DEMO MODE · Anonymized composite data. Fictional client: Meridian Health Group.
Sherlock
Priority Engine
Demos  ›  Priority Engine
← Demos
Module 04 · Priority Engine

Score every AI initiative
the same way, every quarter.

The Sherlock Priority Score is the transparent math behind every "yes" and every "no" on Meridian's AI portfolio. Tuned to Meridian's board-approved weights. Recomputed weekly. Explainable to the CFO in one paragraph.

Model
Sherlock Priority Score v2.3
Approved by
CEO + Board Risk Committee
Weights last calibrated
May 2026
Initiatives scored
14 active · 6 shadow

Board-approved weights

Weights are set by the Board Risk Committee. Any change requires a governance ticket + 2-signer approval.
+Business value
0.28
Annualized $ impact, quality lift, member/provider experience
+Strategic urgency
0.18
Regulatory deadline, competitive necessity, contract obligation
+Feasibility
0.16
Data readiness, integration burden, precedent
+Sponsorship
0.12
Named exec owner, budget already allocated, adoption commitment
−AI Consequence
0.14
Regulatory + PHI + member-safety exposure if it fails
−Delivery complexity
0.08
Multi-team, vendor risk, novel model architecture
−Change burden
0.04
Workflow rewrite, training hours, org resistance
The math (transparent)
Score =
+ 0.28·Value + 0.18·Urgency + 0.16·Feas + 0.12·Spon
− 0.14·Cons − 0.08·Complex − 0.04·Change
Prior Auth AI decisioning 87
Ambient scribe rollout 81
Risk adjustment coder assist 74
STARS gap-closure agent 68
Radiology triage co-pilot 42
87/100
Sherlock Priority Score
#1 of 14 · Fund
● Recommended: Fund Q3

Prior authorization AI decisioning is the highest-priority initiative in Meridian's portfolio. Documented $18M annualized value against modest consequence and complexity. Named CMO sponsor. Existing PA workflow ready to absorb. Regulatory guardrails are the ONLY blocker — resolvable inside Sherlock's governance module.

Factor
Contribution to score
Impact
Raw
+Business value
+26.6
+26.6
95
+Strategic urgency
+15.8
+15.8
88
+Feasibility
+12.5
+12.5
78
+Sponsorship
+10.8
+10.8
90
−AI Consequence
−8.4
−8.4
60
−Delivery complexity
−3.6
−3.6
45
−Change burden
−1.4
−1.4
35
This is what the Board sees
Same math, every initiative, every quarter
Top of portfolio
Prior Auth AI decisioning
87
Fund immediately · $18M value · $1.4M build
Middle third
STARS gap-closure agent
68
Fund after Q3 governance · value validated in pilot
Bottom of portfolio
Radiology triage co-pilot
42
Defer or kill · consequence > value · vendor risk
"What if we changed a weight?"
Board sensitivity analysis · v2.3 baseline
If Board doubles AI Consequence weight (0.14 → 0.28)
Reflecting new HHS guidance on payer AI in medical necessity determinations.
Prior Auth AI
78 −9
Ambient scribe
80 −1
Radiology triage
31 −11
Ranking change
Ambient scribe → #1
If Board lowers Sponsorship weight (0.12 → 0.06)
Reflecting a shift toward funding on merit vs. politics.
Prior Auth AI
83 −4
Ambient scribe
78 −3
Risk adjustment coder
74 ±0
Ranking change
Prior Auth still #1
"Explain this in one paragraph"
Auto-generated CFO memo · one click

“Prior Auth AI decisioning scored 87 of 100, the highest in Meridian's Q3 portfolio. The score reflects $18M annualized value (26.6 pts), a regulatory tailwind after CMS interoperability guidance (15.8 pts), and existing PA infrastructure that shortens time-to-value to 4 months (12.5 pts). The CMO is the named sponsor with $1.4M already committed (10.8 pts). Downside factors — regulatory exposure (−8.4), integration complexity (−3.6), and workflow change (−1.4) — are material but bounded by controls already documented in the Risk Registry. Recommendation: fund in Q3 with a Board-attested medical necessity guardrail.”

← Use-Case Portfolio Next: Governance Builder → All demos