← Vetro Attest · Free Art. 12/14 checker · Free EU AI Act tools
EU AI Act for admissions offices
*Engineering guidance, not legal advice. Your legal team decides how the Act applies to your products.*
Where this sector lands
Annex III point 3(a) covers AI systems intended to be used to determine access or admission or to assign natural persons to educational and vocational training institutions at all levels. That includes university application screening, essay scoring used in selection, scholarship shortlisting, and the algorithms some cities use to allocate pupils to schools. Point 3(c), assessing the appropriate level of education a person will receive, catches placement tests. Tutoring and grading tools are covered on the edtech page.
Admissions is also where public bodies deploy. Public schools and universities that deploy a high-risk system must carry out a fundamental rights impact assessment before first use (Art. 27), and public-authority deployers must register their use in the EU database and may not use a system that is not registered there (Art. 26(8), Art. 49).
The logging duties that follow
- Art. 12 (providers): the admissions tool records events automatically so each applicant's path through it can be traced.
- Art. 19 (providers): keep the logs, when under your control, for at least six months.
- Art. 26 (deployers), the institution: competent human oversight by admissions staff (Art. 26(2)), logs kept for at least six months (Art. 26(6)), and informing applicants that a high-risk system is used in decisions about them (Art. 26(11)).
Admission appeals can run past a single cycle, and applicants can ask for an explanation of the system's role (Art. 86). Keep logs at least as long as your appeal window.
On timing: the Digital Omnibus agreement moves Annex III high-risk obligations to December 2027 (details and caveats).
What counts as evidence
In an appeal the institution must show how the applicant was assessed, which criteria weighed, and where a person made the call.
Abbreviated ledger excerpt (prev, hash and sig omitted):
{"seq":1,"type":"tool.call","data":{"name":"fetch_application","input":{"applicant":"apl_77310","programme":"BSc-CS","cycle":"2027"}}}
{"seq":2,"type":"llm.response","data":{"model":"essay-rubric-1","usage":{"input_tokens":2210,"output_tokens":180}}}
{"seq":3,"type":"tool.result","data":{"name":"rubric_score","output":{"motivation":3,"clarity":4,"total":7,"threshold":6}}}
{"seq":4,"type":"tool.call","data":{"name":"committee_decision","input":{"officer":"adm_12","decision":"offer","override":false}}}
When an officer overrides the model, record it the same way with override set to true. Missing overrides are what an appeal panel looks for.
How Vetro Attest fits
Vetro Attest accepts an OpenTelemetry GenAI trace (OTLP/JSON) or a native Vetro ledger, with nothing to install. Verification is free. For 49 USD per ledger, one-off:
- a full EU AI Act report (Markdown and HTML) mapping the run onto the logging obligations, with an explicit list of what the log cannot show;
- an ed25519 countersignature over the ledger digest, event count and timestamp, verifiable by anyone with our published public key.
A practical pattern: countersign each applicant run once the committee decision is recorded, and store the attestation with the application file until the appeal window closes.
Limits, stated plainly: the countersignature proves the log verified clean at a time, not that the admission decision was fair. The report supports a compliance conversation; it is not a conformity assessment. Paid ledgers are deleted after 7 days, and the report and attestation are emailed to you to keep.
Next steps
- Run the free EU AI Act Art. 12/14 checker against your current setup.
- Verify a trace free, then get the countersigned report for 49 USD.
- Compare approaches: vs. WORM storage, vs. Langfuse.
See a sample ledger verified in one click, check your own logs free or get the countersigned EU AI Act report.