US edition
Discuss your workflow

For compliance teams · In development

You screen the names.
We help clear
the alerts.

A workspace being built for your analysts to investigate sanctions alerts and document their decisions.

Keep your existing screening provider. Bring the original alert, compare the evidence and record a reasoned outcome.

Your analysts perform the review. Your firm retains the final customer decision.

Review workspace Concept

Case EX-001 · Entirely fictional

Same name.
Identity still to establish.

Customer company ALDER TRADING Fictional register record A
Flagged candidate ALDER TRADING Fictional listed entity B
Original trigger Exact name match
Review needed Entity identity & history
01
A matching name starts the investigation.

The evidence and the analyst’s reasoning determine the assessment.

Open the evidence example

Illustrative workflow. No real customer or sanctioned entity.

A clear division of work

Your screener finds a hit.
Your team investigates it.

IA is being developed as software for the reviewing team. This proposed workflow does not include IA providing outsourced analysts.

01 / Your screening provider

Raises the alert.

Identifies a possible match and supplies the original subject, candidate and trigger.

02 / Intelligent Analyst

Structures the review.

Is being built to connect that alert with the evidence considered, the analyst’s reason and the recorded outcome.

03 / Your analyst & firm

Make the decisions.

Your analyst assesses identity and records a disposition. Your firm decides the customer action under its procedures.

Explore the proposed workflow

A decision you can
follow back to its evidence.

One fictional alert, three evidence situations. See why missing information must remain visible and why a different field is not an automatic clearance.

All names, identifiers, sources and findings here are invented for explanation. No live matching or clearing occurs.

EX-001 · Original alert retained Synthetic example

Evidence considered for this alert
Evidence Customer subject Flagged candidate
Show illustrative source notes
Client analyst’s illustrative reason

This records an assessment of one original alert. It is not a blanket clearance or a decision to transact.

Scope & availability

The foundation exists.
Alert intake comes next.

The current engine screens name files. The workflow shown above for reviewing your provider’s original alerts is being developed.

Existing · In validation

Screening, cases and records

  • Name-file screening within OFAC SDN scope
  • Cases for flagged engine results
  • Client analyst dispositions and recorded reasons
  • Downloadable engine records and exports
Planned · Not yet available

Your provider’s alert workflow

  • Import the original alert and candidate
  • Connect sourced identity evidence
  • Link the assessment to the original alert
  • Return the documented outcome or escalation

Current validation excludes PEP, adverse media and ownership checks. We make no production-performance, clearance-rate or cost-saving claim. Real client data is not accepted in this phase pending the required legal and data-processing arrangements.

A few important distinctions.

Does IA replace our screening provider?

The proposed clearing workflow complements your existing provider. It is designed to assess the original alert and specific candidate that provider identified.

Can a second screen with no hit clear an alert?

No. Failure to retrieve a candidate in a new screen does not resolve the original alert. Its identity question still needs evidence and an assessment.

Does a record whose hash checks out prove the decision was correct?

No. Record integrity and decision correctness are separate. A hash check supports comparison of the bytes against the expected hash; it does not establish the truth of the evidence or correctness of the assessment.

Start with your process

Tell us where
the review gets difficult.

We’ll discuss your screening provider, the evidence available to your analysts and how decisions are recorded. The aim is to assess workflow fit and what a future validation would require.

A workflow discussion, not live onboarding. Please do not send client names, alert files or identity documents.

Discuss your workflow

Opens your email app. Privacy information.