Artificial Intelligence for Social Good (AI4SG) is a growing area that explores AI’s potential to address social issues, such as public health. Yet prior work has shown limited evidence of its tangible benefits for intended communities, and projects frequently face real-world deployment and sustainability challenges. While existing HCI literature on AI4SG initiatives primarily focuses on the mechanisms of funded projects and their outcomes, much less attention has been given to the upstream funding agendas that influence project approaches. In this work, we conducted a reflexive thematic analysis of 35 funding documents, representing about $410 million USD in total investments. We uncovered a spectrum of conceptual framings of AI4SG and the approaches that funding rhetoric promoted: from biasing towards technology capacities (more techno-centric) to emphasizing contextual understanding of the social problems at hand alongside technology capacities (more balanced). Drawing on our findings on how funding documents construct AI4SG, we offer recommendations for funders to embed more balanced approaches in future funding call designs. We further discuss implications for how the HCI community can positively shape AI4SG funding design processes.

As the Earth's temperature continues to rise, increasing investments are being made to develop artificial intelligence (AI) technologies to address the current climate crisis.Through interviewing 19 participants-comprising climate and environmental advocates and developers of AI for sustainability in the US and Canada-we examine how advocates perceive and use these technologies, and how their perspectives converge and diverge from practitioners developing AI for sustainability.We identified three key findings: 1) while approaches differ, developers and advocates expressed care for people and the planet; 2) the developers' and advocates' values and perceptions of AI technology varied, especially around ethical issues; and 3) developers and advocates had distinct approaches to using and designing AI and digital tools.Our findings, guided by a climate justice lens, underscore the need for decision-makers to: engage with advocates from intended beneficiary communities early in the design process; prioritize the urgency of the climate crisis; and emphasize the tangible environmental and societal impact of digital systems.

Hevelius, a web-based computer mouse test, measures arm movement and has been shown to accurately evaluate severity for patients with Parkinson’s disease and ataxias. A Hevelius session produces 32 numeric features, which may be hard to interpret, especially in time-constrained clinical settings. This work aims to support clinicians (and other stakeholders) in interpreting and connecting Hevelius features to clinical concepts. Through an iterative design process, we developed a visualization tool (Hevelius Report) that (1) abstracts six clinically relevant concepts from 32 features, (2) visualizes patient test results, and compares them to results from healthy controls and other patients, and (3) is an interactive app to meet the specific needs in different usage scenarios. Then, we conducted a preliminary user study through an online interview with three clinicians who were not involved in the project. They expressed interest in using Hevelius Report, especially for identifying subtle changes in their patients’ mobility that are hard to capture with existing clinical tests. Future work will integrate the visualization tool into the current clinical workflow of a neurology team and conduct systematic evaluations of the tool’s usefulness, usability, and effectiveness. Hevelius Report represents a promising solution for analyzing fine-motor test results and monitoring patients’ conditions and progressions.

Artificial Intelligence for Social Good (AI4SG) has emerged as a growing body of research and practice exploring the potential of AI technologies to tackle social issues. This area emphasizes interdisciplinary partnerships with community organizations, such as non-profits and government agencies. However, amidst excitement about new advances in AI and their potential impact, the needs, expectations, and aspirations of these community organizations--and whether they are being met--are not well understood. Understanding these factors is important to ensure that the considerable efforts by AI teams and community organizations can actually achieve the positive social impact they strive for. Drawing on the Data Feminism framework, we explored the perspectives of community organization members on their partnerships with AI teams through 16 semi-structured interviews. Our study highlights the pervasive influence of funding agendas and the optimism surrounding AI's potential. Despite the significant intellectual contributions and labor provided by community organization members, their goals were frequently sidelined in favor of other stakeholders, including AI teams. While many community organization members expected tangible project deployment, only two out of 14 projects we studied reached the deployment stage. However, community organization members sustained their belief in the potential of the projects, still seeing diminished goals as valuable. To enhance the efficacy of future collaborations, our participants shared their aspirations for success, calling for co-leadership starting from the early stages of projects. We propose data co-liberation as a grounding principle for approaching AI4SG moving forward, positing that community organizations' co-leadership is essential for fostering more effective, sustainable, and ethical development of AI.