Skip to main content
Back to Assessment Areas

AML Governance Assessment

Evaluate your AML governance framework

15 questions • 10-12 min

This assessment evaluates the effectiveness of your organisation's AML governance structure, leadership engagement, and oversight mechanisms. It helps identify strengths and weaknesses in your governance framework.

Instructions

  • Answer all questions honestly based on your organisation's current approach
  • Select the option that most closely matches your situation
  • Complete all sections to receive a comprehensive evaluation
  • Your answers are confidential and not stored on our servers

About This Self-Assessment

This tool helps institutions evaluate their AML governance framework based on common regulatory expectations and industry best practices (e.g., FATF, Wolfsberg Principles). It covers key areas like board oversight, governance structures, policy frameworks, and the three lines of defense model.

Disclaimer: This is a self-assessment tool for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal or regulatory advice. Your responses are processed locally in your browser and are not stored or transmitted. For a comprehensive review, consult with compliance experts or request a personalised demo of iTrack.

Section 1 of 4•Board & Senior Management Oversight
0% Complete

Assessment Sections

Board & Senior Management Oversight

This section evaluates how your board and senior management oversee AML compliance activities and demonstrate a culture of compliance.

How frequently does your board of directors or equivalent governing body receive reports and updates on AML matters?

Quarterly or more frequently
Regular detailed AML reporting as a standing agenda item
Semi-annually
Periodic dedicated AML reporting with key metrics
Annually
Annual AML reports covering high-level information
Irregularly or only when significant issues arise
No regular reporting schedule for AML matters

Does your organisation have a board member or senior executive with specific responsibility for AML compliance?

Yes, with dedicated responsibility and relevant expertise
Responsible individual has compliance background and dedicated focus on AML
Yes, but responsible for multiple compliance areas
Responsible individual oversees AML along with other compliance responsibilities
Yes, but with only general oversight
A designated individual exists but has limited involvement in AML matters
No specific designation of responsibility
No clear ownership of AML compliance at senior level

How would you describe senior management's involvement in promoting a culture of AML compliance?

Proactive and highly visible
Senior management regularly communicates about AML importance and leads by example
Supportive but not highly visible
Management supports compliance efforts but with limited direct involvement
Reactive to compliance issues
Management engages primarily when problems arise
Minimal or token involvement
Little evidence of management commitment to AML compliance

How does your board or senior management demonstrate commitment to adequate resourcing of the AML function?

Consider budget allocation, staffing levels, and technology investment.

Strategic investment with regular resource reviews
Proactively ensures resources are aligned with risk and regulatory expectations
Provides adequate resources upon justified request
Responds positively to resource requests with appropriate justification
Provides minimum necessary resources
Resources are allocated but often constrained or difficult to secure
Reluctant to allocate sufficient resources
Resources are consistently insufficient for effective compliance
Section 1 of 4