PRI-36.3: Automated Decision-Making Technology (ADMT) Opt-Out Consent
Mechanisms exist to provide concise, unambiguous and understandable instructions on how data subjects can opt-out of Automated Decision-Making Technology (ADMT).
Renumbered: Formerly PRI-19.2 in SCF 2025.4.
Control Question: Does the organization provide concise, unambiguous and understandable instructions on how data subjects can opt-out of Automated Decision-Making Technology (ADMT)?
US (2)
| Framework | Mapping Values |
|---|---|
| USA California CCPA 2025 | 7010(d) 7221(a) 7221(b) 7221(b)(1) 7221(b)(1)(A) 7221(b)(1)(B) 7221(b)(2) 7221(b)(2)(A) 7221(b)(2)(B) 7221(b)(3) 7221(b)(3)(A) 7221(b)(3)(B) 7221(c) 7221(d) 7221(e) 7221(f) 7221(g) 7221(h) 7221(m) 7221(n) 7221(n)(1) 7221(n)(2) |
| USA Montana CDPA 2025 | 30-14-2808(1)(e) |
EMEA (5)
| Framework | Mapping Values |
|---|---|
| EMEA Switzerland FADP 2025 | 3.21.3.b |
| EMEA Kenya DPA 2019 | IV.35(1) |
| EMEA Russia 152-FZ 2025 | Art. 16 |
| EMEA Serbia 87/2018 | III.4.38 |
| EMEA South Africa POPIA 2013 | 8.71(3)(a) |
Capability Maturity Model
Level 0 — Not Performed
Practices are non-existent, based on the inability to demonstrate an implemented and operational capability. A reasonable person would conclude the control is not being performed.
Level 1 — Performed Informally
SCR-CMM Level 1 criteria definitions are not available for this control: ▪ A reasonable person would conclude this control requires a structured process. ▪ At this level of maturity, the "ad hoc" nature of performing a capability informally would indicate the intent of the control is not met due to a lack of consistency and formality.
Level 2 — Planned & Tracked
SCR-CMM Level 2 criteria definitions are not available for this control: ▪ A reasonable person would conclude a well-defined and standardized process is required. ▪ At this level of maturity, the “requirements-driven” nature of performing the control is focused on a localized and/or regionalized implementation, not uniform and consistent across the organization. ▪ Requirements are narrowly scoped for applicability and are primarily derived from compliance obligations (e.g., laws, regulations and contracts).
Level 3 — Well Defined
Privacy (PRI) capabilities are standardized across the entity for applicability to People, Processes, Technologies, Data and/or Facilities (PPTDF) to ensure consistency for Technology Assets, Applications, Services and/or Data (TAASD). Capability criteria associated with this control reasonably expect the following criteria to exist: ▪ Policies and standards associated with PRI domain capabilities are formally documented and centrally-managed by the entity's Governance, Risk & Compliance (GRC) team, or similar function. ▪ Standardized Operating Procedures (SOP) associated with PRI domain capabilities are well-documented and kept current by process owners. ▪ A data privacy team, or similar function, is appropriately staffed and supported to implement and maintain PRI domain capabilities. ▪ Technology is leveraged to enhance the efficiency and accuracy of data privacy operations (e.g., privacy notice management software and customer management solution). ▪ The entity's Governance, Risk & Compliance (GRC) team, or similar function, works with business stakeholders and process owners to appropriately scope and reasonably implement cybersecurity and data protection controls associated with PRI domain capabilities to address Minimum Compliance Requirements (MCR) (e.g., applicable statutory, regulatory and/or contractual requirements) and Discretionary Security Requirements (DSR) (e.g., entity-required controls). ▪ An implemented and operational capability exists to provide concise, unambiguous and understandable instructions on how data subjects can opt-out of Automated Decision-Making Technology (ADMT).
Level 4 — Quantitatively Controlled
Utilize SCR-CMM Level 3 criteria definitions: ▪ There are no defined Level 4 criteria, since it is reasonable to assume a quantitatively-controlled process is not necessary to operationalize this control. ▪ While it may be possible to develop “metrics-driven” capabilities for this control, the criteria would be organization-specific to define.
Level 5 — Continuously Improving
Utilize SCR-CMM Level 3 or Level 4 (if available) criteria definitions: ▪ There are no defined Level 5 criteria, since it is reasonable to assume a continuously-improving process is not necessary to operationalize this control. ▪ Level 5 capabilities should be considered “world-class” where the control builds on Level 4 capabilities, but are continuously improving through Artificial Intelligence (AI) and/or Machine Learning (ML) technologies. ▪ While it may be possible to develop responsive capabilities for this control through the use of AI and/or ML technologies, the criteria would be organization-specific to define.
Assessment Objectives
- PRI-36.3_A01 data subject-focused instructions pertaining to Automated Decision-Making Technology (ADMT) are documented.
- PRI-36.3_A02 data subjects are provided concise, unambiguous and understandable instructions on how a data subjects can opt-out of Automated Decision-Making Technology (ADMT).
Evidence Requirements
- E-PRI-11 Automated Decision-Making Technology (ADMT) Documentation
-
Documented evidence of Automated Decision-Making Technology (ADMT) use, notifications, opt-out and transparency documentation.
Privacy
Technology Recommendations
Micro/Small
- Provide opt-out option for automated decision-making
Small
- ADMT opt-out policy and procedure
Medium
- Formal ADMT opt-out process
- User-accessible opt-out mechanism
Large
- Enterprise ADMT opt-out management
- Automated opt-out processing and honoring
Enterprise
- Enterprise consent management platform with ADMT opt-out (e.g., OneTrust)
- Automated opt-out processing across systems