Nine domains, one system
The domains are not nine separate policies. They interlock — a foundation that carries all of them, a standards layer they all apply, a build layer where they all become real, and a coordination map for the risks that belong to no single office. This is the leadership view.
Six shared components run inside every domain
A domain says where governance happens; the six components are how it happens. The same six operate in all nine — only the object they govern changes (a syllabus tool in Domain 1, a model in Domain 5, a contract in Domain 7).
Deep in one area, shallow everywhere else
The typical institutional starting point — the pattern this framework exists to correct. Map your own campus against it.
Six questions that reveal real posture
{{ q }}
The concerns that belong to no single domain
Every shared risk gets one explicit owner, so nothing falls between offices. This map is the connective tissue that keeps nine domains coherent instead of siloed.
{{ c.desc }}
Consequential AI clusters in a few domains — govern those first
Proportionality means the most attention goes where the stakes are highest. High-risk systems that make or inform decisions about people tend to live here — with Domain 6 providing the oversight that governs them all.
The body that keeps the system coherent
One standing group owns the connective work — the charter, the inventory, and the coordination map — so the nine domains operate as a single system, not nine silos. Its standing responsibilities cross every domain:
{{ d }}