Scenario Guide · Embedded Finance & BaaS Infrastructure

Designing Your
BaaS Programme

Whether you're launching embedded finance for the first time, switching BaaS providers, or adding card issuance to an existing programme, the decisions you need to make — and the tools that inform them — differ significantly. Pick your scenario below to run the right four-tool chain for your situation.

4 Tools · 3 Scenarios Fee Schedules · Credit Policy · Interchange · FBO Client-side · Zero PII ~45 min end-to-end
⚙ What describes your situation?

Steps 1 and 4 are common to all scenarios. Steps 2 and 3 swap to the tools most relevant to your programme stage.

01
T152
Common to all scenarios Start here

BaaS Provider Comparator

Compare leading BaaS and embedded finance infrastructure providers across FDIC pass-through coverage, card issuance capabilities, ACH and RTP rail access, KYC/AML tooling depth, compliance support model, developer experience, and pricing structure. For a greenfield launch this is provider selection; for a migration it surfaces the capability gaps driving the switch; for a card addition it confirms your current provider can support the new product or flags that a supplementary partner is needed.

↳ Inputs
Target use case (deposit account / card / lending / payout). Required rails (ACH, RTP, FedNow, Visa/MC). KYC/AML requirements. Compliance support needs. Estimated volume. Geography.
→ Outputs
Side-by-side provider scorecard. Capability gap flags per provider. Pricing model comparison. Recommendation with rationale. Drives Steps 2–3 provider-specific configuration.
Open T152
02
RBE-08
Scenario A

Payment Fee Schedule Authoring Engine

Design the complete fee schedule for your new programme — transaction fees, monthly maintenance fees, ATM fees, foreign transaction fees, NSF/overdraft fees, and any programme-specific charges. The engine validates your fee structure against the CFPB UDAP/UDAAP standard, Reg E disclosure requirements, and network rules (Visa/Mastercard fee schedule constraints). Output is a structured fee schedule document ready for programme agreement negotiation with your sponsor bank and BaaS provider.

↳ Inputs
Provider selection from Step 1. Product type (DDA, prepaid, credit). Target customer segment. Volume projections. Competitive pricing benchmarks. Margin targets.
→ Outputs
Structured fee schedule. UDAP/UDAAP compliance flags. Reg E disclosure summary. Programme economics model. Feeds Step 3 and Step 4 mandate.
Open RBE-08
03
T162
Scenario A

Sponsor Bank Readiness Scorer

Score your sponsor bank partner's readiness across the dimensions that determine programme launch success: regulatory posture (OCC/FDIC enforcement history, CRA ratings), technology integration depth (API maturity, FBO account model, real-time reporting), compliance support model, and contract terms flexibility. The scorer surfaces hidden risks in the bank partnership before you sign a programme agreement — especially important for greenfield programmes where the bank relationship is being established for the first time.

↳ Inputs
Sponsor bank identity and charter type. Fee schedule from Step 2. Regulatory history. Proposed programme agreement terms. Integration model (direct API / BaaS middleware layer).
→ Outputs
Bank readiness score (0–100). Risk flags by category. Contract term red flags. Integration gap list. Go/no-go recommendation. Feeds Step 4 mandate.
Open T162
04
T164
Common to all scenarios Export & mandate

AP2 BaaS Infrastructure Mandate Builder

Translate your BaaS programme controls — provider selection, fee schedule, credit policy, settlement model, card programme parameters — into a validated AP2 Policy Mandate. The mandate includes a human-readable policy summary and an agent_instructions array deployable to an MCP agent runtime for automated programme monitoring. Built-in validation catches contradictions between policy dimensions before export — for example, a credit policy that conflicts with your Reg E fee schedule obligations.

↳ Inputs
Provider selection from Step 1. Programme economics from Step 2. Bank / settlement / interchange outputs from Step 3. Risk appetite. Compliance framework (CFPB, OCC, state).
→ Outputs
Validated AP2 BaaS Policy Mandate JSON. Human-readable programme policy summary. MCP agent_instructions array. Contradiction detection report. Board and investor-ready artefact.
Open T164
✓ What you now have

A validated greenfield BaaS programme design — provider selected, fee model built, bank partner scored

After running this chain you will have: a provider scorecard confirming your BaaS platform selection (T152), a fee schedule validated against CFPB UDAP/UDAAP and Reg E (RBE-08), a sponsor bank readiness score with contract risk flags (T162), and a validated AP2 BaaS Policy Mandate that structures the full programme design in a board-ready, MCP-ingestible format (T164).

The AP2 mandate from T164 is not just a compliance document — the agent_instructions array can be deployed to an MCP agent runtime to enforce programme policy automatically as transactions flow, turning a design artefact into live operational guardrails.