The Challenge
Why Government makes Compliance Remediation harder than it looks.
Government systems fail compliance audits not because of negligence but because the compliance frameworks (FedRAMP, FISMA, NIST) were not built into the architecture at the start. Retroactive FedRAMP authorization is an order of magnitude harder than building for it from day one. We do both — and we've done the harder version.
Compliance Frameworks
fedramp
stateramp
fisma
nist
fips 140
Methodology
How We Deliver in Government
Fixed-price delivery. Working systems. No discovery phase.. Every engineer assigned to this engagement understands government before they write their first line of code. Compliance frameworks — FEDRAMP and STATERAMP — are enforced at every commit, not assessed at the end.
✓Government-qualified engineers assigned before kickoff
✓FEDRAMP compliance mapped to architecture on day one
✓Production-ready output — not prototypes or proof-of-concept
✓Automated compliance monitoring through ALICE at every commit
✓Full IP ownership transferred at engagement close
Engagement Model
How We Engage
Embedded Capabilities
Platforms Deployed
These aren't products we sell. They're capabilities embedded in every engagement of this type.
ProofGrid
API Compliance Verification
Every integration our engineers build gets ProofGrid compliance monitoring as standard. It's why our API architectures don't create compliance gaps that surface during audits.
Regure
Regulatory Intelligence
Our teams deploy with live regulatory monitoring. When HIPAA, GDPR, UAE PDPL, or FCA frameworks change, Regure flags it and queues the engineering response before the client's legal team finishes reading the announcement.
ALICE
QA & Compliance Engine
This is the single most important reason our teams deliver compliance-native systems. ALICE makes it mechanically impossible to ship non-compliant code. It's not a QA phase — it's infrastructure-level enforcement at every commit.
Related