---
title: "Illinois AI Vendor Governance | EFROS"
description: "AI vendors evaluated against Illinois-specific governance frameworks — state-relevant axes highlighted, source-cited per cell, ungated and updated quarterly."
canonical: https://efros.com/research/us-ai-vendor-governance-index/by-state/illinois/
---

- [Home](https://efros.com/)
- /[Research](https://efros.com/research/)
- /[US AI Vendor Governance Index](https://efros.com/research/us-ai-vendor-governance-index/)
- /Illinois

By State / Illinois

# Illinois AI Vendor Governance

AI vendors evaluated against IL-specific frameworks — IL HB 3773 (AI Video Interview Act + AI in employment), BIPA (Biometric Information Privacy Act), IL Personal Information Protection Act (PIPA), and the ISBA / ARDC AI Guidance (2024).

Illinois — vendors with explicit state engagement, ranked by 4 state-relevant governance axes.

Edition: 2026-Q2 State: IL Vendors: 30 State-relevant axes: 4

By [Stefan Efros](https://www.linkedin.com/in/stefanefros-cyberdefense/), CEO & Founder, EFROS

Updated · June 17, 2026

## Why this state view

Illinois has BIPA — the most litigated state biometric privacy law in the US, with class-action exposure for face/voice biometrics in AI workflows. IL HB 3773 added explicit AI-in-employment disclosure. The ARDC + ISBA guidance bound lawyer AI use. Vendors deploying in IL need biometric handling clarity.

## Primary frameworks anchored
- →IL HB 3773 (AI Video Interview Act + AI employment)
- →Illinois Biometric Information Privacy Act (BIPA)
- →IL Personal Information Protection Act
- →ISBA + ARDC AI Guidance (2024)

State-relevant scoring axes

Columns marked with an accent dot in the scorecard below are the axes most relevant to Illinois's regulatory frame. The state-relevance ranking in this view averages vendor performance across these axes only.
- •Training-data opt-out
- •Subprocessor list public
- •ABA Formal Op 512 readiness
- •NIST AI RMF self-attestation

| # | Vendor | IL Rel. | Score | Grade | •BAA | •Opt-out | •US Res | •SOC 2 | •ISO 42001 | •NIST AI | •CO AI | •§1557 | •SR 11-7 | •ABA 512 | •Subproc | TC |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| 1 | Thomson Reuters CoCounsel | 88(4/4) | 80 | B | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | No | Partial | Partial | N/A | N/A | Yes | Yes | 4/5 |
| 2 | Lexis+ AI | 88(4/4) | 76 | B | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | No | Partial | No | N/A | N/A | Yes | Yes | 4/5 |
| 3 | Westlaw Precision AI | 88(4/4) | 76 | B | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | No | Partial | No | N/A | N/A | Yes | Yes | 4/5 |
| 4 | Abridge | 83(3/4) | 87 | A | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Partial | Partial | Partial | Yes | N/A | N/A | Yes | 5/5 |
| 5 | FICO Falcon Fraud Manager + FICO Score AI | 83(3/4) | 80 | B | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | No | Partial | Partial | N/A | Yes | N/A | Yes | 4/5 |
| 6 | Suki AI | 83(3/4) | 72 | B | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | No | Partial | Partial | Partial | N/A | N/A | Yes | 4/5 |
| 7 | Nuance DAX Copilot (Microsoft) | 83(3/4) | 70 | B | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | No | Partial | No | Partial | N/A | N/A | Yes | 5/5 |
| 8 | Salesforce Einstein / Agentforce | 83(3/4) | 69 | C | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | No | Partial | No | Partial | Partial | N/A | Yes | 5/5 |
| 9 | Glean | 83(3/4) | 69 | C | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | No | Partial | No | N/A | N/A | N/A | Yes | 4/5 |
| 10 | Arctic Wolf | 83(3/4) | 69 | C | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | No | Partial | No | N/A | N/A | N/A | Yes | 4/5 |
| 11 | Huntress | 83(3/4) | 69 | C | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | No | Partial | No | N/A | N/A | N/A | Yes | 4/5 |
| 12 | eSentire | 83(3/4) | 69 | C | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | No | Partial | No | N/A | N/A | N/A | Yes | 4/5 |
| 13 | Sophos | 83(3/4) | 69 | C | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | No | Partial | No | N/A | N/A | N/A | Yes | 4/5 |
| 14 | Unit21 | 83(3/4) | 68 | C | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | No | Partial | No | N/A | Partial | N/A | Yes | 4/5 |
| 15 | Anthropic Claude | 83(3/4) | 58 | C | Partial | Yes | Partial | Yes | No | Partial | No | N/A | N/A | N/A | Yes | 4/5 |
| 16 | Microsoft 365 Copilot | 75(4/4) | 75 | B | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Partial | Partial | Partial | Partial | Partial | Partial | Yes | 5/5 |
| 17 | Harvey | 75(4/4) | 74 | B | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | No | Partial | Partial | N/A | N/A | Yes | Partial | 3/5 |
| 18 | Zest AI | 67(3/4) | 74 | B | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | No | Partial | Partial | N/A | Yes | N/A | Partial | 3/5 |
| 19 | Upstart | 67(3/4) | 74 | B | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | No | Partial | Partial | N/A | Yes | N/A | Partial | 3/5 |
| 20 | Google Gemini for Workspace | 67(3/4) | 58 | C | Partial | Partial | Yes | Yes | No | Partial | No | N/A | N/A | N/A | Yes | 4/5 |
| 21 | OpenAI ChatGPT & API | 67(3/4) | 53 | D | Partial | Partial | Partial | Yes | No | Partial | No | N/A | N/A | N/A | Yes | 4/5 |
| 22 | ConnectWise | 67(3/4) | 50 | D | Partial | Yes | Partial | Yes | No | No | No | N/A | N/A | N/A | Yes | 3/5 |
| 23 | Ironclad AI | 63(4/4) | 63 | C | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | No | No | No | N/A | N/A | Partial | Yes | 4/5 |
| 24 | Hummingbird | 50(3/4) | 56 | C | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | No | No | No | N/A | Partial | N/A | Partial | 3/5 |
| 25 | Spellbook | 50(4/4) | 45 | D | Yes | Yes | Partial | Partial | No | No | No | N/A | N/A | Partial | Partial | 2/5 |
| 26 | Heidi Health | 50(3/4) | 45 | D | Yes | Yes | Partial | Partial | No | No | No | Partial | N/A | N/A | Partial | 2/5 |
| 27 | Notion AI | 50(3/4) | 33 | F | No | Partial | No | Yes | No | No | No | N/A | N/A | N/A | Yes | 3/5 |
| 28 | Meta Llama | 33(3/4) | 25 | F | No | Yes | Yes | No | No | No | No | N/A | N/A | N/A | No | 2/5 |
| 29 | Otter.ai | 33(3/4) | 25 | F | No | Partial | No | Yes | No | No | No | N/A | N/A | N/A | Partial | 2/5 |
| 30 | Perplexity AI | 33(3/4) | 19 | F | No | Partial | No | Partial | No | No | No | N/A | N/A | N/A | Partial | 2/5 |

## How vendors score on Illinois's relevant axes

Yes / partial counts across the full 30-vendor pool, restricted to axes relevant to Illinois's regulatory frame. N/A axes are excluded from the applicable denominator.

Opt-out

Training-data opt-out

IL

Yes 25/30 (83%)

Partial 5/30 (17%)

Subproc

Subprocessor list public

IL

Yes 21/30 (70%)

Partial 8/30 (27%)

ABA 512

ABA Formal Op 512 readiness

IL

Yes 4/7 (57%)

Partial 3/7 (43%)

NIST AI

NIST AI RMF self-attestation

IL

Yes 0/30 (0%)

Partial 21/30 (70%)

### Top 3 vendors on the Illinois-relevant axis subset

[1 #### Thomson Reuters CoCounsel BIL 88/100Composite 80Legal AI assistant from Thomson Reuters (parent of Westlaw and Practical Law). Acquired Casetext in 2023. Integrated with Westlaw and Practical Law content.](https://efros.com/research/us-ai-vendor-governance-index/thomson-reuters-cocounsel/) [2 #### Lexis+ AI BIL 88/100Composite 76LexisNexis's legal AI assistant integrated with the Lexis content corpus. Citation grounding from the Lexis case-law and secondary-source database is the differentiator.](https://efros.com/research/us-ai-vendor-governance-index/lexis-plus-ai/) [3 #### Westlaw Precision AI BIL 88/100Composite 76Westlaw's AI-assisted research layer: natural-language query, AI-generated case summaries, and AI memo drafting grounded in Westlaw's primary-source database.](https://efros.com/research/us-ai-vendor-governance-index/westlaw-precision-ai/)

## Buyer's guide for Illinois

For Illinois-deploying organizations, BIPA exposure is the binding constraint for any AI vendor processing voice, face, or other biometric data. Training-data opt-out and subprocessor transparency are the BIPA defensibility axes; class-action plaintiffs target subprocessor chain exposure aggressively.

Operationalize the scoring

### Methodology — BIPA + IL HB 3773 scoring

The Index tells you which vendors clear the bar for Illinois engagement. The companion resource tells you how to turn that selection into a deployable governance program with documented evidence.

[Methodology — BIPA + IL HB 3773 scoring →](https://efros.com/research/us-ai-vendor-governance-index/methodology/)

## Compare Illinois with other state and sector views

Other state views

[California (CA)](https://efros.com/research/us-ai-vendor-governance-index/by-state/california/) [Colorado (CO)](https://efros.com/research/us-ai-vendor-governance-index/by-state/colorado/) [New York (NY)](https://efros.com/research/us-ai-vendor-governance-index/by-state/new-york/) [Texas (TX)](https://efros.com/research/us-ai-vendor-governance-index/by-state/texas/)

Sector views

[foundation →](https://efros.com/research/us-ai-vendor-governance-index/by-sector/foundation/) [productivity →](https://efros.com/research/us-ai-vendor-governance-index/by-sector/productivity/) [legal →](https://efros.com/research/us-ai-vendor-governance-index/by-sector/legal/) [healthcare →](https://efros.com/research/us-ai-vendor-governance-index/by-sector/healthcare/) [banking →](https://efros.com/research/us-ai-vendor-governance-index/by-sector/banking/)

Scoring as of 2026-05-13from public information (vendor trust portals, BAAs, SOC report cover pages, model cards, vendor documentation). Posture changes frequently — re-verify with the vendor's trust center before contract. State filter views surface vendors with explicit state engagement on the axes most relevant to that state's regulatory frame; they do not replace deployer-side state compliance work. Methodology: [read the full methodology](https://efros.com/research/us-ai-vendor-governance-index/methodology/).

## Turn the scoring into a deployable program

The Index tells you the posture. These engagements turn the posture into operational evidence for Illinois deployments.

[Reserve $5K AI Governance Audit](https://efros.com/contact/?source=ai-vendor-index-state-illinois) [Run AI Risk Score →](https://efros.com/tools/ai-risk-score/?source=ai-vendor-index-state-illinois) [See full Index →](https://efros.com/research/us-ai-vendor-governance-index/)