Security Policy & Procedure Development

Templates that don't match practice generate findings; the assessor's interview cross-check is where boilerplate dies. Your ISSO's hours are worth more on operations, and the cost of one slipped authorization cycle exceeds this entire line item.

The 'dash-one' controls are scored findings in every control family, and IG FISMA maturity Level 2 is definitionally about formalized, documented policies and procedures. This is the evidence layer of your authorization, the part the assessor actually reads.

This is a small, severable, fixed-price increment that doesn't disturb incumbent scope, and it clears a backlog the incumbent hasn't cleared. If they had, the finding wouldn't exist.

Yes, the engagement model is built around it: a named senior lead, written disposition of every comment, and capped rounds on a published schedule. Process discipline is part of the deliverable, not an afterthought.

That's true, and Avalon leads with it rather than waiting to be asked. What Avalon offers instead: the named lead's track record, sanitized sample artifacts, and a single-family pilot at a low fixed price with written acceptance criteria, FFP terms that put the performance risk on Avalon, not the agency.

No. The suite is evidence, not an outcome, implementation and independent assessment are separate work, and Avalon says so in every proposal that includes this service.

Prior assessment reports and system inventories are routinely CUI, and buyers should expect to ask about Avalon's own NIST SP 800-171 posture and SPRS standing before sharing them. Avalon requires an NDA and contractual safeguarding terms in place before accepting any such artifact, never informally over email.