EvidenceSheet
NIST AI RMF 1.0 · MAP - NIST AI RMF 1.0

MP-1.6 System requirements are elicited from and understood by relevant AI actors, and design decisions take…

System requirements (e.g., “the system shall respect the privacy of its users”) are elicited from and understood by relevant AI actors. Design decisions take socio-technical implications into account to address AI risks. Requirements are elicited from the actors who will be affected and written down, and the design record shows socio-technical implications were weighed rather than only technical ones.

Source: NIST AI RMF 1.0, MP-1.6. 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

  • Record of who requirements were elicited from and how · Document repository
  • Design decision records showing socio-technical implications considered · Document repository

governing documentDocuments that govern the control

  • Written system requirements including non-functional and trustworthiness requirements · Document repository
  • Traceability from a requirement to the design element that satisfies it · 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

MP-1.5 Organizational risk tolerances are determined and documented · MP-2.1 The specific task, and methods used to implement the task, that the AI system will support is defined