EvidenceSheet

GV-4.2 Organizational teams document the risks and potential impacts of the AI technology they design, develop, deploy, evaluate and use, and communicate about the impacts more broadly

Organizational teams document the risks and potential impacts of the AI technology they design, develop, deploy, evaluate and use, and communicate about the impacts more broadly. Impact documentation is produced by the t

4
artefacts
0
held by a system
3
at each review
hard
to go live
Document repository
where the evidence lives
teal = a system already holds it · olive = produced at each review

system holds itEvidence a system already holds

none for this control

periodic reviewEvidence produced at each review

  • Completed impact assessments for AI systems, with author and date · Document repository
  • Evidence the assessment was communicated outside the delivery team · Document repository
  • The link from an assessment finding to a risk register entry or design change · Policy repository / GRC workspace

governing documentDocuments that govern the control

  • The template or structure the assessments follow · Document repository

First move

This control is evidenced by people and documents, not systems. Put the document under version control with an owner and review date, and log each review as a record with reviewer and date. Do not try to automate it.

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-4.1 Organizational policies and practices are in place to foster a critical thinking and safety-first mindset in the design, development, deployment, and uses of AI systems to minimize negative impacts · GV-4.3 Organizational practices are in place to enable AI testing, identification of incidents, and information sharing