Prove your AI and your disclosures would survive a supervisor's questions.
Risk, compliance and data leads at insurers, pension funds and banks.
European financial institutions are being asked to show, not assert, that their models are fair, documented and governed, and that their sustainability claims hold. We build the evidence trail before someone asks for it.
Three services, with the time each takes
AI governance & model risk review
Risk classification, documentation and oversight structures built for supervisory review rather than internal reassurance.
Ethical dilemma mapping
A working tool that maps the fairness, transparency and governance trade-offs in a specific AI use case, with your own actuarial, data science and compliance teams in the room.
Disclosure & greenwashing exposure
SFDR, CSRD and taxonomy alignment assessed as a governance problem: where the claim outruns the evidence, and what to do about it.
What is driving the question here
EU AI Act
High-risk classification, documentation duties and human oversight for underwriting, pricing and claims models.
SFDR & CSRD
Disclosure obligations where the reporting burden falls on data lineage you may not yet have.
EU Taxonomy
Alignment assessment, and the gap between what is claimed and what the evidence supports.
GDPR & DPIA
Data protection impact assessments for models that make or support decisions about people.
Work in this sector
We built the ethical-dilemma mapping tool published by Forsikring & Pension, the Danish insurance and pension association.
Ethical AI in life and non-life insurance
Forsikring & Pension · Algorithms, Data & Democracy
A workshop-based programme with actuarial, data science and compliance experts, producing a tool that maps the ethical trade-offs in a specific AI use case.
Finance & insurance
Impact Index evaluation framework
Startup Guide (Impact Index)
A multi-layered framework combining transparency, risk, ESG activity and SDG contribution, so investors can compare startup impact performance on a consistent basis.
Scaleups & investors · Finance & insurance
Three ways to start
Scoping review
2 weeks · fixed fee
We establish what you are actually deciding, what evidence you already hold, and whether the question needs us at all.
- Two structured sessions with your team
- Review of existing documentation and data
- A written scope with options, effort and sequence
Assessment
6–10 weeks · fixed scope
A structured review against a defined standard (regulatory, methodological or strategic), returned as a prioritised action list rather than a report that sits on a shelf.
- Baseline against the applicable framework
- Benchmarking against comparable organisations
- Findings ranked by exposure, with owners and sequence
- A workshop handing the findings to the people who act on them
Retained advisory
6–12 months · monthly
For organisations under continuing regulatory or geopolitical pressure, where the question changes faster than a project can answer it.
- Standing access for named decision-makers
- Quarterly horizon briefings on your specific exposure
- Board and committee material on request