← All consultingCYBAIR · posture, compliance, evidence

Cyber AI Readiness Assessment

A CYBAIR-driven posture and compliance assessment of the AI workloads you actually run — CRI score, framework crosswalk, evidence package, and a remediation roadmap that tracks to closure. Compliance is included; it is not a second package.

Assessment2–4 weeks
from $50,000Engagement fee plus the platform units the work consumes — shaped below.
Brief us on this →

Why this engagement exists

Most organizations cannot answer a direct question about whether their AI deployments are secure or defensible, because posture is measured at the wrong level. Generic GRC scanners report policy checkboxes; they do not see the workload — the model, the RAG pipeline, the agentic workflow — where exposure actually lives. Compliance, evidence, and attestation are then treated as a second project, assembled by hand the moment an auditor, insurer, or customer asks for proof.

What it looks like in your organization

  • Security reviews describe controls in general but cannot produce workload-level posture on demand.
  • An auditor, insurer, or customer request triggers a manual evidence scramble that takes weeks.
  • Compliance obligations (EU AI Act, NIST AI RMF, ISO 42001, CMMC) are tracked in spreadsheets disconnected from the systems they govern.
  • Remediation findings arrive as a dump with no owner, sequence, or closure tracking.

What you take away

Every deliverable is named, formatted, and tied to the outcome it enables. Nothing ships as a deck with no use.

CRI posture scorecard with evidence package

Scorecard + evidence bundle

A Cyber Readiness Index score per workload with the control-level findings and supporting evidence underneath each score.

You can show a defensible, workload-level posture number to a board, insurer, or regulator — with the evidence attached, not promised.

Framework compliance crosswalk

Crosswalk report

Each workload mapped against the regimes that bind you — EU AI Act, NIST AI RMF, ISO 42001, CMMC, and any additional frameworks in your environment.

Compliance questions get answered from the assessment itself instead of launching a separate gap-analysis project.

Evidence & attestation strategy

Strategy document

What evidence to keep, how it is generated, and the attestation language boards, insurers, and regulators will accept.

The next audit or insurance review starts from prepared evidence instead of a fire drill.

Prioritized remediation roadmap

Roadmap with closure tracking

Findings sequenced by risk and effort, each with an owner, a priority, and a closure criterion — not a findings dump.

Your team knows exactly what to fix first, and leadership can track remediation to completion.

Executive narrative

Briefing deck

The posture story translated out of engineering language: what is exposed, what is defensible, and what it takes to close the gap.

Leadership and the board can make funding and risk decisions from a single, honest picture.

How this engagement runs

2–4 weeks · 4 phases
01

Scope the workloads

Week 1

You nominate the AI systems in play — models, RAG pipelines, agentic workflows. Each one is a CYBAIR unit; we confirm the estate, the sensitivity envelope, and the frameworks that bind you before scoring starts.

Deliverables
Confirmed workload inventoryFramework scope list
You exit with

A signed-off scope: exactly which workloads are assessed and against which regimes.

02

Profile and score

Weeks 1–2

CYBAIR profiles architecture, controls, and exposure for each nominated workload and produces a Cyber Readiness Index with mapped frameworks. We work with your system owners, not around them.

Deliverables
CRI score per workloadControl-level findings
You exit with

Workload-level posture you can defend — numbers with evidence underneath, not a maturity guess.

03

Evidence and attestation

Weeks 2–3

We turn scores into an evidence package and an attestation strategy: what to keep, how it is generated, and the language boards, insurers, and regulators will accept.

Deliverables
Evidence packageAttestation strategy
You exit with

Audit- and insurance-ready evidence assembled from the assessment, not after it.

04

Remediation to closure

Weeks 3–4

Findings become a sequenced plan with owners, priority, and closure criteria. We close with an executive briefing — and a path into the Cyber Readiness retainer if you want the picture kept current.

Deliverables
Remediation roadmapExecutive briefing
You exit with

A plan your team can run immediately, and leadership clarity on residual risk.

How the fee is built

The engagement fee moves on three multipliers — sensitivity, involvement, and organization type — and the platform units the work consumes are their own lines. Nothing is hidden inside a flat number.

Sensitivity

×0.90 – ×1.30 on the engagement fee

Sensitivity sets the handling envelope around the whole engagement: how data moves, where evidence lives, who can touch it, and what containment we must maintain. Higher sensitivity means cleared handling, segregated evidence, and slower, more deliberate operations — real cost that a flat fee would hide.

Public×0.90

Open information. Standard handling, no containment overhead.

Confidential×1.00

Proprietary business information. NDA-grade handling and controlled evidence storage.

Regulated×1.15

Compliance-bound data. Framework controls and audit-ready evidence handling shape the work.

Restricted×1.30

Defense-grade pathways. Cleared handling, boundary containment, and evidence segregation inside your perimeter.

Involvement

×0.85 – ×1.35 on the engagement fee

Involvement is how much Multipolar operator time is on the hook. Counsel at checkpoints is a different commitment than embedded delivery inside your team, your systems, and your cadence. The multiplier tracks senior hours actually committed — not a markup.

Light×0.85

We advise and interpret; your team executes. Senior counsel at defined checkpoints.

Standard×1.00

We run the engagement end to end, with your stakeholders at the decision points.

Deep×1.35

Embedded delivery. Our operators work inside your team until the outcome is actually in place.

Organization type

×0.85 – ×1.25 on the engagement fee

The same technical work lands differently depending on who is buying it. Federal and defense engagements carry procurement, compliance, security review, and stakeholder alignment that a mid-market engagement does not. The multiplier prices the coordination and accountability surface, not the analysis.

SMB / Mid-Market×0.85

Fewer stakeholders, faster decisions, lighter coordination overhead.

Enterprise×1.00

The baseline: standard commercial engagement surface.

State & Local×1.00

Public-sector procurement and multi-agency stakeholder surface.

VC / PE×1.00

Investment-platform cadence: deal-driven timelines and IC audiences.

Partners×1.00

Joint-delivery and enablement motions with partner delivery teams.

Auditors / Insurers×1.00

Assurance functions: evidence standards and underwriting audiences.

Federal×1.15

Federal procurement, compliance crosswalks, and multi-office alignment.

Defense×1.25

Mission-critical review, security handling, and acquisition-process alignment.

Scope & scale of platform units

The largest component of most totals

Every engagement consumes platform units — CYBAIR workloads, AIR organization bands, GENOMIA twins, WINS scenarios, SiliconAIR systems. Units track your estate, not our appetite for flat pricing: an 8-workload assessment and a 50-workload assessment are different engagements and are priced as such. You set the scope in the configurator; the total moves with it, and nothing is quietly under-scoped to fit a number.

Simulation compute

Estimated until configured · billed on actuals

WINS simulations carry real compute costs that scale with scenario count, branching depth, and campaign length. A focused single-scenario game and a sustained multi-agent campaign are orders of magnitude apart. Facilitation and after-action are in the fee; compute is estimated once the game is configured, then billed on actuals — you pay for what actually runs, never a padded average.

Platform units in this engagement

Units track your estate, not our appetite for flat pricing. You set the scope; the total moves with it. Each unit below is consumed by this engagement and billed as its own line.

CYBAIR™$5,000 per workload
AI workload

Each model, RAG pipeline, or agentic workflow you nominate for posture, compliance, evidence, and attestation.

The number of AI workloads you put in scope. Minimum one. You choose the estate to assess — the count is yours to set, and we do not flatten ten workloads and fifty into the same fee.

Engagement profile
Platform units
Fee statement
Engagement fee$25,000
CYBAIR · 5 AI workloads × $5,000$25,000
Total$50,000

What the engagement fee covers

  • Scoping, workshops, and interpretation
  • Every deliverable listed on this page
  • Cross-framework mapping where the package includes compliance
  • Executive translation — board, program-office, or IC language
  • Handoff and a defensible next-step recommendation

What it does not cover

  • Platform units consumed by the work (shown as their own lines)
  • WINS simulation compute (estimated, then billed on actuals)

Frequently asked questions

No. Framework crosswalks, evidence, and attestation are inside this assessment. We do not sell a standalone Cyber AI Compliance Assessment or Cyber Evidence & Attestation engagement — that work belongs here.

Ready to brief us on the Cyber AI Readiness Assessment?

We choose who we work with and confirm scope, capacity, and final pricing in the briefing.

Request a briefing →