Ever since the introduction of AI tools a few years ago, there has been an onslaught of new and updated/enhanced AI platforms available for organizations to consider and use. The healthcare industry has been inundated as have all other industries.

It can be overwhelming to an organization to evaluate the products. Just deciding which products to evaluate and in what order can be a big project.
UChicago Medicine decided to be proactive and create a single point of entry, i.e., a "front door," for all submissions for AI products, from both external vendors and internal teams. Before a submission is routed to the appropriate teams, it goes through a cybersecurity review, a financial review, and assessment of use-case. AI submissions are reviewed weekly by a dedicated team before being forwarded for specific team consideration.
A major consideration during the intake evaluation process is if a pilot is needed, and if so, what form it will take. Many organizations put this decision off until much later in the evaluation process.
Risk classification drives the process. AI tools that are more administrative in nature generally have lower risk, but those that are more clinical require a more rigorous evaluation. By performing the risk classification at the beginning, the potential for having to stop and restart the governance process halfway through the evaluation after discovering a hidden risk in the tool.
How does your organization evaluate AI tools and products for adoption?