Independent assurance

So the assessment is a separate system, with no shared identifiers with the platform. It asks your team the questions a supervisor would and records what actually comes back. It runs against institutions on any platform, including ours — we pointed it at our own first, and it found something.

Two halves, and the second tests the first

The control assessment

What you have

Every control scored on whether evidence exists
Whether it is adequate, current and governed
And whether it is proportionate to your size
Cited to the instruments that bind you locally

The evidence exercise

What you can produce

Supervisory information requests, issued in writing
Answered by your team, unaided
Recorded by source — system of record, spreadsheet, or recollection
And by what it cost in hours

Where a control is assessed as in place and the request testing it cannot be answered, the report says so — and names the obligations you cannot currently evidence.

That finding is what no questionnaire reaches. A supervisor treats a control that cannot be evidenced as a control that is not there, and most institutions do not discover which of theirs fall into that category until somebody external asks.

It is an engagement, not a form

It takes your senior compliance people's time. That is the point of it — an examination you fail in a meeting room costs nothing, and the same one in front of a regulator costs a great deal. We would rather be honest about the commitment than have you discover it in week two.

See it with your rules, not our demo data

Tell us where you operate and what you sell, and we will show you the platform configured the way it would actually run for you.

What happens next

One of us reads it, not a queue. We come back inside two working days with a time — or a straight answer about whether we are the right fit.

Every vendor offers a compliance score. Almost all of them mark their own homework.