GCC Government · Health · Education
Accelerate your AI mandate with clear institutional governance.
AI decisions cross Technology, Data, Security, Legal, Procurement and the business. Threshold makes clear what each function owns, what leadership needs to decide, and what evidence supports the institution’s position.
Threshold Regulatory Register
Institutional applicability record5 GCC jurisdictions
Provenance
Primary source / issuing-body record
Applicability
Institution-specific
Legal interpretation
Recorded for counsel where required
Jurisdictions
UAE
Saudi Arabia
Qatar
Oman
Bahrain
Evidence RegisterAI approval authority
Decision route
Confirmed
Approval record
In place
Decision owner
Named
Security evidence
Required before production
Threshold Assessment
Governance & accountability
Declared baseline
Governed
Evidence-supported position
Governed
Evidence coverageFull
Decision recordProduction approval authority is documented and the accountable owner is identified.
ILLUSTRATIVE ONLY · NOT A CLIENT RESULT
34Regulatory and governance instruments
5GCC jurisdictions
6Governance dimensions
62Assessment indicators
Assessment, not certification, assurance, legal advice or a compliance determination.
01The institutional problem
Every new AI use brings the same institutional questions with it.
Each function keeps authority over its own work. The institution needs a consistent answer where decisions cross functions or require leadership.
Q-01
What governs it?Which laws, regulations and internal rules apply, and where is legal interpretation required?
Q-02
Where is it in use?Which systems are in use, which functions operate them, what data they touch and what decisions they influence?
Q-03
Who decides?Which decisions sit with the function, which need another authority and which belong with leadership?
When those decisions do not keep pace with AI use, the institution accumulates accountability debt. Each new use has to reopen questions that should already have an institutional answer.
02The Threshold Assessment
The Assessment starts with the position the institution states at the outset.
Declared baseline
Governed
The governance position stated by the institution at the outset.
→
Evidence-supported position
Developing
The highest position supported by the evidence produced.
Where the declared baseline and the evidence-supported position differ, the difference is itself a finding.
01Governance and accountability
02Data readiness and privacy
03Strategy and use case management
04Workforce readiness
05Vendor and procurement
06Incident response and risk
Each Dimension carries its own position. There is no overall institutional score. A Dimension can be supported at Governed and still contain a material finding. Regulatory findings are reported separately.
03What leadership receives
Evidence establishes the current position.
Leadership establishes the owned position.
Threshold takes the findings to leadership, where the decisions that need to apply across the institution are made and recorded.
Discuss your institution →
AI Use Policy
The institution’s documented position on approved use, prohibited use and escalation.
Accountability Map
Named accountable owners against material AI decisions, with system ownership, operating responsibility and oversight kept distinct.
Governance Brief
A concise leadership record suitable for a minister, board, regulator or audit committee.
Accountability map · extractEducation
Student progression flagsDecision owner confirmed
Admissions ranking supportNo decision owner identified
Research grant prioritisationDecision owner disputed
ILLUSTRATIVE ONLY · NOT A CLIENT RESULT
Committee oversight does not remove the need for identifiable accountability. Decision accountability is recorded separately from system ownership.
The institution also receives the evidence and regulatory records behind the Assessment findings.
GCC Government · Health · Education
Accelerate your AI mandate with clear institutional governance.
AI decisions cross Technology, Data, Security, Legal, Procurement and the business. Threshold makes clear what each function owns, what leadership needs to decide, and what evidence supports the institution’s position.
Evidence register
AI approval authority
Decision route confirmed
Threshold Assessment
Governance & accountability
Declared baseline
Governed
Evidence-supported position
Governed
Evidence coverageFull
Decision recordProduction approval authority is documented and the accountable owner is identified.
ILLUSTRATIVE ONLY · NOT A CLIENT RESULT
Threshold Regulatory Register
5 GCC jurisdictions
34
Regulatory and governance instruments
Assessment, not certification, assurance, legal advice or a compliance determination.
01The institutional problem
Every new AI use brings the same institutional questions with it.
Each function keeps authority over its own work. The institution needs a consistent answer where decisions cross functions or require leadership.
Q-01What governs it?
Q-02Where is it in use?
Q-03Who decides?
When those decisions do not keep pace with AI use, the institution accumulates accountability debt. Each new use has to reopen questions that should already have an institutional answer.
02The Threshold Assessment
The Assessment starts with the position the institution states at the outset.
Declared baseline
Governed
↓
Evidence-supported position
Developing
Lower, equal to, or higher than the declared baseline.
Where the declared baseline and the evidence-supported position differ, the difference is itself a finding.
01Governance and accountability
02Data readiness and privacy
03Strategy and use case management
04Workforce readiness
05Vendor and procurement
06Incident response and risk
Each Dimension carries its own position. There is no overall institutional score. A Dimension can be supported at Governed and still contain a material finding. Regulatory findings are reported separately.
03What leadership receives
Evidence establishes the current position.
Leadership establishes the owned position.
Threshold takes the findings to leadership, where the decisions that need to apply across the institution are made and recorded.
Output 01
AI Use Policy
The institution’s documented position on approved use, prohibited use and escalation.
Output 02
Accountability Map
Named accountable owners against material AI decisions, with system ownership, operating responsibility and oversight kept distinct.
Output 03
Governance Brief
A concise leadership record suitable for a minister, board, regulator or audit committee.
Discuss your institution →
Accountability map · extractEducation
Student progression flags
Decision owner confirmed
Admissions ranking support
No decision owner identified
Research grant prioritisation
Decision owner disputed
ILLUSTRATIVE ONLY · NOT A CLIENT RESULT