ECL Square
Menu
Primary diagnostic

ECL Governance Maturity Assessment

A practical 14-question diagnostic for finance, risk, modelling, controls, and audit stakeholders who need to understand whether the ECL process is fragmented, controlled, governed, or review-ready.

Score out of 100
Immediate result
Stored for follow-up
Assessment intake

Start with your role, pressure point, and declared ECL challenge.

Results are stored with your responses so the follow-up conversation can focus on evidence gaps instead of repeating the intake.

Completion
0%

0 of 14 scored questions answered

Next unanswered section: Data (0 of 2)

Scoring scale
0 - Not evidenced

Mostly informal, missing, or reconstructed late.

1 - Ad hoc

Some activity exists, but ownership and evidence are inconsistent.

2 - Partly controlled

Controls exist, but handoffs, exceptions, or review trail remain fragile.

3 - Governed

Repeatable process with visible ownership, review, and retained support.

4 - Review-ready

Integrated workflow, strong traceability, and reliable evidence pack output.

Assessment questions

14 scored questions across 7 sections.

The last six questions are in Approvals, Movement analysis, Audit evidence, and Disclosure readiness.

Data
0 of 2 answered
Staging
0 of 2 answered
Models
0 of 2 answered
Overlays
0 of 2 answered
Approvals
0 of 2 answered
Movement analysis
0 of 2 answered
Audit evidence
0 of 1 answered
Disclosure readiness
0 of 1 answered

Data

0 of 2 answered
Question 1 of 14Source exposures are reconciled, validated, and frozen before the ECL run starts.
Question 2 of 14Data exceptions are owned, resolved, approved, or explicitly carried into the allowance with evidence.

Staging

0 of 2 answered
Question 3 of 14SICR, default, cure, restructuring, and rebuttable presumption rules are approved and version controlled.
Question 4 of 14Stage overrides and reviewer challenges have rationale, approval status, and retained evidence.

Models

0 of 2 answered
Question 5 of 14PD, LGD, EAD, discounting, life, and recovery assumptions are documented with owner sign-off.
Question 6 of 14Model parameter changes can be traced from proposal to approval to final run impact.

Overlays

0 of 2 answered
Question 7 of 14Macroeconomic scenarios, weights, sensitivities, and release criteria are governed consistently.
Question 8 of 14Management overlays have a clear trigger, quantified basis, expiry or review date, and double-counting check.

Approvals

0 of 2 answered
Question 9 of 14Maker-checker, committee, and final sign-off workflows are visible in one review trail.
Question 10 of 14Open issues, late changes, and unresolved reviewer comments are tracked through closure.

Movement analysis

0 of 2 answered
Question 11 of 14Period movement is explained by portfolio, stage, model, scenario, overlay, write-off, and recovery drivers.
Question 12 of 14Management packs connect final allowance movements to approved source results and commentary.

Audit evidence

0 of 1 answered
Question 13 of 14Audit evidence packs are produced from the workflow, not rebuilt manually after the numbers are final.

Disclosure readiness

0 of 1 answered
Question 14 of 14Disclosure tables and narratives are traceable to approved ECL outputs, assumptions, and movement analysis.

Complete the Cloudflare human verification before submitting.

Score is shown immediately after submission.