AI Governance Charter & Decision-Rights Map

A one-document answer to the question that stalls most campus AI efforts: who decides? Fill it in with your cabinet, ratify it through your existing governance, and publish it.

Use this in a single 90-minute cabinet session. The goal is not a perfect document; it is a named owner and an escalation path for every decision type, agreed in the room. Revisit quarterly.

Part 1 · Purpose & scope

Institution	Name
Charter owner (accountable executive)	Name, title
Governance body this charter reports to	e.g. President’s Cabinet, Senate committee
Effective date / next review	Date / +90 days
What this charter covers	e.g. all AI tools touching institutional data, admissions, advising, research
What it explicitly does not cover	Name the boundaries so gaps are deliberate, not accidental

Part 2 · The six decision types

For each decision type, name the single accountable owner (one name, not a committee), who must be consulted, and where it escalates when contested.

Decision type	Accountable owner	Consulted before deciding	Escalates to
1. Tool adoption approving an AI tool for institutional use	Name	IT, security, privacy, affected unit	Name / body
2. Data access what data an AI system may touch	Name	Data governance, compliance	Name / body
3. Procurement & contracts terms, price, exit, no-training clauses	Name	Counsel, procurement	Name / body
4. Academic policy use in teaching, assessment, integrity	Name	Senate, provost, faculty	Name / body
5. Risk acceptance signing off on a known residual risk	Name	Risk, compliance, counsel	Name / body
6. Incident response who acts when an AI system fails publicly	Name	Comms, counsel, IT, affected unit	Name / body

Part 3 · Escalation path

When an owner and a consulted party disagree, or a decision exceeds an owner’s authority, it moves up this path. Name the real people.

Owner decides within their defined authority and documents the decision.
Governance body reviews (name it) when contested or above a defined threshold (cost, data sensitivity, public exposure).
Accountable executive rules (name them) when the body cannot resolve, or the risk is institution-level.
Board is informed for decisions affecting mission, reputation, or material risk.

Part 4 · Integration with existing governance

This charter does not replace your governance; it plugs into it. Name the connection so this does not become a parallel bureaucracy.

Existing body / process	How AI decisions connect to it
Academic Senate	e.g. academic-policy decisions route through …
Data governance committee	e.g. data-access decisions require sign-off from …
Risk / audit / compliance	e.g. risk acceptance logged in …
Procurement	e.g. AI contracts flagged for … review

Companion to The Path, Module 3 and the AI Governance & Policy domain profile at campusaiproficiency.com.