AI Governance

Know which AI systems you run, what risk they carry, and prove you're governing them.

The EU AI Act is live. If your organisation deploys AI — even through third-party tools — you need to classify risk, assess impact, and report incidents. HelixGate connects AI governance to the data you already maintain — your services, your suppliers, your contracts. No new registers to maintain. No duplicate data entry.

EU AI Act ready
Connected to your existing data
15d
Incident tracking
0
Duplicate entry
The Regulation

The EU AI Act. The obligations are clear. The challenge is evidence.

The EU AI Act establishes a risk-based framework for AI systems operating in or affecting EU citizens. Every organisation deploying AI — whether built in-house or procured from a vendor — faces obligations that vary by risk classification. High-risk systems require conformity assessments, impact assessments, incident reporting, and ongoing monitoring.

"Regulators are not asking whether you use AI. They are asking whether you know which AI systems you operate, what risk class each carries, and whether your governance processes are documented, current, and evidenced."

The four risk tiers

Unacceptable Risk

Prohibited AI systems

Social scoring, real-time biometric surveillance in public spaces, subliminal manipulation. Banned outright.

High Risk

Strictest obligations

AI in critical infrastructure, employment, education, essential services. Full conformity assessment, impact assessment, incident reporting, and post-market monitoring required.

Limited Risk

Transparency obligations

Chatbots, deepfakes, emotion recognition. Users must be informed they are interacting with an AI system.

Minimal Risk

No mandatory obligations

Spam filters, AI-enabled search, recommendation systems. Voluntary codes of conduct encouraged.

How HelixGate covers it

Five areas of obligation. One governance platform.

Each area of EU AI Act obligation, connected to the governance data your organisation already maintains.

🏷️

Risk Classification

Flag any service as an AI system and assign its risk class. Classification connects to your existing service catalogue — owner, lifecycle, supplier, and governing contracts.

⚖️

Impact Assessment Workflow

Structured Fundamental Rights Impact Assessment with approval tracking and immutable audit trail. Required for high-risk AI systems that affect people's rights.

🚨

Incident Register

Log AI incidents with severity classification. Serious incidents trigger the 15-day regulatory reporting deadline with countdown tracking.

📊

Post-Market Monitoring

Schedule and track periodic reviews of live AI systems. Monitoring plans attach to the relevant service record with full audit trail.

🧠

Foundation Model Register

Catalogue the foundation models your organisation uses and link them to the services that depend on them. Surface downstream impact when a model changes.

Classify once. Evidence follows.

Service catalogue data, supplier risk, contract expiry, architectural decisions — all connected. No spreadsheets. No separate registers.

Connected Intelligence

Your AI compliance doesn't live in a silo.

AI Governance connects to the data you already maintain — eliminating separate registers and ensuring compliance evidence is always current.

AI Register

AI classification on your existing services

Flag any catalogued service as an AI system. Owner, tier, lifecycle status, and dependencies carry through. Your service catalogue becomes the register.

AI Provider Risk

AI provider risk from your supplier register

Suppliers who provide AI systems are already in your register with risk ratings and due-diligence status. AI Governance surfaces this during classification and assessments.

AI Contract Expiry

Contract expiry awareness for AI systems

Contracts governing AI systems are tracked with renewal alerts. AI records link to their contracts, making expiry visible alongside compliance obligations.

AI Decisions

Architecture decisions governing AI

Decisions about AI adoption or model selection are governed through HelixGate's ADR workflow and linked to AI system records — traceable from principle to compliance evidence.

Who It Serves

Built for teams with AI governance obligations.

Governance & Risk Teams

A single view of every AI system — risk class, assessment status, monitoring schedule, incident history. Evidence available for regulatory inspection without reconstruction effort.

Data Protection Officers

Impact assessment workflows structured for DPO review. The connection between AI systems and fundamental rights is documented, tracked, and immutably recorded alongside your data protection activities.

CIO / CISO / Board Sponsors

Confidence that every AI system is classified, every high-risk system assessed, and every incident tracked to deadline. Compliance posture visible at board level on demand.

Compliance

Compliance evidence generated as you work.

🤖

EU AI Act

Risk classification, impact assessment, incident reporting, monitoring, and model register

🇬🇧

GDPR-Connected

AI system records connect to data processing and fundamental rights obligations

🔒

Immutable Audit Trail

Every classification, assessment, and incident is permanently recorded

📋

SOC 2-Ready

AI governance activity captured in the same immutable audit log as all platform activity

Evidence — generated automatically. Every assessment, every incident record, every monitoring review, every risk classification — logged with actor identity, timestamp, and outcome. When a regulator asks, HelixGate produces the evidence. Nothing to reconstruct.

Technical detail

For teams preparing their EU AI Act compliance programme.

Fundamental Rights Impact Assessment — Article 27

Required for high-risk AI systems deployed by public bodies, banks, insurance companies, and hospitals. HelixGate provides a structured workflow for completing, reviewing, and approving FRIAs. Each assessment captures the rights considered, mitigations proposed, and the identity of the approver — all in the immutable audit trail.

Incident Reporting — Article 73

Operators of high-risk AI must report serious incidents to the relevant authority within 15 days. Serious incidents include death, serious harm to health, critical infrastructure disruption, or infringement of fundamental rights. HelixGate tracks the countdown automatically when an incident is classified as serious.

General-Purpose AI Models — Article 53

Foundation models carry obligations around transparency, capability documentation, and systemic risk assessment. HelixGate's model register links each model to its dependent services, recording provider documentation, capability assessments, and systemic risk status.

Post-Market Monitoring — Article 72

High-risk AI systems require ongoing monitoring after deployment. HelixGate schedules periodic reviews attached to the relevant service record. Completed reviews are logged with reviewer identity, findings, and outcome.

Risk Classification — Articles 6-7

Four tiers: Unacceptable (prohibited), High (full obligations), Limited (transparency), and Minimal (voluntary). Classification is stored against existing service catalogue records so owner, lifecycle, supplier, and contract data carry through without re-entry.

Enforcement Timeline

The regulation is in force. Prohibitions on unacceptable-risk AI apply first, followed by high-risk obligations across 2025-2027. Organisations should be classifying their AI systems and establishing governance processes now.

Related modules

Governance that connects across your platform.

Get Started

Govern your AI systems with confidence.

Meet EU AI Act obligations without building a parallel compliance infrastructure. HelixGate connects AI governance to the data you already maintain.