10filers, current period
3the period before
6controls it touches
4frameworks
The long view
Filings containing this phrase, every month since 2008. The last
point is the current month and is still filling, so it always looks lower than it will be.
2008
peak 5 in February 2024
2026
Who disclosed it
From SEC full-text search over 8-K filings. Every row links to the filing itself.
| Company | Form | Filed | |
|---|
| Catalyst Crew Technologies Corp. CCTC | 10-K/A | 2026-05-04 | filing |
| TUCSON ELECTRIC POWER CO | 10-Q | 2026-05-06 | filing |
| Global AI, Inc. GLAI | 10-K | 2026-05-28 | filing |
| BayCom Corp BCML | 10-Q | 2026-05-11 | filing |
| SharonAI Holdings Inc. | 10-Q | 2026-05-15 | filing |
| Yext, Inc. YEXT | 10-Q | 2026-06-02 | filing |
| Central Plains Bancshares, Inc. CPBI | 10-K | 2026-06-18 | filing |
| Nkarta, Inc. NKTX | 10-Q | 2026-05-12 | filing |
| Ondas Inc. ONDS | 8-K | 2026-05-18 | filing |
| RIVERVIEW BANCORP INC RVSB | 10-K | 2026-06-12 | filing |
The full search on EDGAR
Which industries file it
Companies grouped by the industry classification on their own filing. A count, not a
survey.
| Industry | | Companies |
|---|
| Banking | | 19 |
| Software and IT services | | 10 |
| Holding and investment offices | | 7 |
| Chemicals and pharmaceuticals | | 5 |
| Retail | | 3 |
| Health services | | 2 |
| Industrial machinery | | 2 |
| Electronics and electrical equipment | | 2 |
| Professional and social services | | 2 |
| Wood, paper and printing | | 1 |
What it obligates
Our corpus holds 6 controls across
4 frameworks whose text speaks to this. Not a judgement:
these controls say so, and each is one lookup from its source document. Ordered by how much each
framework has to say about it, so the one that will cost you the most work is first. Every name
opens that framework in the corpus.
What an auditor will ask you to produce
The artefacts named on those controls, most frequently cited first.
- Value elicitation + categories + stakeholder mapping + workshops + value scenarios
- Value prioritisation + AHP + MCDA + trade-off analysis + ethical framework selection per context
- IEEE 7001 transparency levels per stakeholder + technical means + UI/UX evidence
- IEEE 7002 privacy by design + 7003 bias considerations + bias measurement (Aequitas/Fairlearn/AIF360)
- IEEE 7000-2021 applicability assessment + system scope + ethical concern relevance per project
- Value-Based Engineering process adoption + organisational charter + integration with system engineering
- IEEE 7000 family alignment matrix + 7001 Transparency + 7002 Privacy + 7003 Bias + 7010 Wellbeing applicable
- Coordination with EU AI Act + NIST AI RMF + ISO/IEC 42001 + ISO/IEC 23894 risk + OECD AI Principles
How it usually fails
Recorded when each control was verified against its source. This is where programmes
that think they are covered turn out not to be.
- Value elicitation theoretical (no real stakeholder workshops)
- Prioritisation arbitrary (no MCDA or AHP methodology)
- IEEE 7001 transparency not differentiated by stakeholder
- Privacy + bias considered separately (not integrated)
- IEEE 7000 referenced but VBE process not actually adopted
- Family standards not coordinated (using 7000 without 7001/7002/7003 where applicable)
Where this comes from
The left half is public record: SEC full-text search over 8-K filings, counted across a
14 day window against the equivalent window before it. You can check
every row.
The right half is ours: 723 frameworks and
20,473 controls, 531 of those frameworks verified against
their source documents, with the auditor evidence and common failure modes recorded control by
control. Controls appear here because their own text names this term.
Today's edition ·
How programmes fail ·
The obligation index