Where you actually stand against the standard you are going for, before you spend the money finding out the expensive way.
Four questions every certification programme opens with, and almost nobody can answer on day one:
- How much of the target standard do you already satisfy through what you already hold?
- Which of your existing controls will an assessor accept as evidence, and which only look like they will?
- What is genuinely missing, as opposed to what looks missing because it is documented elsewhere under another name?
- Where are you claiming coverage you cannot defend?
What you get
A control-level map from the standards you hold to the standard you are pursuing, drawn from a graph of 686 frameworks, 21,696 controls and 306,653 cross-framework mappings.
For every control in the target standard: satisfied, partially satisfied or absent, naming the specific control of yours that carries it.
The refutations. 42,246 mappings in that graph have been tested and rejected, each with the reason recorded. Where a mapping looks obvious and does not hold, you get the argument for why rather than silence. That record is what stops a programme building on an assumption that fails at assessment.
The evidence list. For each gap, the artefact an assessor asks to see, not a restatement of the control.
What it is not
Not an audit, not a certification, not a readiness score. It does not write your policies and it does not remediate your gaps.
Price and terms
$5,000 fixed. Ten business days from the date you send your current certification list and your target standard. No scoping call is needed to quote it, and the price does not move with the number of controls, sites, or the size of the organisation.
Why a fixed price works here
Because the expensive part is already built. The graph exists, the mappings exist, the refutations exist. What you are buying is that judgement applied to your position, not discovery time billed by the day.