Description

A focused course, tailored for you

Regulatory Reporting Data Quality and Submission Sign-Off

Build the data lineage, exception-handling, and attestation layer that gets FINREP and COREP submissions out the door without last-minute fire drills.

Every reporting cycle has a moment where a data exception surfaces late and no one can immediately trace whether it is material. This course eliminates that moment by building the methodology before it is needed.

$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

Regulatory reporting teams at large banks operate under a structural tension: the source systems that feed COREP and FINREP were not designed to make lineage transparent, yet the EBA, ECB, and PRA expect clear audit trails from reported figure back to source transaction. When a data quality flag appears during close, the team must manually trace impact through trading book, banking book, and consolidation layers before anyone can sign off. That trace typically takes hours, involves three people, and happens under submission deadline pressure. The cost is not just time: it is the attestation letter that the Head of Reporting signs without full confidence in what they are certifying.

What you walk away with

Map data lineage from source systems to FINREP and COREP cells so any exception can be traced in under 30 minutes.
Build a tiered materiality framework that distinguishes holdable exceptions from documentable-and-submit ones.
Design an exception register that satisfies both internal audit and ECB/PRA examination teams.
Write attestation memos that give your Head of Reporting genuine confidence in what they are certifying.
Establish a recurring data quality review cadence that catches issues before they surface at 4 PM on day three of close.

The 12 modules

Module 1. The Reporting Data Architecture Your Controls Must Cover

Maps the typical source-to-template data journey at a large European bank: general ledger extracts, risk system feeds, consolidation layer, and the EBA template population logic. Identifies the six most common points where data quality exceptions originate and why they are structurally hard to catch before close. Establishes the vocabulary used throughout the course: data lineage, exception, materiality, attestation, sign-off chain.

Module 2. BCBS 239 Principles Applied to Regulatory Reporting

Translates the 11 BCBS 239 data aggregation and reporting principles from supervisory guidance into practical controls for a regulatory reporting team. Covers accuracy, completeness, timeliness, and adaptability as operationalised in FINREP and COREP. Builds the mapping between each principle and the specific data quality risk it mitigates in your submission process. Includes a self-assessment template against each principle.

Module 3. Data Lineage Mapping: From Transaction to Reported Cell

Practical methodology for building cell-level lineage documentation for the ten highest-risk FINREP and COREP cells in a typical bank's submission. Covers the lineage artefact format the ECB Data Quality Framework expects, how to handle cells that aggregate across multiple source systems, and how to maintain lineage documents when source systems change. Produces a reusable lineage register template.

Module 4. Classifying Data Quality Exceptions: A Tiered Materiality Framework

Builds a three-tier materiality classification for data quality exceptions: tier one (hold submission pending resolution), tier two (document and submit with explanatory note), tier three (log for next cycle, no impact on current submission). Covers the quantitative thresholds and qualitative criteria that determine tier assignment, how to handle exceptions that span multiple cells or templates, and how to document tier decisions so they survive internal audit review.

Module 5. The Exception Register: Design, Ownership, and Lifecycle

Designs the exception register as a living governance document rather than a post-hoc log. Covers required fields for EBA and ECB examination purposes, ownership assignment (who raises, who classifies, who resolves, who signs off), the escalation path from analyst to Head of Reporting, and the retention and access controls that regulators expect. Includes a worked example using a FINREP F-02.00 cash and balances exception.

Module 6. Reconciling Trading Book and Banking Book in COREP

Addresses one of the most common sources of late-stage data quality exceptions: mismatches between trading book risk system outputs and banking book general ledger positions in COREP C-02 to C-07. Covers the reconciliation methodology, the documentation standard for residual differences, and how to write the explanatory note that satisfies the Joint Supervisory Team without triggering a formal query. Includes a reconciliation checklist and worked example.

Module 7. The Attestation Memo: What Your Head of Reporting Needs to Sign

Builds the attestation memo as a structured artefact rather than a boilerplate cover letter. Covers what the memo must confirm (data quality review completed, exceptions classified and resolved or documented, lineage validated, submission consistent with prior quarter or differences explained), who reviews it before it reaches the signatory, and how to calibrate the level of detail to the seniority of the reader. Includes a memo template and three annotated examples.

Module 8. Managing a Pre-Submission Data Quality Review

Designs the pre-submission data quality review as a structured process with defined inputs, outputs, and a time budget that fits inside a typical T-2 close calendar. Covers the review agenda, who runs it, what automated checks run before the meeting, what manual checks are assigned, and how decisions made in the review are recorded and traceable. Addresses the common failure mode where the review becomes a status meeting rather than a quality gate.

Module 9. Responding to ECB and PRA Data Quality Queries

Covers the full lifecycle of a regulatory data quality query: initial acknowledgement, internal triage, root cause analysis documentation, draft response, legal and compliance review, and submission to the regulator. Includes the response format the ECB Data Quality Framework specifies, how to handle queries that reveal a systemic data lineage gap versus a one-off exception, and how to close the loop with internal audit after a query is resolved.

Module 10. Embedding Controls into the Reporting Production Process

Moves from reactive exception management to preventive control design. Covers the control points in a FINREP/COREP production process where automated data quality checks can be embedded, the tolerance and threshold logic for each control, how to document controls in a format that satisfies the model validation team, and how to update controls when EBA template versions change. Produces a controls catalogue template tied to the lineage register from module 3.

Module 11. Audit Trail Requirements for EBA ITS Submissions

Covers what a complete audit trail for an EBA ITS submission looks like from the perspective of an internal auditor and an external examiner. Includes the document set expected at each stage (source extract, population logic, data quality review record, exception register, attestation memo, submission confirmation), retention periods under EBA guidelines, and how to produce an audit pack quickly when a query arrives. Addresses the most common audit finding: trail exists but is not retrievable under time pressure.

Module 12. Building a Sustainable Data Quality Governance Calendar

Designs the ongoing governance calendar that prevents the fire-drill dynamic from returning. Covers monthly data quality reviews outside the close window, quarterly lineage validation exercises, annual attestation framework reviews, and the escalation thresholds that trigger a deep-dive before submission day. Produces a governance calendar template and an agenda for the first monthly review, so the methodology does not depend on any one person's memory of how last cycle went.

How this addresses your situation

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

Late exception discovered during FINREP close: modules 4 and 5 give you the classification and register to handle it inside the existing process without delaying the submission.

Head of Reporting asks what they are actually certifying when they sign: module 7 builds the attestation memo that answers that question with documented evidence.

ECB query arrives three weeks after submission: modules 9 and 11 cover the response process and the audit trail that should already exist.

Internal audit identifies that data lineage documentation is incomplete: modules 3 and 10 build the lineage register and embedded controls that close the finding.

What you get with this course

12 written modules with worked examples drawn from FINREP, COREP, LCR, and NSFR submission scenarios
Downloadable templates: data lineage register, exception register, tiered materiality framework, attestation memo, pre-submission review agenda, controls catalogue, governance calendar
Hand-built implementation playbook covering the specific data quality and sign-off gaps most common in your reporting role, delivered alongside course access

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

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

Before and after

Before

Data quality exceptions surface during close and the team spends hours manually tracing impact across source systems before anyone can determine whether the submission can go out. Attestation is a formality rather than a documented quality confirmation. ECB queries take two weeks to answer because the audit trail has to be reconstructed.

After

Exceptions are classified against a documented materiality framework within the hour. The Head of Reporting signs an attestation memo that reflects a completed quality review rather than a best-effort certification. An ECB query can be answered in 48 hours because the lineage register and exception register already exist.

What happens if you do not address this

Regulatory reporting errors at large banks attract supervisory attention disproportionate to their size. A FINREP submission with an unexplained cell movement, a late query response, or an internal audit finding of incomplete lineage documentation creates reputational and supervisory risk that is hard to reverse. The cost of building the methodology proactively is a fraction of the cost of responding to a formal supervisory finding.

Who it is for

Regulatory reporting professionals at banks subject to EBA ITS: analysts, team leads, and senior managers responsible for FINREP, COREP, LCR, NSFR, or large exposures. Typically working within a dedicated regulatory reporting function or at the interface between finance, risk, and IT. Already fluent in the templates. Not yet fluent in building the controls layer that makes submissions defensible rather than just submitted.

Who this is NOT for. Anyone looking for a refresher on EBA template structure or basic accounting. This course assumes you already understand what goes into the templates. It builds the methodology layer above that: data lineage, exception governance, and sign-off process.

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. Each module takes 30-45 minutes to read and apply. The full course is designed to be completed over two to three working weeks alongside normal reporting responsibilities, with the highest-priority modules (3, 4, 5, 7) usable in the current cycle.

Why $199 is the right number

EBA training materials cover template structure but not the data quality governance layer. Internal training at most banks covers the production steps but not the methodology for building defensible controls. Consultancy engagements that address this cost significantly more and produce recommendations that a team then has to operationalise without structured support. This course builds the methodology and the working artefacts in the same exercise.

FAQ

Does this assume a specific core banking system or GL?

No. The lineage methodology and exception governance framework are system-agnostic. The worked examples reference common source system types (GL extract, risk aggregation layer, consolidation tool) rather than named vendors.

Is this relevant if my team already submits on time?

On-time submission and defensible submission are different standards. Most teams that submit on time have not built the audit trail and attestation documentation that satisfies an ECB examination or an internal audit deep-dive. This course builds the layer above on-time.

What if my role is more IT-side than finance-side?

The course covers both the data engineering controls (lineage, source system documentation, automated checks) and the governance layer (exception register, attestation, regulatory response). IT-side professionals typically find modules 3, 6, 8, and 10 most directly applicable.

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.