Benefit — cross-agency baseline stance

What safe-secure-trustworthy evidence saves in cross-agency review

EO 14110 provides the shared vocabulary for federal AI. Even where specific provisions have been amended, the safe-secure-trustworthy test survives across agency reviews, GAO audits, and Congressional inquiries.

The three moments where it matters

  1. Cross-agency AI oversight review. OMB, GAO, and NSC-level review may apply EO 14110's baseline to program-office AI. Independent evidence is the direct answer to each question.
  2. Congressional hearing / staff briefing. Members and staff use the "safe-secure-trustworthy" frame in questions. A dated independent-verifier record is the shortest narrative from technical finding to defensible answer.
  3. Public-facing AI-incident narrative. When an AI-related event becomes public, the operator's stance shifts sharply if independent-evaluation evidence pre-dated the incident.

Dollar frame

Cross-agency adverse-finding report: named-remediation plan + multi-year monitor. Typical $500K-$3M cumulative cost.
Congressional-briefing reputational impact: follow-on funding + option-year scrutiny. Hard-to-quantify but load-bearing on the program's political stance.
Preventive stance value: $499 Snapshot produces the safe-secure-trustworthy evidence, dated + independent + signed. Referenceable across every agency review venue.

Who at your org cares

What "having it" looks like

Green: Snapshot on file mapped to safe-secure-trustworthy language. Cross-agency review confirms baseline is met with independent evidence. Congressional-briefing narrative is defensible.
Red: Program-office AI cited in a cross-agency finding without independent evidence backing the diligence claim. Adverse-finding-report risk becomes live.

$499. 3 business days.

Cross-agency-baseline evidence on your program's AI surface — referenceable in every review venue.

Buy $499