Control 3.8: Model Risk Management Alignment (OCC 2011-12 / SR 11-7) — Verification & Testing
Test cases and evidence collection procedures to validate alignment with OCC and Federal Reserve model risk management requirements for Copilot.
Test Cases
Test 1: Model Inventory Completeness
- Objective: Verify that the Copilot model inventory entry contains all required fields appropriate to the institution's tier classification
- Steps:
- Review the model inventory entry for Microsoft 365 Copilot.
- Verify all required fields are populated: model name, version, purpose, inputs, outputs, risk tier, owner, validation date.
- Confirm the risk tier classification follows the firm's model tiering methodology and reflects actual Copilot usage scope (Tier 1/2/3 as appropriate).
- Verify the model card references Microsoft's published AI documentation.
- For community banks applying OCC Bulletin 2025-26 proportionality: verify the tier selection rationale documents usage scope, institution characteristics, and the OCC Bulletin 2025-26 citation.
- Expected Result: Model inventory entry is complete with all required fields populated; tier classification is documented with supporting rationale.
- Evidence: Model inventory entry export with all fields verified; proportionality rationale documentation if applicable.
Test 2: Proportionality Classification Verification
- Objective: Verify that the Copilot model inventory entry includes a proportionality classification consistent with OCC Bulletin 2025-26 and that the tier reflects actual usage
- Steps:
- Review the model inventory entry for the risk tier and classification rationale.
- Confirm the inventory entry documents one of: Tier 3 (limited-scope / internal productivity), Tier 2 (business decision support), or Tier 1 (client-facing / lending workflows).
- Cross-reference the tier against the approved use-case register — if client-facing or lending uses are approved, Tier 3 should not be selected.
- For Tier 3 classifications at community banks: verify OCC Bulletin 2025-26 is cited and the proportionality rationale is documented in writing.
- Verify the tier classification has been reviewed and approved by the designated model owner or model risk committee.
- Expected Result: Model inventory entry includes a proportionality classification with documented rationale; tier is consistent with actual usage scope.
- Evidence: Model inventory entry with tier field and proportionality rationale; approved use-case register for cross-reference.
- Objective: Confirm that model performance monitoring detects quality degradation
- Steps:
- Run the Copilot feedback metrics script for the current reporting period.
- Compare satisfaction rates against the baseline established during initial deployment.
- Verify that alert thresholds are configured for significant performance changes.
- Test that alerts trigger when metrics cross defined thresholds.
- Expected Result: Performance monitoring is operational, baseline comparison is available, and alerts function correctly.
- Evidence: Performance metrics report and alert policy configuration screenshots.
Test 4: Vendor Risk Documentation Currency
- Objective: Validate that third-party risk documentation for Microsoft Copilot is current
- Steps:
- Verify the latest Microsoft SOC 2 Type II report is on file and within 12 months.
- Confirm the AI Impact Assessment from Microsoft Service Trust Portal is reviewed and current.
- Check that the vendor risk assessment is dated within the last 12 months.
- Verify that Microsoft's data processing terms are reviewed and documented.
- Expected Result: All vendor risk documentation is current and on file.
- Evidence: Document index showing file dates and review attestations.
Test 5: Model Validation Documentation
- Objective: Confirm that the Copilot model validation process is documented and current
- Steps:
- Review the model validation documentation for the current assessment period.
- Verify that the validation includes: conceptual soundness, data quality assessment, outcome analysis, and limitations.
- Confirm an independent review was performed (separate from model users).
- Verify that identified limitations and recommendations are tracked for remediation.
- Expected Result: Model validation is documented, independently reviewed, and remediation items are tracked.
- Evidence: Validation report with independent reviewer sign-off and remediation tracking log.
Evidence Collection
| Evidence Item |
Source |
Format |
Retention |
| Model inventory entry |
MRM system |
PDF/Export |
Life of model + 5 years |
| Proportionality rationale |
MRM system |
PDF/Document |
Life of model + 5 years |
| Performance metrics |
PowerShell |
CSV |
7 years |
| Vendor risk documentation |
Service Trust Portal |
PDF |
7 years |
| Validation report |
MRM system |
PDF |
Life of model + 5 years |
Compliance Mapping
| Regulation |
Requirement |
How This Control Helps |
| OCC Bulletin 2011-12 |
Model inventory and validation |
Supports compliance with model risk management framework |
| OCC Bulletin 2025-26 |
Proportionality for community banks |
Provides documented rationale for simplified MRM approach |
| SR 11-7 |
Ongoing monitoring and outcome analysis |
Helps meet supervisory expectations for model performance tracking |
| OCC Third-Party Risk |
Vendor risk assessment |
Supports third-party risk management requirements for AI vendors |
Next Steps