Artificial Intelligence Policy Tracker
Legal requirement Impact assessment United Kingdom Guidance

Carry out a data protection impact assessment for high-risk AI processing

Download: JSON · MarkdownUnder ICO AI guidance, UK GDPR Article 35; ICO guidance, accountability and governance section

Source-linked · linked to the official source, not yet confirmed by a reviewer (a factual check against the official source, not a legal review or legal advice)
What this label means
Verified
— a named reviewer opened the official source and confirmed the record; the date and the reviewer are shown.
Pending review
— linked to the official source and in the queue for a reviewer to confirm.
Source-linked
— linked to the official source, not yet confirmed by a reviewer.
Verification policy and current standing · a factual check, not legal advice.
No change recorded as of 26 Sep 2026 · official source last checked
On this page 9 sections

In brief

Carry out a data protection impact assessment for high-risk AI processing is a legal requirement under the ICO AI guidance in the United Kingdom (UK GDPR Article 35; ICO guidance, accountability and governance section). Where AI processing of personal data is likely to result in a high risk to individuals, UK GDPR requires a DPIA before processing begins.

Instrument
ICO AI guidance
Jurisdiction
United Kingdom
Nature
Legal requirement
Source reference
UK GDPR Article 35; ICO guidance, accountability and governance section
Who it binds
Provider / developer, Deployer / user organisation, Public authority / government body
Evidence examples
1
Framework mappings
ISO/IEC 42001:2023, NIST AI Risk Management Framework 1.0
Controls that meet it
2
Official source
Open official text
Verification
Source-linked

What does it require?

Where AI processing of personal data is likely to result in a high risk to individuals, UK GDPR requires a DPIA before processing begins. The ICO treats most AI involving profiling, large-scale processing or novel technology as meeting this threshold.

Practical action

Use the ICO's DPIA template and add AI-specific sections on bias, explainability and human oversight.

Who does it apply to?

Controllers using personal data in AI where processing is likely high risk.

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.

  • satisfiesProcessData protection officer · once per ai system
    Privacy and data-protection controls for AI

    Serves 13 recorded duties · evidence: Data protection impact assessment for an AI system, AI data-flow and legal-basis record, Privacy notice section on AI use

    DPIA with AI-specific sections before processing starts.

  • supportsProcessAI system owner · once per ai system
    AI impact and fundamental-rights impact assessment

    Serves 11 recorded duties · evidence: AI impact assessment, Impact assessment approval, Impact assessment procedure and template

    Bias, explainability and oversight analysis reused in the DPIA.

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.

All 7 templates that cover it →

What evidence would a reviewer expect?

Evidence examples
EvidenceTypeNotes
Data protection impact assessmentreport

Framework mappings

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

See every United Kingdom duty mapped this way →

Framework mappings table
FrameworkReferenceNoteConfidence
ISO/IEC 42001:2023Clause 6.1.4 AI system impact assessmentOriginal editorial mapping.high
NIST AI RMF 1.0MAP 5.1Impact assessment.medium

Frequently asked questions

Is this a legal requirement?

Yes. It is a legal requirement under ICO AI guidance (UK GDPR Article 35; ICO guidance, accountability and governance section).

Who must comply with this obligation?

Controllers using personal data in AI where processing is likely high risk.

What evidence shows compliance?

A reviewer would expect: Data protection impact assessment.

Which frameworks map to this obligation?

It is mapped to ISO/IEC 42001:2023 Clause 6.1.4 AI system impact assessment, NIST AI Risk Management Framework 1.0 MAP 5.1. These are editorial crosswalks with a stated confidence, not official mappings.

Which controls satisfy this obligation?

Privacy and data-protection controls for AI; AI impact and fundamental-rights impact assessment.

What should an organisation do in practice?

Use the ICO's DPIA template and add AI-specific sections on bias, explainability and human oversight.

Cite this record

AIPolicyTracker (2026). “Carry out a data protection impact assessment for high-risk AI processing (ICO AI guidance)” [AIPT-OBL-0077, verified 26 September 2026 by Bhaskar Bhatt]. https://aipolicytracker.org/id/AIPT-OBL-0077 (accessed 27 October 2026). Data licensed CC BY 4.0.

Permanent id AIPT-OBL-0077: it never changes or gets reused, and its address keeps working if this page moves.

Cite the official text alongside it: Guidance on AI and data protection, Information Commissioner's Office, https://ico.org.uk/for-organisations/uk-gdpr-guidance-and-resources/artificial-intelligence/guidance-on-ai-and-data-protection/.

BibTeX
@misc{aipolicytracker2026_carryoutadataprotectioni,
  author       = {{AIPolicyTracker}},
  title        = {{Carry out a data protection impact assessment for high-risk AI processing (ICO AI guidance)}},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://aipolicytracker.org/obligations/uk-ico-dpia-for-ai}},
  url          = {https://aipolicytracker.org/obligations/uk-ico-dpia-for-ai},
  urldate      = {2026-10-27},
  note         = {Data licensed CC BY 4.0. Accessed 27 October 2026}
}

Change history

No change to this record's tracked fields has been recorded since 15 October 2026, when field-level history began.

Similar obligations in other instruments

Disclaimer: informational only, not legal advice. Verify every claim against the linked official sources and consult a qualified lawyer before acting.