AI GRCAPractice Lab
Step 5 of 5Evidence
05 · Practitioner output · Financial services

Prepare and rehearse the final viva

Demo mode — sign in to save your work

Your recommendation should show whether customer-outcome, model-risk and accountability evidence is strong enough for approval.

PRACTICE MODELoading

Restoring your saved mode and lab work…

FINANCIAL SERVICES WORKING CONTEXT

Write the regulated decision record

A regulated firm is using AI in a process that can affect customer access, pricing or treatment. Consumer outcomes, model risk and explainability are board concerns.

Evidence bar
  • Decision paper
  • Evidence index
  • Residual-risk acceptance record
REVIEW CHECKPOINTS

Final Viva & Improvement Pack

Final Viva & Improvement Pack

Complete the fields against the financial services operating context. Your work saves automatically in this browser.

Write at least 20 characters of your own answer to unlock the review guide.

Write at least 20 characters of your own answer to unlock the review guide.

Write at least 20 characters of your own answer to unlock the review guide.

Write at least 20 characters of your own answer to unlock the review guide.

Write at least 20 characters of your own answer to unlock the review guide.

Write at least 20 characters of your own answer to unlock the review guide.

Loading saved answers…

ASSURANCE WORKPAPER

Test whether the controls actually operate

Move beyond policy design: define a population, select a defensible sample, test evidence, document exceptions and write the conclusion an audit committee would need.

01Define

Objective, population and period.

02Sample

Risk-based and representative items.

03Test

Inspect, observe and reperform.

04Conclude

Rate findings and communicate.

STRUCTURED ARTEFACT

Risk → control → evidence traceability

Build an auditable decision trail. A risk without a control—or a control without evidence—remains visible as a gap.

No traceability rows yet. Add the first priority risk and connect it to a control, test and evidence.

SCENARIO INJECT

The situation has changed

Choose an event and update the governance response as if the system were already operating.

NEW EVENT

Unannounced model change

The supplier upgrades the underlying model and cannot confirm whether prior validation remains representative.

The business wants to keep the original approval because users have not complained.

Write at least 40 characters to unlock the response criteria.

PRACTITIONER MATURITYLevel 1 · Initial

Work has started, but material evidence and ownership are missing.

Why this level?
  • Workflow is 0% complete.
  • Worksheet answer coverage is 0%.
  • No complete risk-control-evidence row is ready for review.
  • Rubric ratings are not yet consistently strong or competent.
READINESS GATENot ready
Workflow
0%
Answers
0%
Traceability
0 rows
Why this gate?
  • Workflow completion is 0%.
  • Answer coverage is 0%.
  • Add at least one traceability row marked ready for review.
TRAINER FEEDBACK

What to strengthen next

  • Name the affected people and explain the pathway from system behaviour to impact.
  • Assign an accountable human role; responsibility cannot sit with the AI system.
  • Define the evidence and acceptance criteria needed to support the conclusion.
  • Add post-deployment monitoring, escalation thresholds and a reassessment trigger.
SELF-ASSESS BEFORE EXPORT

Practitioner quality rubric

Rate the work honestly. “Needs revision” is a useful result when it identifies what to strengthen before review.

Context and scope

Strong: States the system, decision, actors, people affected, boundaries and material assumptions.

Improve: Avoid generic statements or conclusions that depend on unstated facts.

Risk reasoning

Strong: Links a credible cause and event to a specific impact, then assesses likelihood, severity and uncertainty.

Improve: Do not list harms without explaining how they could arise in this scenario.

Proportionate controls

Strong: Selects preventive, detective and corrective controls that address the identified risks and assigns owners.

Improve: Avoid control lists with no connection to a risk, trigger or responsible role.

Evidence and decision

Strong: Defines testable evidence, acceptance criteria, residual risk and a clear, conditional recommendation.

Improve: A confident conclusion is not defensible when evidence, thresholds or escalation routes are missing.

EVIDENCE-QUALITY GATES
FULL VIVA SIMULATOR

Question 1 of 8

0 responses completed

2:00
EXECUTIVE PANEL QUESTION

Explain the system and your recommendation in 90 seconds without jargon.

Practitioner evidence pack

CapstoneAI

PrinciBank Retail Finance · Financial services overlay · Mock exam, evidence pack and viva

Prepared by
Learner name not added
Course coverage
Week 24
Training simulation only · Fictional scenario and data

Executive assignment

PrinciBank Retail Finance proposes an AI affordability assistant for personal-loan applications. It analyses application details and transaction categories, then recommends approve, refer or decline; an underwriter remains responsible for the final decision.

In simple terms: The bank wants AI to help assess whether someone can afford a loan. A human underwriter makes the final decision, but the recommendation may still strongly influence access to credit.

Assignment: Complete the final integrated assessment, defend your recommendation and produce a personal improvement plan.

Sector overlay: Financial services

Decision pressure: The steering committee meets in 10 working days. The launch slot will be lost if the decision is deferred beyond this meeting.

Ownership gap: Product, Risk and Operations each believe another function owns final residual-risk acceptance. The governance charter is silent.

Known facts

  • The assistant processes application and categorised transaction data
  • A hosted model identifies affordability patterns and produces reason codes
  • The system recommends approve, refer or decline
  • Underwriters can override the recommendation but must record a reason
  • Subgroup outcome testing and the retention period are not complete

Timed Scenario Analysis

Material facts and assumptions
Not completed
Actor and responsibility analysis
Not completed
Harm, risk, control and evidence
Not completed
Stakeholders and affected people
Not completed
Time-management record
Not completed

Integrated Framework Assessment

OECD AI Principles
Not completed
NIST AI RMF
Not completed
ISO/IEC 42001 and 42005
Not completed
EU AI Act classification
Not completed
UK GDPR and DUAA
Not completed
COSO and vendor risk
Not completed
Wider legal issues
Not completed

Capstone Evidence Pack

Priority risk register
Not completed
Control and evidence matrix
Not completed
Testing and release-readiness plan
Not completed
Post-launch, incident and deactivation plan
Not completed
Final approval recommendation
Not completed
Recommendation rationale
Not completed

Final Viva & Improvement Pack

Executive presentation
Not completed
Viva challenge questions
Not completed
Capstone evidence-pack index
Not completed
Practitioner confidence check
Not completed
Final improvement plan
Not completed
Viva reflection
Not completed

Assurance testing workpaper

Assurance objective
Not completed
Population and period
Not completed
Sampling approach
Not completed
Test procedure
Not completed
Exceptions and root cause
Not completed
Finding and severity
Not completed
Management action
Not completed
Board / audit summary
Not completed

Quality review and sign-off

Reviewer: Executive viva panel

Decision challenge: Can the learner defend one integrated recommendation under challenge and uncertainty?

Context and scope
Not rated
Risk reasoning
Not rated
Proportionate controls
Not rated
Evidence and decision
Not rated

Reviewer sign-off: ____________________   Date: __________   Version: 1.0

Prepared as a learning artefact. Validate legal and regulatory conclusions against current authoritative sources before real-world use.
TRAINER REVIEW

Sign in to submit this evidence

Demo work stays in this browser. A registered account can submit a fixed version to a cohort trainer.

Sign in or create account
Back Finish lab