Playbook
AI Governance Playbook for Healthcare
A working governance model for Australian healthcare organisations that already have staff using AI tools, whether or not anyone approved them.
We do not send a generic PDF.
That is why we ask for your job title and your company. Every resource is tailored dynamically around both, so what reaches you speaks to the decisions your role actually owns, inside an organisation like yours.
Generated around your role, then checked by us before it goes out. That is what the 48 hours is for.
Request your copy
Four fields. Your job title and company shape the document you get back, within 48 hours.
What you get
- A one page policy your executive can sign, written in plain language instead of legal boilerplate.
- The approval path for a new AI tool, from the first request through to sign off, naming who is responsible at each step.
- Where patient information can and cannot go, mapped against the Privacy Act and the Australian Privacy Principles.
- What to do on the day you discover a clinician has been pasting case notes into a public chatbot.
Who it is for
Written for whoever ends up owning this. Sometimes that is a CIO. Often it is a privacy officer, a practice manager, or the one clinician who asked the question nobody else wanted to ask.
Questions this raises
Who is responsible when an AI tool gets a clinical decision wrong?
The registered practitioner. Ahpra's guidance, Meeting your professional obligations when using Artificial Intelligence in healthcare, makes practitioners ultimately responsible for any AI used in their practice and says they cannot defer to an AI output without applying their own professional judgement (Source: Ahpra, Meeting your professional obligations when using Artificial Intelligence in healthcare). A governance policy that does not name a human owner for each tool leaves that responsibility undefined.
What does the Voluntary AI Safety Standard ask a healthcare provider to do?
It sets out ten voluntary guardrails covering accountability, risk assessment, data governance, testing, human oversight, transparency, contestability, supply chain, records and stakeholder engagement (Source: DISR, Voluntary AI Safety Standard, September 2024). It is not law, so the practical use is as a checklist a board can be shown, rather than a compliance obligation.
Does an AI governance policy need board approval?
For most providers the useful test is not whether a board must approve it, but whether anyone can say who did. Health information is sensitive information under the Privacy Act, and the reforms enacted in 2025 raised the consequences of getting its handling wrong (Source: Attorney General's Department, Privacy Act Review Report 2023, reforms enacted 2025). A named approver and a dated decision is the minimum that survives a later question.
Still scrolling? The form is at the top of the page.