The ProblemHow It WorksDemosPolicyRegulatoryStandardsBriefingsAboutContact
Policy & Regulatory Landscape

The framework is being written.
The enforcement layer already exists.

Congress and the executive branch are actively defining how AI should operate in regulated financial services. GRACE is the operational infrastructure that makes those frameworks enforceable from day one.

The Gap That Agentic AI Created

Existing Guidance Wasn’t Written
for Autonomous AI

The model risk management frameworks that govern financial institutions today — including SR 11-7, the foundational interagency guidance on supervisory expectations for model risk — were written for a different era of AI. They address statistical models, predictive algorithms, and defined decision systems.

They were not designed for agentic AI: systems that plan, execute multi-step tasks, take actions in the real world, and operate with degrees of autonomy that no prior regulatory framework anticipated.

This is not a criticism of existing guidance. It is an acknowledgment of reality. The regulatory gap is real, it is documented, and it is currently unresolved. Regulated financial institutions — banks, broker-dealers, investment advisers, and credit unions — are deploying or evaluating agentic AI systems right now, without a clear enforcement framework to govern how those systems should be validated, monitored, and controlled within existing compliance obligations.

GRACE was built to close that gap.

The Governance Gap

Covered by SR 11-7
Statistical models · Predictive algorithms · Defined decision systems · Validation protocols
Not Covered — Agentic AI
Autonomous planning · Multi-step task execution · Real-world action · Dynamic decision chains
GRACE closes this gap
Pre-execution enforcement · FIPS 204 audit records · MRM continuity
The Legislative Moment

Policymakers Are Moving.
The Infrastructure Has to Be Ready.

Framework-level actions are underway across Congress and the executive branch. What they cannot provide at the legislative level is the enforcement architecture that makes responsible deployment operationally real inside a regulated institution.

Congress

AI Innovation Labs at Federal Regulators

Bipartisan legislation advancing to establish AI innovation labs at the Federal Reserve, OCC, FDIC, SEC, CFPB, NCUA, and FHFA — creating supervised environments where regulated institutions can test AI projects under direct agency oversight.

Bipartisan financial services AI legislation, introduced 2025. Co-sponsored across party lines.

Executive Branch

Regulatory AI Centers of Excellence

The Administration’s AI policy framework calls for regulatory Centers of Excellence to test AI tools and share results across agencies — a structured federal approach to enabling responsible AI deployment at the institutional level.

Administration AI Action Plan, July 2025.

Senate

Bipartisan AI Policy Roadmap

The Senate’s bipartisan AI policy framework explicitly addresses financial regulation, cybersecurity, and national security applications of AI — and directed relevant committees to conduct a financial sector regulatory gap analysis.

Bipartisan Senate AI Working Group Policy Roadmap, May 2024.

For Those Focused on Innovation

GRACE removes the uncertainty that keeps institutions on the sidelines — replacing it with documented, examiner-ready evidence of responsible operation. Institutions can engage with regulatory innovation environments from day one rather than waiting for clarity that may be years away.

For Those Focused on Accountability

GRACE ensures that agentic AI systems operating inside regulated financial institutions cannot act without a validated audit trail, pre-execution controls, and cryptographically signed records of every action taken. Accountability is built into the execution layer — not added as an afterthought.

These are not competing priorities. GRACE addresses both.

The Regulatory Timeline

From Model Risk to Agentic AI

The problem GRACE solves did not appear overnight. It accumulated across fifteen years of evolving AI capability and a regulatory framework that was never designed to keep pace with it.

2011 — SR 11-7 / OCC 2011-12
Model Risk Management: The Standard Is Set
Interagency guidance establishes the foundational standard for how financial institutions validate, test, and govern statistical and algorithmic models. Written for a world of regression models and defined decision trees. It remains the operative standard today.
2017–2021
Machine Learning Enters Financial Services
Regulators issue supplemental guidance addressing machine learning models. SR 11-7 is extended conceptually but not formally updated. Institutions adapt existing frameworks to cover machine learning — imperfectly, but workably. The gap is manageable.
2022–2024
Generative AI Arrives. The Gap Begins to Widen.
Large language models enter financial services. Regulators issue risk bulletins and the OCC, Federal Reserve, and FDIC issue a joint statement on AI in 2023. SR 11-7 remains the operative standard. The existing framework is strained but holding.
2025
Agentic AI Changes Everything. The Gap Becomes a Chasm.
AI systems no longer just generate outputs — they plan, decide, and act. Agentic AI executes multi-step tasks autonomously, interacts with external systems, and takes real-world actions inside regulated environments. No existing model risk management guidance was written to govern this. SR 26-2, issued April 2026, formally confirms the gap in Footnote 3: agentic AI is explicitly excluded from its scope.
2025–2026
Congress and Regulators Respond
Bipartisan legislation advances to create AI innovation labs at federal financial regulators. The Administration’s AI policy framework calls for Centers of Excellence. NIST launches the AI Agent Standards Initiative. The Senate produces a bipartisan AI policy roadmap explicitly calling for a financial sector regulatory gap analysis. The frameworks are being built. The enforcement infrastructure has to be ready.
Today
GRACE
The enforcement architecture built for this moment. Pre-execution validation. Real-time state capture via SHADOW. Post-quantum cryptographic signing of all execution logs under FIPS 204 / ML-DSA-65. Model risk management continuity for agentic systems. Operating within today’s regulatory frameworks — not waiting for tomorrow’s.
ALLOWMODIFYABSTAINDENYSHADOW
Where GRACE Fits

Enforcement Architecture
for a Framework Era

GRACE operates at the layer below policy. While legislators define what responsible AI in financial services should look like, and regulators determine how to supervise it, GRACE provides the technical enforcement layer that makes both possible.

Agentic AI Governance

Pre-Execution Enforcement

Intent validation and behavioral boundary controls for AI systems that act autonomously within regulated environments. Every action intercepted before it executes — not logged after the fact.

Model Risk Management

MRM Continuity Layer

Extending SR 11-7 model risk obligations to cover agentic systems that current supervisory guidance does not explicitly reach — providing the validation documentation and examiner-ready audit records that SR 26-2 Footnote 3 implicitly requires but does not define.

Audit Integrity

Cryptographically Signed Execution Logs

Real-time state capture via SHADOW and cryptographically signed Policy Action Packets using ML-DSA-65 / FIPS 204 post-quantum standards. Tamper-evident, institution-owned records that satisfy examiner expectations without requiring manual reconstruction.

Cybersecurity Integration

Post-Quantum Cryptographic Standards

FIPS 204 / ML-DSA-65 signing aligned with current NIST guidance, designed for institutions operating under heightened national security scrutiny and cybersecurity examination requirements. This is not a future capability — it is what GRACE uses today.

GRACE is not a compliance checklist. It is not a policy document. It is the operational infrastructure that allows regulated financial institutions to deploy agentic AI — today, within current regulatory frameworks — rather than waiting on the sidelines for clarity that may be years away.
Grace AI Control · Technical Position Statement
Built for What’s Coming. Available Now.

The regulatory environment for AI in financial services
is being defined in real time.

Institutions that engage now — with the right governance infrastructure in place — will be positioned to lead when the frameworks are finalized. Those that wait will be playing catch-up against a moving standard.

We are actively briefing policymakers, regulators, and institutional stakeholders on GRACE and the governance gap it addresses. If you are working on AI policy, financial regulation, or the intersection of cybersecurity and financial infrastructure, we welcome the conversation.

Request a Briefing Standards & Technical Alignment

See the enforcement layer in action.

Live demonstrations across banking, broker-dealer, and investment adviser enforcement scenarios.