Employers that use AI to screen resumes often ask for a bias audit and then wonder what it should contain. California does not hand over a template. What it does provide is a list of factors that a decision maker may weigh, and a standard for any practice that has an adverse impact. This post explains both, uses New York City's Local Law 144 as a reference model, and ends with a checklist.

What California Says About Testing

The key language is in 2 CCR section 11009(f), part of the Civil Rights Council's regulations that took effect on October 1, 2025. It states that "Relevant to any such claim or available defense is evidence, or the lack of evidence, of anti-bias testing or similar proactive efforts to avoid unlawful discrimination, including the quality, efficacy, recency, and scope of such effort, the results of such testing or other effort, and the response to the results."

That sentence gives six factors to build around: quality, efficacy, recency, scope, results, and response. Notice that it counts the lack of testing as evidence too. For the wider picture, see our overview of the Civil Rights Council rules.

Section 11017(e) sets the standard for what follows a bad result. An adverse impact, as defined in the Uniform Guidelines on Employee Selection Procedures, "is permissible only upon a showing that the selection practice is job-related and consistent with business necessity." So a test that finds a disparity creates a second task: either show the job-related reason or change the practice.

What California Does Not Prescribe

The regulations summarized here prescribe no audit method. They do not require an independent auditor, and they do not offer a safe harbor for any employer that completes a test. They also do not set a pass line. A four-fifths ratio is a common screening measure, but it is not stated as California law in these rules. A certificate, from any provider, is not a safe harbor under these rules.

New York City as a Reference Model

New York City's Local Law 144 is not California law. It is useful because it is one of the few places where a government wrote down what a bias audit must contain. According to the city's rules and guidance, a covered employer must have a bias audit completed within one year before use of the tool, and it must publish a summary of the results. The auditor must be independent. The audit reports the selection rate and the impact ratio by sex, by race and ethnicity, and for intersectional categories. It reports unknown categories, and it may exclude a category that is under 2 percent of the data. For tools that score candidates, the audit uses the median score and the scoring rate. The summary stays posted for six months after the tool was last used, and candidates receive notice 10 business days before use.

The city's FAQ is just as instructive about what the law omits. It requires no action on the results, and it sets no statistical significance threshold. Auditors need not be approved by the city. The law has been enforced since July 5, 2023, with penalties of $500 for a first violation and $500 to $1,500 for later ones.

A California-Ready Checklist

Combine the California factors with the New York City minimums and you get a file that covers the ground. These items are our synthesis, not a legal requirement.

Fix the method in writing before the test runs. Decide the categories and the measures first, so the file shows a method chosen in advance and not one chosen after the numbers arrived.

Scope. List every tool and every stage it touches, from resume scoring to knockout questions. A test that covers one tool and skips another has a narrow scope.

Data. Record the period, the number of applicants, and how group membership was determined. Report how many records had unknown categories.

Measures. Calculate selection rates and impact ratios by sex, by race and ethnicity, and for the intersections. For scoring tools, also calculate median scores.

Independence. California does not require it, but a test run by someone other than the tool's builder carries more weight. Document who ran the test and what they were told.

Recency. Date every test, and repeat it after any change to the tool, the job description, or the applicant pool. A year-old result says little about a model updated last month.

Results. Keep the numbers, not only a conclusion. Section 11009(f) refers to "the results of such testing."

Job-relatedness. For any disparity, write the reason the criterion relates to the job and why it is consistent with business necessity, or record the decision to change it.

Limits. State the sample size and the weaknesses of the data. A small group produces unstable ratios, and an honest limitations note reads better than a clean number that hides it.

Retention. Keep the file as long as the related records. See our post on the four-year rule.

Documenting the Response

The last factor in section 11009(f) is "the response to the results," and it is the one teams forget. A test result with no follow-up reads as knowledge without action. Write down what the group reviewed, what it decided, who approved it, which setting or criterion changed, and when the retest took place. If the answer was to change nothing, record why. A person who later asks about testing, as described in our guide to candidate questions, will be asking for exactly this file.

How TrueScan HR Helps

TrueScan HR scores a resume against the job description and shows the matched and missing skills, along with a narrative assessment that explains each score. The reviewer makes the decision, and TrueScan HR keeps a scored record for each resume. Enterprise plans include certified weekly bias testing and a 4/5ths adverse impact report, which can feed the dated, repeatable testing file described above.

The Bottom Line

California rewards quality, efficacy, recency, scope, results, and response, and it leaves the method to you. Build the file around those six factors, use a published model such as New York City's for the details, and keep the record of what you did next.

This post is general information, not legal advice. TrueScan HR is not a law firm. Confirm how these rules apply to your organization with employment counsel.

Sources: