Answer questions about one AI system you already use, in about ten minutes. You get a report showing where it falls short of the rules that apply to you, and how to fix each gap, ready for your board and regulator.
Overall
Deployment blocked
16 governance gaps identified, three of which block deployment.
UK-NHS-G01 · Critical
DCB0160 requires a clinical safety case before a system reaches patients. None exists. Action: appoint a Clinical Safety Officer and start the safety case immediately.
CLEARANCE is a fixed-scope, point-in-time check of one live AI workflow. About ten minutes of structured questions, then a four-part report within minutes of payment.
Post-deployment is where the gap sits: in the UK government’s consultation on its AI governance self-assessment tool, respondents asked for a more structured approach to monitoring and evaluating AI systems after deployment.1
Decision points, autonomy, data flows and ownership. One question at a time, no technical knowledge needed.
Your answers are checked against a fixed, versioned gap library for your sector. No consultant interpretation, no AI model in the decision.
Executive summary, detailed findings, a remediation roadmap and an evidence appendix, delivered to your inbox.
Which gap, which obligation, when it becomes visible, and what closes it.
A finding is a lookup against a fixed rule, so it comes back identical, with the rule it rests on. A chat tool writes fresh text each time.
FS-G04 · Critical
No named SM&CR accountable individual for the AI decision system. Action: name the accountable Senior Manager in the Statement of Responsibilities.
Run 1 · identical every run
It’s worth checking whether there’s a clear owner for AI-related decisions in your business. That could be a governance gap worth looking into.
Run 1 · wording can change each run
One report in four parts, structured to support board, regulator and insurer conversations.
Both samples are real engine output for a fictional organisation, Exemplar Health. No real organisation has been assessed.
The engine activates the gap layers for your sector and country, so findings cite the rules you actually answer to.
| CLEARANCE | GRC consulting | General AI chat | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Same answers give the same findings | Yes | Varies by consultant | No |
| Each finding mapped to a named obligation | Yes | Depends on the consultant | Unverified |
| Evidence appendix | Included as standard | Varies | No |
| Time to result | Minutes | Days to weeks | Instant |
| Price | £750 per workflow, £2,500 for healthcare (all prices) | Usually quoted per engagement | Free or low cost |
| Ongoing commitment | None: one engagement, one report | Often a retainer | None |
| Judgement beyond the questions asked | No | Yes | Unverified |
No. CLEARANCE is a self-assessment: findings are based on the answers you give about your workflow, applied to fixed rules. It does not certify your organisation or replace an independent audit.
No one can promise acceptance. The report is structured to support those conversations: findings mapped to named obligations, a remediation roadmap, and the answers behind every finding.
No. It identifies where governance evidence has gaps against named obligations, to inform your own legal or compliance advice.
No. It is a point-in-time check of one workflow. Run it again when the workflow or the rules around it change.
AQE qualifies an AI use case before it goes live.
Start with six free questions. No card required, no sales call. The full report is £750, or £2,500 for healthcare.