Trust Infrastructure Index (TII) HEART Standard

The Trust Infrastructure Index (TII) is a composite letter-grade rating of organizational AI governance quality — aggregating BGF certification data across five scoring dimensions into a market-legible signal that investors, insurers, procurement officers, and regulators can consume without expertise in the underlying methodology. TII is the credit rating for AI governance: AAA to D, with the same investment grade/speculative grade threshold that financial markets already understand.

How it works

TII starts with the same data source as Trust Credits: Φ scores produced by Guardian assessment of MAP-States behavioral evidence, attested by the Behavioral Oracle. Where Trust Credits are the transactional instrument — units an organization retires for regulatory, procurement, or insurance purposes — TII is the analytical instrument. It rates the organization for the parties making decisions about it.

The five scoring dimensions

Dimension Weight What it measures
Governance Quality (GQ) 35% Weighted average of Φ scores across all certified Divisions
Division Coverage (DC) 20% Proportion of applicable Divisions where certification is held
Certification Currency (CC) 15% Recency of Guardian assessments; expired certifications score zero
Governance Consistency (GC) 15% Variance across Φ scores — rewards uniform quality, penalizes imbalance
Accountability Infrastructure (AI) 15% Correction pathways, monitoring systems, transparency practices, governance leadership

The composite formula is:

TII Composite = (GQ × 0.35) + (DC × 0.20) + (CC × 0.15) + (GC × 0.15) + (AI × 0.15)

The rating scale

Rating TII Composite Governance quality
AAA ≥ 0.92 Exceptional; industry leader across multiple Divisions
AA 0.87 – 0.919 Excellent; strong performance across certified Divisions
A 0.82 – 0.869 Strong; consistent above-threshold performance
BBB 0.75 – 0.819 Adequate; meets baseline certification — investment grade floor
BB 0.70 – 0.749 Below certification threshold or incomplete Division coverage
B 0.60 – 0.699 Weak governance; significant gaps
CCC 0.50 – 0.599 Poor; major deficiencies
CC 0.40 – 0.499 Very poor; immediate remediation required
C 0.25 – 0.399 No meaningful governance architecture
D < 0.25 or unassessed No BGF assessment conducted

Modifiers (+/-) apply within grades AA through CCC. BBB and above is investment grade. Below BBB is speculative grade.

Three index products

Entity-level TII is the primary product: a single letter grade for an organization, published in the HEART certification registry with full methodology disclosure. Any party can trace the rating to its component scores, through those scores to Guardian assessments, and through the assessments to Behavioral Oracle-attested evidence.

Sector-level TII aggregates entity ratings into industry benchmarks. A media company rated A in a sector averaging AA faces market pressure to improve. An insurer evaluating a sector averaging BB faces a different risk picture than one evaluating a sector averaging A.

Division-level TII disaggregates organizational ratings by Division, enabling domain-specific evaluation. A school district evaluating an educational AI vendor cares specifically about the HEART-DI (Developmental Interaction) Division rating, not the vendor’s aggregate. A hospital cares about HEART-SE (Somatic/Embodied Interface).

Why it matters

ESG ratings face a credibility crisis. Correlation between major ESG providers runs between 0.42 and 0.47 — meaning the same company can receive contradictory governance assessments depending on which agency rates it. The root cause is structural: ESG ratings are built on self-reported data that each agency interprets through its own proprietary methodology. No standardized measurement instrument. No independent assessment class. No tamper-evident evidence chain.

TII is architecturally different. The evidence is behavioral data from actual AI processing, not operator self-reporting. The assessors are structurally independent Guardians, not agency analysts interpreting disclosed data. The methodology is fully published — BGF formula, dimension weights, scoring criteria, grade thresholds, all open. The EU ESG Ratings Regulation (effective July 2026) requires methodology transparency, conflict-of-interest management, and quality assurance from rating providers; TII’s architecture satisfies these requirements by design, not by retrofit.

The financial materiality signal is growing. AI governance failures create litigation exposure. Regulatory non-compliance creates operational risk. Broken consumer trust affects adoption. TII provides the instrument to capture these risks in a format markets already know how to price.

The analog

Bond ratings translate complex issuer creditworthiness into letter grades that market participants use without becoming fixed income specialists. HVC certifies individual AI systems the way individual bonds get rated. TII rates the organization the way Moody’s rates the issuer — aggregating across the portfolio to produce the number that institutional capital, insurance underwriters, and procurement officers actually consume.