Access Control and Provisioning Workflow
Implementing access granting, review, and revocation with records, since auditors test whether access was removed promptly rather than whether policy says it should be.
Custom Software
Hire SOC 2 Compliance Engineers
SOC 2 readiness engineering means implementing and evidencing the technical controls an auditor tests against the trust services criteria. Taction Software builds those controls and the evidence they generate, alongside the CPA firm that performs the examination and the compliance function that owns policies and scope.
The distinction matters. We are a software engineering firm, not an audit firm. We do not perform examinations, issue reports, or determine whether controls are operating effectively. What we do is build systems whose controls satisfy the criteria and produce evidence continuously, which is what a Type II examination period actually requires. Our hire dedicated developers hub covers implementation roles.
Tell Us Your Requirements
Our experts are ready to understand your business goals.
Trusted Partners
Trusted by Industry Leaders Worldwide
Recognition
Awards & Recognitions
What This Engineering Work Produces
The criteria cover security primarily, with availability, confidentiality, processing integrity, and privacy added by scope decision. Much is technical and buildable. The work below reflects that, following practices in our HIPAA engineering guidance.
Change Management With Approval Records
Building deployment pipelines that record approval, testing, and who deployed what, since change management is among the most commonly tested control areas.
Monitoring and Alerting Implementation
Building system monitoring with defined alerting and response, since availability and security criteria both depend on detection capability.
Vulnerability Management Workflow
Integrating scanning and remediation with tracked timelines, since evidence of consistent remediation over the period matters more than current state.
Backup and Recovery Verification
Implementing backup with tested restoration, since auditors examine whether recovery was verified rather than whether backups exist.
Continuous Evidence Generation
Building evidence collection into operations, since a Type II examination covers a period and requires proof throughout rather than at a point.
Framework and Operational Context This Work Requires
Type II examinations test operation over time, which changes what engineering must produce. Controls must run consistently and generate proof continuously rather than being demonstrated once. The context below spans the healthcare work you assign.
01
Type II Tests Operation Over a Period
Controls must operate consistently throughout the examination period. A control implemented correctly and bypassed once produces an exception.
02
Evidence Must Cover the Whole Period
Point-in-time proof is insufficient. Evidence generation must run continuously, which is an engineering requirement rather than a documentation task.
03
Scope Determines Which Criteria Apply
Security is always included; other categories are scope decisions. Your compliance function and auditor determine which apply before engineering begins.
04
Exceptions Come From Inconsistency
Most findings arise from controls that usually operate and occasionally do not. Consistency matters more than sophistication.
05
Access Review Timeliness Is Tested
Auditors examine whether access reviews occurred on schedule and whether departures resulted in prompt revocation, both of which are evidenced.
06
Report Issuance Belongs to the Auditor
The examination and report are the CPA firm’s work. No engineering vendor issues reports or determines control effectiveness.
Technical Skills This Work Requires
The differentiating skills are consistency engineering and continuous evidence rather than control design. The competencies below reflect that, with verification consistent with our quality assurance approach.
Access Lifecycle Automation
Building provisioning and deprovisioning that operates reliably with records, since manual processes produce the inconsistency examinations detect.
Change Pipeline With Enforced Gates
Implementing deployment requiring approval and testing, where bypassing is structurally prevented rather than discouraged by policy.
Monitoring and Incident Workflow
Building detection, alerting, and documented response so incident handling produces evidence rather than depending on recollection.
Evidence Pipeline Engineering
Automating collection so proof accumulates continuously across the examination period rather than being assembled before fieldwork.
Backup Verification Automation
Implementing tested restoration on schedule with records, since untested backups fail the criterion regardless of their existence.
Secure Configuration and Drift Detection
Establishing baselines with monitoring, following practices under our certifications and compliance approach.
How We Evaluate SOC 2 Compliance Engineers
The distinguishing question is what caused an exception in a prior examination. Engineers who have been through one know that consistency rather than control design produces findings. Our assessment centers on automation and evidence continuity. Our delivery process includes review points where you can reassess fit.
Exception Experience
We ask what produced findings in an examination they supported. Engineers who have been through one understand where consistency actually breaks.
Evidence Continuity Approach
We ask how evidence covered the period. Engineers assembling proof before fieldwork produced documentation weaker than continuous generation.
Access Revocation Timeliness
We ask how departures were handled. Manual revocation produces the delays examinations detect and document as exceptions.
Change Gate Enforcement
We ask whether deployment gates could be bypassed. Gates that can be skipped under pressure produce exceptions during the examination period.
Backup Restoration Testing
We ask how restoration was verified. Engineers who never tested restoration have backups whose usefulness nobody established.
Verified Regulated Experience
We describe which environments each engineer worked in and what they implemented. We do not claim audit credentials or certifications for engineers.
Engagement Options for Readiness Work
Engagements should follow your auditor’s scope and account for the examination period. Structures below reflect that, and our engagement models accommodate project or ongoing arrangements.
Readiness Gap Assessment
Reviewing implemented controls against the criteria in scope, identifying where consistency or evidence generation would produce exceptions.
Control and Evidence Implementation
Building the automation identified as gaps, particularly access lifecycle, change gates, and evidence pipelines that operate without manual intervention.
Pre-Examination Remediation
Addressing findings before the examination period begins, since remediating during the period leaves part of it evidenced under old controls.
Augmenting Your Security Function
Where you own the program, staff augmentation adds implementation capacity within your existing controls and evidence conventions.
Full Team With Controls Built In
A dedicated healthcare development team builds to criteria during development, which costs less than retrofitting before an examination.
Fixed-Scope Automation Delivery
Where gaps are defined, a fixed-scope build delivers the automation and evidence pipelines with documentation for your auditor.
Tell Us Your Examination Timeline
Share your auditor’s scope and examination period dates. Remediation before the period begins is substantially more effective than during it.
Scope Boundaries and What We Do Not Do
We do not perform examinations, issue reports, or determine control effectiveness. Those belong to your CPA firm. Scope and policy belong to your compliance function. We build to HIPAA-aligned practices where HIPAA applies; software cannot be HIPAA certified.
01
We Are Not an Audit Firm
Examinations and reports are performed by CPA firms. We build controls and evidence they test, which is a different function entirely.
02
Scope Belongs to Compliance and the Auditor
Which trust services criteria apply is determined by your compliance function with your auditor rather than by engineering.
03
Policy Controls Sit Outside Engineering
Policies, training, and organizational controls are your compliance function’s work. Engineering cannot close those gaps.
04
Evidence Reflects Actual Operation
We produce evidence of controls as they run rather than describing intended practice, since examinations test what actually happened.
05
Sensitive Environment Handling
Where in-scope systems hold behavioral health data, additional restriction applies. We built CHIPSS, a behavioral health system, where such segmentation was foundational.
06
Claims We Would Not Make
We would not describe our work as audit or attestation, produce evidence of controls not actually operating, or suggest our involvement affects a report opinion.
Cost to Engage Readiness Engineering
Cost tracks automation scope and existing control maturity rather than criteria count. Examination fees are entirely separate. We publish no figures on examination outcomes, because those are auditor determinations.
- 01
MVP or Single Module
$40,000 to $80,000
Gap assessment and remediation for a bounded scope with access lifecycle automation, change gates, and evidence collection.
- 02
Full Platform Build
$80,000 to $200,000
Control implementation across an estate with continuous evidence pipelines, monitoring, incident workflow, backup verification, and configuration management.
- 03
Enterprise Deployment
Starting at $200,000
Multi-system implementation across environments with governance documentation, evidence infrastructure, and coordinated remediation before examination.
- 04
Discovery Phase Scoping
Discovery is paid and time-boxed. It produces a control gap assessment against your auditor’s scope, exception risk findings, and an itemized fixed-scope estimate.
- 05
Cost Drivers to Expect
Criteria in scope, existing automation maturity, environment count, access lifecycle complexity, evidence collection state, and examination timeline pressure.
- 06
Ongoing Support Costs
Examinations recur annually and controls must operate continuously. Budget for evidence pipeline maintenance and remediation as findings arise.
Third-party licensing, cloud infrastructure, data subscriptions, and hardware are separate from engineering cost and itemised clearly.
Examination fees, auditor engagement, and compliance program costs are entirely separate from our scope.
Why Engage Readiness Engineering Through Taction
Two questions matter. Whether evidence generation is continuous, and whether the vendor is clear about not performing examinations. Taction Software has built healthcare software since 2013, more than twelve years, with over 200 healthcare projects delivered and ISO 27001 certification. Leadership brings more than twenty years of personal experience in the field, which is separate from company age.
ISO 27001 Certified Information Security
Taction Software holds ISO 27001 certification covering our own information security management, which reflects operating under external assessment ourselves.
Experience Under Regulatory Registration
We built Revive Ease and PainKare, both FDA-registered applications. That work established the change control discipline examinations test.
Clinical Systems Built From the Inside
We built Voyant Health, an EHR platform, and CHIPSS, a behavioral health system, which informs how controls apply to clinical environments.
Evidence Generated Continuously
Controls are built so operation produces proof throughout the period, which is what a Type II examination requires rather than point-in-time demonstration.
Gates That Cannot Be Bypassed
Change controls prevent deployment rather than warning about it, which occasionally blocks a release someone wanted and prevents examination exceptions.
We Will Say the Gap Is Policy
Where findings concern policy or training, engineering cannot close them. We report that rather than building technical controls around an organizational gap.
FAQs
Frequently Asked Questions
We work from your auditor’s scope and examination timeline, review implemented controls, then present engineers with regulated environment experience for approval.
Bounded remediation runs $40,000 to $80,000, control implementation across an estate $80,000 to $200,000, and multi-system programs start at $200,000. Examination fees are separate.
No. We are not an audit firm. Examinations and reports are performed by CPA firms, and we build the controls and evidence they test.
Type II tests operation over a period, which requires controls running consistently and generating evidence continuously rather than being demonstrated once.
Before the examination period begins. Remediating during the period leaves part of it evidenced under the controls you were replacing.
Both are readiness engineering for assessed frameworks. The criteria, evidence expectations, and assessor relationship differ, though the engineering discipline overlaps substantially.
Share your auditor’s scope, examination period dates, current control maturity, evidence collection state, and the engagement model you have in mind. We will prioritize remediation before the period begins. We do not perform examinations.