EvidenceSheet

RA-3 Risk Assessment

a. Conduct a risk assessment, including: 1. Identifying threats to and vulnerabilities in the system; 2. Determining the likelihood and magnitude of harm from unauthorized access, use, disclosure, disruption, modification, or destruction of the system, the information it processes, stores, or transmits, and any related information; and 3. Determining the likelihood and impact of adverse effects on individuals arising from the processing of personally identifiable information; b. Integrate risk assessment results and risk management decisions from the organization and mission or business process perspectives with system-level risk assessments; c. Document risk assessment results in Selection: security and privacy plans; risk assessment report; [organization-defined document]; d. Review risk assessment results organization-defined frequency; e. Disseminate risk assessment results to organization-defined personnel or roles; and f. Update the risk assessment organization-defined frequency or when there are significant changes to the system, its environment of operation, or other conditions that may impact the security or privacy state of the system.

Source: NIST SP 800-53 Rev 5, RA-3. The statement above is our statement of the clause, read from the published text and cited so you can check it against the official text, not the instrument verbatim. Open NIST SP 800-53 Rev 5 in the compliance library.

Base controls and their enhancements. Which apply follows the baseline you are assessed against (for example FedRAMP Moderate or High, or the low, moderate and high baselines of SP 800-53B). Text in square brackets is a parameter your organisation sets.

10
artefacts
0
held by a system
6
at each review
hard
to go live
Policy repository / GRC workspace
where the evidence lives
teal = a system already holds it · olive = produced at each review. To go live: easy when half or more of the artefacts are already held by a system, moderate from a quarter to a half, hard below a quarter.

These are the artefacts auditors commonly ask for on this requirement, our guidance rather than text from the standard. Your assessor decides what is sufficient in your context, and asks for samples across the period when a report covers one.

system holds itEvidence a system already holds

none for this control

periodic reviewEvidence produced at each review

  • Procedures addressing organizational assessments of risk · Policy repository / GRC workspace
  • Risk assessment · Policy repository / GRC workspace
  • Risk assessment results · Policy repository / GRC workspace
  • Risk assessment reviews · Policy repository / GRC workspace
  • Risk assessment updates · Policy repository / GRC workspace
  • Test of Organizational processes for risk assessment; mechanisms supporting and/or conducting, documenting, reviewing, disseminating, and updating the risk assessment · Policy repository / GRC workspace

governing documentDocuments that govern the control

  • Risk assessment policy · Policy repository / GRC workspace
  • Risk assessment procedures · Policy repository / GRC workspace
  • Security and privacy planning policy and procedures · Policy repository / GRC workspace
  • System security plan · Policy repository / GRC workspace

First move

No system holds this evidence for you: it is people and documents. Reminders and routing to the owner still save time. Put the document under version control with an owner and review date, and log each review as a record with reviewer and date.

Common gaps auditors find

Do this for your whole sheet

Paste the rows you run your controls from and get this mapping for every control at once, with the periodic-review ones flagged and a first move per row. No account for the first run.

Build my evidence sheet

RA-2(1) Security Categorization | Impact-level Prioritization · RA-3(1) Risk Assessment | Supply Chain Risk Assessment