assess
Context
Context
Visible. Explicit. Accountable.
F.R.A.M.E.™ started as a documented, referenceable protocol, setting out how design has always been as much about governance and process as about aesthetics.
This work has now evolved.
Governments across the UK, the EU and a growing number of US states are moving to require organisations to show why an AI assisted decision was made, and that a human was genuinely involved rather than simply accepting the outcome. We built F.R.A.M.E.™ assess to turn that thinking, and the original document, into a working tool.
Visible
A reading only works if the thinking behind it can be seen, not held in someone's memory of the meeting. F.R.A.M.E.™ assess writes down what it looked for on every question, who was in the room, and who wasn't, naming the gaps in who got a say as plainly as it names the score itself.
Explicit
Every score carries its reasoning with it. Why it landed where it did, what breaks first if it's wrong, and, where a weak answer limits what a later claim can stand on, exactly which condition set that limit and why. Nothing here is a number on its own, waiting to be interpreted later.
Accountable
Where the people in the room agreed, that's recorded. Where they didn't, that's recorded too, by name, with the lower reading carried forward rather than averaged into something more comfortable. Once a reading is committed, any change to it needs a reason, and that reason stays on the record permanently, not quietly overwritten.
Field Work
Why now
A belief about good design does not hold up in front of a regulator, evidence does. F.R.A.M.E.™ Assess exists because what is being asked of organisations has changed, not whether governance was considered, but whether that thinking can be shown, in writing, with names attached to it. What follows is not philosophy. It is what three separate regulatory shifts are now actually asking for, and how the tool answers each one directly, before the spend goes anywhere.
The UK has already flipped the default
Why it matters:
Since the Data (Use and Access) Act 2025, automated decisions about people are no longer "not permitted unless", they are "permitted provided appropriate safeguards are documented." The burden has moved from asking permission to being able to prove it, and most organisations are not yet set up to prove anything.
The EU puts a name to the oversight
Why it matters:
Under the EU AI Act, anyone deploying a high risk system must assign human oversight to people who are genuinely competent to do it, not a policy, and not a human in the loop in name only. Saying "a human is involved" is not enough, the law asks whether they can actually understand the system, catch it when something looks wrong, and override it.
Regulators are naming individuals, not departments
Why it matters:
The FCA and PRA looked at creating a dedicated AI oversight role and turned it down, firms told them existing governance was enough. Instead, AI risk sits inside whichever senior manager already answers for that area, technology under the Chief Operations function, model risk under the Chief Risk Officer. There is no policy document to hide behind, that person has to show they took reasonable steps to keep the business, AI included, under control.
F.R.A.M.E.™
How it works
F.R.A.M.E.™ is a governance-backed design thinking framework. It connects creativity to accountability, vision to viability and speed to stewardship. At its core, F.R.A.M.E.™ challenges designers, policymakers and delivery teams to pause to ask not just whether we can build this, but whether it should be built and how it will be held to account. We have split this up into five core segments, which can be operationalised using the :
The F.R.A.M.E™ Readiness Canvas
The F.R.A.M.E™ Integrity Canvas
Both linked and calibrated to a Crosswalk middle layer.
It's where that thinking gets tested rather than only written down. It is built to be worked through with the people who actually own the decision, each one scored separately where the room disagrees, so the gap itself goes on the record rather than being smoothed away. What it produces is not a verdict, it is a judgement, not a measurement, weighed against the commercial outcome and the ethical one, with the visibility and accountability now expected of both.
Foresight & Foundations
Ensures systems are anticipatory, not reactive
Risks & Resilience
Embeds stress testing into design and development
Alignment & Accountability
Connect cross-functional ownership to design decisions
Measures That Matter
Evaluates what success really means, beyond throughput or adoption
Endurance & Execution
Sustains delivery integrity and operational performance over time
Let’s Partner
Contact Us
Contact Us
We work with you, your teams, leaders, and communities to build cultures where products and services thrive
Available Worldwide
assess
Context
Visible. Explicit. Accountable.
F.R.A.M.E.™ started as a documented, referenceable protocol, setting out how design has always been as much about governance and process as about aesthetics.
This work has now evolved.
Governments across the UK, the EU and a growing number of US states are moving to require organisations to show why an AI assisted decision was made, and that a human was genuinely involved rather than simply accepting the outcome. We built F.R.A.M.E.™ assess to turn that thinking, and the original document, into a working tool.
Visible
A reading only works if the thinking behind it can be seen, not held in someone's memory of the meeting. F.R.A.M.E.™ assess writes down what it looked for on every question, who was in the room, and who wasn't, naming the gaps in who got a say as plainly as it names the score itself.
Explicit
Every score carries its reasoning with it. Why it landed where it did, what breaks first if it's wrong, and, where a weak answer limits what a later claim can stand on, exactly which condition set that limit and why. Nothing here is a number on its own, waiting to be interpreted later.
Accountable
Where the people in the room agreed, that's recorded. Where they didn't, that's recorded too, by name, with the lower reading carried forward rather than averaged into something more comfortable. Once a reading is committed, any change to it needs a reason, and that reason stays on the record permanently, not quietly overwritten.
Field Work
Why now
A belief about good design does not hold up in front of a regulator, evidence does. F.R.A.M.E.™ Assess exists because what is being asked of organisations has changed, not whether governance was considered, but whether that thinking can be shown, in writing, with names attached to it. What follows is not philosophy. It is what three separate regulatory shifts are now actually asking for, and how the tool answers each one directly, before the spend goes anywhere.
The UK has already flipped the default
Why it matters:
Since the Data (Use and Access) Act 2025, automated decisions about people are no longer "not permitted unless", they are "permitted provided appropriate safeguards are documented." The burden has moved from asking permission to being able to prove it, and most organisations are not yet set up to prove anything.
The EU puts a name to the oversight
Why it matters:
Under the EU AI Act, anyone deploying a high risk system must assign human oversight to people who are genuinely competent to do it, not a policy, and not a human in the loop in name only. Saying "a human is involved" is not enough, the law asks whether they can actually understand the system, catch it when something looks wrong, and override it.
Regulators are naming individuals, not departments
Why it matters:
The FCA and PRA looked at creating a dedicated AI oversight role and turned it down, firms told them existing governance was enough. Instead, AI risk sits inside whichever senior manager already answers for that area, technology under the Chief Operations function, model risk under the Chief Risk Officer. There is no policy document to hide behind, that person has to show they took reasonable steps to keep the business, AI included, under control.
F.R.A.M.E.™
How it works
F.R.A.M.E.™ is a governance-backed design thinking framework. It connects creativity to accountability, vision to viability and speed to stewardship. At its core, F.R.A.M.E.™ challenges designers, policymakers and delivery teams to pause to ask not just whether we can build this, but whether it should be built and how it will be held to account. We have split this up into five core segments, which can be operationalised using the :
The F.R.A.M.E™ Readiness Canvas
The F.R.A.M.E™ Integrity Canvas
Both linked and calibrated to a Crosswalk middle layer.
It's where that thinking gets tested rather than only written down. It is built to be worked through with the people who actually own the decision, each one scored separately where the room disagrees, so the gap itself goes on the record rather than being smoothed away. What it produces is not a verdict, it is a judgement, not a measurement, weighed against the commercial outcome and the ethical one, with the visibility and accountability now expected of both.
Foresight & Foundations
Ensures systems are anticipatory, not reactive
Risks & Resilience
Embeds stress testing into design and development
Alignment & Accountability
Connect cross-functional ownership to design decisions
Measures That Matter
Evaluates what success really means, beyond throughput or adoption
Endurance & Execution
Sustains delivery integrity and operational performance over time
Let’s Partner
Contact Us
We work with you, your teams, leaders, and communities to build cultures where products and services thrive
Available Worldwide
assess
Context
Visible. Explicit. Accountable.
F.R.A.M.E.™ started as a documented, referenceable protocol, setting out how design has always been as much about governance and process as about aesthetics.
This work has now evolved.
As governments across the UK, the EU, and a growing number of US states move to require organisations to be able to show why an AI assisted decision was made and that a human was genuinely involved, not simply accept the outcome.
F.R.A.M.E.™ assess takes the thinking and the document into a working tool.
Visible
A reading only works if the thinking behind it can be seen, not held in someone's memory of the meeting. F.R.A.M.E.™ assess writes down what it looked for on every question, who was in the room, and who wasn't, naming the gaps in who got a say as plainly as it names the score itself.
Explicit
Every score carries its reasoning with it. Why it landed where it did, what breaks first if it's wrong, and, where a weak answer limits what a later claim can stand on, exactly which condition set that limit and why. Nothing here is a number on its own, waiting to be interpreted later.
Accountable
Where the people in the room agreed, that's recorded. Where they didn't, that's recorded too, by name, with the lower reading carried forward rather than averaged into something more comfortable. Once a reading is committed, any change to it needs a reason, and that reason stays on the record permanently, not quietly overwritten.
Field Work
Why now
A belief about good design does not hold up in front of a regulator, evidence does. F.R.A.M.E.™ Assess exists because what is being asked of organisations has changed, not whether governance was considered, but whether that thinking can be shown, in writing, with names attached to it. What follows is not philosophy. It is what three separate regulatory shifts are now actually asking for, and how the tool answers each one directly, before the spend goes anywhere.
The UK has already flipped the default
Why it matters:
Since the Data (Use and Access) Act 2025, automated decisions about people are no longer "not permitted unless", they are "permitted provided appropriate safeguards are documented." The burden has moved from asking permission to being able to prove it, and most organisations are not yet set up to prove anything.
The EU puts a name to the oversight
Why it matters:
Under the EU AI Act, anyone deploying a high risk system must assign human oversight to people who are genuinely competent to do it, not a policy, and not a human in the loop in name only. Saying "a human is involved" is not enough, the law asks whether they can actually understand the system, catch it when something looks wrong, and override it.
Regulators are naming individuals, not departments
Why it matters:
The FCA and PRA looked at creating a dedicated AI oversight role and turned it down, firms told them existing governance was enough. Instead, AI risk sits inside whichever senior manager already answers for that area, technology under the Chief Operations function, model risk under the Chief Risk Officer. There is no policy document to hide behind, that person has to show they took reasonable steps to keep the business, AI included, under control.
F.R.A.M.E.™
How it works
F.R.A.M.E.™ is a governance-backed design thinking framework. It connects creativity to accountability, vision to viability and speed to stewardship. At its core, F.R.A.M.E.™ challenges designers, policymakers and delivery teams to pause to ask not just whether we can build this, but whether it should be built and how it will be held to account. We have split this up into five core segments, which can be operationalised using the :
The F.R.A.M.E™ Readiness Canvas
The F.R.A.M.E™ Integrity Canvas
Both linked and calibrated to a Crosswalk middle layer.
It's where that thinking gets tested rather than only written down. It is built to be worked through with the people who actually own the decision, each one scored separately where the room disagrees, so the gap itself goes on the record rather than being smoothed away. What it produces is not a verdict, it is a judgement, not a measurement, weighed against the commercial outcome and the ethical one, with the visibility and accountability now expected of both.
Foresight & Foundations
Ensures systems are anticipatory, not reactive
Risks & Resilience
Embeds stress testing into design and development
Alignment & Accountability
Connect cross-functional ownership to design decisions
Measures That Matter
Evaluates what success really means, beyond throughput or adoption
Endurance & Execution
Sustains delivery integrity and operational performance over time
Let’s Partner
Contact Us
We work with you, your teams, leaders, and communities to build cultures where products and services thrive
Available Worldwide