Criteria for Assessing DEIA Efficacy

Workspace for creating consensus driven methodology and tools for measuring identity outcomes, impacts across different demographics, and overall return on investment (ROI) for adopting more inclusive practices.

Category Definitions:

Diversity - Organizations should seek to ensure a range of people with various background (e.g., racial, socioeconomic, gender, cultural, age, experience) are represented in the organization
Equity - Organizations should seek to deliver solutions that promote fair treatment, and remove systemic barriers for underserved communities participating in the system. Impacts should be measured and made transparent.
Inclusion - Organizations should seek to actively participate and engage with the broader community to understand where identity systems are falling short and how they should be improved. Feedback should inform product development.
Accessibility - Organizations should seek to design solutions and services in a manner that all people including those with disabilities can fully and independently use them.

Category	Criteria	Description	Measurement Approach	Comments

Criteria	Description	Comments
Auto Decision Rate	How often the solution returned a conclusive decision (“accept” or “reject”) for a submission.	Consider hierarchy w/ things like resubmit rate.
True Reject Rate	How often the solution accurately rejected a fraudulent submission	Should we consider for different dimensions of verification (bio vs pii vs other)
True Accept Rate	How often the solution accurately accepted a legitimate submission	Should we consider for different dimensions of verification (bio vs pii vs other)
False Reject Rate	How often the solution falsely rejected a legitimate submission	Should we consider for different dimensions of verification (bio vs pii vs other)
False Accept Rate	How often the solution falsely accepted a fraudulent submission	Should we consider for different dimensions of verification (bio vs pii vs other)
Resubmit Rate / # of attempts required	How often a person had to resubmit or engage in the process to achieve an outcome
Abandonment Rate	% of people that began but never completed the process	Sub-categories (evidence, technology, process burden
Time to Complete / Time taken to conduct a task.	How long the identity proofing process took to complete
Coverage Accuracy For Demographics	How often an identity can be uniquely resolved for a given population via authoritative data sources	Scrutinize - may be a bridge too far.
Manual Review Rate	How often an identity has to be reviewed through an in-person or out of band method to resolve to a unique individual.
% of channel referral	How often a user to shifted from one channel to another to complete the identity proofing process	Consideration on making this another lens for all the metrics - focusing on what the macro metrics look like across all channels.
Disparity between initial adjudication and final adjudication	% difference between the initial determination on an identity vs the ultimate determination for the identity	Perhaps shifting to appeals / redress rate or other. What is the percentage of reversal following appeal / redress