Compliance tools tell you you're fine.
Get Frank tells you the truth.

Frank is the tool you run on yourself before the audit, the board, or the regulator — not the dashboard you show afterwards. It stamps a scope and an expiry date on your posture, with the named owners and the evidence that earned it — so the person who signs can stand behind what they signed.

Start with obligation visibility See the model Conditional · holds until 2026-12-16
Overall assurance posture
Conditional

Conditional posture holds until 2026-12-16. Identity Service and Incident Management are the binding constraints.

Reading this: confidence is the probability the posture still holds at the decay date. Signals are the individual checks contributing to it.

14 of 18 signals holding.

Coverage
78%
↑ 4 this week
Confidence
0.81
decays 2026-10-01
Open debts
12
3 expire soon
§ 01

Boards don't need more dashboards. They need fewer lies.

Most GRC tools optimise for the moment a certificate issues. Frank optimises for the eleven months in between — when posture decays, ownership drifts, and evidence quietly goes stale. The problem is not your team. It is a category built to manufacture confidence.

Not acceptable

Compliance theatre

  • "One-click compliance" — generate a pass before reality is understood
  • AI-powered maturity scoring that smooths over uncomfortable gaps
  • Fully automated GRC promising outcomes before evidence exists
  • Per-user pricing that punishes accountability roles
  • SSO tax. Activity metering. Hidden exceptions to keep dashboards green
  • Vanity dashboards engineered to stay green between audits
Acceptable

Frank assurance

  • Identify obligations that actually apply — with explicit scope and assumptions
  • Show whether each control works on a Tuesday, not just on audit day
  • Name owners. Surface unowned dependencies. Track exceptions as first-class objects
  • Charge for scope and projections — never for users or activity
  • BYO identity. Essential Eight stays free for SMBs. Evidence referenced in your systems — never hoarded
  • Publish claims with a scope, an expiry, and the evidence lineage that earned them
§ 02

The coverage assertion: a posture you can put your name to.

The coverage assertion is the artefact Frank exists to produce — we stand behind this posture, for this scope, until this date, on this evidence. Every claim links to its obligations, commitments, control reality, and known limitations, so you hand a regulator a credential, not a slide deck.

Anatomy of a coverage assertion

Every claim Frank publishes carries this shape.

Conditional

What it covers
Obligations across regulations, contracts, and buyer commitments — with jurisdiction and source named.
Who stands behind it
A named accountable authority inside your organisation. Not a vendor footer.
What evidence backs it
Controls without contradiction, with lineage from source system to assertion.
What holds it down
Scoped debts and exceptions — each with a named owner and an expected resolution date.
When it stops being defensible
Holds until 2026-10-23. Confidence is the probability the posture still holds at that date.

A regulator, insurer, or buyer verifies provenance — not just trust the publisher. Aligned with verifiable credentials and assurance levels.

§ 03

The canonical model.

Obligation to verifiable claim, without inventing what you don't have. One shape across the platform — same four layers, same expiries, same ownership rules wherever assurance is asserted. Each layer adds explicit structure to the next. Confidence is time-bounded; exceptions are governed; evidence has lineage. Nothing renews itself silently.

Step 01 · Obligation

What applies

Regulations, contracts, and commitments that bind you. Scope, jurisdiction, and the assumptions you're standing on — named.

Step 02 · Commitment

What you said

Obligations translated into commitments your organisation actually made — to customers, regulators, your board — with named owners.

Step 03 · Control reality

What you do

How each commitment is met in practice. Effectiveness, fragility, dependency risk. Exceptions are first-class, not hidden.

Step 04 · Verifiable claim

What you can prove

Machine-consumable trust signals linked to obligations, evidence lineage, scope, and known limitations. Renewable. Auditable.

Signal posture · live example
Payment Gateway · 14 of 18 holding
Conditional
14 holding · 3 conditional · 1 failing holds until 2026-12-16 confidence 0.81
Disclosure
Confidence is a window, not a stamp. Every claim Frank publishes carries an expiry.
§ 04

What you'll find in week one.

Four things Frank looks for in your first week. None of them require an enterprise contract — and none of them are flattering.

An obligation you didn't know applied

A regulation, contract clause, or buyer commitment that has been quietly in scope for months. Surfaced with jurisdiction, source, and the assumption it depends on.

A dependency with no named owner

A backup system, an upstream feed, a vendor — load-bearing but un-owned. Frank treats unowned dependencies as first-class objects, not footnotes.

An assumption no one wrote down

The thing a control implicitly trusts: a tenancy boundary, a key rotation, an SLA. Once named, it stops being silent and starts being defensible.

A claim your own evidence contradicts

A treatment marked complete that stalled months ago. An acceptance whose review window lapsed. Frank surfaces the contradiction between what you recorded and what the evidence shows — before an auditor does.

§ 05

Your risk register says what you typed. Frank says what your evidence does.

Most registers record what you told them: scores you assigned, residuals you declared, a heat map that turns a guess into a coloured square. Frank reads risk as a read-only lens over the canonical model — every risk domain materialises from the obligations, decisions, debts, and assumptions already under assurance, and lights up where the register and the incidents beneath it diverge: a stalled treatment, an acceptance whose review window has lapsed, a residual reduction the incident record disproves. You do not curate it. It resolves to the same coverage assertion as everything else Frank publishes — with one named authority standing behind it.

Three things Frank refuses to do — on principle

No credit for self-reports. The register materialises from the model, or it does not exist. These refusals are the difference — not gaps we apologise for.

  • No heat map A coloured grid launders a judgement into something that reads like a measurement. Frank publishes posture with an expiry, not a quadrant.
  • No self-reported residual A residual score you assigned yourself is an opinion. Frank credits neither the number nor the optimism behind it — only what the evidence shows.
  • No in-app curation If you could edit the register by hand, it would say what you typed again. It is materialised from the model, never maintained inside the app.
§ 06

Principles we ship by

Commitments encoded into the product. None are subject to renegotiation by sales.

Canonical model

One canonical shape across the platform — obligation, commitment, control reality, claim. Each layer has named owners, scoped assumptions, and an expiry. Confidence is a window, not a stamp.

Discomfort is signal

Surfacing gaps, fragility, and dependency risk is the point — not a failure mode. Frank exists to make things uncomfortable enough to act on.

Real ownership

No anonymous controls. A named accountable owner per commitment, with contributors and dependencies made explicit.

No theatre

We reject "one-click compliance" and AI-powered maturity scores. Discomfort you can act on beats reassurance you cannot.

§ 07

Upstream of the audit, on purpose.

Frank is a tool you run on yourself. It is not an auditor, not a certifier, and not a shortcut to either — and the boundaries that keep it that way are structural, not policy. They are why a posture produced in Frank is one you can defend.

Issues no certificate

Frank grades no maturity and issues no pass. It is the dress rehearsal you run before the audit, the attestation, or the assessment — never a substitute for them.

Stores no evidence

Evidence stays in the systems that produce it. Frank references it with lineage and stores none of it — there is no second copy to secure, and no incentive for us to hoard your data.

Will not help you mislead a regulator

If the evidence does not support the claim, Frank will not publish the claim. That is not a limitation. That is the product working.

Pays for no recommendations

No auditor, assessor, or consultant is paid, given quotas, or otherwise incentivised to recommend Frank. Nobody who certifies you can also sell you Frank.

Independence
Frank is never sold inside an audit or advisory engagement. When a practitioner directory exists, listing will be free, earned, and carry no commission.
Start with the uncomfortable answer

What obligations apply to you — and what are you assuming?

The free tier won't certify you, score you, or reassure you. It will tell you what's actually true about your scope. That's where useful work begins.

Who this is not for

We turn buyers away. It saves both of us a renewal.

  1. N01 Organisations seeking reassurance, certification shortcuts, or cosmetic compliance. Refused
  2. N02 Buyers who expect a tool to smooth uncomfortable truths. Refused
  3. N03 Teams unwilling to name ownership, assumptions, or dependency risk. Refused
  4. N04 Sales-led compliance motions where outcomes are promised before reality is understood. Refused