Find out what you're actually getting for your development spend. An independent read on the code and how it gets built, written in plain language for the person funding it, so you can ask better questions and know which answers are good ones.
A confidential, third-party review of the code and how it gets built, written to be read by someone who isn’t an engineer. You get a plain-language account of what’s solid, what’s risky, what it would cost to leave alone, and the questions worth asking your own team next.
It isn’t a review of your people. We report on what the code and the delivery data show, never on whether someone is doing their job well, and we ask that your team knows the review is happening. A review run behind their backs produces a worse result and costs you their trust.
It also isn’t a rewrite proposal. We don’t arrive with a plan to rebuild everything, and we don’t recommend staffing changes.
We start cold, before asking anyone anything: clone it, build it, run the tests, try to make a small change. That first hour is the only chance to see the system the way a new engineer would, and how long it takes to make a safe change is one of the clearest signals there is.
Then the evidence. Commit and review history, whether the tests actually catch anything, dependency and security posture, where change concentrates, and whether it can be deployed and rolled back. Every finding cites something your own team can go and check — you’re trusting our reading, so the reading has to be verifiable.
You get a report that leads with what’s working, states each risk with its cost of inaction in business terms, and closes with the questions worth asking next. Then a live session to talk it through. If you want the findings fixed, that’s a separate quote from the same list, and your team is welcome to do it instead.
The specifics
FAQ
No. That’s the point. The report is written for the person paying for software, not for the people building it, and it ends with the questions worth asking your own team.
Not if it’s done right. We report on the code and the delivery data, never on people. We also ask that your team knows the review is happening, because a review done behind their backs produces a worse result and costs you their trust.
We can, as a separate piece of work quoted from the findings. The review itself stays independent, which is what makes it worth having.
Ways to start
Fixed scope, fixed price, agreed in writing before anything starts.
$4,500about 3 weeks from access
Best for leaders funding software development without an independent read on it
A confidential, third-party review of the code and how it gets built, written to be read by someone who isn't an engineer.
Ready when you are
Not sure where you stand? Tell us what you're seeing and we'll come back with a plan.
