EvidenceSheet
NIST AI RMF 1.0 · MEASURE - NIST AI RMF 1.0

MS-3.1 Approaches, personnel, and documentation are in place to regularly identify and track existing…

Approaches, personnel, and documentation are in place to regularly identify and track existing, unanticipated, and emergent AI risks based on factors such as intended and actual performance in deployed contexts. Risk identification continues after deployment with assigned personnel and a tracking record, so risks that emerge in real use are captured rather than only those anticipated at design.

Source: NIST AI RMF 1.0, MS-3.1. 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
1
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

  • The tracking record showing risks identified after deployment · Source control / CI pipeline

governing documentDocuments that govern the control

  • The approach for identifying emergent and unanticipated risks in deployment · Policy repository / GRC workspace
  • Personnel assigned to that identification and tracking · Document repository
  • Comparison of actual against intended performance in the deployed context · 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

MS-2.13 Effectiveness of the employed TEVV metrics and processes in the MEASURE function are evaluated and documented · MS-3.2 Risk tracking approaches are considered for settings where AI risks are difficult to assess using currently…