AI Model Card
In brief
The AI Model Card is a free DOCX and XLSX kit for EU AI Act, ISO/IEC 42001 and NIST AI RMF. A model or system card: intended use, out-of-scope uses, data, evaluation results by group, risks, oversight and monitoring, with the documentation and transparency duties it helps evidence. It is licensed CC BY 4.0 and is not legal advice.
- Format
- DOCX and XLSX · Kit
- Version
- v2, built 6 Oct 2026
- Duties cited
- 30 from 10 instruments
- Rows from the records
- 50
- Frameworks
- EU AI Act, ISO/IEC 42001, NIST AI RMF
- Written for
- Deployer / user organisation, Provider / developer, Public authority / government body
- Price and licence
- Free · CC BY 4.0
What's inside
- Document: twenty questions in seven sections, each with space for the answer
- Workbook: the same card as a fill-in sheet with evidence links
- Documentation duties sheet: every recorded technical-documentation, transparency and record-keeping duty
Preview
The sheets and sections of version v2, as built. Columns marked ▾ have a dropdown; ƒ is a formula.
Sheet: Model card
| Section | Field | Your answer | Evidence link |
|---|---|---|---|
| Overview | Model or system name and version | ||
| Overview | Provider, and the team accountable for it | ||
| Overview | Release date and status | ||
| Intended use | Intended purpose and users | ||
| Intended use | Uses that are out of scope or prohibited | ||
| Intended use | Decisions about people it may influence |
One card per model or AI system. Keep it with the technical documentation and update it on every material change.
Sheet: Documentation duties
| Duty | Category | Instrument | Jurisdiction | Who it binds | Nature | Source reference | Applies from | What it requires | Evidence a reviewer expects | ISO/IEC 42001 | NIST AI RMF | Verification | Record |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Frontier developers must publish a transparency report before deploying a new frontier model | Transparency and disclosure | California SB 53 | California (United States) | General-purpose AI model provider, Provider / developer | Legal requirement | Business and Professions Code Section 22757.12 (as added by SB 53) | 2026-01-01 | Before or at the time a frontier developer deploys a new frontier model, or a substantially modified version, it must publish a transparency report on its websi | Published model transparency report; Redaction justification log | Annex A.8.2, A.8.3 | GOVERN 4.2, MAP 5.1, MEASURE 2.6 | Verified against the official source 26 Sep 2026 | https://aipolicytracker.org/obligations/us-california-sb-53-transparency-report |
| Notify consumers before automated decision-making technology influences a consequential decision | Transparency and disclosure | Colorado ADMT law (SB 26-189) | Colorado (United States) | Deployer / user organisation | Legal requirement | 2027-01-01 | Deployers must tell a consumer, before the decision is made, that automated decision-making technology will be used to make or materially influence a consequent | Source-linked | https://aipolicytracker.org/obligations/us-colorado-admt-advance-notice | ||||
| Disclose the use of the technology and the principal reasons after an adverse consequential decision | Transparency and disclosure | Colorado ADMT law (SB 26-189) | Colorado (United States) | Deployer / user organisation | Legal requirement | 2027-01-01 | After an adverse consequential decision, the deployer must tell the consumer that automated decision-making technology was used, give the principal reasons for | Source-linked | https://aipolicytracker.org/obligations/us-colorado-admt-adverse-decision-disclosure | ||||
| Keep records of consequential decisions influenced by the technology for three years | Record keeping and logging | Colorado ADMT law (SB 26-189) | Colorado (United States) | Deployer / user organisation | Legal requirement | 2027-01-01 | Deployers must retain records showing how automated decision-making technology was used in consequential decisions, for three years, according to secondary repo | Source-linked | https://aipolicytracker.org/obligations/us-colorado-admt-record-keeping | ||||
| Developers must supply deployers with documentation of the technology | Technical documentation | Colorado ADMT law (SB 26-189) | Colorado (United States) | Provider / developer | Legal requirement | 2027-01-01 | Developers of automated decision-making technology must provide deployers with the documentation the statute lists, so that deployers can meet their notice, dis | Source-linked | https://aipolicytracker.org/obligations/us-colorado-admt-developer-documentation | ||||
| Draw up technical documentation before placing a high-risk system on the market | Technical documentation | EU AI Act | European Union | Provider / developer | Legal requirement | Article 11 and Annex IV | 2027-12-02 | Technical documentation must be drawn up before a high-risk system is placed on the market or put into service and kept up to date. It must demonstrate complian | Annex IV technical file | Clause 7.5 Documented information; Annex A control on system documentation | GOVERN 1.4, MAP 3.x | Source-linked | https://aipolicytracker.org/obligations/eu-ai-act-technical-documentation |
The recorded duties a model card helps evidence: technical documentation, transparency to deployers and users, and record keeping.
Document outline (DOCX)
- AI model card
- Overview
- Intended use
- Data
- Performance
- Risk
- Oversight
- Operations
- The duties this card helps evidence
- Developers must supply deployers with documentation of the technology
- Draw up technical documentation before placing a high-risk system on the market
- Providers must document and register a conclusion that an Annex III system is not high-risk
- Providers of GPAI models must maintain technical documentation and inform downstream providers
How to use it
- 1Request the files. Enter your name, company and work email in the form on this page. The DOCX and XLSX download links arrive by email and work for 7 days.
- 2Read the README page. It states the version (v2), the dataset it was built from and the licence, so anyone reviewing your copy knows which records it reflects.
- 3Fill in your rows. Complete the "Model card" sheet for your own systems. Dropdowns, formulas and colour rules are already set.
- 4Check the duties against your situation. The "Model card" and "Documentation duties" sheets list the recorded duties with their source references. Mark which apply to you and follow each link to the official text.
- 5Complete the document. Work through the DOCX sections (AI model card, The duties this card helps evidence) and replace each placeholder with your organisation's answer.
- 6Keep the evidence and watch for new versions. Link each completed row to the evidence that supports it. When the law on record changes, this template gets a new version and a changelog on this page.
Duties this template covers (30)
Each is cited in the file with its source reference and a link back to the record.
- Frontier developers must publish a transparency report before deploying a new frontier model
- Notify consumers before automated decision-making technology influences a consequential decision
- Disclose the use of the technology and the principal reasons after an adverse consequential decision
- Keep records of consequential decisions influenced by the technology for three years
- Developers must supply deployers with documentation of the technology
- Draw up technical documentation before placing a high-risk system on the market
- Design high-risk systems to log events automatically
- Provide deployers with clear instructions for use
- Disclose AI interaction and label synthetic content
- Providers must keep high-risk AI documentation for ten years
- Providers must retain automatically generated logs under their control
- Providers must document and register a conclusion that an Annex III system is not high-risk
Legal basis
Version history
| Version | Built | Dataset | What changed |
|---|---|---|---|
| v2 | 9710140e23e4 | Dataset bb068ecd9dad → 9710140e23e4. | |
| v1 | bb068ecd9dad | First version, built from dataset bb068ecd9dad. |
Only the latest version is served. A rebuild that changes the content adds a version; a rebuild that does not is skipped.
Frequently asked questions
What is in the AI Model Card?
Document: twenty questions in seven sections, each with space for the answer. Workbook: the same card as a fill-in sheet with evidence links. Documentation duties sheet: every recorded technical-documentation, transparency and record-keeping duty.
Which duties does it cite?
30 recorded duties from California SB 53, Colorado ADMT law (SB 26-189), EU AI Act and NYC Local Law 144 (automated employment decision tools), including Business and Professions Code Section 22757.12 (as added by SB 53), Article 11 and Annex IV, Article 12; Article 26(6) for deployers, Article 13, Article 50 and Article 18. Each row links to the record, and the record to the official source.
Who is it for?
The duties it cites fall on deployer / user organisation, provider / developer and public authority / government body. Whoever owns AI governance for those roles usually completes it, with the system owner supplying the facts.
Is it free?
Yes. Request the DOCX and XLSX with your work email on this page; the download links arrive by email, valid for 7 days. No account and no charge. Licensed CC BY 4.0. You may use, adapt and share this template, including commercially, with attribution to aipolicytracker.org.
How will I know when it changes?
Version v2 was built on 6 October 2026. The library is rebuilt daily; when a change to the records reaches this template it gets the next version, a changelog below and an entry in the templates feed.
Does completing it make us compliant?
No. It is an informational resource, not legal advice; it helps produce the evidence a regulator, customer or auditor asks for. Whether a duty applies to you is a judgement the template cannot make.
Disclaimer: informational only, not legal advice. Verify every claim against the linked official sources and consult a qualified lawyer before acting.