ScreenOn

Who it’s for

Compliance, Risk, and Operations teams that need consistent screening and structured handling of hits/exceptions, without slowing down good customers.

When you need it

• Screening is manual or inconsistently documented
• You need periodic or event‑driven re‑screening during the lifecycle
• You want structured hit handling with traceable decisions
• You need risk signals to trigger step‑up verification only when necessary

What it prevents

• “Invisible” AML screening (no proof of what happened, when, and why)
• Over‑friction for good customers (forcing everyone into high‑assurance checks)
• Inconsistent hit handling (different reviewers, different outcomes, weak documentation)
• Slow escalations and rework when fraud suspicion appears late in the journey
• Gaps between detection --> decision --> step‑up --> resolution

What you get

• Integrated screening results with review workflows
• Documented decisions (review / approve / escalate) with traceability
• Step‑up routing when risk signals or hits require higher assurance
• Evidence‑ready outputs for audits and internal controls

Key capabilities

• Screening integration via your chosen provider (where applicable)
• Hit management workflow (review/approve/escalate)
• Risk signal ingestion (session/document/device signals where available)
• Policy‑based routing to step‑up verification (Auto‑identOn or agent verification)
• Case linkage and reporting (when used with Workbench and DataOn)

Trust & governance

• Traceable outcomes for screening checks and reviewer actions
• Consistent decision process with documented rationale
• Evidence outputs designed for compliance review

Typical use cases

• Sanctions/PEP screening as part of onboarding decisions
• Re‑screening during lifecycle reviews (periodic or event‑based)
• Structured handling of hits (false positives, escalations, approvals)
• Step‑up verification for suspicious sessions or document anomalies
• Audit exports of screening outcomes and review history