Appendix C — Seven-Layer Implementation Checklist

This checklist provides a practical tool for organizations to assess their implementation progress across the Seven-Layer RAGF Governance Architecture. Each layer is broken down into specific implementation items that can be evaluated on a simple scale.

Instructions: For each item, assess your organization’s current implementation status using the following scale:

• ✅ Implemented — Fully implemented and operational
• ⚠️ Partial — Partially implemented or in progress
• ❌ Not Started — Not yet implemented or not started
• N/A — Not applicable to your organization

---

Layer 1: Righteousness Foundation

Purpose: To establish the fundamental values, principles, and ethical commitments that anchor all subsequent governance activities.

Section 1.1: Core Values

#	Implementation Item	Implemented	Partial	Not Started	N/A
1.1.1	The organization has defined its commitment to the Five Pillars of AI Righteousness (Integrity, Justice, Stewardship, Wisdom, Beneficence)	☐	☐	☐	☐
1.1.2	The Five Pillars have been translated into specific ethical principles relevant to the organization’s AI activities	☐	☐	☐	☐
1.1.3	Executive leadership has visibly and actively committed to the righteousness governance initiative	☐	☐	☐	☐
1.1.4	The righteousness vision has been communicated across the organization	☐	☐	☐	☐
1.1.5	A formal Righteousness Charter or equivalent document exists	☐	☐	☐	☐

Section 1.2: Leadership Commitment

#	Implementation Item	Implemented	Partial	Not Started	N/A
1.2.1	Leadership demonstrates visible commitment to righteous AI through public statements and actions	☐	☐	☐	☐
1.2.2	Leadership has allocated sufficient resources (budget, personnel, tools) for AI governance	☐	☐	☐	☐
1.2.3	Leadership participates in regular AI governance reviews	☐	☐	☐	☐
1.2.4	Leadership holds themselves and others accountable for AI righteousness	☐	☐	☐	☐
1.2.5	Leadership models righteous behavior in AI-related decisions	☐	☐	☐	☐

Section 1.3: Organizational Awareness

#	Implementation Item	Implemented	Partial	Not Started	N/A
1.3.1	Employees can articulate the organization’s AI righteousness principles	☐	☐	☐	☐
1.3.2	AI righteousness principles are included in onboarding and training	☐	☐	☐	☐
1.3.3	Regular communication about AI righteousness occurs across the organization	☐	☐	☐	☐
1.3.4	Employees feel empowered to raise righteousness concerns	☐	☐	☐	☐
1.3.5	There is a shared understanding of righteousness across teams and departments	☐	☐	☐	☐

---

Layer 2: Policy and Process

Purpose: To translate foundational values into actionable policies, procedures, and governance structures.

Section 2.1: AI Governance Policies

#	Implementation Item	Implemented	Partial	Not Started	N/A
2.1.1	Written AI governance policies exist and are accessible	☐	☐	☐	☐
2.1.2	Policies operationalize the Five Pillars in the context of AI development and deployment	☐	☐	☐	☐
2.1.3	Data governance policies are in place	☐	☐	☐	☐
2.1.4	Algorithmic fairness policies are in place	☐	☐	☐	☐
2.1.5	Transparency and explainability policies are in place	☐	☐	☐	☐

Section 2.2: Governance Structures

#	Implementation Item	Implemented	Partial	Not Started	N/A
2.2.1	Clear roles and responsibilities for AI governance are defined	☐	☐	☐	☐
2.2.2	A governance board or committee oversees AI governance	☐	☐	☐	☐
2.2.3	An AI ethics committee provides ethical guidance	☐	☐	☐	☐
2.2.4	A compliance function monitors AI governance	☐	☐	☐	☐
2.2.5	A risk management function identifies and manages AI risks	☐	☐	☐	☐

Section 2.3: Procedures and Workflows

#	Implementation Item	Implemented	Partial	Not Started	N/A
2.3.1	Procedures for implementing governance policies are documented	☐	☐	☐	☐
2.3.2	Workflows for AI governance activities are established	☐	☐	☐	☐
2.3.3	Employees understand and follow established procedures	☐	☐	☐	☐
2.3.4	Procedures are reviewed and updated regularly	☐	☐	☐	☐
2.3.5	Procedures include clear escalation paths	☐	☐	☐	☐

---

Layer 3: Map and Analyze

Purpose: To identify, inventory, and analyze AI systems and their associated risks from a righteousness perspective.

Section 3.1: AI Inventory

#	Implementation Item	Implemented	Partial	Not Started	N/A
3.1.1	A comprehensive inventory of all AI systems exists	☐	☐	☐	☐
3.1.2	The inventory is maintained and updated regularly	☐	☐	☐	☐
3.1.3	AI systems are classified by risk level	☐	☐	☐	☐
3.1.4	AI systems are classified by function and data sensitivity	☐	☐	☐	☐
3.1.5	AI systems are classified by impact level	☐	☐	☐	☐

Section 3.2: Risk Assessment

#	Implementation Item	Implemented	Partial	Not Started	N/A
3.2.1	Data flows are mapped and understood	☐	☐	☐	☐
3.2.2	Stakeholders are identified and engaged	☐	☐	☐	☐
3.2.3	Risk assessments are conducted for high-impact AI systems	☐	☐	☐	☐
3.2.4	Risks are assessed against the Five Pillars	☐	☐	☐	☐
3.2.5	Risk assessments are documented and reviewed	☐	☐	☐	☐

Section 3.3: Context Analysis

#	Implementation Item	Implemented	Partial	Not Started	N/A
3.3.1	The operational context of each AI system is understood	☐	☐	☐	☐
3.3.2	The regulatory context of each AI system is understood	☐	☐	☐	☐
3.3.3	The social context of each AI system is understood	☐	☐	☐	☐
3.3.4	The ethical context of each AI system is understood	☐	☐	☐	☐
3.3.5	Contextual factors are documented and reviewed	☐	☐	☐	☐

---

Layer 4: Measure and Monitor

Purpose: To establish quantitative and qualitative measures of AI righteousness and to monitor performance over time.

Section 4.1: Metrics Definition

#	Implementation Item	Implemented	Partial	Not Started	N/A
4.1.1	Metrics are established for Integrity	☐	☐	☐	☐
4.1.2	Metrics are established for Justice	☐	☐	☐	☐
4.1.3	Metrics are established for Stewardship	☐	☐	☐	☐
4.1.4	Metrics are established for Wisdom	☐	☐	☐	☐
4.1.5	Metrics are established for Beneficence	☐	☐	☐	☐

Section 4.2: RI Assessment

#	Implementation Item	Implemented	Partial	Not Started	N/A
4.2.1	RI-D assessments are conducted for developers	☐	☐	☐	☐
4.2.2	RI-P assessments are conducted for providers	☐	☐	☐	☐
4.2.3	RI-O assessments are conducted for the organization	☐	☐	☐	☐
4.2.4	RI-A assessments are conducted for AI agents	☐	☐	☐	☐
4.2.5	RI-R assessments are conducted for robots	☐	☐	☐	☐

Section 4.3: Continuous Monitoring

#	Implementation Item	Implemented	Partial	Not Started	N/A
4.3.1	Continuous monitoring systems are in place	☐	☐	☐	☐
4.3.2	Monitoring data is collected and analyzed	☐	☐	☐	☐
4.3.3	Baselines are established for measurement	☐	☐	☐	☐
4.3.4	Regular reports are produced and reviewed	☐	☐	☐	☐
4.3.5	Monitoring results are communicated to stakeholders	☐	☐	☐	☐

---

Layer 5: Manage and Control

Purpose: To implement controls, safeguards, and interventions that ensure AI systems operate within righteous boundaries.

Section 5.1: Technical Controls

#	Implementation Item	Implemented	Partial	Not Started	N/A
5.1.1	Bias detection tools are deployed	☐	☐	☐	☐
5.1.2	Transparency mechanisms are deployed	☐	☐	☐	☐
5.1.3	Action boundaries are enforced	☐	☐	☐	☐
5.1.4	Security safeguards are in place	☐	☐	☐	☐
5.1.5	Technical controls are tested and updated	☐	☐	☐	☐

Section 5.2: Human Oversight

#	Implementation Item	Implemented	Partial	Not Started	N/A
5.2.1	Meaningful human review exists for critical AI decisions	☐	☐	☐	☐
5.2.2	Human oversight roles are defined and staffed	☐	☐	☐	☐
5.2.3	Human overseers are adequately trained	☐	☐	☐	☐
5.2.4	Human-in-the-loop controls are maintained	☐	☐	☐	☐
5.2.5	Oversight activities are documented	☐	☐	☐	☐

Section 5.3: Incident Response

#	Implementation Item	Implemented	Partial	Not Started	N/A
5.3.1	Incident response procedures are in place	☐	☐	☐	☐
5.3.2	Incident response teams are identified and trained	☐	☐	☐	☐
5.3.3	Incident response procedures are tested regularly	☐	☐	☐	☐
5.3.4	Incidents are documented and reviewed	☐	☐	☐	☐
5.3.5	Lessons learned from incidents are incorporated	☐	☐	☐	☐

---

Layer 6: Assess Impact

Purpose: To evaluate the broader impacts of AI systems on individuals, communities, and society, and to assess the effectiveness of governance activities.

Section 6.1: Impact Assessment

#	Implementation Item	Implemented	Partial	Not Started	N/A
6.1.1	Social impact assessments are conducted	☐	☐	☐	☐
6.1.2	Ethical impact assessments are conducted	☐	☐	☐	☐
6.1.3	Environmental impact assessments are conducted	☐	☐	☐	☐
6.1.4	Human rights impact assessments are conducted	☐	☐	☐	☐
6.1.5	Impact assessments are documented and reviewed	☐	☐	☐	☐

Section 6.2: Stakeholder Engagement

#	Implementation Item	Implemented	Partial	Not Started	N/A
6.2.1	Stakeholders are identified for each AI system	☐	☐	☐	☐
6.2.2	Affected communities are engaged	☐	☐	☐	☐
6.2.3	Stakeholder feedback is collected and incorporated	☐	☐	☐	☐
6.2.4	Stakeholder concerns are addressed	☐	☐	☐	☐
6.2.5	Stakeholder engagement is documented	☐	☐	☐	☐

Section 6.3: Governance Effectiveness

#	Implementation Item	Implemented	Partial	Not Started	N/A
6.3.1	Governance activities are evaluated for effectiveness	☐	☐	☐	☐
6.3.2	Unintended consequences are identified and documented	☐	☐	☐	☐
6.3.3	Alignment with the Five Pillars is reviewed	☐	☐	☐	☐
6.3.4	Lessons learned are documented	☐	☐	☐	☐
6.3.5	Lessons learned are applied to improve governance	☐	☐	☐	☐

---

Layer 7: Sustain and Improve

Purpose: To ensure that righteousness governance is not a one-time effort but a continuous, evolving practice.

Section 7.1: Review and Update

#	Implementation Item	Implemented	Partial	Not Started	N/A
7.1.1	Governance policies are reviewed regularly	☐	☐	☐	☐
7.1.2	Governance procedures are reviewed regularly	☐	☐	☐	☐
7.1.3	Governance controls are reviewed regularly	☐	☐	☐	☐
7.1.4	Updates are made based on review findings	☐	☐	☐	☐
7.1.5	Reviews are documented	☐	☐	☐	☐

Section 7.2: Feedback and Improvement

#	Implementation Item	Implemented	Partial	Not Started	N/A
7.2.1	Feedback from measurement is incorporated	☐	☐	☐	☐
7.2.2	Feedback from assessments is incorporated	☐	☐	☐	☐
7.2.3	Feedback from stakeholders is incorporated	☐	☐	☐	☐
7.2.4	Continuous improvement processes are in place	☐	☐	☐	☐
7.2.5	Improvement is tracked and measured	☐	☐	☐	☐

Section 7.3: Capability Development

#	Implementation Item	Implemented	Partial	Not Started	N/A
7.3.1	Training is provided to build governance capabilities	☐	☐	☐	☐
7.3.2	Best practices are shared across the organization	☐	☐	☐	☐
7.3.3	External best practices are monitored and adopted	☐	☐	☐	☐
7.3.4	RGS is tracked to ensure continuous improvement	☐	☐	☐	☐
7.3.5	Governance capabilities are evaluated and developed	☐	☐	☐	☐

---

Summary Scorecard

Layer Implementation Score

Layer	Total Items	Implemented	Partial	Not Started	Score (%)	Status
Layer 1: Foundation	15	___	___	___	___%	___
Layer 2: Policy and Process	15	___	___	___	___%	___
Layer 3: Map and Analyze	15	___	___	___	___%	___
Layer 4: Measure and Monitor	15	___	___	___	___%	___
Layer 5: Manage and Control	15	___	___	___	___%	___
Layer 6: Assess Impact	15	___	___	___	___%	___
Layer 7: Sustain and Improve	15	___	___	___	___%	___
Total	105	___	___	___	___%	___

---

Score Calculation

Each Layer Score (%) = (Implemented Count ÷ Total Items) × 100
Overall Score (%) = (Sum of 7 Layer Scores) ÷ 7

Status Interpretation

Score Range	Status	Description
80–100%	Fully Implemented	The layer is fully implemented and operating effectively
60–79%	Proficient	The layer is largely implemented with room for improvement
40–59%	Developing	The layer is partially implemented and needs further development
20–39%	Emerging	The layer is at an early stage and needs significant improvement
0–19%	Not Started	The layer has not yet been implemented

---

Implementation Priority Matrix

Layer	Score (%)	Priority	Recommended Actions	Owner	Timeline
Layer 1: Foundation	___%	High/Medium/Low	___	___	___
Layer 2: Policy and Process	___%	High/Medium/Low	___	___	___
Layer 3: Map and Analyze	___%	High/Medium/Low	___	___	___
Layer 4: Measure and Monitor	___%	High/Medium/Low	___	___	___
Layer 5: Manage and Control	___%	High/Medium/Low	___	___	___
Layer 6: Assess Impact	___%	High/Medium/Low	___	___	___
Layer 7: Sustain and Improve	___%	High/Medium/Low	___	___	___

---

Implementation Roadmap

Phase	Layers	Focus	Timeline
Phase 1: Foundation	Layer 1, Layer 2	Establish values, policies, and governance structures	3-6 months
Phase 2: Assessment	Layer 3, Layer 4	Map AI systems, assess risks, and establish measurement	6-12 months
Phase 3: Control	Layer 5	Implement controls and safeguards	6-12 months
Phase 4: Evaluation	Layer 6	Assess impact and stakeholder engagement	9-18 months
Phase 5: Maturity	Layer 7	Continuous improvement and capability development	Ongoing

---

Next Steps

Step	Action	Owner	Timeline
1	Complete the assessment for all seven layers
2	Identify priority gaps (lowest scores, highest risk)
3	Develop action plans for priority gaps
4	Implement corrective actions
5	Re-assess periodically (recommended: annually)

---