Skip to content
fencia.

AI GOVERNANCE RESOURCES

From an AI question
to evidence you can review

Start with official sources, see what Fencia currently covers, and bring a concrete question to the person responsible for the decision.

01 / GUIDES

Choose a framework to explore

Each guide separates the regulatory subject from Fencia’s current product coverage.

01EU AI ACT

Start with the obligations that may apply

Understand the Act's risk-based structure, then identify which systems and roles need a closer review.

FENCIA'S SCOPE

Selected document requirements; a person confirms what applies.

Explore the EU AI Act
02GDPR

Keep personal data questions in view

Connect AI governance to data protection questions without treating one review as a substitute for the other.

FENCIA'S SCOPE

Partial document review, not a complete GDPR assessment.

Explore GDPR scope
03ISO/IEC 42001

Map management-system evidence

See how a management-system lens can organize work, and where certification remains separate.

FENCIA'S SCOPE

Governance mapping, not an audit against the standard.

Explore ISO/IEC 42001
MAPS AND CAPABILITIES

Explore the new workspace

Four additional maps and product workflow guides, with explicit limits. ISO 9001 still uses the 2015 structure while the 2026 edition is reviewed.

FRAMEWORKISO 9001:2026 transition: evidence to review for AI teamsA practical ISO 9001:2026 transition guide for AI-supported processes, with Fencia’s 2015-based mapping limit made clear.FRAMEWORKHIPAA and AI: scope and evidence checklistUse this HIPAA and AI evidence checklist to review applicability, information flows and human sign-off without claiming automatic compliance.FRAMEWORKSOC 2 evidence checklist for AI systemsMap SOC 2 criteria to control owners and dated AI-system evidence while keeping the independent examination separate.FRAMEWORKPCI DSS scope and evidence for AI-assisted paymentsDefine PCI DSS v4.0.1 scope, retained payment responsibilities and reviewable evidence when AI tools touch payment workflows.PRODUCTAI governance readiness by requirement: a review checklistFollow a source-linked AI finding through evidence confirmation, human decision and versioned readiness by requirement.PRODUCTMulti-client AI governance: separate workspaces and evidenceA practical workflow for consultants to separate AI systems, findings, evidence and human decisions by client.PRODUCTAI governance agent: review suggested actions before applyingSee how an AI governance agent can explain findings and propose next steps while people retain review and approval.PRODUCTShadow AI discovery checklist: review signals before adding toolsA practical checklist for reviewing AI-use signals from connected sources, resolving uncertain matches and keeping an AI inventory useful.PRODUCTAI governance Trust Center: share reviewed evidenceChoose which confirmed framework views and documents buyers can see, with public or approved-request access.
02 / START WITH A QUESTION

Find the next useful action

AI governance becomes clearer when each question leads to a source, an owner and a reviewable decision.

01

Which AI systems do we actually use?

Start with known systems and owners, then review candidate signals from connected sources. A mention is not proof of use.

Build an AI inventory
02

What does this policy leave unclear?

Use a supported document to find possible gaps and inspect the passage behind each one before changing your policy.

See document analysis
03

What needs a person to decide?

Separate an AI-generated suggestion from confirmed evidence and record why the reviewer accepted, revised or dismissed it.

Explore findings and decisions
03 / BUYER'S GUIDES

Comparing platforms? Check the job each one does.

Fencia publishes its entry pricing and focuses on a source-linked first review. Larger platforms cover more of the trust or AI governance program. These guides use each provider's public information.

05 / FROM READING TO REVIEW

Bring your own evidence into the picture

Fencia can connect supported AI-use signals and policy documents, surface possible gaps with source context, and help a person decide what to verify next.