AQE AI Deployment Qualification

A real result, for a fictional firm.

This is exactly what an organisation receives after an AQE assessment. Excel Invests and Jason Butler are fictional; no real organisation or person has been assessed.

Verdict

Qualified with conditions

The deployment may go ahead within its assessed scope. Fourteen required actions must be completed before it can be fully qualified.

Use case
AI in back-office process automation
Sector
US financial services
Reference
AQE-63528BB9
Framework
2.0.4 · gap library 2026-02-US
Named owner
Jason Butler, Chief Product Officer (fictional)
PositionExposure × control
Exposure: low21

The AI recommends and a person decides, and it is used by a single team.

Control: strong80

A named owner can stop the system, but senior leadership has not yet been told about it.

How the verdict was reached

Six answers decide the position. The same answers, under the same framework version, always produce the same verdict.

QuestionAnswer
Is someone officially in charge of this AI system?Yes
Can that person stop or pause it if something goes wrong?Yes
Does senior leadership or the board know about it?No
How much does the AI decide on its own?Recommends, human decides
How widely will it be used?Single team
Deployment-blocking governance signals foundNone

Where the organisation stands

24 questions across five areas, each scored out of 10. All five fall short of the pass level of 7, and each comes with required actions in the evidence book.

Data readiness3.6
Process maturity4.2
Tooling and infrastructure3.8
People and capability6.0
Governance and compliance4.8

The dark line marks the pass level of 7.

Frameworks referenced

Findings point to the obligations they relate to. They are not legal advice and not a finding of breach.

FrameworkStatus
NIST AI RMF: GovernReview
NIST AI RMF: ManageReview
State AI laws (Colorado, California, Texas)Review
Sector regulators (SEC, FINRA, OCC, HHS)Not assessed
ISO/IEC 42001:2023Not assessed

Anyone can check the result

No AI model and no assessor judgement sit in the decision. Each report carries two fingerprints: one identifies the exact ruleset used, the other the decision it produced. Recomputing them from the inputs confirms nothing was changed.

Ruleset
68f1741f0e8b622f…
Decision
820b2f4553c2e190…

Run it on your own use case.

Self-assessedRules-basedNot an independent audit