EU AI Act Readiness & AI Governance Advisory

What we assess

We inventory AI systems and their intended uses, identify organizational roles, and support a documented applicability and risk review with counsel. The resulting work plan connects governance, technical documentation, data practices, evaluation, human oversight, and monitoring to the obligations confirmed for each use case. A single organization can have different roles across systems.

Evidence to prepare

• AI inventory, intended-use descriptions, role mapping, and classification rationale.
• Risk-management and evaluation documentation, data governance, and oversight procedures.
• Supplier information, deployment decisions, monitoring records, and incident escalation processes.

Keep design evidence separate from operating evidence. An approved procedure shows how a control is designed; dated records show whether it ran consistently over the review period. Evidence should identify its source, owner, scope, and collection date.

What you receive

• System-by-system readiness findings for qualified legal review.
• Obligations, evidence, and ownership matrix for the confirmed scope.
• Implementation priorities mapped to existing AI management and risk practices.

Common questions

Is every AI system classified as high risk?

No. Duties depend on the system, its intended purpose, organizational role, and the Act’s categories. Document the analysis for each use case and have legal counsel confirm the classification.

What determines the engagement timeline and cost?

The system boundary, number of entities and locations, existing control maturity, evidence availability, and assessment pathway determine the effort. Share your customer requirements and target milestone so we can define a realistic scope before proposing a schedule.