Evidence AI safety event reporting route
Evidence library · RUAIH focus area 4

AI safety event reporting route

What it is

The AI safety event reporting route is the artifact that satisfies RUAIH focus area 4 — Monitoring, evaluating and validating — at the control level.

Who signs it

The patient safety officer.

A document without a signature is a draft. An assessor is checking that someone with authority put their name to it.

What an assessor asks for

The internal route a clinician uses, plus a decision on external voluntary reporting with the mechanism named.

What goes in it

  • What counts as an AI safety event, with examples staff will recognise
  • How to report it, inside the existing incident system
  • Triage and who reviews
  • Feedback to the reporter
  • Aggregate review at the AI committee
  • The decision on external voluntary blinded reporting, and the route chosen

The most common failure

Assuming the existing incident system covers it. Mechanically it does — but staff do not recognise a bad model output as reportable unless someone tells them it is. The gap is taxonomy and training, not plumbing.

Where this sits

See the RUAIH crosswalk for how this control maps across CHAI’s playbooks and the NIST AI RMF.

The drafted version. This page specifies the artifact. The Governance Artifact Pack ships it already drafted, one per RUAIH focus area, with the source files so you can put your own name on it.

Written and reviewed by Neel Chauhan, MD MBA, physician-executive and founder of the Healthcare AI Institute. Last reviewed 2026-07-30.

Specified from the published RUAIH focus areas and the September 2025 Joint Commission and CHAI guidance, plus the failure modes we see most often in practice.

The Institute accepts no vendor sponsorship, holds no vendor equity and takes no referral fees.