Alcott CAIHL draft report

Alcott: CAIHL reassessment

September 8, 2026. Published AI-assisted draft.

Alcott’s historical profile describes patient and family visit preparation with clinic delivery. Current pages could not be read in this reassessment. Patient approval of outgoing briefs, correction after delivery, and caregiver authority remain unresolved.

Scope and agency posture

Historically a hybrid patient/family visit companion with clinic delivery and EHR/CRM integrations. No current page body was recovered.

Posture: Potentially agency-expanding, mixed.

Axis: 72/100, retained provisionally. No numerical recalibration was performed.

Sources and documented findings

• The July baseline documents patient agendas, visit summaries, family links, data rights and clinic integration, with incomplete patient review of outgoing briefs.

• The focused patient and privacy pages returned empty bodies. One targeted homepage fallback also returned no body. This is a retrieval limitation, not evidence the service stopped operating. https://alcottai.com/patients and https://alcottai.com/privacy and https://alcottai.com/

Patient authority

Inference from the documented workflow: Historical patient preparation and sharing support patient priorities. Patient approval of the exact clinician brief and caregiver authority remain distinct unresolved controls.

Critical capacity

Editorial assessment: Agendas and records could support reflection and action, but the current pass cannot verify correction of generated summaries or information already written to institutional systems.

Informed control

Editorial assessment: Historical named processors and deletion periods must keep their July date. The empty pages do not confirm or refute those commitments.

Assessment and limits

The specific historical hybrid assessment remains useful. Present-day uncertainty should be explicit, with no score deduction for failed extraction.

Confidence: Low for current behavior, moderate for frozen historical documentation.

Remaining uncertainty: All current public controls and changes since July remain unverified

Published documentation is evidence of stated conditions, not proof of actual implementation. Unknowns did not receive automatic negative points. Funding, sponsorship, and public code do not determine agency by themselves.

Review provenance

• Reviewer/model: OpenAI Codex / GPT-6.
• Method: Focused public-source reassessment using CAIHL: patient authority, critical capacity, and informed control. Existing evidence plus one focused primary-source pass and at most one targeted follow-up. No live product testing. Numerical scores remain provisional editorial placements, not a new calculation.
• Human review: Hugo Campos authorized publication of these AI-assisted draft reassessments on September 8, 2026. This does not claim comprehensive human verification of every finding.
• Earlier review: 2026-07-01. Historical assessment. Earlier claims are not automatically reverified by this publication.