The hard part is not choosing a vendor — it is writing an agreement that defines what good looks like, and then holding someone to it.
Who this is for
Organizations selecting or replacing an MSP, MSSP, or cloud provider, and organizations with an incumbent vendor whose performance they cannot objectively evaluate.
Problems we address
- Requirements defined loosely enough that any vendor can claim to meet them
- MSPs selected on price and relationship rather than capability
- Agreements without measurable service levels or security obligations
- No internal ability to evaluate whether the vendor is performing
- Providers unfamiliar with defense compliance requirements
- Transition risk when changing providers
Scope and approach
We define requirements specifically enough to differentiate — including compliance obligations your provider must actually support, such as CUI handling, GCC High experience, and evidence production for assessments.
We manage a structured selection with consistent evaluation criteria, then help negotiate agreements with measurable service levels and clear security responsibilities. After selection, we can stay engaged as the technical counterpart who reviews performance on your behalf.
Typical deliverables
- Requirements definition including compliance-specific obligations
- Vendor evaluation framework with weighted criteria
- RFP or requirements document and structured response evaluation
- Reference validation and capability verification
- Contract, SLA, and security obligation review
- Transition plan with rollback provisions
- Ongoing performance review against defined measures
Framework and technology context
MSP and MSSP capability assessment, DFARS and NIST SP 800-171 provider obligations, CMMC ESP considerations, and Microsoft partner and GCC High requirements.
If you cannot tell whether your provider is doing a good job, you need an independent technical counterpart.