Risk and Governance Documentation
AI governance documentation services leave you with files an auditor, a customer or a regulator can read without calling us. As a Dhaka-based company, we write them for international companies, one AI system at a time, at a fixed price: an inventory of every AI system, a risk register with owners and controls, policies written for how your teams actually use AI, and review evidence. A documentation lead and an engineer read your systems inside your own document system, and your named owner approves every page.
One exit at each step. No long-term commitment at any of them. We start with the AI system that would embarrass you first in an audit: the chatbot nobody registered, the vendor model with no owner, the scoring tool a customer questionnaire just asked about. What exists is inventoried, the gaps against the framework you are measured on are listed, and the first pack is defined and costed in your numbers.
You get a written verdict — an inventory first, one system’s governance pack, a policy set with owners, a law-specific pack instead of a generic one, or a quarterly review over what already exists. If nothing justifies a pack, you stop here and keep the gap review.
30 minutes 01 Scope · free call
2 weeks 02 Diagnose · $1,500, half credited to the pilot
4 weeks 03 Pilot · $4,000 fixed
Per system 04 Production · from $6,000, quoted after the pilot
Quarterly 05 Managed Ops · optional, cancel any quarter
What is included in AI governance documentation services?
AI governance documentation services produce six documents that show how your organisation controls its AI: an AI inventory, a risk register with owners and controls, a policy and procedure set, a mapping to the framework you are measured on, approval records, and a routine that keeps them true. The deliverable is files an assessor can read.
AI inventory and use-case register
Every AI system and use case listed with purpose, users, data, vendor or model, version, owner and status, so “which AI do we use?” takes a minute, not a meeting.
Risk register with owners and controls
Each system’s risks with likelihood, impact, a named owner, the control against it and the review date, in plain language your risk committee accepts.
AI policy and procedure set
An acceptable-use policy, a development and procurement procedure, a human-oversight rule and an incident procedure, written for how your teams use AI, approved and dated.
Framework mapping
Each document tied to the clauses of the framework you are measured on, so a gap is visible before an assessor finds it; mapping is documentation work, not a certification.
Review evidence and approval records
Who approved which document, when, against which version, and what changed since: the records that turn a policy into proof.
Maintenance and handover
A review calendar, a change procedure and a handover session, so your own team keeps the files current as systems, vendors and rules change.
Not included: Legal advice or legal classification · conformity assessment or certification · AI governance software or platforms; we write the documents, not the tools.
Which AI governance document do you need first: inventory, risk register, policy set or control record?
Every AI governance documentation pack is built from four documents, and the gap review says which you lack first. The inventory says what AI exists; the risk register says what could go wrong and who owns it; the policy set says what people may do; the control record says what is in place. All four sit inside our AI services.
AI inventory
A register of every AI system and use case with owner, data and purpose, when nobody can say how many AI tools the company runs.
Risk register
Risks per system with likelihood, impact, owner, control and review date, when a customer questionnaire or a board asks what could go wrong.
Policy set
Acceptable use, procurement, human oversight and incident procedures, when staff use AI daily and the only policy is a generic IT rule.
Control record
Which controls exist, who runs them, and the evidence they ran, when policies are written but nobody can show they are followed.
What does an AI governance documentation pilot produce for one AI system?
An AI governance documentation pilot produces one system’s full pack in four weeks: the scope signed, the inventory entry, the risk register, your owner’s sign-off and the handover. The example is a customer-support chatbot on a vendor model; every item traces to a document version, an approver and a date, and yellow marks where a person signs.
Pilot log · one AI system
The pack at that step · its result
Scope signed
The system, its data and its owner, before any drafting.
SystemCustomer-support chatbotModelVendor modelData sources3Documents0 existingOwnerNamed
0
Existing governance documents1 system · 3 data sources · owner named
Inventory entry
The first record an assessor asks for.
PurposeRecordedUsersRecordedData3 sourcesVendor modelRecordedVersionRecordedOwnerNamed · approved
Inventory entry approvedkept in your document system
Risk register
Every risk with an owner and a control.
Logged11 risks
Rated high4 risks
Owner and controlone against each risk
11
Risks logged4 rated high · an owner and a control against each
Owner sign-off · a person signs
Your risk owner reviews the whole pack.
Inventory entryRisk registerPoliciesFramework mappingApproval records
Owner sign-off2 controls are added at review, and the approval is logged with its date.
2
Controls added at reviewapproval logged with date
Handed over
The pack stays in your own systems.
Pack approved→Your document system→Review date set→Quarterly cycle
Handed overreview date set · quarterly cycle agreed
Click a step, or a number below, to switch the result
Every quarter the owner signs a review record, so the files stay true between audits.
Illustrative example. Click a step to see the pack at that point. Yellow marks where a person signs; every item traces to a document version, an approver and a date.
How do AI governance services work, from scope to Managed Ops?
AI governance services with us run in five steps you can stop between, because governance fails when it is sold as a workshop and a template: a free scoping call, a two-week inventory and gap review, a four-week pilot that writes one system’s pack, production for the remaining systems, then quarterly Managed Ops. Every step ends with signed documents.
01 30 min · free
Scope A call about which AI systems exist, who owns them, and which framework, law or customer questionnaire you are being measured against. If the systems are known, you leave with a diagnostic quote.
02 2 weeks · credited
Diagnose Every AI system and use case inventoried; existing policies and records collected; gaps listed against the framework you name; the first system chosen by exposure; the pilot pack priced in writing.
03 4 weeks · fixed price
Pilot One system’s pack written: inventory entry, risk register with owners and controls, the policies that apply, framework mapping and approval records, reviewed with your owner weekly and signed on the last day.
04 Per system · quoted after pilot
Production The remaining systems in the gap review’s order, each with its own pack and approval, plus the organisation-level policy set, a review calendar and training for the people who own the files.
05 Quarterly · optional
Managed Ops A quarterly review: new systems added to the inventory, risks re-rated, policies updated as rules and vendors change, approvals refreshed, with a named documentation lead. Cancel any quarter.
Who writes your AI governance documents, and with what?
A documentation lead who owns the pack and the review calendar, an engineer who reads how each system works, and a reviewer who checks every document before your owner sees it.
Communication A weekly review call and a shared channel
Delivery Your document system and ticketing tool; nothing stored on our side
QA Second-person review of every document; versioned; approver named
Review calendar A review date on every file, signed by its owner each quarter
Boundary No legal advice, legal classification or certification
Ownership Every document, register and template in your name
Which AI governance documentation comes first: an inventory, one system’s pack, a policy set, a law-specific pack or a review?
The first AI governance documentation depends on which of five situations you are in; five questions decide. No inventory means the inventory first; a few systems and no policies, one system’s pack as the pilot; nobody owning AI risk, owners and a policy set; a specific law, our EU AI Act documentation; everything in place, a quarterly review.
1. How many AI systems or tools are in use?
2. Is there an inventory of them?
3. Who owns AI risk today?
4. What are you being measured against?
5. Do AI-specific policies exist?
Which one do you need? Answer five questions.
One system’s governance pack as the pilot
A few systems and no policies is the normal starting point: the most exposed system gets a full pack (inventory entry, risk register with owners and controls, the policies that apply, framework mapping and approvals) in four weeks.
A first estimate; the gap review confirms it.
How the verdict is decided
A specific law or standard named → the law-specific pack
No inventory → the inventory first
Nobody owns AI risk → owners and a policy set first
Complete inventory, a committee and approved policies → a quarterly review
Everything else → one system’s pack
Why choose us as your AI governance documentation company?
An AI governance documentation company is judged on whether its files survive the first hard question from a customer or an assessor, not on the binder’s thickness. We write registers with owners, policies with approvals and records with dates; where a law such as the EU AI Act is in scope, the files follow its list of required records.
Without owned documents
!!!!!
- A policy PDF written for another company that nobody has read
- AI tools in daily use that no register lists and nobody owns
- Risks without owners, and controls without evidence they ran
- A framework named in the sales deck and absent from the files
With EICRA
Pilot report · Support chatbot
Systems inventoried1Risks logged11Controls mapped14Approvals recorded3VerdictPack accepted
Illustrative example
- An inventory of every AI system, with owner, data and purpose
- A risk register where every entry has a control and a reviewer
- Policies written for how your teams actually use AI, approved and dated
- Approval records and review dates that answer an audit question
Is it safe to outsource AI governance documentation?
Outsourcing AI governance documentation is safe when access, approval and boundaries are settled first, because the real risk is who sees system details and who signs the documents. As a Bangladesh-based company, we work inside your document system under a non-disclosure agreement, read system descriptions and never production data, and give no legal advice. Reviewed By Eicra.com team
Which AI governance agreements are signed, and when?
Non-disclosure agreement (NDA) — mutual, signed before any system description, policy draft or register is shared with anyone.
Data processing agreement (DPA) — processor terms under Article 28(3) of the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) and the equivalent national law, for any personal data in system records or examples.
International data transfers — standard contractual clauses or the transfer instrument your jurisdiction requires, signed before personal data moves.
Access — read access to system documentation and your document system only; no production systems, no live data, no credentials of ours.
Certifications — listed only when held; none are claimed on this page or in any proposal, and no certification of your organisation is implied.
What AI governance controls, ownership and rework terms apply?
Your accounts Every register, policy and record lives in your document system and ticketing tool from the first draft; nothing is stored on our side.
Document ownership All intellectual property (IP) in documents, templates and registers is assigned to you in the contract; you may edit, reuse or hand them to another provider.
Boundary We draft and structure documentation; we do not give legal advice, decide legal classifications, perform conformity assessments or certify anything.
Approval No document is final until your named owner has approved that version; the approval, the date and the version are recorded in the pack.
Rework Free when a document fails its agreed acceptance list within thirty days of handover; new systems or frameworks are priced first as a change request.
What proof do you get before you pay for AI governance documentation?
Before you pay for AI governance documentation, you get evidence instead of promises: a two-week gap review that ends in your own written plan, a pilot pack approved by your owner before production is quoted, and a free 30-minute scoping call. Client case studies with numbers are added as clients give permission to name them.
2 weeks
For the AI inventory and gap review, ending in a written plan against the framework you name.
4 weeks
To one AI system’s full governance pack, written with your owner and signed on the last day.
30 days
Of free rework when a document fails its agreed acceptance list after handover.
Case studies: client results with numbers are added here as clients give permission to name them. Ask on the scoping call for references in your industry.
What do buyers ask about AI governance documentation?
How much do AI governance documentation services cost?
Our AI governance documentation services are priced per outcome, never per hour, and each price is on the price cards at the top: a two-week AI inventory and gap review ending in a written plan, half credited to the pilot; one AI system’s full governance pack, written, approved and handed over; further systems quoted after the pilot.
What are AI governance documentation services?
AI governance documentation services produce the written records that show how an organisation controls its AI: an inventory of every AI system and use case, a risk register with owners and controls, an acceptable-use and oversight policy set, a mapping to the framework you are measured on, and dated approval records. The deliverable is files an assessor can read.
What documents are included in an AI governance framework?
Six, in practice: an AI inventory listing every system with owner, data and purpose; a risk register with likelihood, impact, owner and control per risk; policies for acceptable use, procurement, human oversight and incidents; a control record showing what is in place; approval records with versions and dates; and a review calendar that says when each file is re-checked.
What should an AI risk register document?
For each AI system: the risk in one sentence, the harm it could cause and to whom, a likelihood and impact rating, the named owner, the control that reduces it, evidence that the control runs, the residual rating, and the next review date. A register that lacks owners or evidence is a list of worries, not a governance record.
How is AI governance documentation kept current as systems change?
Through a review calendar and a change procedure written into the pack: any new AI system or vendor tool is added to the inventory before use, risks are re-rated when a system’s purpose, data or model changes, policies are re-approved when rules change, and every quarter the owner signs a review record. Managed Ops runs that cycle if you want.
Start with a free 30-minute scoping call or the two-week gap review.