Skip to content
Illustrative scenario

Not based on a specific customer deployment. The company, figures, decisions, and outcomes below are a constructed example that shows how Intended’s mechanism applies to this kind of problem. They are not measured results from a named customer. Where we publish a real, attributed customer outcome, we will say so explicitly.

← All case studies
Government

Mapping AI Governance to the EU AI Act in the Public Sector

Consider a public-sector agency whose AI agents handle document processing, case management, benefits eligibility determination, and citizen communication — operating under transparency and data-residency obligations such as the EU AI Act.

01 · the challenge

The kind of problem this addresses.

0%
of AI-driven citizen decisions met EU AI Act transparency requirements
Auditable
every citizen interaction needs an explainable, reviewable AI decision trail
Build vs. buy
long internal timelines to stand up compliant AI governance from scratch

02 · how it works

See the difference.

Citizen submits benefits application

Application #FA-2026-48291

AI agent evaluates eligibility

No transparency into decision logic

Decision rendered

Denied -- no explanation provided to citizen

No audit trail

Cannot reconstruct why AI denied application

03 · the solution

What they deployed.

  • — Policy rules for citizen-service and case-management actions, written by the agency
  • — Policy requires a caseworker's review for every adverse decision, the human oversight the EU AI Act expects for high-risk systems
  • — Policy denies agent actions that would send citizen data to a system outside the approved jurisdiction, by matching the destination in the request
  • — Each decision record carries the policy and the reason, which caseworkers use to write the citizen's explanation
  • — Tamper-evident, hash-chained audit records, plus a signed receipt per decision that verifies against the agency's public keys
  • — Agencies that cannot use the managed cloud can ask about single-tenant and air-gapped deployment, available on request

04 · implementation

From zero to governed.

Phase 1

Assess

Map AI agent decision points against EU AI Act requirements. Identify the high-risk AI use cases that require governance.

Phase 2

Configure

Write the human-review, jurisdiction, and citizen-privacy rules. Choose the managed cloud or an on-request self-hosted deployment.

Phase 3

Integrate

Add the SDK call ahead of agent actions in the case-management, benefits, and document-processing systems. Train caseworkers on the approval queue.

Phase 4

Evidence

Run the compliance evidence export. It scores each EU AI Act control it can support as satisfied, partial, manual, or not covered, as input to the agency's own compliance review.

05 · illustrative outcomes

What this is designed to deliver.

Modeled figures for this scenario — what the workflow above is built to achieve, not measured results from a named customer.

0%

Adverse decisions human-reviewed

By design, per EU AI Act mandate

0%

Decisions explainable

Citizen-facing explanation from the authority trace

0%

Out-of-jurisdiction exports denied

By policy on the destination system

0

Control statuses in the export

Satisfied, partial, manual, not covered

06 · decision replay

Example decisions, full trace.

Sample decision records that show the shape of the evidence Intended produces. Illustrative, not drawn from a live customer’s logs.

2026-03-15 08:04:12gov.citizen.benefits-determinationRISK: 76/100ESCALATE

AI evaluates housing assistance eligibility for Application #FA-2026-48291

Resolved by: Senior Caseworker (reviewed and confirmed the denial)

2026-03-15 08:22:33gov.document.classificationRISK: 22/100ALLOW

AI classifies submitted tax documents for verification

Resolved by: Policy: document classification auto-approved (non-adverse)

2026-03-15 09:15:44gov.citizen.communicationRISK: 34/100ALLOW

AI generates response letter to citizen inquiry about application status

Resolved by: Policy: informational communications auto-approved with template check

2026-03-15 10:44:18gov.citizen.data-exportRISK: 100/100DENY

AI agent attempts to export citizen PII to analytics system outside jurisdiction

Resolved by: Policy: data residency violation -- target system outside sovereign boundary

the takeaway

The EU AI Act requires that citizens can understand and challenge AI decisions that affect them. Mapping authority traces to that requirement provides explainability and human-oversight evidence without rebuilding the underlying AI infrastructure.

Why this pattern matters — not a customer quote.

Start achieving AI compliance

Free to start. See every AI decision from day one.

Intended — The Authority Layer for Autonomous Systems