The standard for public confidence in AI.

People trust businesses with life-changing decisions.
AVAAS certifies the AI behind them.

Schedule Discovery Call → See how it works →
Why this matters

Behind every unvalidated AI decision is a person who trusted the system.

$2B+
in lawsuit exposure from unvalidated AI deployments
90%
of UnitedHealth AI denials reversed on appeal
0
had independent evaluation before deployment
What we believe

Trust isn’t a feature. It’s an obligation.

Organizations that deploy AI owe something to the people affected by it: proof that the system is fair, explainable, and aligned with human values. Not a promise. Not a policy document. Proof. That’s what we provide.

Structural independence

We don't sell software to the companies we evaluate. No consulting relationship, no platform license, no conflict of interest. The independence regulators and procurement committees require.

Diagnosis + prescription

Not just a score — the root cause, the exact fix, and the projected improvement. causal attribution decomposes every finding to the specific variables driving it.

Streamlined evaluation

Upload your AI's input-output data and receive independent evaluation with causal decomposition and prescriptive remediation. Engagement scoped to your systems, jurisdictions, and risk profile.

See the real-world failures that prove why this matters →
The independence question

You wouldn’t let a student grade their own exam.

The organizations building AI governance tools are doing important work. But when the same company selling you the software also evaluates your compliance, the independence a regulator needs isn’t there. Independence isn’t a feature you can add to a platform. It’s a structural relationship between the evaluator and the evaluated. We built AVAAS around that principle.

GOVERNANCE PLATFORMS
Inventory AI systems. Classify risks. Build policies. Essential — but the vendor selling the software is grading its own test.
CONSULTING AUDITORS
Genuine independence. Rigorous evaluation. But weeks per engagement and limited by human throughput.
YOUR INTERNAL TEAM
Tests for bias. Validates accuracy. Documents compliance. Critical — but internal testing isn't independent testing.
AVAAS
Independent validation. Causal decomposition. Prescriptive remediation. Patent-protected capabilities.
See detailed comparison table and governance flow →
What you receive

A certification report your regulator will actually read.

Not a 200-page compliance document that sits in a drawer. A clear, structured evaluation with a letter grade, causal analysis, and specific fixes designed to be shared with regulators, boards, and customers.

LETTER GRADE
Every evaluation produces a clear grade.
A
Unconditional certification. No findings above advisory level. Your system meets every applicable standard.
B
Certified with conditions. Findings require remediation within 90 days. Certification valid during the remediation period.
C
Provisional. Significant findings. Certification withheld pending remediation and re-evaluation.
F
Not certified. Critical findings. System should not be deployed in its current form.
REPORT CONTENTS
Every report contains six sections.
Executive summary — overall grade, key metrics, validator consensus, and regulatory coverage at a glance.
Findings — each issue with severity, description, applicable regulation, and Irreversibility Index score.
causal attribution — which specific variables drive each finding, with contribution percentages.
Prescriptive remediation — the exact fix for each finding, with projected improvement after implementation.
Regulatory mapping — every finding mapped to applicable frameworks across all relevant jurisdictions.
Certification statement — digitally signed, publicly verifiable, with validity period and verification hash.
View a sample certification report →
A growing ecosystem

We’re not the only ones who believe AI needs independent evaluation.

AIUC shares our conviction that AI systems need independent certification. They’ve built a credible standard and certified real enterprises. We admire the work. Where we differ is in how we think evaluation should be grounded — not in what an authority decided matters, but in what the people affected by the AI actually need.

DIFFERENCE 1
Streamlined, not audit-gated
AIUC-1 certification requires an authorized auditor like Schellman, with a traditional engagement cadence. AVAAS delivers evaluation through a streamlined engagement process. Enterprises work directly with our team rather than waiting for an authorized third-party auditor to become available.
DIFFERENCE 2
Customer-authored evaluation criteria
AIUC-1 is a fixed standard that AIUC authored. AVAAS grounds evaluation in customer-authored Living Constitutions, so the measurement is contextual to what your enterprise actually values rather than what a third party decided matters.
DIFFERENCE 3
Irreversibility + harm-of-inaction
AIUC-1 covers six risk domains where irreversibility appears as a sub-category at most. AVAAS measures irreversibility and harm-of-inaction as dedicated evaluation dimensions: the impact of what your AI did that it can’t undo, and what it failed to do when action was required.
AIUC is the SOC-2 model for AI agents. AVAAS is the contextual evaluation model for enterprise AI deployments. See the full landscape →

Let’s talk about what your AI owes the people it affects.

Every conversation starts with understanding your systems, your values, and the people your AI touches. No obligation, no pitch deck — just a conversation about what responsible deployment looks like for your organization.

Schedule Discovery Call →
hello@avaas.ai · Response within one business day