Compliance Assessment Methodology
Transparent, evidence-based scoring system for AI compliance across EU AI Act, GDPR, and SOC 2 frameworks.
Our compliance scoring methodology is built on regulatory frameworks, industry best practices, and real-world compliance patterns. Every score is backed by specific evidence and actionable recommendations.
Regulatory Sources
Direct references to EU AI Act, GDPR, SOC 2 requirements, and many more
Algorithmic Scoring
Consistent, objective evaluation across all assessments
Evidence-Based
Every score includes specific compliance evidence
Data Sources & Regulatory Framework
Our EU AI Act assessments are based on the official regulation text and implementing acts, including Annex III high-risk categories and conformity assessment requirements.
Primary Sources:
- Official EU AI Act text (2024/1689)
- Annex III high-risk AI systems
- Conformity assessment procedures
- Technical documentation requirements
Risk Categories:
- Prohibited AI practices
- High-risk AI systems
- Limited-risk AI systems
- Minimal-risk AI systems
GDPR compliance scoring incorporates the General Data Protection Regulation requirements, focusing on AI-specific data processing considerations.
Key Areas:
- Data processing principles
- Legal basis for processing
- Data subject rights
- Data protection by design
AI Considerations:
- Automated decision-making
- Profiling and bias prevention
- Data minimization
- Transparency requirements
SOC 2 compliance mapping covers the five trust service criteria: Security, Availability, Processing Integrity, Confidentiality, and Privacy.
Trust Criteria:
- Security (CC6.1-CC9.8)
- Availability (A1.1-A1.2)
- Processing Integrity (PI1.1-PI1.4)
- Confidentiality (C1.1-C1.4)
- Privacy (P1.1-P6.8)
AI System Controls:
- Access controls and authentication
- Data encryption and protection
- Change management procedures
- Incident response capabilities
Scoring Algorithm & Evaluation Steps
The algorithm first determines the risk category based on your AI system's characteristics and intended use case.
Risk Classification Logic:
- Analyze use case against Annex III categories
- Evaluate potential impact on fundamental rights
- Assess data sensitivity and processing scope
- Determine applicable regulatory requirements
For each identified requirement, the system evaluates your current compliance posture and identifies gaps.
Gap Analysis Process:
- Map requirements to your system characteristics
- Identify missing controls and documentation
- Assess implementation maturity levels
- Calculate compliance percentage per requirement
Final scores are calculated using weighted criteria based on regulatory importance and implementation complexity.
Scoring Formula:
Overall Score = Σ(Requirement Weight × Compliance Level) / Total Weight
Requirement Weight = Regulatory Importance × Implementation Complexity
Compliance Level = 0-100% based on evidence and controls
Evaluation Rubric & Score Interpretation
Documentation Evidence:
- Policies and procedures
- Technical documentation
- Training records
- Audit reports
Implementation Evidence:
- System configurations
- Access controls
- Monitoring logs
- Incident responses
Regular Updates
- Monthly regulatory framework updates
- Quarterly algorithm refinements
- Annual methodology reviews
- Continuous feedback integration
Validation Methods
- Expert review by compliance professionals
- Cross-validation with regulatory guidance
- User feedback and case studies
- Industry benchmark comparisons
Transparency Commitment: Our methodology is publicly available and regularly updated. We welcome feedback and questions about our scoring approach.
Ready to Assess Your Compliance?
Use our transparent, evidence-based methodology to evaluate your AI compliance posture.