CEO of QF Nexus – Economist and leader in integrated risk management with nearly 25 years of experience.
She has been a CRO, CEO and consultant in the financial sector, supporting high-impact organizations in strategic decisions, risk appetite frameworks, predictive models and digital/fintech transformationh.
She combines critical, analytical and holistic thinking with a clear conviction: well-used data generates better results. She promotes excellence and continuous improvement as a living learning process; her philosophy is “planting seeds and caring for them”.
She has led high-performing teams through clear objectives, effective communication and transparent accountability, cultivating trust as the basis of sustainable relationships and results.
On a personal note: she is a wife and mother of three curious and enthusiastic children; she strives to instill in them curiosity, openness and experiences over material things.
Areas of expertise: integrated risk management; digital transformation and fintech solutions; innovation and process optimization; team leadership; advanced analytics and predictive models.
Objective
Strengthen the conceptual, regulatory and practical understanding of the Risk Appetite Framework and Statement (RAF/RAS) required by the Superintendency of Banks of the DR, aligning them with international best practices, so that participants have the inputs to design or update their institution’s RAS.
Who Is It For?
- Staff from areas involved in the RAS process
- Members of Risk Committees
- Staff from risk management areas Staff from internal audit
Workshop Scope Day 1
Opening and Introduction
8:00 am – 8:30 am
Objective: Align expectations, explain the purpose of the workshop and connect the SB-DR Instructions with the day’s agenda.
Activities:
- Welcome and introduction of participants.
- Context: why the SB-DR issues the Circular Letter and the Risk Appetite Instructions.
- Workshop objectives and expected results.
- Methodology: participatory approach, group work, “from paper to practice” approach.
Expected result:
Commitment and clarity on the purpose of the workshop.
From Basel to the DR: why talk about risk appetite?
8:30 am – 9:30 am
Objective: Connect the instructions of the Superintendency of the DR with international trends in risk management and corporate governance, and align key concepts.
Topics:
- International evolution of the Risk Appetite Framework (RAF).
- Approach of the Dominican regulator: circular letter, instructions and annexes.
- Relationship between RAF/RAS, integrated risk management and strategic planning.
- Core concepts: material risk, appetite, tolerance, capacity, risk profile.
- Why the RAF/RAS is a priority for the Board, Senior Management and the supervisor.
- Activity: “Maturity radar”
Expected result:
Participants understand the international and local context of the RAF/RAS, recognize the key concepts and place their institution at a preliminary maturity level against the regulator’s requirements.
From paper to practice: Anatomy of the Risk Appetite Framework
9:30 am – 10:30 am
Objective: Understand what the RAF is, which components it must include according to the instructions and what the minimum steps are for building it.
Topics:
- Definition of the RAF and its relationship with policies, limits and indicators.
- Minimum content of the RAF.
- Linking RAF – strategy – capital – liquidity – recovery plans.
- Sequence for building the RAF: diagnosis, design, validation, approval.
- Common mistakes when implementing a RAF in financial institutions.
- Activity: “RAF checklist”
Expected result:
Participants identify the elements a robust RAF must contain and visualize the steps their institution must follow.
The RAS as a strategic compass: more than a requirement
10:30 am – 12:00 am
Objective: Recognize the strategic role of the RAS and its key concepts, and validate understanding of the content covered so far.
Topics:
- RAS as an instrument for aligning strategy and risks.
- Essential components of the RAS.
- Relationship of the RAS with business plans.
- Role of the Board and Senior Management in approving and monitoring the RAS.
- Questions the supervisor may ask about a “paper” RAS vs. a “living” RAS.
- Activity: “Kahoot/concept quiz”
Expected result:
Participants consolidate the strategic concepts of the RAS and verify their understanding.
Workshop Scope Day 2
Identifying Material Risks
8:00 am – 9:30 am
Objective: Define what material risks are, understand the regulator’s expectations and practice identifying them in concrete cases.
Topics:
- Definition of material risk according to the instructions.
- List of risk types to consider (credit, liquidity, market, operational, technology, cyber, reputational, etc.).
- Criteria for determining the materiality of a risk for the RAS.
- Regulator’s expectations on risk coverage in the RAF/RAS.
- Consequences of omitting or underestimating material risks.
- Activity: Group case study
Expected result:
Participants are able to distinguish material risks for different business models and translate this identification into direct inputs for the RAS.
Who are we and who do we want to be? Current and target risk profile
9:30 am – 10:45 am
Objective: Understand what the current and target risk profile is, how they are defined and what the role of the Board and Senior Management is.
Topics:
- Definition of current risk profile vs. target profile.
- Typical profile categories (conservative, moderate, aggressive).
- Tools to identify the current profile.
- How to translate strategy into a target risk profile by type of risk.
- Role of the Board and Senior Management in discussing and approving profiles.
- Activity: Role play
Expected result:
Participants understand how to derive target risk profiles and experience the role of the Board/Senior Management in setting the institution’s risk direction.
From material risks to key indicators: first steps
10:45 am – 12:00 pm
Objective: Introduce the approach to translating material risks into key indicators, highlighting the role of the first line of defense.
Topics:
- Concept of key risk indicator (KRI) and its relationship with the RAS.
- Difference between first- and second-level indicators.
- How to start from material risks to identify possible indicators.
- Practical constraints: availability and quality of internal data.
- Role of the first line in proposing and managing indicators.
- Activity: “Indicator brainstorm”.
Expected result:
Participants recognize the logic of moving from risks to indicators and visualize the contribution of business and support areas in defining KRIs.
Workshop Scope Day 3
From material risks to key indicators: first steps
8:00 am – 10:00 am
Objective: Go deeper into how to turn indicators into limits using historical analysis, projections and stress tests.
Activities:
- From KRI to limit: appetite, tolerance and capacity bands.
- Use of historical analysis to calibrate thresholds.
- Forward-looking: business scenarios and growth plans.
- Integration with stress tests: adverse and severe scenarios.
- How to document the logic of limits for the supervisor and the Board. Activity: Group case
Expected result:
Participants master the relationship between historical data, projections and stress tests and can sketch limits consistent with their institution’s reality.
Giving voice to the numbers: the qualitative statement
11:00 am – 12:00 pm
Objective: Master what the qualitative risk appetite statement is, how it is written and in which cases it is especially useful.
Activities:
- Definition of the qualitative statement and how it differs from the quantitative part.
- Cases where quantification is limited or uncertain.
- Suggested structure for clear qualitative statements.
- Typical mistakes: generic or contradictory phrases.
- How to align qualitative statements with the Board’s discourse and the strategy.
- Activity: Words for appetites.
Expected result:
Participants are able to write coherent qualitative statements that are aligned with the strategy and complementary.
Workshop Scope Day 4
Seeing the forest and not just the trees
8:00 am – 10:30 am
Objective: Explore methodologies for aggregating indicators and determining the risk level by type of risk in a structured and defensible way.
Topics:
- Why aggregation by type of risk is necessary.
- Simple methods: consolidated traffic light, qualitative scoring, weighted averages.
- Use of weightings, thresholds and materiality criteria.
- How to handle conflicting indicators (some within appetite, others within tolerance/capacity).
- Documentation and traceability of the aggregation methodology. Activity: Building an aggregated dashboard
Expected result:
Participants learn practical methods for consolidating signals from multiple indicators into one conclusion per type of risk.
Reading the RAS: how to infer the current risk profile
10:30 am – 12:00 pm
Objective: Learn to use the RAS itself (indicators, limits and aggregation) to determine the institution’s current risk profile.
Topics:
- Relationship between indicator results and the level of risk assumed.
- Use of the traffic light and aggregation to “read” the current profile by risk.
- Criteria for classifying the profile by material risk.
- How to reflect profile changes over time (trends).
- Linking the current profile to decisions on adjusting appetite or the business.
- Activity: Concluding the current profile.
Expected result:
Participants know how to use the RAS as a tool for reading the current risk profile and can communicate that reading clearly to governing bodies.
Workshop Scope Day 5
Corporate governance around the RAF and the RAS
8:00 am – 10:30 am
Objective: Clarify the corporate governance required around the RAF/RAS according to the instructions and best practices.
Topics:
- Responsibilities of the Board and committees.
- Role of Senior Management and the Integrated Risk Management Unit.
- Involvement of the first and second lines in monitoring the RAS.
- Annual RAS cycle: preparation, review, approval, update and reporting to the supervisor.
- Key evidence and documentation the supervisor may request.
- Activity: Governance Map.
Expected result:
Participants gain clarity on who does what and when around the RAF/RAS.
Putting risk appetite into practice in decision-making
10:30 am – 12:00 pm
Objective: Turn the Risk Appetite Statement into a practical tool to support strategic, tactical and operational decision-making,
Topics:
- The RAS as a frame of reference for deciding, not as a static document.
- Different levels of use of the RAS: Board, Committees, Teams.
- Integration of the RAS into key decisions: changes in credit policies, launch or modification of products, adjustments to commercial or growth strategies, among others.
- Evidencing the use of the RAS in decision-making.
- Group activity: Making decisions with the RAS.
Expected result:
Participants understand how and when to use the RAS at each level of the organization.
Benefits:
- Participating institutions strengthen their ability to design and update a robust Risk Appetite Statement, aligned with the SB-DR instructions and with international standards.
- Participants develop practical skills to identify material risks, define indicators and limits, write qualitative statements and build current and target risk profiles.
- Corporate governance around the RAF/RAS improves, clarifying roles, responsibilities and the evidence the supervisor expects.
- Alignment between strategy, risk and decision-making is strengthened, turning the RAS into a living and useful tool for the Board and Senior Management.
Connect with our networks