Methodology

How we check AI tools, and what we will and will not say.

What we check

Each entry records what the supplier itself publishes in its privacy notice, data processing agreement, terms and help pages: whether it acts as a processor or controller, where data is stored, whether inputs are used to train AI models, how long inputs are kept, whether there is a UK GDPR representative or DPO, whether it signs individual DPAs with schools, its minimum age and any notable safety features.

The criteria behind the fields

  • DfE generative AI product safety standards. The Department for Education's standards set out expectations for generative AI products used in education, including filtering, monitoring and reporting, security, privacy and data protection, intellectual property and design for safe use. Our fields focus on the parts that can be checked against a supplier's published documents.
  • Data protection impact assessment (DPIA). UK GDPR requires schools to carry out a DPIA before using processing that is likely to be high risk, and DfE guidance expects one for AI tools that process personal data. Our entries are designed to help with the fact-finding for a DPIA, not to replace it.
  • Re-check when a tool changes. A tool approved last term may not be the same tool today. When a supplier changes its terms, models or features, the entry should be checked again. Every page shows the date it was last checked.

One-line summaries (retired)

Earlier versions showed a one-line summary on each tool. From 23 October 2026 these were removed because they could repeat or contradict the rating. Each tool now shows only its red, amber or green rating and the reasons behind it.

How the red, amber and green rating works

The rating summarises the supplier’s published terms. It isn’t legal advice and isn’t a substitute for a DPIA. It is worked out automatically by fixed rules from the facts on each tool’s page, so anyone can check it. Every rating lists its reasons, each linked to the field it comes from. Each rating has an icon as well as a colour: ✓ green, ! amber, ✕ red, ? grey.

We rate staff use and pupil use separately. If the two match, one rating is shown. If not, both are shown, for example “Amber for staff, Red for pupils”.

Key fields

Six fields count as key: processor or controller; where data is stored; trains on inputs; how long inputs are kept; a school DPA (a DPA link, or the supplier says it signs DPAs); minimum age.

Staff rating, checked in this order

  1. ? GREY: Not enough information yet if research status is “needs full read” or “listed only”, or the supplier doesn’t say whether it trains on inputs and 4 or more key fields are not stated.
  2. ✕ RED: Not recommended for school data if any of these apply: it trains on inputs by default (on the plan listed). This includes consumer plans where only the individual user can opt out, even if the supplier’s business or education plans don’t train, because a school can’t control a per-user setting; the supplier’s role is “controller”; or the supplier says it does not sign DPAs with schools.
  3. ! AMBER: Use with caution if any of these apply: training depends on plan or settings; training is not stated; the processor/controller role is not stated or depends on use; data may be stored outside the UK/EU and either no transfer safeguards are stated or no school DPA was found; storage location is not stated; no school DPA was found; or 3 or more key fields are not stated.
  4. ✓ GREEN: Lower risk: fine to use with normal checks only if none of the above apply. That means it is a processor, doesn’t train on inputs, stores data in the UK/EU or (if mixed or outside the UK/EU) states transfer safeguards such as standard contractual clauses, the UK IDTA or addendum, or adequacy, has a school DPA, and at most 2 key fields are not stated.

Pupil rating

This starts from the staff rating, then:

  • It becomes red if the staff rating is red, if the supplier says the tool is not for pupils, or if the minimum age is 18 or over (unless younger pupils may use it through a school account, in which case it becomes amber).
  • It becomes at least amber if the minimum age is 13 to 17 (not for younger pupils; check consent) or not stated.
  • Grey stays grey.

“General-purpose, not designed for schools”

Consumer assistants built for the general public (for example Grok, Claude Free/Pro/Max, ChatGPT Free/Plus, Meta AI, DeepSeek, Le Chat, consumer Copilot and Gemini, Perplexity Free/Pro, Character.ai and Snapchat My AI) carry this badge. It is a label, not a rating rule: it doesn’t change the colour, which still comes from the published terms.

Sorting “lower risk first” orders tools green, amber, red, then grey, by staff rating and then pupil rating.

How we keep entries up to date

  • Daily change watch. Every day at 06:00 UTC (07:00 in British Summer Time) an automated check downloads each tool’s privacy notice, terms, DPA and source pages and compares the wording with the last copy. If the wording has changed, the tool goes on a review list. The automated check never changes any facts on this site: a person re-reads the supplier’s documents first.
  • Monthly full re-check. Every entry is re-read in full at least once a month. If an entry hasn’t been checked for more than 30 days, its page shows a “may be out of date” warning.
  • Weekly new tools. Each week we add tools that readers have asked us to check, starting with the most requested.
  • Change history. Every change to an entry is logged with the date, the field, the old and new wording and the source. You can see it on each tool page and on the Recently changed page.

Corrections, including from suppliers

Anyone can use the “Report an error” button on a tool page. Suppliers are welcome to send corrections too, but we need evidence: a link to the supplier’s own published document (privacy notice, terms, DPA or help page) that says what the entry should say. We don’t change entries based on private emails, sales materials or promises of future changes. A correction is logged in the change history like any other change.

Rules we follow

  • Every fact links to a source. If we could not find it in a published document, we show not stated. We never guess.
  • Research status shows how complete an entry is: Sourced (published documents read), Partial (some fields still missing), or Needs full read.
  • Our rating is rules-based, not a pass mark or approval (see How we rate tools). Whether a tool is right for your school depends on how you use it.
  • Sponsorship never changes the facts. If we ever accept sponsors or suppliers verify their own listings, that will be clearly labelled, and it will never change what an entry says.

This site is not legal advice. Always read the supplier's current documents and follow your school's or trust's data protection process.