RisKIT · Prudential models · Recovery and resolution
RisKIT model 900 is a recovery and resolution planning tool in native Excel, built by RiskTAE for banks and building societies that need a recovery plan they can test and keep current.
It holds the recovery triggers and thresholds, the options and what each is worth, the early warning indicators and the governance around them, and maps the creditors, claims and critical functions a resolution would turn on.
Bought once, under a perpetual licence, with every formula open to your board, your validators and your supervisor.
By Mark Dougherty, CPA (CAN)Updated
The model
One model number; it holds a plan rather than a ratio.
| Model | Framework | What it is for |
|---|---|---|
| 900 | Recovery and resolution planning: the Financial Stability Board’s standards, adapted to the national rules you report under | The recovery plan (triggers and thresholds, options and their value, early warning indicators, governance), resolution planning (creditors and claims, critical function continuity, resolvability metrics), remediation tracking and solvent exit. |
The stressed capital and liquidity paths a plan is tested against come from the capital models and model 400 (see stress testing models); model 900 holds what is tested against them.
Inside the model
Three parts of one workbook.
Triggers and thresholds, defined and monitored against the regulator’s requirements, with early warning indicators ahead of them; recovery options catalogued and valued; and the governance around them.
Creditors and claims in their hierarchy with the providers each depends on, critical banking functions assessed for continuity under resolution, and resolvability measured as operational, legal and financial separability.
Gaps become remediation actions, tracked until they close. For a UK bank or building society outside the systemic tier, the workbook also supports the solvent exit analysis and the execution plan.
The Bank of England expects modified insolvency for an institution with total assets not exceeding £25 billion (MREL statement of policy, July 2025, para 4.3), so for most smaller firms the resolution map is the working part: who is owed what, and which services must keep running.
Options and scenarios
SS9/17 expects at least three scenarios for most firms (four for G-SIIs and O-SIIs, two under Simplified Obligations), severe enough to test the plan, with capital and liquidity over time under each one, without the recovery options and then with them. The second run gives the recovery capacity, in CET1, leverage ratio and LCR percentage points.
Model 900 does not run the stress itself. The stressed paths come from the RisKIT capital models and model 400, or your own stress tests, and it holds what is laid over them: each option’s value and the time it takes, and each trigger’s level. An option that takes months is worth nothing against a trigger that fires once the firm is inside its buffers, which is why SS9/17 wants calibration justified against the credible options, the time they take and the buffers.
Source: PRA SS9/17 Recovery planning, March 2026, paras 2.39, 2.51, 2.54, 2.57 and 2.66.
Data and set-up
Inputs are the indicators with their thresholds and current readings, each option with the analysis behind it, the legal entity structure, the creditor and claims hierarchy, the critical functions and their providers, and open remediation actions. Input and output cells are colour-coded separately, and assumptions sit in a register.
What breaks when a firm moves off a home-built approach is the split, not the arithmetic: the plan in a document, the indicators in a dashboard, the option valuations in a spreadsheet nobody has opened since the last submission. Set-up starts by agreeing which figures the plan monitors and where each comes from (see implementation and support).
Validation and audit
Governance of the model stays your firm’s responsibility; it is built to be tested.
Reviewers tend to start by reconciling the thresholds in the model to the board-approved plan. Where they differ, the model is usually right and the document out of date.
PRA timetable
Updated SS9/17 in effect
The Recovery Plans Part of the PRA Rulebook requires a plan of measures to restore the firm’s financial position after a significant deterioration, approved by the board before submission. The PRA’s expectations sit in SS9/17, updated on 26 March 2026 and effective from 1 April 2026; its annex records the SDDT review cycle moving from at least annually to at least every two years, following PS10/26.
The PRA also expects at least one fire drill before each submission and at least one every three years; set the model up before the drill. Since 1 October 2025, chapter 7 of the same Part has required non-systemic banks and building societies to prepare for a solvent exit: an analysis updated on material change and at least every three years, and an execution plan once an exit is a reasonable prospect.
Sources: PRA Rulebook, Recovery Plans Part, rules 2.2, 5.2 and 7.2 to 7.4; PRA SS9/17, 26 March 2026, paras 2.72 and 2.73 and annex; PRA SS2/24, 12 March 2024, paras 3.3 and 3.4.
Licence and support
You pay once: a perpetual licence for internal use by the legal entity named in your order, with no subscription or annual maintenance fee, plus a user manual and remote support for set-up, data entry and early use. A regulatory logic error or functional defect in the model as delivered is corrected free of charge, and a regulatory update commitment covers statutory changes to the rules for the update period in your order.
Implementation is a walkthrough against your current plan, then configuration, a first run with your own indicators and options, and training for the people who will own it, typically in weeks rather than months.
Tailoring, validation and a written or reviewed plan come from Risk Advisory under a separate agreement. Prices are on request; the full terms are on the RisKIT page.
FAQ
No. It holds the plan: triggers, thresholds, early warning indicators, options and their value, and the resolution map. The stressed capital and liquidity paths come from the RisKIT capital models and model 400, or your own ICAAP and ILAAP stress tests.
It holds the data the document rests on. The narrative, the playbook and the board’s view on whether the plan is credible and executable are yours to write, with Risk Advisory if you want help.
Yes, for a UK bank or building society not subject to the Operational Continuity Part and not, or part of a group that is, a G-SII or an O-SII: the solvent exit analysis and, once an exit is a reasonable prospect, the execution plan.
Insights
The ICAAP is a bank’s own assessment of whether it holds enough capital for its risks; the ILAAP asks the same question of its liquidity and stable funding. The two sit in different Parts of the...
By Mark Dougherty, CPA (CAN) · 7 min read
An ICAAP, or Internal Capital Adequacy Assessment Process, is a bank's own assessment of how much capital it needs, of what type and where, to cover its risks now and over its business plan, including under stress. The PRA requires one from every bank and building society and uses it in the SREP to set Pillar 2 capital.
By Mark Dougherty, CPA (CAN) · 6 min read
Most UK banks and building societies that meet the nine SDDT criteria, and expect to keep meeting them, should join the strong and simple regime. From 1 January 2027 an SDDT holds one Single Capital Buffer...
By Mark Dougherty, CPA (CAN) · 6 min readNext step
In 45 minutes we share a screen and walk through the model closest to what you need, using sample data.
Tell us which models you want to see. We will set up a 45-minute walkthrough with sample data.
Prefer email? advisory@risktae.com or +44 20 3996 9599. We use these details only to reply to you: privacy notice.