Inconsistent source material
Relevant terms appear in different formats, language and document structures.
Regulatory data operations
Turn DORA evidence into structured, reviewable regulatory data.
Extract evidence from ICT contracts, map it to DORA requirements, and maintain a defensible record of how each field was derived and reviewed.
For financial entities, DORA programme teams, ICT risk functions and specialist consultants.
Register status
Action required Needs review
ICT providers
12
Active contracts
27
Records in review
5
Missing information
3
Expiring < 90d
2
Approved records
41
Attention required
- High
Cloud hosting agreement — exit strategy clause not found
Missing information
- High
Payment gateway contract review is overdue
Review overdue
- Medium
Managed SOC services agreement expires in 45 days
Contract expiring
- Medium
Data location extracted from §8.2 awaiting approval
Approval required
Audit & extraction activity
Field approved
Data location · Germany · Compliance Officer
Extraction completed
MSA-2026-041 · 38 candidate facts
Evidence linked
Section 8.2 · Page 14
Evidence-backed workflow
Human review built in
Connected operational records
Traceable decision history
The operational problem
The register needs structure. The evidence rarely arrives that way.
ICT contract information is scattered across clauses, schedules and amendments. Teams need the value, its source, and the decision behind it—not another disconnected spreadsheet.
Interconnected data
Providers, services, functions, contracts and evidence must remain connected.
Review overhead
Repeated manual extraction makes challenge, correction and maintenance harder to control.
Evidence traceability
Know what supports every field
Move from a structured value back to the exact document passage, interpretation and reviewer decision.
Register field / DT-0047
Data location
Underlying evidence
ICT AgreementSection 8.2 · Page 14
“The primary data processing location for the contracted service is Germany…”
Evidence selected
Exact source passage retained
- Field
- Data location
- Value
- Germany
- Source
- ICT Agreement · 8.2 · p.14
- AI confidence
- 96% · illustrative
- Reviewer
- Compliance Officer
- Status
- Approved
Connected records
More than rows in a spreadsheet
Maintain the relationship between the provider, service, agreement, source evidence and the resulting DORA information.
Connected record graph
- 01
Provider
Nordlicht Cloud GmbH
- 02
ICT service
Managed cloud hosting
- 03
Agreement
MSA-2026-041
- 04
Evidence
Section 8.2 · Page 14
- 05
DORA record
Data location · Germany
One workflow across your client portfolio
A repeatable operating model for DORA consultants
Separate client workspaces while applying a consistent approach to contract inventories, evidence review, open findings and review dates.
Workspace control
Keep client records and documents separated by engagement.
Consistent review
Apply the same evidence and approval discipline across assignments.
Clear handover
Retain decisions, open items and audit history for accountable client teams.
Use cases
Built around accountable operational roles
Financial entities
Maintain structured third-party information with evidence and ownership attached.
Compliance and DORA teams
Coordinate interpretation, challenge and approval without losing source context.
DORA consultants
Run a repeatable evidence workflow across multiple client engagements.
ICT third-party risk teams
Connect provider, service and contract records to reviewable control data.
Questions
Clear boundaries from the outset
Focused evaluation
See how your ICT evidence can become structured DORA data.
Bring your current register process, contract sources and review responsibilities to a working product discussion.