When an AI system informs a player health decision and something goes wrong, who has the record that proves the organization governed it correctly?
This is not a hypothetical. It is the question your legal team, your insurer, and the league will ask. Darwin by Medigram is how you answer it before it is asked.
AI is already informing decisions about your players. Most organizations cannot prove how.
Performance analytics platforms, injury prediction models, load management tools, return-to-play systems. AI is embedded in how your medical and performance staff work. That is appropriate. What is missing is the layer that proves each of those systems operated within defined boundaries, that a qualified human was accountable, and that the organization can reconstruct the decision trail when it is challenged.
A vendor report is not that record. A compliance certificate is not that record. A sealed governance record created at the moment of the decision, owned by the organization, and verifiable by outside counsel is that record. That is what Darwin creates.
A sealed governance record at the moment of every AI-assisted player health decision.
Not a report generated afterward. Not a compliance document assembled under pressure. A tamper-evident record created at the moment it happens, owned by the organization, retrievable by counsel within hours.
The question your organization needs to answer is not whether you are using AI. It is whether you can prove you governed it.
Darwin is not another AI tool competing for space in your technology stack. It is the governance layer above the tools you already have, sealing a record of every AI-assisted decision before anyone asks for it. The conversation starts here.
Trust and Identity Subgroup Co-Chair, IEEE/UL 2933:2024
Co-Author, ANSI/HSI 2800:2025 · AIMed 2025 AI Champion Award