers with documentation of the technology — Colorado ADMT law (SB 26-189), Colorado (United States)