ADA Institutional Standard

Public Institutional Reference Standard — Version 1.0

Version 1.0 Date February 2026 Review Annual Cycle Status Public Institutional Reference Standard

Purpose and Scope

ADA defines the minimum structural, governance, contractual, and capital-readiness requirements for enterprises deploying autonomous or semi-autonomous AI agents into production environments.

ADA addresses the institutional architecture necessary for agentic enterprises to be contractable, investable, and insurable under enterprise and institutional scrutiny. It does not address product design, engineering implementation, or operational matters outside the governance perimeter.

Where a domain requirement refers to 'autonomous action,' this includes any agent behaviour that executes without contemporaneous human approval, whether initiated by system logic, model inference, or workflow trigger.

⚠️ Disclaimer and Limitations

ADA is a proprietary institutional reference framework developed by Venture Bench Pty Ltd. It is published for informational and educational purposes.

ADA is not: (a) a regulatory standard, code, or instrument issued by any governmental authority; (b) a certification, accreditation, or compliance verification regime; (c) endorsed, approved, or recognised by any regulator or standards body; (d) a guarantee of operational performance, regulatory compliance, insurability, or commercial success.

The framework is provided without warranty as to completeness, accuracy, or fitness for any particular purpose. Venture Bench has no obligation to update ADA to reflect regulatory, market, or technological developments.

Application of ADA to specific organisational circumstances requires independent professional assessment. Nothing in this document constitutes legal, financial, or professional advice.


Normative Language

TermInterpretation
MUSTAn absolute requirement. Failure to satisfy any MUST requirement precludes ADA Conformance.
MUST NOTAn absolute prohibition.
SHOULDRecommended practice. Departure requires documented rationale.
MAYOptional provision. Included for completeness.

Normative language in this document describes the structural requirements of the ADA framework. It does not create legal obligations, contractual duties, or regulatory compliance requirements. Whether an enterprise chooses to implement ADA, and to what extent, is a matter of independent commercial and professional judgement.


Autonomy Governance

4.1

Autonomy Classification

MUST Maintain a documented autonomy classification for each production agent or agent class.

MUST Classification MUST distinguish between: advisory (recommendations only), semi-autonomous (executes within defined parameters with human override), and fully autonomous (executes without contemporaneous human approval).

SHOULD Classification methodology SHOULD be reviewed at least annually or upon material change to agent capabilities.

4.2

Control Architecture

MUST Define and document the control architecture governing each agent's operational boundaries.

MUST Control architecture MUST include: scope boundaries (what the agent is permitted to do), escalation triggers (conditions under which human review is required), and override mechanisms (how human operators can intervene).

MUST NOT Deploy agents with commitment authority (ability to create, modify, or discharge legal or financial obligations) without documented control architecture that specifically addresses commitment scope.

4.3

Autonomy Drift Monitoring

SHOULD Implement monitoring to detect autonomy drift: expansion of agent behaviour beyond documented scope.

MAY Use automated tooling to support drift detection, provided such tooling does not itself operate outside documented control architecture.


Liability and Contractual Architecture

5.1

Liability Containment

MUST Maintain contractual liability provisions that are proportionate to the agent's autonomy classification and operational scope.

MUST Liability architecture MUST distinguish between: errors in agent execution (the agent did what it was supposed to do, but the outcome was adverse), errors in agent scope (the agent exceeded its documented operational boundaries), and errors in agent governance (control, escalation, or override failures).

MUST NOT Rely on generic SaaS limitation of liability provisions for agents operating at semi-autonomous or fully autonomous classification levels.

5.2

Customer-Facing Agreements

MUST Customer-facing agreements MUST accurately reflect the agent's autonomy classification, data handling practices, and governance commitments.

SHOULD Agreements SHOULD include governance exhibits or schedules documenting control architecture, escalation pathways, and incident classification discipline.

5.3

Upstream Agreements

SHOULD Review upstream model provider agreements for provisions that may constrain or conflict with downstream customer commitments.

SHOULD Identify and document any upstream dependency that could affect service continuity, data handling, or liability allocation.


Data and Model Governance

6.1

Data Provenance

MUST Maintain documented data provenance for all training data used in production agent models.

MUST Provenance documentation MUST be sufficient to substantiate: lawful basis for collection and use, licensing and intellectual property status, and whether customer or third-party data has been used in training.

MUST NOT Use customer data for model training without explicit, informed consent that is separate from general terms of service acceptance.

6.2

Model Governance

MUST Maintain a model governance framework that documents: model versioning and change management, retraining triggers and approval processes, and performance monitoring for production models.

SHOULD Model governance framework SHOULD be reviewed by a cross-functional body (such as an AIOC) rather than solely by engineering or product teams.

6.3

Data Handling

MUST Data handling practices MUST comply with applicable privacy and data protection laws.

SHOULD Where data is processed across jurisdictions, maintain documented cross-border data transfer mechanisms.


Capital and Institutional Readiness

7.1

Governance Documentation

MUST Maintain governance documentation sufficient for institutional due diligence review, including: board or equivalent governance structure, risk management framework, and material contract register.

SHOULD Governance documentation SHOULD be structured for procurement and investor legibility, not solely for internal use.

7.2

Concentration Risk

MUST Identify and document material concentration risks, including: revenue concentration (customer, sector, geography), upstream dependency concentration (model providers, infrastructure), and data source concentration.

SHOULD Maintain a documented plan for concentration risk mitigation where concentration exceeds structural resilience tolerance.

7.3

Institutional Readiness Artefacts

SHOULD Prepare procurement-ready governance artefacts including: AIOC Operating Card (or equivalent), agent autonomy classification register, incident classification and response framework, and data provenance summary.

MAY Engage independent assessment (such as a formal ARAF audit) to produce definitive classification and remediation roadmap for institutional use.


Evidence Requirements

ADA Conformance requires documentary evidence sufficient to demonstrate satisfaction of all mandatory (MUST) requirements across Domains I through IV.

Evidence may include: board or governance body minutes and resolutions, documented policies, procedures, and frameworks, contract extracts or summaries (appropriately redacted), audit reports and assessment outputs, training data provenance registers, and incident response records and post-incident reviews.

ADA does not prescribe specific evidence formats. Enterprises should maintain evidence in whatever form is proportionate to their scale, complexity, and governance maturity.

Point-in-Time Qualification

Documentary evidence reflects organisational posture at the time of assessment. ADA alignment is not a permanent status. Material changes to autonomy deployment, governance structures, contractual arrangements, or capital posture may affect alignment and should trigger reassessment.


Five Maturity Levels

ADA defines five maturity levels to provide a progression pathway for enterprises building toward full conformance.

L1

Ad Hoc

No formal governance structure. Agent deployment governed by informal practices.

L2

Emerging

Some governance elements in place. Documentation incomplete. Gaps in one or more mandatory domains.

L3

Structured

All mandatory requirements addressed. Documentation substantially complete. Governance processes operational. Minimum for ADA Conformance.

L4

Managed

Governance processes embedded operationally. Evidence maintained continuously. External assessment confirms conformance.

L5

Optimised

Governance architecture is a competitive differentiator. Proactive risk management. Continuous improvement discipline.

ADA Conformance requires satisfaction of all MUST requirements, which corresponds to L3 or above. L1 and L2 represent pre-conformance states.

Conformance Statements

An enterprise that has implemented all mandatory requirements across Domains I through IV may state:

"Aligned with Agentic Durability Architecture (ADA) v1.0"

Such statements:

Enforcement

Venture Bench does not monitor, validate, or enforce third-party alignment claims unless formally engaged. Venture Bench reserves the right to publicly clarify, correct, or challenge alignment statements it reasonably believes to be materially false or misleading.


Governance and Versioning

Founding Stewardship

ADA v1.0 is a proprietary framework developed and published by Venture Bench Pty Ltd. "Founding Steward" reflects initial authorship and ongoing calibration responsibility. Venture Bench is a private commercial entity, not a regulator, standards body, or certification authority. The stated intention to transition stewardship to an independent governance body is aspirational and subject to ecosystem development.

ParameterDetail
Current versionv1.0, February 2026
Review cycleAnnual minimum; interim updates for material regulatory or market developments
Calibration inputsARAF assessment cohort data (anonymised); enterprise procurement feedback; institutional investor diligence feedback
Amendment processMaterial amendments published with version increment, change summary, and reasonable notice period

Relationship to Runtime Standards

ADA addresses institutional architecture: the structural, governance, contractual, and capital-readiness requirements that must be in place before deployment.

ADA is complementary to, and does not replace, runtime safety standards, technical AI safety frameworks, or operational monitoring requirements. Enterprises should implement appropriate runtime controls alongside ADA institutional architecture.

ADA does not address jurisdiction-specific legal requirements, which vary by location and sector. Enterprises should obtain independent legal advice regarding regulatory compliance obligations applicable to their AI deployments.


Intellectual Property

ADA is the intellectual property of Venture Bench Pty Ltd. You may cite or reference ADA for internal governance purposes with appropriate attribution identifying the version number and date. Reproduction, adaptation, commercialisation, creation of derivative frameworks, or extraction of methodology is prohibited without prior written consent. All rights reserved.