rotascale authority and evidence for AI agents See the demo

Solutions — instrument

Model risk management, for models that act.

Supervisory Guidance on Model Risk Management. Written in 2011 for models that produce numbers, and now read against systems that take actions — which is where the inventory question gets interesting.

SR 11-7 / OCC 2011-12 Federal Reserve · OCC clause map
Status
In force
Applies to
US banking organisations using models in decisioning

What the platform evidences

Model inventory
Every model an agent used, with the column that earns the page: source. A runtime reporting the model that served a call is evidence; a human typing a name into a form is a claim. Every regime in scope asks for an inventory, and only the first kind is one.
Configuration provenance
Versioned snapshots of what each agent was at a point in time, so a grant issued against v1 reports drift when the agent becomes v2 rather than silently continuing.
Ongoing monitoring
Behavioural drift with an explanation attached — an agent whose behaviour moved with a governance act behind it is housekeeping; one that moved with nothing explaining it is the only row on the screen that is news.
Effective challenge
The record of who reviewed, what they refused, and what they approved — including the second named approver on authority above the regime's threshold.

Validation is not ours. SR 11-7's core demand is independent validation by people with the standing to challenge. RotaGrant records the validation status of a model and who set it. It does not validate a model, and a vendor claiming to satisfy SR 11-7 by shipping software has misunderstood the guidance.