AI Developer Assessment Template - WiseRighteous Network

Appendix D — AI Developer Assessment Template

This template provides a structured framework for assessing the righteousness of AI development practices using the Developer Righteousness Index (RI‑D) . It evaluates developers across the Five Pillars of AI Righteousness and provides actionable insights for improvement.

Instructions: For each item, assess the development team or project using the following scale:

✅ Yes — Fully implemented and consistently practiced
⚠️ Partial — Partially implemented or inconsistent
❌ No — Not implemented or not yet addressed
N/A — Not applicable to this development context

Assessment Overview

Assessment Date	___	Assessor	___
Development Team/Project	___	RI‑D Version	1.0
Organization	___	Assessment Type	Initial / Follow-up

Pillar 1: Integrity — Truthful and Trustworthy Development

Integrity requires that AI development practices be honest, transparent, and free from deception.

Section 1.1: Code Transparency

#	Assessment Item	Yes	Partial	No	N/A
1.1.1	Is code open to review by relevant stakeholders?	☐	☐	☐	☐
1.1.2	Is code documentation complete and maintained?	☐	☐	☐	☐
1.1.3	Are hidden functionalities disclosed?	☐	☐	☐	☐
1.1.4	Are dependencies and third-party components documented?	☐	☐	☐	☐
1.1.5	Is the code base version-controlled with clear history?	☐	☐	☐	☐

Section 1.2: Truthful Documentation

#	Assessment Item	Yes	Partial	No	N/A
1.2.1	Do documentation and specifications accurately describe system capabilities?	☐	☐	☐	☐
1.2.2	Do documentation and specifications accurately describe system limitations?	☐	☐	☐	☐
1.2.3	Are known issues documented and disclosed?	☐	☐	☐	☐
1.2.4	Are trade-offs and design decisions documented?	☐	☐	☐	☐
1.2.5	Is documentation updated when systems change?	☐	☐	☐	☐

Section 1.3: No Hidden Functionality

#	Assessment Item	Yes	Partial	No	N/A
1.3.1	Is code reviewed for hidden functionality?	☐	☐	☐	☐
1.3.2	Are automated checks in place to detect hidden functionality?	☐	☐	☐	☐
1.3.3	Are third-party components reviewed for hidden functionality?	☐	☐	☐	☐
1.3.4	Is there a process for reporting suspected hidden functionality?	☐	☐	☐	☐
1.3.5	Are hidden functionality concerns investigated and resolved?	☐	☐	☐	☐

Pillar 2: Justice — Fair Development Practices

Justice requires that AI development practices be fair, equitable, and free from bias.

Section 2.1: Bias Detection

#	Assessment Item	Yes	Partial	No	N/A
2.1.1	Are bias tests conducted on training data?	☐	☐	☐	☐
2.1.2	Are bias tests conducted on model outputs?	☐	☐	☐	☐
2.1.3	Are bias tests conducted across demographic groups?	☐	☐	☐	☐
2.1.4	Are bias test results documented and reviewed?	☐	☐	☐	☐
2.1.5	Are bias mitigation strategies implemented when bias is detected?	☐	☐	☐	☐

Section 2.2: Fair Data Practices

#	Assessment Item	Yes	Partial	No	N/A
2.2.1	Is training data representative of all affected groups?	☐	☐	☐	☐
2.2.2	Are data collection practices fair and transparent?	☐	☐	☐	☐
2.2.3	Is data quality assessed for bias?	☐	☐	☐	☐
2.2.4	Are data privacy protections in place?	☐	☐	☐	☐
2.2.5	Is data consent documented and respected?	☐	☐	☐	☐

Section 2.3: Equitable Outcomes

#	Assessment Item	Yes	Partial	No	N/A
2.3.1	Does the model produce equitable outcomes across groups?	☐	☐	☐	☐
2.3.2	Are performance metrics evaluated across demographic groups?	☐	☐	☐	☐
2.3.3	Are fairness constraints applied during training?	☐	☐	☐	☐
2.3.4	Is feedback from affected groups incorporated?	☐	☐	☐	☐
2.3.5	Are equity concerns escalated and addressed?	☐	☐	☐	☐

Pillar 3: Stewardship — Responsible Development Practices

Stewardship requires that AI development be conducted with care, accountability, and ethical governance.

Section 3.1: Ethical Design Process

#	Assessment Item	Yes	Partial	No	N/A
3.1.1	Are ethics considered throughout the development lifecycle?	☐	☐	☐	☐
3.1.2	Is there an ethical review process for development decisions?	☐	☐	☐	☐
3.1.3	Are diverse perspectives included in design reviews?	☐	☐	☐	☐
3.1.4	Are ethical trade-offs discussed and documented?	☐	☐	☐	☐
3.1.5	Is ethics training provided to developers?	☐	☐	☐	☐

Section 3.2: Governance Compliance

#	Assessment Item	Yes	Partial	No	N/A
3.2.1	Do development practices comply with relevant policies?	☐	☐	☐	☐
3.2.2	Are compliance requirements integrated into development workflows?	☐	☐	☐	☐
3.2.3	Is compliance monitored and documented?	☐	☐	☐	☐
3.2.4	Are non-compliance issues escalated and addressed?	☐	☐	☐	☐
3.2.5	Are compliance requirements updated with regulatory changes?	☐	☐	☐	☐

Section 3.3: Accountability

#	Assessment Item	Yes	Partial	No	N/A
3.3.1	Are roles and responsibilities for development clearly defined?	☐	☐	☐	☐
3.3.2	Is there clear accountability for development outcomes?	☐	☐	☐	☐
3.3.3	Are developers held accountable for ethical practices?	☐	☐	☐	☐
3.3.4	Is there a process for reporting ethical concerns?	☐	☐	☐	☐
3.3.5	Are accountability mechanisms documented and communicated?	☐	☐	☐	☐

Pillar 4: Wisdom — Prudent Development Practices

Wisdom requires that AI development reflect sound judgment, foresight, and moral discernment.

Section 4.1: Risk Assessment

#	Assessment Item	Yes	Partial	No	N/A
4.1.1	Are potential risks identified and assessed during development?	☐	☐	☐	☐
4.1.2	Are risk assessments conducted for new features and changes?	☐	☐	☐	☐
4.1.3	Are risk assessments documented and reviewed?	☐	☐	☐	☐
4.1.4	Are risks prioritized based on severity?	☐	☐	☐	☐
4.1.5	Are risk mitigation strategies developed and implemented?	☐	☐	☐	☐

Section 4.2: Prudent Design

#	Assessment Item	Yes	Partial	No	N/A
4.2.1	Are design choices made with foresight and caution?	☐	☐	☐	☐
4.2.2	Are alternative approaches considered during design?	☐	☐	☐	☐
4.2.3	Are design decisions documented with rationale?	☐	☐	☐	☐
4.2.4	Are potential unintended consequences considered?	☐	☐	☐	☐
4.2.5	Is design reviewed by diverse stakeholders?	☐	☐	☐	☐

Section 4.3: Long-Term Thinking

#	Assessment Item	Yes	Partial	No	N/A
4.3.1	Are long-term implications of design choices considered?	☐	☐	☐	☐
4.3.2	Is the system designed for future adaptability?	☐	☐	☐	☐
4.3.3	Are plans in place for system evolution and updates?	☐	☐	☐	☐
4.3.4	Is sustainability considered in design choices?	☐	☐	☐	☐
4.3.5	Are future regulatory changes anticipated?	☐	☐	☐	☐

Pillar 5: Beneficence — Development for Human Flourishing

Beneficence requires that AI development actively promote human and environmental well-being.

Section 5.1: Social Impact Consideration

#	Assessment Item	Yes	Partial	No	N/A
5.1.1	Is positive social impact considered in design decisions?	☐	☐	☐	☐
5.1.2	Are potential negative social impacts assessed?	☐	☐	☐	☐
5.1.3	Are affected communities identified and consulted?	☐	☐	☐	☐
5.1.4	Are social impact assessments documented?	☐	☐	☐	☐
5.1.5	Are social impact concerns addressed?	☐	☐	☐	☐

Section 5.2: Environmental Impact

#	Assessment Item	Yes	Partial	No	N/A
5.2.1	Is the environmental footprint of development considered?	☐	☐	☐	☐
5.2.2	Are energy-efficient approaches considered?	☐	☐	☐	☐
5.2.3	Is environmental impact assessed for model training?	☐	☐	☐	☐
5.2.4	Are environmental sustainability practices in place?	☐	☐	☐	☐
5.2.5	Is environmental impact monitored and improved?	☐	☐	☐	☐

Section 5.3: Positive Contribution

#	Assessment Item	Yes	Partial	No	N/A
5.3.1	Does the AI system contribute positively to human well-being?	☐	☐	☐	☐
5.3.2	Are developers encouraged to consider positive impact?	☐	☐	☐	☐
5.3.3	Are community benefits identified and measured?	☐	☐	☐	☐
5.3.4	Is there a process for maximizing positive impact?	☐	☐	☐	☐
5.3.5	Are positive contributions documented and shared?	☐	☐	☐	☐

RI‑D Score Summary

Score Calculation

Pillar	Total Items	Yes	Partial	No	Score (%)
Integrity	15	___	___	___	___%
Justice	15	___	___	___	___%
Stewardship	15	___	___	___	___%
Wisdom	15	___	___	___	___%
Beneficence	15	___	___	___	___%
RI‑D Total	75	___	___	___	___%

Score Interpretation

Score Range	Rating	Description
80–100%	Righteous	Exemplary development practices; righteousness is embedded in development culture
60–79%	Proficient	Solid development practices; righteousness is considered but could be strengthened
40–59%	Developing	Foundational practices in place; significant improvement opportunities exist
20–39%	Emerging	Basic awareness exists; development practices need substantial improvement
0–19%	Unassessed	No systematic righteousness assessment has been conducted

Action Plan

Pillar	Priority Gaps	Recommended Actions	Owner	Target Date	Status
Integrity
Justice
Stewardship
Wisdom
Beneficence

Strengths and Opportunities

Key Strengths

Improvement Opportunities

Assessment Notes

Observations

Recommendations

Next Steps

Step	Action	Owner	Timeline
1	Review assessment findings with development team
2	Prioritize action items
3	Assign owners and target dates
4	Implement improvements
5	Schedule follow‑up assessment

Sign‑Off

Role	Name	Signature	Date
Assessor
Developer Lead
Governance Lead