The 110-control questionnaire landed. The deadline didn't move.
CMMC, HIPAA, SOC, FedRAMP adjacency — compliance is where deals stall and audits bite. We turn your Microsoft tenant into the evidence machine: controls mapped, gaps priced, artifacts collected once and reused for every framework that asks.
It looks straightforward on paper. It never is.
Defense work now means CMMC, and CMMC means proving controls you may not have — in a tenant that may be the wrong cloud entirely. Healthcare and finance carry their own versions of the same clock.
Most Microsoft partners can't credibly play here: GCC High migrations, Purview configuration, and audit-ready evidence are specialist work.
A defensible compliance posture, evidence collected once and reused, and a partner who won't disappear after the audit.
Not vibes — each control marked met, partially met, or gapped, with the Microsoft feature or process that satisfies it named.
Every finding comes with the fixed-price engagement that closes it, so the remediation plan is a budget document, not a wish list.
Screenshots, exports, and policy documents organized per control — produced by the tenant itself, refreshed on a schedule instead of reconstructed in a panic.
The playbook, phase by phase.
Compliance work is sequencing: know the frame, measure against it, fix in priority order, keep the evidence flowing. Five phases, documents at every gate.
Which framework, which scope, which deadline — CMMC level, HIPAA covered functions, the customer questionnaire in hand. Ambition and scope get written down.
Read-only assessment of the tenant against the framework — SCuBA baselines, Purview posture, identity, device, and data controls, plus the process controls tooling can't see.
Each gap mapped to a remediation — a configuration change, a published service, or a process you'll own — with a fixed price and a sequence that respects dependencies.
Identity and data protection first (they anchor most frameworks), then device, logging, and process controls. GCC/GCC High migration runs here when the framework demands it.
Scheduled evidence refresh, drift checks against the baseline, and a standing control map — so the next questionnaire is a filtering exercise, not a fire drill.
Week ranges reflect a typical engagement — your written plan comes with dates and fixed prices before anything starts.
The horror stories, and the engineering that prevents them.
Compliance projects fail in predictable ways — usually expensively, usually right before a deadline. The four patterns and their controls:
E5 everywhere, Purview untouched, and the auditor's first question unanswerable.
Evidence reconstructed per audit, stale on arrival, owned by someone who left.
The contract required a government cloud nobody scoped, and the migration became the project.
The binder was perfect; the global admin had no MFA.
Assembled from published, fixed-price engagements.
Compliance engagements are assembled from published, fixed-price services — assessment first, then the remediations the control map calls for.
Names, not logos.
Regulated clients, telling their own stories on camera.
Recorded by the clients themselves — real names, real projects. Videos open in a new tab.
Questions we get asked, answered without spin.
If your question isn't here, ask it below — an engineer answers by email, and Mike reads every one.
Which frameworks do you actually work with?
CMMC and NIST 800-171, HIPAA, SOC 1/SOC 2 preparation, ISO 27001 preparation, and the CISA SCuBA baselines for M365 — plus customer security questionnaires, which are most companies' real compliance workload. We prepare you for auditors; we don't replace them.
Do we need GCC High?
Only specific data types force it — ITAR, certain CUI under DFARS flow-downs. It's a scoping question with a factual answer, and it changes cost materially, so we settle it in week one rather than discovering it in month six.
How disruptive is remediation?
The roadmap sequences changes so users feel as little as possible — most identity and data controls tighten silently. Anything user-visible (MFA changes, sharing restrictions, device policies) ships with the comms-and-pilot discipline from our migration playbooks.
Can you just fill in our questionnaire?
We can do better: answer it truthfully from your control map, and where the honest answer is 'no,' hand you the priced plan that turns it into 'yes.' Security teams on the other side read confident, specific answers very differently from marketing prose.
What does this cost?
Assessments are published fixed prices on this site. Remediation cost depends entirely on the gap list — which is why the roadmap prices every item individually and you approve each before work starts.
Talk to the person who’ll actually be accountable.
Thirty minutes with Mike — our CEO, not a sales rep. He’ll tell you whether we’re the right fit, including when we’re not.