Motion Consulting Group · AI Governance

Prepared for Tulane Energy Institute.

A proposal for an AI-governance baseline. Enter the access key you were provided.

Invalid key
Motion Consulting Group · a Kelly Services company Confidential · Draft for discussion · June 2026
Proposal · AI Governance Baseline

Govern the AI your constituents and your auditors will ask about.

Tulane Energy Institute uses AI in decision-support and constituent-facing workflows — where transparency and accountability are the standard, not the exception. We propose a fixed-scope baseline that inventories the AI estate, scores it across three lenses, and hands you a public-ready posture and roadmap — in weeks, not quarters.

01 · The moment

Why now.

Public bodies are held to a rising bar: the NIST AI Risk Management Framework is the de-facto federal baseline, state-level AI executive actions are setting transparency and inventory requirements, and public-records and procurement obligations increasingly demand a documented basis for AI used in decisions that touch constituents.

To be clear about what we are not saying: nothing in our preliminary review suggests Tulane Energy Institute's AI behaves improperly. Working from public materials only (June 2026), what we observe is that a published basis — model disclosure, accuracy basis, or human-oversight description for AI in decision-sensitive workflows — is not readily locatable. The remedy for a control gap is fast: document, add the right human-in-the-loop gates, and review — which is exactly what the baseline delivers.

02 · The proposal

A fixed-scope AI Inventory & Risk Baseline.

Inventory. Every AI feature, model dependency, and data access across your products and internal tooling — including shadow AI your teams may already be using.
Three-lens posture. One score each for technology rationalization, security, and AI governance — evidence-based, mapped to recognized standards.
Public-accountability control review. A documented oversight basis for AI in decision-support and constituent-facing workflows — disclosure, human oversight, and a bias/disparate-impact review path.
Cost & efficiency read. Where AI spend concentrates and what's recoverable through model right-sizing and caching discipline — governance that pays for itself.

You receive a prioritized remediation roadmap and a posture readout your leadership, owners, and counsel can act on. Where independent attestation is the goal, we prepare the evidence — we never self-certify; formal certification runs through accredited third-party bodies, and the baseline is the on-ramp to ISO/IEC 42001 readiness.

Indicative fee — Focused enterprise

$150K

Indicative range for an organization your size; fixed once we confirm the AI-system count together in the first working session. Standards mapped: NIST AI RMF · ISO/IEC 42001 · NIST CSF 2.0.

03 · How it runs

Three to four weeks, human-led, low-friction.

WeekWhat happensFrom your side
1Working session; access scoping; AI-feature and data-flow inventory begins.One technical contact; product/ops walkthroughs.
2–3Evidence collection; three-lens scoring; sector control review; cost read.Short interviews with product, security, and compliance owners.
4Readout: posture, prioritized roadmap, remediation plan, attestation path.A leadership readout session.

Every step has a human decision gate — nothing is assessed, scored, or reported without your context.

04 · Why us

We build and run — not just assess.

  • Standards-mapped method. Every control we check traces to NIST AI RMF, NIST CSF 2.0, ISO/IEC 42001, OWASP, or MITRE ATLAS — no invented checklists.
  • Honesty as policy. We mark what's real: monitoring isn't claimed live until it's connected; findings are control gaps, never unsubstantiated verdicts.
  • Delivery muscle behind the advice. When the roadmap says build, we stand up the registry, controls, and monitoring and run them — on a deterministic governance engine, independent of the body that attests.
  • Independence respected. Attestation and certification stay structurally separate from remediation — what you show your auditors holds up.
05 · Next step

One working session.

We bring the baseline instrument and a draft inventory built from your public footprint; you bring the people who know the work. Ninety minutes confirms scope, fee, and timeline — and you leave with our preliminary observations either way.

Prepared for Eric Smith, Associate Director. To schedule, reply through your Motion Consulting Group contact. This document is a draft for discussion — nothing here is a finding about your operations; it is the case for documenting what's already true.