CMMC&DefenseComplianceinNewYorkCity

We treat CMMC as an operational program, not a one-time project. For Level 1 we stand up the self-attestation evidence you'll need for annual senior-official affirmation. For Level 2 we run the gap assessment, close findings via sequenced remediation, and coordinate with a C3PAO partner when you're ready for the certification assessment.

We map 7012's 14 families to concrete controls in your environment, configure your cloud footprint for FedRAMP Moderate equivalency (typically GCC High or Azure Government), and operationalize the 72-hour reporting workflow including DIBNet credentials and media preservation.

Full-lifecycle implementation: control-by-control gap assessment, remediation roadmap with effort scoring, SSP and POA&M authoring, evidence collection, and periodic re-baselining as contracts and Rev 3 adoption evolve.

We design access controls that enforce U.S.-person-only handling of ITAR/EAR-controlled technical data — identity-based segmentation, geofencing, managed-service-provider staffing attestations, and documented deemed-export safeguards for your offshoring decisions.

If your pipeline includes contracts trending toward Level 3, we scope the expected 800-53 enhancements, identify which 800-171 controls need deepening, and sequence a multi-year uplift so you're not surprised when a Level 3 flow-down appears.

NYDFS Part 500 shares substantial surface area with NIST 800-171 — multi-factor, encryption, incident response, vendor risk, audit logging. For NYC firms subject to both, we build a harmonized control program with one SSP, one risk assessment, and one evidence repository that satisfies DFS examiners and DoD assessors. Different frameworks, one operating model.

The SHIELD Act's 'reasonable safeguards' standard is baseline — any 800-171-aligned program exceeds it. We document that alignment explicitly so your legal team can defend the safeguards standard in a notification event, and we integrate SHIELD notification triggers with DFARS 7012 DoD reporting so a single incident doesn't trigger conflicting timelines.

Defense firms increasingly use biometric access control at CUI-handling spaces. We design those systems to satisfy DoD facility-security expectations while respecting NYC's disclosure and consent obligations — and structure the data-retention side so biometric templates don't bleed into CUI storage scope.