OT Elevate

How Eli works

Last updated: September 28, 2026

Summary. Eli is an AI advisor inside OT Elevate. It is not a person, and the app says so on screen the whole time you are using it. The answers about rules and eligibility are decided by a deterministic rules engine — written rules, not a guess — and Eli’s job is to explain those answers in plain language and show you where they came from. There are things Eli will not do, and they are listed below.

Eli is AI#

Eli is a software program built on large language models. It is not a coach, a counselor, a doctor, a lawyer, a compliance officer, or a friend.

These commitments are how we meet California SB 243, the companion chatbot law, and they apply to every user regardless of what state you live in.

How an answer gets made#

Two different systems, doing two different jobs:

  1. The rules engine decides. Questions about eligibility, transfer rules, participation limits, academic requirements, seasons, and deadlines are answered by a deterministic rules engine: coded rules drawn from published state association handbooks, NCAA rules, and other public sources. The same facts always produce the same answer. No language model is in that decision path.
  2. The AI explains and cites. Eli takes the rules engine’s answer and puts it in language a parent or a fifteen-year-old can use, then shows the rule and the source it came from so you can check the work yourself.

When Eli is answering something the rules engine does not cover — general questions, planning, how to think about a decision — it says so, and you should treat the answer as informed conversation rather than a finding.

Confirm anything consequential. An eligibility answer from OT Elevate is informational. It is not a determination, and we are not the body that makes determinations. Before you act on one — a transfer, a move, sitting a season, signing anything — confirm it with your school’s athletic director, your state high school association, or the NCAA Eligibility Center. We repeat this inside the app at the point of the answer.

What Eli refuses to do#

These are hard refusals. They are enforced in the product, not left to the model’s discretion, and Eli says plainly that it is refusing and why.

Third-party AI processing, and the no-training commitment#

To generate its explanations, Eli sends text to a third-party AI provider. We are explicit about this:

To find the rulebook passages a question is about, Eli also sends the text of the question — and separately, the rulebook text itself — to Voyage AI (a MongoDB company), under the same no-training-on-customer-content commitment as Anthropic’s, above. Voyage never receives the athlete’s record, health information, or Eli’s memory of past conversations — only the question text and the published rule text a search is checking against (decided 2026-09-15; see rulebook-retrieval.md §8, question 6).

Current providers, retention limits, and the full processor list are in Privacy policy and Retention schedule.

What a parent can see and control#

The account holder is a parent or guardian. From the parent account you can:

Details and how to do each one are in Privacy policy.

Reporting a bad answer#

Please tell us. A wrong rule citation is a bug, and we want it.

What we do with a report: a person reads it. If the rules engine is wrong, we fix the rule and note it. If Eli explained a correct rule badly, we fix the explanation. If Eli crossed one of the refusal lines above, we treat it as a safety defect and it goes into the safety review described in Crisis protocol. We answer every report within 48 hours.