- Matter
- Case preparation & quality review
- Buyer
- Federal agencies; state program offices
- Delivery
- Cleared platform, cleared staff
- Determination
- Stays with government staff
A backlog is an inconvenience. An error rate is a liability.
We prepare, verify, and quality-review the files behind your queue — inside a system built to hold the data, worked by people vetted to see it — at a fixed price per file. Your staff spend their time deciding rather than assembling. The determination stays where the law requires it.
Where the time actually goes
Your staff aren’t slow. They’re doing three jobs.
Deciding a case takes minutes. Getting it ready to be decided takes hours — chasing missing documents, verifying what came in, reconciling records that disagree, assembling the file into something a reviewer can act on. Then, after the decision, someone has to check the work before an auditor does.
The decision itself is the part that requires your staff. The assembly before it and the review after it are not — and together they are where most of the hours go.
The obvious remedy, adding contracted help, runs into two walls at once. Those files hold criminal history data, federal tax information, or protected health information, so most vendors aren’t permitted to see them. And the few who are permitted rarely operate a system authorized to hold the record while they work it. You need both, from the same vendor, or the record leaves your control on the way to getting cleared.
What you actually buy
We don’t sell hours. We sell finished files.
Staff augmentation prices the wrong unit. It turns our efficiency into your savings only in theory, and in practice it makes throughput something you have to supervise. So we price the output instead: a fixed rate per file delivered decision-ready, against a committed completeness standard, with the record assembled to be read by whoever questions it next.
The platform is what makes that price hold. Intake, matching, completeness checks, and the audit trail are done by the system, every time, the same way. Our people spend their hours on the judgment the system can’t make — which is the only part worth paying a vetted human to do.
Fixed price per file, tiered
Set from a calibration sample on your real queue, priced in complexity tiers so a genuinely hard file doesn’t get the same treatment as a routine one. You know the cost before it starts.
Committed quality standard
An agreed threshold for completeness and verification accuracy, measured by blind re-review and reported each cycle. Work outside it is our cost to redo, not yours.
A record, not a number
Each file arrives with the evidence gathered, what was verified and how, and the open questions flagged — so the decision takes minutes and holds up later.
Paying for hours buys activity. Paying for files buys the thing you actually needed.
Where the work happens
The service runs inside our system, not inside your inbox.
That is a deliberate choice rather than a convenience. Work that moves through shared drives and mail attachments has no boundary, which means it has no access model and no audit trail worth the name. Running it in one system gives the engagement a defined perimeter — one place the record lives, one way access is granted, one log of everything done to it.
It is also what makes the rest of this page possible to state plainly. A fixed price needs repeatable work. A compliance posture needs something specific to be in scope. Both point at the same system.
This system is the boundary. When a standard is named in the next section, this is the thing being held to it.
The part most vendors skip
Vetting isn’t overhead here. It’s the entry requirement.
Different queues sit behind different authorities, and each sets its own bar for who may see the record and what may hold it. We staff and build to the standard the data requires, and sequence vetting ahead of production work rather than alongside it. Where a formal outsourcing or interconnection agreement is required, that is the instrument we work under.
| What’s in scope | Authority | Standard we build and staff to |
|---|---|---|
| The platform itself | FedRAMP High | Architected against the High baseline — see our status below, which is a roadmap commitment and not an authorization we hold today. |
| Federal information systems | FISMA / NIST SP 800-53 | High-baseline control set, documented system security plan, continuous monitoring, and incident response aligned to agency reporting timelines. |
| Criminal justice information | CJIS Security Policy | Fingerprint-based state and national check completed before access, security awareness training, agency authorization, and CJIS-compliant handling in the system. |
| Federal tax information | IRS Pub. 1075 | Background investigation, signed disclosure awareness, restricted physical and logical access, and the notification requirements before work begins. |
| Protected health information | HIPAA / State PII | Business associate agreement, role-scoped minimum-necessary access, audited handling. |
| Criminal history record info | 28 CFR Part 906 | Compact Council outsourcing standard: authorized access, use limitation, no retention beyond authorization, audits and sanctions. Applies chiefly to our state program work. |
FedRAMP High is the baseline we build to — not an authorization we hold.
Our platform is architected against the NIST SP 800-53 High controls that FedRAMP High draws from, and pursuing authorization is on our roadmap. We do not hold a FedRAMP authorization today, and we are not listed as In Process on the FedRAMP Marketplace.
Every vendor’s status there is public and takes a minute to check. We would rather you check ours and find it stated correctly here than find it overstated.
We never make the determination.
Adjudication is an inherently governmental function. In federally funded programs the decision is reserved to government staff, and in several it may not be delegated to a contractor at all. We treat that as a design constraint rather than an obstacle: we do the assembly before the decision and the review after it, and the decision itself stays with your people. Any vendor offering you the decision is selling something the program cannot buy.
Which standards apply is a function of your program, your system categorization, and your data-sharing agreements. We scope that in writing during calibration, before any record is touched.
How it runs
Four phases, and you can stop after the first.
Calibration exists so neither of us prices a backlog we haven’t seen. If the sample says the work isn’t a fit, that is a legitimate outcome — and a cheap one, arrived at early.
How we’re built
Thirty people, one tier, everyone vetted before they touch a record.
Thirty across engineering and practice — the people who build the system and the people who work your files, under one roof and one standard. The engineers are vetted to the same bar as the practitioners, because in a software-enabled service the person with production access sees the record just as surely as the person reviewing it. Treating that as a separate, lower-trust role is how vendors end up with a compliance boundary that doesn’t hold.
We don’t subcontract, and we don’t staff a bench. Growth in this business normally means adding a cheaper layer underneath the experienced one — and that layer is where error rates and access problems both come from.
Engineering and practice
No third-party labor
Vetted before access
Controls we build to
Next step
Send us the queue you can’t get to.
Calibration is a small, bounded, fixed-fee engagement. It tells you the real per-case cost of clearing the backlog, and tells us whether we’re the right firm to do it. Either answer is worth having early.