Reports communicate clearly and concisely, are easy to understand yet complete enough for informed decisions, balance data, analysis and interpretation with qualitative explanation (more interpretation higher in the organisation) and are tailored to recipients. Reporting policies recognise the different needs of the board, senior management and other levels such as risk committees. The board determines its own reporting requirements, makes sure it asks for and receives what its governance mandate and appetite monitoring need, and tells senior management when reports fall short, including on the balance of detail and qualitative content; senior management likewise sets its own requirements. The bank keeps an inventory and classification of risk data items with a reference to the concepts behind the reports. Supervisors expect clear interpretation of data and trends, and periodic confirmation with recipients that the information is relevant and appropriate in amount and quality.
This control maps to 2 controls across 2 other frameworks. If you already hold one of them, the evidence you collected for it is the starting point here rather than new work.
Every mapping shown was judged rather than inferred from wording similarity, and the ones that failed review are published too. See the coverage reports and what was rejected.
The graph holds this control, the 2 it maps to, and the evidence behind each claim, over MCP and REST.