Choose the Work Addressing Your Next Security Decision.

It assesses your systems, security controls, policies and operating practices against relevant requirements. The Governance Blueprint also examines control ownership, supporting evidence and unresolved risk decisions, giving you documented findings and a prioritized action plan. NIST SP 800-53 provides the assessment foundation, with tests tailored to your organization across all 20 control families.

Plan an annual review, with additional assessments after a cloud migration, acquisition, major product launch, new compliance requirement or security incident. For organizations pursuing SOC 2, ISO/IEC 27001 or CMMC, regular reviews help keep control evidence current and support audit readiness.

The Governance Blueprint helps identify changing risks, control gaps and unclear ownership early, so your team can prioritize improvements before they become more costly.

The Governance Blueprint delivers your assessment findings and prioritized action plan in as little as 2 weeks. Our assessment covers all 20 NIST SP 800-53 control families, with tests tailored to your systems, cloud environments and operating practices. Larger or more complex environments may require additional time, with your delivery date confirmed before work begins.

A penetration test attempts to exploit weaknesses in selected systems, networks or applications. An IT security audit examines the broader security program, including policies, processes, access controls, technical safeguards and compliance evidence.

The Governance Blueprint adds a clear view of control ownership and risk decisions, with a prioritized improvement plan. The two assessments complement each other: an audit establishes your priorities, while penetration testing helps validate how specific defenses withstand an attack.

Yes. The Governance Blueprint reviews cloud security controls, including identity and access management, configuration safeguards, logging, data protection and shared responsibilities. We assess cloud controls alongside relevant on-premises controls and governance practices, using evidence from your environment to identify gaps and prioritize improvements.

Your Governance Blueprint brings together:

Security & Governance Review: tailored tests across all 20 NIST SP 800-53 control families, supporting evidence and accountability gaps

Prioritized Action Plan: recommended actions, owners and timelines and closure evidence

The Governance Blueprint turns your IT security audit findings into a prioritized security remediation roadmap. Each finding includes a risk rating, recommended corrective action, suggested control owner, dependencies and target timeline. It also identifies the evidence needed to confirm closure.

Your team gets a clear plan to address cybersecurity risks, close compliance gaps and strengthen security controls. Leadership can use the roadmap to prioritize investment, assign accountability and track progress toward audit readiness and compliance goals.

Yes. The Governance Blueprint helps you prepare for a successful first audit by identifying control and evidence gaps before your independent assessment. We map your controls to relevant SOC 2 criteria or ISO/IEC 27001 requirements and provide a prioritized security remediation roadmap.

Your team gains clear actions to strengthen controls, organize audit evidence and address readiness gaps, helping you approach your first SOC 2 examination or ISO 27001 certification audit with confidence.

NIST SP 800-53 forms the assessment foundation. The Governance Blueprint assesses controls against relevant SOC 2 criteria, ISO/IEC 27001, NIST CSF 2.0, PCI DSS, CMMC and HIPAA Security Rule requirements.

We map findings across the requirements relevant to your business, customers and industry within one assessment. This helps your team reuse supporting evidence, understand overlapping controls and prioritize compliance gaps through a coordinated remediation roadmap.

The Governance Blueprint starts at $5,000, with a fixed price agreed before work begins. Following your free 30-minute consultation, you receive a written proposal confirming the assessment scope, deliverables, timeline and fee.

Visit our pricing page to compare options, or book a consultation for a quote tailored to your organization.

We walk your team through the Governance Blueprint findings, explain the cybersecurity risks and clarify your remediation priorities. You receive 30 days of follow-up access to ask questions about the report and next steps.

Ready to put your roadmap into action? Continue with our virtual CISO service for ongoing security leadership, remediation oversight and compliance program management. Your assessment becomes the starting point for coordinating improvements, assigning accountability and reporting progress to leadership.

The Governance Blueprint is designed to fit around your day-to-day operations. We review documentation, configuration exports and existing control evidence, supported by scheduled interviews and walkthroughs with your team.

Evidence requests and meetings are coordinated in advance to keep the assessment focused and minimize demands on your staff. Your systems remain in normal operation throughout the review.

Our IT security and governance assessments support financial services, healthcare and healthtech, technology and SaaS, government contractors, investment portfolios and family offices.

Temi brings over two decades of experience across technology, financial services, healthcare and media. The Governance Blueprint adapts the assessment to your industry’s security risks, operating environment and relevant compliance requirements, including SOC 2, ISO/IEC 27001, NIST CSF 2.0, PCI DSS, CMMC and HIPAA.

Three things define the Governance Blueprint:

Connected security and governance: We review all 20 NIST SP 800-53 control families through tests tailored to your organization, connecting controls, evidence, ownership and risk decisions with your target compliance frameworks.

Actionable findings: Your security remediation roadmap sets out priorities, corrective actions, recommended owners and timelines so your team can move from assessment to improvement. The roadmap identifies the evidence needed to confirm closure.

Founder-led expertise: Every engagement is led by Temi, bringing over two decades of experience and more than 100 assessments across multiple industries, with fixed pricing and delivery in as little as 2 weeks.

Bring the request or decision you face. The consultation identifies an appropriate starting point; several overlapping questions often lead to an integrated assessment.

Yes. We agree ownership with your IT, security, risk, legal and compliance participants rather than assuming their responsibilities disappear.

Independent examination, certification and assessment fees are separate unless the written proposal expressly states otherwise. The external provider issues its own assurance result.

The Pricing page presents approved starting-price offers with units and scope explanations. The written proposal confirms the fee and terms for your engagement.

The service directory describes assessment, readiness, governance and leadership work. A software product has its own license, configuration and operating responsibilities. If tools or other providers are needed, the proposal should distinguish those costs and responsibilities from our deliverables.

The scope must state what coverage is included. Incident Planning addresses preparedness and decision-making. Monitoring, alert handling and active incident response require separately defined operational arrangements. Use your designated responder's emergency channel for an active incident.

Start with the requirement, available owners and current evidence. The Security for Startups pathway helps identify an appropriate starting scope. Company size alone does not determine which assessment, readiness or leadership work is needed.

The proposal should identify which activities can be performed remotely and whether any evidence or work requires an on-site participant. Confirm access, availability, locations and travel arrangements before agreeing the plan.

Begin with the actual request, relevant activities and jurisdictions. Confirm whether the requirement concerns a report, management system, contractual obligation or regulatory duty. The applicable service page sets out the readiness pathway; qualified advisers should confirm legal interpretations where needed.

For example, if a UK buyer asks for Cyber Essentials, confirm the required level, certification scope and any expressly accepted alternative. Cyber Essentials uses a self-assessment verified by a certification body; Cyber Essentials Plus adds a technical audit to verify the same five controls. The scheme does not assure a particular product or service. A governance assessment, roadmap or readiness report is not that certificate or technical verification. Check the current scheme requirements and the buyer’s acceptance terms before choosing work or promising an outcome.

Confirm the responsible practitioner, roles and expected participation in the proposal. Review relevant qualifications and experience, and agree how changes in personnel or responsibilities will be handled.

An assessment and a penetration test answer different questions. Technical testing needs an explicitly authorized target, method and scope. The proposal identifies whether testing is included, supplied by a separate provider or outside the engagement.

Different methods observe different parts of an application:

Static application security testing (SAST) examines source or compiled code without running the application. It can identify code-level issues; a finding alone does not establish exploitability in the deployed system. [1]

Dynamic application security testing (DAST) exercises a running application from the outside and examines its responses. Coverage depends on the interfaces, authenticated roles and paths reached by the tests. [2]

Interactive application security testing (IAST) uses runtime instrumentation to observe an application as tests exercise it. What it can observe depends on the supported runtime, instrumentation and code paths exercised. [3]

Ask which application version and environment were examined, what access and test coverage were available, and which findings were validated. These methods provide different evidence; their names alone do not establish equivalent coverage or replace a separately scoped penetration test. Reviewing their results does not perform the tests or provide an independent audit opinion. Any testing needs its own authorized scope and delivery responsibilities.

Use the selected service's stated scope and delivery terms. The proposal confirms the plan and dependencies for the actual engagement. Readiness work, ongoing leadership and technical implementation have different delivery requirements; a timeline for one service does not apply automatically to another.

The agreed handoff identifies open actions, owners and supporting evidence. Further readiness support, remediation, verification or ongoing leadership is included only where the written scope says so. The organization retains responsibility for its decisions and operating controls.