The Department for Science, Innovation and Technology does not currently use solely automated decisions-making (ADM) with legal or similarly significant effects on individuals. However, should the department decide to use solely ADM in the future, it must comply with the UK’s data protection laws, namely the UK GDPR and the Data Protection Act 2018, (as amended by the Data (Use and Access) Act 2025), and should have regard to guidance from the Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO) as the independent data protection regulator. This includes providing safeguards for individuals such as informing them if significant decisions are taken about them based solely on automated processing, an individual will always be able to challenge such decisions, obtain human intervention, and make representations to the department about the decision.

If personal data is processed using systems that support a decision, but a human contributes meaningfully to the final outcome, the decision is unlikely to be classed as solely automated decision-making. In these cases, the specific safeguards for solely automated decisions would not apply. However, the processing must still comply with wider data protection requirements, including fairness, lawfulness, transparency and accountability.

Where processing is likely to present a high risk to individuals, a Data Protection Impact Assessment (DPIA) will be undertaken to identify and assess those risks and put appropriate mitigations in place. DSIT also operates a data protection complaints procedure, in line with the Data Protection Act 2018, to investigate and respond to any concerns raised by individuals.

The Department for Science, Innovation and Technology does not currently use solely automated decisions-making (ADM) with legal or similarly significant effects on individuals. However, should the department decide to use solely ADM in the future, it must comply with the UK’s data protection laws, namely the UK GDPR and the Data Protection Act 2018, (as amended by the Data (Use and Access) Act 2025), and should have regard to guidance from the Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO) as the independent data protection regulator. This includes providing safeguards for individuals such as informing them if significant decisions are taken about them based solely on automated processing, an individual will always be able to challenge such decisions, obtain human intervention, and make representations to the department about the decision.

If personal data is processed using systems that support a decision, but a human contributes meaningfully to the final outcome, the decision is unlikely to be classed as solely automated decision-making. In these cases, the specific safeguards for solely automated decisions would not apply. However, the processing must still comply with wider data protection requirements, including fairness, lawfulness, transparency and accountability.

Where processing is likely to present a high risk to individuals, a Data Protection Impact Assessment (DPIA) will be undertaken to identify and assess those risks and put appropriate mitigations in place. DSIT also operates a data protection complaints procedure, in line with the Data Protection Act 2018, to investigate and respond to any concerns raised by individuals.

The Ministry of Defence (MOD) has firmly established policies, guidance, and governance arrangements in place to ensure compliance with data protection legislation when processing special category personal data. These arrangements require that personal data be processed lawfully, fairly, and securely, and only where an appropriate condition for processing applies. They also require business areas to identify and implement suitable safeguards.

In addition, the MOD’s Data Protection Impact Assessment process mandates a thorough assessment of privacy risks where processing is likely to pose a high risk to individuals, including cases involving special category personal data, to ensure risks are identified and mitigated before processing begins.

These measures are supported by advice and oversight from Principal Data Protection Authorities within MOD and the MOD’s Data Protection Officer’s Team, alongside mandatory training, guidance, and assurance activities across the Department.

The Drugs Strategy Ministerial Forum (DSMF) brings together Ministers from six departments (the Home Office, the Department for Health and Social Care, the Ministry of Justice, the Department of Work and Pensions, the Department for Education and the Ministry of Housing Communities and Local Government), along with other departments as appropriate, to ensure cross-government accountability and join-up on a range of drug-related activity.

The last DSMF was held in December, and the next meeting is being planned for the autumn.

All processing of personal data, including special category data, within the Department is screened to identify whether it is likely to result in a high risk to the rights and freedoms of individuals. Where high-risk processing is identified, a Data Protection Impact Assessment is completed to support compliance with data protection law and associated guidance.

What constitutes meaningful human involvement will vary depending on the specific use case, so the Department considers and assesses the nature of human involvement in decisions supported or made by automated decisions on a case-by-case basis supported by relevant guidance.

The Department has developed guidance on Responsible Artificial Intelligence (AI) usage for staff and follows the AI Playbook for UK Government that requires us to have meaningful human control at the right stages, including human validation of any high-risk decisions influenced by AI and having strategies for meaningful intervention.

Where the Department uses automated decision-making systems that process personal data, these processing activities are required to be assessed via the completion of a Data Protection Impact Assessment to support compliance with data protection law and associated guidance. This process is used to identify and mitigate any risk of bias and discrimination and assess the effectiveness of human oversight.

Where the Department uses automated decision-making systems that process personal data, these processing activities are required to be assessed via the completion of a Data Protection Impact Assessment to support compliance with data protection law and associated guidance. This process is used to identify and mitigate any risk of bias and discrimination and assess the effectiveness of human oversight.

The Department is not using automated decision-making systems in relation to civil service employment, including recruitment, performance management, discipline or the allocation of work.

The Department holds regular consultations with its trade unions on all matters concerning the workforce, including its future strategy for the use of Artificial Intelligence.

The Driver and Vehicle Licensing Agency uses automated processes based on the information held on their records to generate penalty letters to those vehicle keepers who have failed to meet their obligations relating to the registration, licensing and insurance of vehicles. All letters generated explain what recipients should do next and any subsequent contact regarding the penalty, including appeals, is dealt with by an official and is not subject to automated decision making.

There are no other solely automated decisions currently made by the Department that produce legal or similarly significant effects. Any future initiatives involving significant automated decision making would adhere to the relevant guidance and details would be published in accordance with the Algorithmic Transparency Recording Standard.

The Department's Personal Information Charter sets out how individuals will be informed about decisions that have been made partially or wholly by automated means, the safeguards, and the information rights that apply.

The Department also has an internal data protection policy which was updated to reflect the changes introduced by the Data (Use and Access) Act 2025 and provides guidance to the Department on its obligations when using automated decision making.

The Department's Personal Information Charter sets out how individuals will be informed about decisions that have been made partially or wholly by automated means, the safeguards, and the information rights that apply.

The Department also has an internal data protection policy which was updated to reflect the changes introduced by the Data (Use and Access) Act 2025 and provides guidance to the Department on its obligations when using automated decision making.

The Department's Personal Information Charter sets out how individuals will be informed about decisions that have been made partially or wholly by automated means, the safeguards, and the information rights that apply.

The Department also has an internal data protection policy which was updated to reflect the changes introduced by the Data (Use and Access) Act 2025 and provides guidance to the Department on its obligations when using automated decision making.

The Department's Personal Information Charter sets out how individuals will be informed about decisions that have been made partially or wholly by automated means, the safeguards, and the information rights that apply.

The Department also has an internal data protection policy which was updated to reflect the changes introduced by the Data (Use and Access) Act 2025 and provides guidance to the Department on its obligations when using automated decision making.

There are different interpretations of what constitutes Automated Decision-Making (ADM). The Ministry of Defence (MOD) does not hold a central database on all activities that might meet the definition of ADM within the Department

We have robust policies and guidance on ADM. As Artificial Intelligence (AI) and similar technologies become more prevalent within our business, we also have policies and guidance on AI which apply in addition to our data policies, and which stress the importance of human accountability as a key aspect of responsible use.

The Department is fully committed to setting up the Statutory Public Inquiry into the serious harms that have taken place at the Tees, Esk and Wear Valleys NHS Foundation Trust.

The Department has begun work to set up the inquiry, the Inquiry Secretary is in post, and we anticipate announcing the Chair soon.

In the last 12 months the following number of Coastguard Rescue Officers have left the Coastguard Rescue Service – Coastguard Rescue Officers leave the service for a variety of reasons:

Changing the Coastguard Rescue Service operating model was not something which we wanted to do but is a mandated consequence of the Court of Appeal ruling.

Public safety remains our priority and careful consideration was given to the options for a revised operating model. The legal position, the operational implications, and the wider organisational impact have all been looked at in detail, as well as the views of current Coastguard Rescue Officers (CRO). They were clear that serving their community was a major reason why they volunteer. Protecting volunteering preserves a valuable form of public service. The revised model protects choice, flexibility and the ability for people to serve alongside their primary employment. As a result, the decision was made to move to a new model with expenses but no hourly remuneration. This will be implemented in September 2026.

In the last 12 months the following number of Coastguard Rescue Officers have left the Coastguard Rescue Service – Coastguard Rescue Officers leave the service for a variety of reasons:

Changing the Coastguard Rescue Service operating model was not something which we wanted to do but is a mandated consequence of the Court of Appeal ruling.

Public safety remains our priority and careful consideration was given to the options for a revised operating model. The legal position, the operational implications, and the wider organisational impact have all been looked at in detail, as well as the views of current Coastguard Rescue Officers (CRO). They were clear that serving their community was a major reason why they volunteer. Protecting volunteering preserves a valuable form of public service. The revised model protects choice, flexibility and the ability for people to serve alongside their primary employment. As a result, the decision was made to move to a new model with expenses but no hourly remuneration. This will be implemented in September 2026.

In the last 12 months the following number of Coastguard Rescue Officers have left the Coastguard Rescue Service – Coastguard Rescue Officers leave the service for a variety of reasons:

Changing the Coastguard Rescue Service operating model was not something which we wanted to do but is a mandated consequence of the Court of Appeal ruling.

Public safety remains our priority and careful consideration was given to the options for a revised operating model. The legal position, the operational implications, and the wider organisational impact have all been looked at in detail, as well as the views of current Coastguard Rescue Officers (CRO). They were clear that serving their community was a major reason why they volunteer. Protecting volunteering preserves a valuable form of public service. The revised model protects choice, flexibility and the ability for people to serve alongside their primary employment. As a result, the decision was made to move to a new model with expenses but no hourly remuneration. This will be implemented in September 2026.