EvidenceSheet
NIST AI RMF 1.0 · GOVERN - NIST AI RMF 1.0

GV-1.5 Ongoing monitoring and periodic review of the risk management process and its outcomes are planned…

Ongoing monitoring and periodic review of the risk management process and its outcomes are planned, organizational roles and responsibilities are clearly defined, including determining the frequency of periodic review. Monitoring and review are scheduled with a stated frequency and a named owner, and the review actually produces recorded findings rather than a confirmation that nothing changed.

Source: NIST AI RMF 1.0, GV-1.5. 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 AI RMF 1.0 in the compliance library.

4
artefacts
0
held by a system
2
at each review
hard
to go live
Document repository
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

  • Completed review records with findings, decisions and follow-up actions · Document repository
  • Role definitions assigning monitoring and review duties to named functions · Identity provider / directory

governing documentDocuments that govern the control

  • The monitoring plan naming what is monitored, by whom and at what frequency · Policy repository / GRC workspace
  • Review schedule with the basis for the chosen interval · Document repository

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

GV-1.4 The risk management process and its outcomes are established through transparent policies, procedures, and… · GV-1.6 Mechanisms are in place to inventory AI systems and are resourced according to organizational risk priorities