Description

A focused course, tailored for you

The Credit Risk Watchlist and CECL Q-Factor Playbook

A working method for moving a borrower from pass to watchlist, defending the rating, and showing the Q-factor change to the ACL committee in one paper.

A borrower is sliding. The relationship manager wants the rating held. The ACL committee meets in two weeks. The downgrade memo, the Q-factor change log, and the watchlist review pack all have to land in the same week, and they have to agree with each other.

$199 one-time

Tailored to your situation. Access within 24 hours. 30-day money-back.

Includes a hand-built implementation playbook delivered alongside course access, generated for your specific situation.

Why this course

Credit Risk at a US regional bank sits between three pressures. The relationship side wants the rating defended because a downgrade triggers covenants and pricing grids the borrower will fight. Finance wants the allowance moved cleanly because every Q-factor change has to be supported in writing for the auditor and the regulator. The ACL committee chair wants one paper that ties the rating action, the segment-level loss expectation, and the qualitative overlay together, not three. Most credit risk officers end up writing the rating memo, the Q-factor justification, and the watchlist narrative as three separate documents in three separate templates, which is why ACL review cycles drag and why audit findings keep landing on the qualitative factor support. The working method this course teaches is one paper, one defensible chain of reasoning, and a templated artefact set that the OCC examiner has already seen the shape of.

What you walk away with

A repeatable working method for migrating a single name from pass to watchlist with the memo, the Q-factor change log, and the review pack in one consistent paper.
A defensible Q-factor change record that survives auditor and OCC scrutiny in the next horizontal review.
A rating-action memo template that the relationship side accepts without a second round.
A watchlist review pack that the ACL committee chair signs in the meeting, not after.
A criticised asset reporting flow that matches what your loan review team is already auditing against.

The 12 modules

Module 1. The one borrower on your screen

Open with the specific name that is on the watch list this cycle. The course frames every artefact around one live name running through the working method end to end. You pick the borrower at the start, the modules track that name through downgrade, ACL impact, and committee paper, and the templates fill themselves with that borrower's facts.

Module 2. The trigger set worth acting on

Not every covenant trip, not every EBITDA miss, and not every utilisation creep is worth a rating action. The module sets out the trigger set that a US regional credit risk officer should treat as actionable, separating the genuine migration signal from the noise the relationship side will push back on. Includes the trigger checklist used in the working method.

Module 3. Writing the rating-action memo

The downgrade memo is the artefact that goes to credit committee. The module walks through structure, exhibits, and the language that holds up against a relationship manager who wants the rating held. You write the memo for the live borrower from module one, using the rating-action memo template that ships with the course.

Module 4. From the rating action to the watchlist pack

Once the rating moves, the watchlist review pack takes over for the rest of the credit's life on the list. The module covers the standing exhibits the watchlist pack carries, the cadence the chair expects, and the narrative that ties this quarter's pack to the previous one without restating the whole credit story.

Module 5. Q-factor mechanics for the segment that name lives in

The Q-factor overlay is the part of CECL that the auditor and the OCC examiner spend the most time on. The module covers segmentation, the directional logic, and the supporting evidence that turns a qualitative judgement into a defensible number. You map the live borrower's segment and identify which Q-factor buckets the migration actually moves.

Module 6. The Q-factor change log

The audit finding that lands most often on the qualitative overlay is not the size of the change, it is the documentation. The module builds the Q-factor change log artefact: what changed, why it changed, what evidence supported the change, who approved it, and what range was considered. The template ships with the course and matches the shape your loan review team already audits against.

Module 7. One paper for the ACL committee

Most credit risk teams write the rating memo, the Q-factor justification, and the watchlist narrative as three documents in three templates. The module shows how to consolidate them into one ACL committee paper that the chair signs in the meeting. The consolidation is the difference between a one-meeting decision and a two-meeting cycle.

Module 8. Concentration and the limit framework that has to back it up

A migration on a single name is usually a signal about a concentration. The module covers borrower, industry, geography, and sponsor concentration, and the limit framework that has to react when a name on the watchlist sits inside a concentration that is approaching a limit. You read the live borrower's concentration footprint and decide whether the limit framework needs an adjustment.

Module 9. Criticised asset reporting and the loan review interface

Criticised asset reporting is where the watchlist intersects the regulatory reporting cycle. The module covers the Call Report classifications, the loan review sample selection logic, and the way your watchlist pack should pre-empt what loan review is about to ask. You build the criticised asset roll-forward exhibit that explains this quarter's movement to the loan review team.

Module 10. Stress testing the watchlist

The bank's stress testing process treats the watchlist as a sensitive bucket. The module covers segmentation for stress, the way migration assumptions feed the loss path, and the documentation that ties your watchlist actions to the stress testing function's outputs. You identify the stress testing implications of the live borrower's migration.

Module 11. Preparing for the OCC conversation

Every credit risk officer at a US regional bank knows the OCC conversation is coming. The module covers the artefacts the OCC examiner asks for first, the way the rating-action memo, the Q-factor change log, and the ACL committee paper line up against the examiner request list, and the working method's contribution to a clean horizontal review outcome.

Module 12. Running the working method on the next twenty names

The final module turns the single-borrower walkthrough into a portfolio routine. The watchlist cycle has twenty names this quarter, the next quarter has another twenty, and the working method has to survive scale. The module covers the calendar, the artefact reuse pattern, and the handoff to the credit analysts who write the first draft of the memos for you to review.

How this addresses your situation

Specific modules that map to what you said you are dealing with.

Module 1 to 4: live borrower, downgrade decision, rating-action memo, watchlist pack.

Module 5 to 7: Q-factor mechanics, change log, consolidated ACL committee paper.

Module 8 to 10: concentration, criticised asset reporting, stress testing of the watchlist.

Module 11 to 12: OCC examiner artefact alignment and running the method at portfolio scale.

What you get with this course

Twelve written modules, each tuned to a US regional bank credit risk officer.
Rating-action memo template tied to the live borrower walkthrough.
Q-factor change log template matching the audit and OCC artefact set.
ACL committee one-paper template that consolidates rating, Q-factor, and watchlist narrative.
Criticised asset roll-forward exhibit and concentration limit-tracker worksheets.
Per-buyer implementation playbook hand-built around your portfolio mix (middle-market C and I, CRE, ABL, sponsor).
30-day money-back guarantee.

What you will have in hand by Day 1, Week 1, Month 1

Within 24 hours: account in the learning environment is provisioned, the twelve written modules are available, and the implementation playbook is delivered alongside.

Week 1: pick the live borrower, run modules 1 to 4, write the rating-action memo against the template.

Week 2: run modules 5 to 7, build the Q-factor change log, consolidate into the ACL committee paper.

Week 3: run modules 8 to 10, fold concentration, criticised asset reporting, and stress testing into the working method.

Week 4: run modules 11 to 12, align the artefact set with OCC examiner expectations, and turn the method into a portfolio routine.

Before and after

Before

The rating memo, the Q-factor justification, and the watchlist narrative are written as three separate documents in three separate templates. The relationship side pushes back on the rating action, the auditor flags the Q-factor support, and the ACL committee meeting needs a second round.

After

One consolidated paper carries the rating action, the Q-factor change, and the watchlist narrative through a single ACL meeting. The relationship side accepts the rating because the memo holds up. The auditor signs off because the Q-factor change log is the artefact they were asking for. The OCC horizontal review finds the documentation in the shape the examiner expects.

What happens if you do not address this

The next ACL cycle still runs as three documents, the watchlist drags into a second committee meeting, and the qualitative factor support is what the next audit cycle and the next horizontal review pick apart. The relationship side keeps winning the rating-defence argument because the memo gives them room.

Who it is for

You are an experienced credit risk officer at a US regional or super-regional bank. You sit close to the watchlist process, the criticised asset reporting, and the allowance for credit losses model. You write the rating-action memos, you sign off on the Q-factor changes, and you sit in the ACL committee. You have lived through a CECL implementation, at least one OCC horizontal review, and the loan-review cycle that follows.

Who this is NOT for. Not for relationship managers, not for syndications underwriters, not for retail credit scorecard modellers, not for fresh credit analysts who have not yet written a rating-action memo. This course assumes you have signed off on at least a dozen downgrades.

How it arrives

Text-based course in the Art of Service learning environment, plus downloadable templates and worked examples for every module, plus the hand-built implementation playbook delivered alongside course access.

Time investment. Roughly six to eight hours across the twelve written modules, plus the implementation work on the live borrower the buyer picks in module one.

Why $199 is the right number

The alternative is to keep writing the rating memo, the Q-factor justification, and the watchlist narrative as three documents and hope the ACL committee, the auditor, and the OCC examiner each find what they need. The Risk Management Association running courses on watchlist management are excellent and broad; this course is narrower and is built around producing the consolidated ACL committee paper end to end on a live borrower the buyer brings in. Free regulator guidance from the OCC and FDIC is comprehensive but does not give you the artefact templates.

FAQ

Is this CECL training?

No. CECL training covers the full allowance methodology. This course is narrower. It teaches the consolidated working method for moving a single borrower through watchlist with the Q-factor change documented and the ACL committee paper written in one pass.

Will the templates match my bank's existing memo format?

The rating-action memo template, the Q-factor change log, and the ACL committee paper are written to the shape the audit and examiner artefact set expects. The implementation playbook adapts the templates to your portfolio mix and existing committee cadence.

Does this cover retail credit?

No. The course is built for the commercial side: middle-market C and I, CRE, ABL, and sponsor finance. The Q-factor logic and the watchlist process for retail scorecards is a different problem.

How is the implementation playbook tailored?

Once the order lands, the playbook is hand-built around the buyer's portfolio mix, the existing watchlist cadence, the segmentation used in the ACL model, and the artefacts the buyer's last horizontal review focused on.

What if it does not fit my situation?

30-day money-back guarantee. If the working method does not match the way your credit risk function actually runs, the order is refunded in full.

30-day money-back guarantee. If after a week of working through the materials this is not what you needed, reply to the receipt email and a full refund is processed. No questions, no forms.

Within 24 hours your account in the learning environment is provisioned and the tailored implementation playbook is delivered alongside it.