MP-1.3 The organization's mission and relevant goals for the AI technology are understood and documented
The organization’s mission and relevant goals for the AI technology are understood and documented. The system's connection to a stated organisational goal is written down, which is what makes a go or no-go decision reviewable later.
Source: NIST AI RMF 1.0, MP-1.3. 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 AI RMF 1.0 in the compliance library.
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
- The go or no-go decision record referencing that linkage · Document repository
- Evidence of review when goals or the system changed · Document repository
governing documentDocuments that govern the control
- Documented mission and the specific goals the AI technology serves · Document repository
- The linkage from system objectives to those organisational goals · Policy repository / GRC workspace
First move
Common gaps auditors find
- Goal recorded as improve efficiency with nothing measurable behind it
- Alignment written after the build to justify a decision already taken
- No record of the alternatives weighed
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 sheetMP-1.2 Inter-disciplinary AI actors, competencies, skills and capacities for establishing context reflect… · MP-1.4 The business value or context of business use has been clearly defined or, in the case of assessing existing…