Paid AML/Compliance Industry Reviewer and Design Partner

We are developing SDS Intelligence, an early-stage governance-intelligence and decision-support product for professionals working with policies, contracts, controls, approvals, exceptions, and governance documentation.

We are seeking a U.S.-based AML, compliance, financial-crime, risk, audit, or governance professional to participate as a paid industry reviewer and design partner.

We are not looking for favorable feedback. We want candid professional criticism that helps us identify where the product is useful, unclear, incomplete, or potentially misleading.

This is a paid engagement lasting approximately 2 weeks and requiring about 3–5 total hours.

Scope of work

Participate in a 45–60 minute expert discovery interview about your experience reviewing AML, compliance, risk, audit, regulatory, policy, control, or governance materials.

Test an early SDS workflow using SDS-provided, public, or synthetic sample materials only.

The review may include:

evidence-linked findings

governance findings

reviewer decisions and adjudication

amendment or change-impact review

review cases

traceability and auditability

organizational decision-history workflows

Participate in a final review discussion and provide short written feedback covering:

whether findings are understandable and professionally useful

false positives, false negatives, and missing context

where supporting evidence is insufficient

workflow gaps and usability problems

whether findings are traceable, reviewable, and auditable

situations where a human reviewer should reject, modify, or escalate a result

important edge cases or exceptions the system should handle better

recommendations for improving the product before broader professional use

Payment

$500 fixed price through Upwork

$100 — expert discovery interview

$150 — structured SDS workflow testing

$250 — adjudication review, edge cases, final discussion, and written recommendations

Ideal experience

Relevant backgrounds may include:

AML/BSA

financial-crime compliance

banking compliance

internal audit

enterprise or operational risk

regulatory compliance

regulatory counsel

investigations

model risk

fintech compliance

governance and controls review

Experience working with U.S. banks, financial institutions, fintechs, consulting firms, or other regulated financial-services organizations is especially relevant.

Important confidentiality and data restrictions

Only SDS-provided, public, or synthetic materials may be used.

Please do not provide or upload:

SARs or SAR-related information

customer or employee PII

confidential employer information

proprietary bank policies or contracts

restricted regulatory information

customer or client materials

credentials or access to employer systems

You should also confirm that participating in this independent consulting engagement does not violate any obligations to your current or former employer.

Some SDS materials and methodologies are proprietary. Additional confidentiality terms may apply before access to non-public product materials is provided.

SDS is currently an early-stage research and decision-support product. It does not make autonomous compliance decisions, determine whether misconduct occurred, rank financial institutions, or claim production readiness.

You are being compensated for your professional time, independent judgment, and candid critical feedback, regardless of whether your conclusions are positive or negative.

To apply, please include:

Your relevant professional background

Your primary area of expertise

One example of reviewing policy, contract, control, exception, approval, or governance language

Your availability during the next two weeks

Confirmation that you can commit approximately 3–5 hours

Confirmation that you accept the $500 milestone-based fixed price

Confirmation that you can participate without using or disclosing confidential employer, customer, or client information

Confirmation that you are comfortable providing critical feedback, including identifying errors, edge cases, and situations where you would reject or override a system-generated finding