Examination Readiness

---
name: examination-readiness
description: Pre-exam playbook for regulator examinations — PBC tracker, walkthrough rehearsal, mock interviews, exam-week posture, MRA / MRIA / management-letter response patterns. Used by `examination-prep-specialist` (primary).
---

# Skill: examination-readiness

**Purpose:** Pre-exam playbook for a regulator examination. Used by `examination-prep-specialist` (primary).

## When to use

- Exam notice received (typical 6-12 weeks notice for scheduled exam; less for special / for-cause)
- Mid-cycle review of exam readiness ("are we exam-ready *today*?")
- Post-exam debrief planning
- Acquired-entity integration where the acquirer's exam cycle takes over

## The phases

### Phase 1 — Pre-exam (weeks 6 to 1 before fieldwork)

| Week | Workstream | Owner |
|---|---|---|
| -6 | Exam notice received; PBC list (or expected scope) reviewed; internal kickoff | Compliance lead + executive sponsor |
| -5 | PBC tracker built; items assigned to owners with due dates | Examination-prep specialist |
| -5 to -3 | PBC items gathered; gaps identified | Item owners |
| -4 | Walkthrough rehearsals scheduled for in-scope processes | Examination-prep specialist + process owners |
| -3 | Walkthrough rehearsals begin; gaps surfaced for remediation | Process owners |
| -3 to -2 | Mock interviews for senior interviewees | Examination-prep specialist + interviewees |
| -2 | Final PBC bundle assembled, maker-checker'd | Compliance lead |
| -1 | PBC submitted to examiners per cover letter; entry meeting agenda finalized | Compliance lead |

### Phase 2 — Entry meeting

Set tone, confirm scope, agree on logistics:

- Scope: full / targeted / special / thematic
- Period under review
- Likely interviewees and walkthrough subjects
- Examiner-side logistics (working space, system access if any, info-request portal)
- Issue-tracking method (live tracker is best; daily-recap meetings work too)
- Status meeting cadence

### Phase 3 — Fieldwork

Day-by-day discipline matters:

- **Single-point coordination.** Compliance lead owns intake of every information request and routes it.
- **Audit trail on every request.** Date asked, who asked, what was asked, by when, what was sent, by whom.
- **Pre-walkthrough huddle.** 15 minutes with the process owner before each walkthrough; confirm what they'll say, what evidence they'll show.
- **Post-day debrief.** 30 minutes at end of day: what came up, what's at risk, what needs preparation for tomorrow.
- **No volunteering.** Answer the question; don't editorialize.
- **No withholding.** Asked questions get full answers.

### Phase 4 — Exit

Examiner gives a preliminary findings discussion. Listen carefully — these usually evolve into the written findings.

- Take detailed notes
- Distinguish exam-observation from MRA / MRIA / management-letter language
- Don't push back in the exit meeting; that's not the venue. Acknowledge, take notes, respond in writing.

### Phase 5 — Report

Examiner issues the report. Common formats:

- **Open observations / matters requiring attention (MRA) / matters requiring immediate attention (MRIA)** — graded by severity
- **Management letter** — observations not rising to MRA
- **Public enforcement action** (if severe) — different process; involves legal counsel from start

### Phase 6 — Remediation

For every finding:

| # | Finding | Severity | Root cause | Remediation | Owner | Target date | Status | Verification |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|

Discipline:
- Root cause analysis before remediation design — fix the cause, not the symptom
- Remediation has a tester independent of the designer
- Target dates negotiated, not aspirational
- Rolling updates to the regulator on long-running remediation
- Closure: independent verification + regulator acknowledgment

## Walkthrough rehearsal — the most leveraged prep

A walkthrough rehearsal exposes the gap between policy and practice. Run it before the examiner does.

Format:
1. Process owner walks an "examiner" (a rehearsal partner, ideally from outside the team) through the actual process.
2. Examiner asks the questions a real examiner would: who does this, when, how often, what's the evidence, what happens when it doesn't go to plan.
3. Process owner answers from memory, then shows the evidence.
4. Rehearsal partner records gaps: missing evidence, ambiguous ownership, undefined frequency, "we don't do that anymore but the policy still says we do."
5. Gaps either: fixed before the exam (preferred), or surfaced + given a remediation plan to disclose during the exam (next best), or hidden (anti-pattern).

A bad walkthrough rehearsal that produces 20 findings is better than a "smooth" rehearsal that produces zero — the real examiner *will* find the gaps.

## Mock-interview prep for senior interviewees

For the CCO / MLRO / CRO / CFO / CEO (whoever is likely to be interviewed):

- Brief on likely scope of their interview
- Walk through their domain's open issues, recent incidents, remediation status
- Pressure-test by interview-style Q&A; record where they struggle
- Repeat once more before the actual interview

## Anti-patterns

- PBC tracker without owners or dates
- Walkthroughs that describe the policy not actual practice
- Mock-interview skipped because "the CCO knows it cold"
- Information request answered by the team being examined, no second pair of eyes
- Volunteering issues to "build credibility" (expand scope instead)
- Defensive responses in the exit meeting
- Remediation date negotiated to be impossible-to-hit just to get the regulator off the call
- Same-person designer + tester on remediation
- No status update on a long-running remediation past the original target date

## See also

- Template: [`../../templates/examination-response-tracker.md`](../../templates/examination-response-tracker.md)
- Agent: [`../../agents/examination-prep-specialist.md`](../../agents/examination-prep-specialist.md)