Credit scoring AI systems make high-stakes financial decisions that directly affect individuals' access to credit. Post-implementation review for such systems must confirm that the system performs within ethical, legal, and regulatory boundaries—particularly regarding fairness and explainability.

Why B is Correct: According to ISACA AAIR post-implementation review guidance for high-stakes AI, confirming explainability and fairness is the most critical review element for credit scoring systems. Anti-discrimination laws (Equal Credit Opportunity Act, Fair Housing Act) require that credit decisions be explainable and not discriminatory. Fairness testing detects whether the system produces disparate outcomes across demographic groups, while explainability ensures individual decisions can be justified if challenged.

Why A is Wrong: Access token logging is a security audit trail mechanism. While important for access governance, it does not address the primary regulatory and ethical obligations of a credit scoring system regarding decision quality and fairness.

Why C is Wrong: Stakeholder communication of performance metrics is a governance reporting activity. Metric communication does not confirm the system is making fair, explainable decisions—it only reports on performance indicators.

Why D is Wrong: User ease of learning and use is a user experience and adoption concern. System usability does not determine whether credit scoring decisions are accurate, fair, or legally compliant—which are the primary post-implementation concerns.