Self-assessment  ·  ~3 minutes  ·  Private to your browser

Where does your regulated-AI program actually stand?

A short, indicative self-assessment of how ready your organization is to run AI on regulated data — across four dimensions an auditor or board would ask about: how you use AI, your governance maturity, whether your evidence holds up, and your regulated-data exposure. It mirrors the workflow exposure map a discovery engagement produces, in a form you can run yourself.

Your answers are scored in your browser and are never sent anywhere unless you choose to have a tailored summary emailed to you. This is a self-assessment signal — not a compliance certification or audit.

Begin the assessment↓ What is the evidence layer?
How to read your result

An honest signal, deliberately

What it is

An indicative read of your regulated-AI posture across usage, governance, evidence, and exposure — the same dimensions a discovery engagement examines, in a form you can run in three minutes. It points to where the audit risk tends to concentrate and what a real engagement would examine.

What it is not

Not a compliance certification, an audit, or a legal opinion. It does not inspect your systems and cannot make you compliant. It scores only the answers you give, in your browser. The work of proving your posture to a regulator is the engagement itself — this just shows you where to start.

FAQ

About this assessment

No. It is an indicative self-assessment that scores the answers you provide. It does not inspect your systems, it is not an audit or a legal opinion, and it does not make your organization compliant. It is meant to show you where your regulated-AI posture likely stands and what a discovery engagement would examine.
Nowhere, unless you choose to send them. The assessment scores your answers locally in your browser. Your answers are only transmitted if you fill in the optional form to have a tailored brief emailed to you — and even then, please don’t include regulated data in free-text fields.
From your answers across four dimensions: how you use AI, your governance maturity, whether your evidence is independently verifiable, and the sensitivity of the data and frameworks involved. Governance and evidence drive the readiness tier; data sensitivity, sector, and framework breadth drive the exposure level. The result names the answers that drove it, so the logic is transparent — fitting for a firm whose product is verifiable evidence.
A senior practitioner reads it directly and replies by email with a short, specific brief on the gaps your profile surfaced. There is no obligation and no automated drip sequence. If you would rather just talk, request a consultation instead.
Next step

Turn the signal into a plan

Whatever your result, the next move is the same: a short conversation about the one workflow your compliance officer has blocked, or the one consuming the most staff time. We respond with a preliminary read — the framework gap and evidence path, or the automation candidates and ROI.

Request a consultation→ See the evidence layer  →