The offering

A committee-ready account of oversight.

For Audit and Risk Committees and accountable Senior Managers (SMFs) of firms regulated in the United Kingdom. The board is the final recipient. Implementation and steering committees are supporting users. The work concerns automated systems already in use, and the evidence the firm already holds under the Senior Managers and Certification Regime.

Request a demonstration Practitioner experience

What the Audit or Risk Committee receives

Not a software licence and not a generic training day. A prepared account the Audit or Risk Committee can read before it meets.

Findings they can take

The decisions the meeting is asked to record, and the documents that support each one.

Owners and dates

Each material gap named to an accountable Senior Manager, with a 30, 60 or 90 day expectation.

Evidence state

What is present, partial or missing, including systems that sit inside vendor software.

A governance map

Who holds what today, against statements of responsibilities and committee minutes.

A follow-up cadence

What the next report should contain, and when the committee will see it again.

What we draw on

We start from the file you already keep. Typical sources include policies, the system inventory, committee minutes, statements of responsibilities and vendor contracts. If a document is absent, that absence is itself a finding.

How the engagement runs

1

Scoping conversation

The Audit or Risk Committee in view, the accountable Senior Managers, the systems, and the questions the chair wants answered.
2

Document pass

Practitioners read what you provide and mark where the evidence supports a finding, and where it does not.
3

Draft for owners

Accountable senior managers see the draft before the committee does, so the meeting is not the first time they meet a gap.
4

In-person session

45 to 60 minutes with the Audit or Risk Committee. Owners confirmed. Date of the next report agreed.

Questions Audit and Risk Committees ask

Which automated systems are in use, including those embedded in vendor products?
Which senior manager is accountable for each material gap?
What evidence is on file today, and what is only asserted?
Where does a decision run without a documented human review?
What will the audit or risk committee be shown at the next meeting?
How do statements of responsibilities line up with the inventory?
What changes if a supplier updates a model or a workflow we do not operate ourselves?
What should be closed in 30 days, and what can wait 90?

Where this sits

Firms already commission software suites and large advisory programmes. Govaitum is a practitioner engagement for the Audit or Risk Committee.

Route	What you typically get	What you still need
Software platform	A register and workflow the firm must populate and maintain.	A committee narrative and named owners from the documents you already hold.
Large advisory firm	A broad programme, often with a team and a long timetable.	A short, in-person session a mid-sized committee can actually use.
Govaitum	Practitioner-led reading of your existing file, prepared for Audit and Risk Committees and accountable Senior Managers.	Your documents, your owners, and time on the committee agenda.

The engagement is prepared for committee review. It does not replace your own legal, audit or regulatory advisers.

See it against your own file

A demonstration is arranged after we understand the committee and the documents in scope. There is no public price list. Scope is agreed in the conversation.

Request a demonstration