Issued by: Converged Security Institute (CSI)
Version: 1.0
Date: September 2025
Location: Martorell, Catalonia, Spain
Credentialing Authority: CSI Advisory Panel – C-CSP Chartered Members
The CSI Product-Oriented Endorsement & Readiness Framework provides a comprehensive methodology for certifying market-ready converged security solutions. This framework validates technical interoperability, regulatory compliance, and deployment maturity while promoting vendor-neutral standards aligned with EN, ISO, and EU directives.
To strengthen accessibility and global relevance while maintaining certification rigor, the framework incorporates:
The framework evaluates products across 22 comprehensive domains, each focusing on specific capability areas:
| Domain | Product Capability Focus |
|---|---|
| Strategic Governance | Risk dashboards, compliance mapping, executive reporting |
| Technical Architecture | Modular design, open APIs, Zero Trust/SASE compatibility |
| Operational Capability | Incident response automation, SOC integration, business continuity modules |
| Credentialing & Assurance | Audit logs, maturity scoring, documentation transparency |
| Zero Trust Architecture | Policy enforcement, segmentation engines, continuous validation |
| Identity & Access Management | Role-based access, MFA, IAM integration |
| Strategy & Risk Management | Threat modelling tools, risk scoring engines |
| Leadership & Governance | Board-level analytics, strategic alignment modules |
| IT Platforms & Infrastructure | Cloud/hybrid deployment, endpoint protection, scalability |
| Physical Security | CCTV, access control, PSIM integration |
| Vendor Management | SLA tracking, vendor risk scoring, lifecycle management |
| Legal & Compliance | GDPR/NIS2/DORA compliance modules, ISO certification mapping |
| Human Resources | Insider risk detection, onboarding/offboarding automation |
| Education & Training | LMS integration, awareness modules, certification tracking |
| Operations & Resilience | BCP automation, failover orchestration, recovery analytics |
| Audit & Assurance | Controls testing, reporting engines, compliance dashboards |
| Systems Integration | SIEM, PSIM, IAM orchestration, API connectors |
| Cross-Functional Collaboration | Shared dashboards, workflow engines, IT/OT/security alignment |
| Intelligence (OSINT/HUMINT) | Threat feeds, source validation, situational awareness engines |
| Cybersecurity | IDS/IPS, threat hunting, vulnerability management |
| Digital Resilience | Backup orchestration, resilience scoring, continuity planning |
| Insider Risk | UEBA, behavioural analytics, access misuse detection |
For the Pre-Certification Track, assessment focuses on 10 core domains:
| Core Domain | Rationale for Pre-Certification Inclusion |
|---|---|
| Strategic Governance | Essential for enterprise readiness and stakeholder buy-in |
| Technical Architecture | Foundation for scalability and integration capabilities |
| Operational Capability | Critical for day-to-day security operations effectiveness |
| Systems Integration | Core requirement for converged security solutions |
| Cybersecurity | Fundamental security protection capabilities |
| Identity & Access Management | Essential access control and authentication functions |
| Legal & Compliance | Basic regulatory alignment and compliance readiness |
| IT Platforms & Infrastructure | Infrastructure deployment and compatibility requirements |
| Physical Security | Physical-cyber convergence demonstration |
| Zero Trust Architecture | Modern security architecture alignment |
Each product is assessed across five critical dimensions:
| Dimension | Description |
|---|---|
| Interoperability | Seamless integration with SIEM, PSIM, IAM, and other platforms |
| Compliance Readiness | Alignment with EN standards, ISO frameworks, and EU directives |
| Deployment Maturity | Proven field performance, scalability, and modularity |
| User Experience | Intuitive interfaces, role-based access, multilingual support |
| Innovation & Intelligence | Use of AI/ML, threat intelligence, automation, and predictive analytics |
Purpose: Evaluate product capabilities in integrating core security systems
Use Case: Vendor submission, evaluator scoring, and technical validation
| Integration Type | Description |
|---|---|
| SIEM | Security Information & Event Management – centralized log analysis and threat detection |
| PSIM | Physical Security Information Management – unified control of physical systems |
| IAM | Identity & Access Management – authentication, authorization, and role-based access |
| API Connectors | RESTful or streaming APIs for interoperability with third-party platforms |
| Reference | Applies To | Vendor Evidence Required |
|---|---|---|
| Oracle SIEM Integration Guide | SIEM orchestration in cloud environments | Log ingestion, alert correlation, ML-based threat detection |
| CISA SIEM & SOAR Implementation | SIEM/SOAR deployment best practices | Priority log sources, automated response workflows |
| Microsoft Defender SIEM API Integration | Streaming APIs and incident ingestion | OAuth2 authentication, schema mapping, CIM compatibility |
| Integration Type | Score (0–5) | Evidence / Notes |
|---|---|---|
| SIEM | Supported platforms (Splunk, ArcSight, Sentinel, etc.) | |
| PSIM | Physical system connectors (CCTV, access control, alarms) | |
| IAM | Role-based access, MFA, SSO, identity federation | |
| API Connectors | RESTful endpoints, streaming APIs, SDKs, documentation | |
| Subtotal Score: | ____ / 20 | |
Scoring Weights Within Interoperability Dimension:
| Criteria | Score Range | Weight (%) | Evaluator Guidance |
|---|---|---|---|
| SIEM Compatibility | 1–5 | 35% | Ability to ingest logs, correlate events, and support threat detection workflows |
| PSIM Interoperability | 1–5 | 25% | Integration with physical security systems and control center platforms |
| IAM Orchestration | 1–5 | 25% | Support for identity lifecycle, access provisioning, and federated authentication |
| API Architecture | 1–5 | 15% | Quality of API documentation, openness, scalability, and third-party integration |
Note: These weightings reflect the critical importance of SIEM integration in converged security environments, while recognizing the foundational role of PSIM and IAM capabilities.
| Item | Status (✓/✗) |
|---|---|
| SIEM integration tested with at least 2 platforms | |
| PSIM connectors validated in live deployment | |
| IAM orchestration supports RBAC and SSO | |
| API documentation available and versioned | |
| Streaming or event-based API supported |
Purpose: Help vendors align their products with CSI's Compliance Readiness dimension
Use Case: Pre-certification self-assessment, evaluator scoring, and audit preparation
| Standard | Applies To | Vendor Evidence Required |
|---|---|---|
| EN 50131 | Intrusion detection systems | System architecture, sensor integration |
| EN 50518 | Alarm receiving/control centers | Facility design, redundancy, failover protocols |
| EN 62676 | Video surveillance systems | Camera specs, VMS interoperability |
| EN 60839-11-1 | Electronic access control | Credentialing logic, door controller integration |
| EN 50133 | Access control systems | Access policies, physical security integration |
| Standard | Applies To | Vendor Evidence Required |
|---|---|---|
| ISO/IEC 27001:2022 | Information security governance | ISMS documentation, risk treatment plans |
| ISO 31000 | Enterprise risk management | Risk registers, scoring models |
| ISO 22301 | Business continuity | BCP documentation, recovery workflows |
| Directive | Applies To | Vendor Evidence Required |
|---|---|---|
| NIS2 Directive | Cybersecurity for essential entities | Network defense, incident response, reporting protocols |
| Cyber Resilience Act | Lifecycle security of digital products | Secure-by-design architecture, patching policies |
| GDPR | Data protection and privacy | Data flow diagrams, consent management, DPO contact |
| DORA | ICT risk in financial services | Resilience metrics, third-party risk controls |
To enhance international accessibility, CSI compliance mapping now includes:
| Framework | Region | Vendor Evidence Required |
|---|---|---|
| NIST 800-53 | North America | Control implementation matrix, security control documentation |
| CIS Controls v8 | Global | Implementation guide alignment, control mapping evidence |
| NIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0 | North America | Function and category mapping, implementation tiers |
| ISO 27001:2022 (Global) | International | ISMS certification, risk assessment documentation |
| COBIT 2019 | Global | Governance and management practices alignment |
Scoring Weights Within Compliance Readiness Dimension:
| Criteria | Score Range | Weight (%) | Evaluator Guidance |
|---|---|---|---|
| EN Standards Alignment | 1–5 | 30% | Product meets technical and operational requirements of relevant EN standards |
| ISO Framework Integration | 1–5 | 25% | Product supports ISO-aligned governance, risk, and continuity models |
| EU Directive Compliance | 1–5 | 25% | Product demonstrates readiness for GDPR, NIS2, DORA, and CRA obligations |
| Global Standards Mapping | 1–5 | 15% | Alignment with NIST, CIS Controls, and international frameworks |
| Documentation Quality | 1–5 | 5% | Clarity, completeness, and traceability of compliance evidence |
Purpose: Evaluate product performance, scalability, and modularity in live environments
Use Case: Vendor self-assessment, evaluator scoring, and CSI credentialing review
| Category | Description |
|---|---|
| Field Performance | Evidence of operational success in live deployments across sectors |
| Scalability | Ability to scale across users, sites, geographies, and workloads |
| Modularity | Component-based architecture enabling flexible deployment and integration |
| Reference | Applies To | Vendor Evidence Required |
|---|---|---|
| Azure Security Maturity Model | Secure deployment lifecycle, threat modeling, system hardening | SDLC integration, threat modeling, monitoring, encryption strategies |
| AWS OT/IT Convergence Maturity Model | Industrial-grade scalability and convergence readiness | Multi-site deployment, OT/IT integration, resilience metrics |
| Security Convergence Maturity Model – Leiden University | Conceptual maturity levels for convergence (CMMI-based) | Governance, process, technology, and people maturity scoring |
| Deployment Attribute | Score (0–5) | Evidence / Notes |
|---|---|---|
| Field Performance | Client references, uptime metrics, incident logs | |
| Scalability | Multi-tenant support, cloud elasticity, regional expansion | |
| Modularity | Microservices, plug-in architecture, containerization | |
| Subtotal Score: | ____ / 15 | |
Scoring Weights Within Deployment Maturity Dimension:
| Criteria | Score Range | Weight (%) | Evaluator Guidance |
|---|---|---|---|
| Proven Field Performance | 1–5 | 50% | Product has demonstrated stability, reliability, and resilience in real-world use |
| Scalability | 1–5 | 30% | Product scales across users, geographies, and workloads without degradation |
| Modularity | 1–5 | 20% | Product supports flexible deployment, integration, and component upgrades |
| Item | Status (✓/✗) |
|---|---|
| Product deployed in at least 3 live environments | |
| Uptime SLA ≥99.9% documented | |
| Supports horizontal and vertical scaling | |
| Modular architecture documented (e.g., microservices) | |
| Supports containerization or virtualized deployment |
Purpose: Assess product usability, accessibility, and interface intelligence
Use Case: Vendor self-assessment, evaluator scoring, and CSI credentialing review
| Category | Description |
|---|---|
| Intuitive Interfaces | Clean, responsive UI/UX design that supports fast navigation and task execution |
| Role-Based Access | Interface adapts to user roles (admin, analyst, operator, etc.) with permissions |
| Multilingual Support | Language localization and internationalization for global deployments |
| Reference | Applies To | Vendor Evidence Required |
|---|---|---|
| Cisco Converged UX Principles | Unified experience across networking and security domains | UI screenshots, workflow demos, user feedback logs |
| Avigilon UX Best Practices | Physical/cybersecurity convergence interface design | Role-based dashboards, multilingual UI samples |
| CSI Publications on IAM & UX | Strategic standards for IAM and interface usability | Access control logic, UI/UX design documentation |
| UX Attribute | Score (0–5) | Evidence / Notes |
|---|---|---|
| Intuitive Interfaces | UI screenshots, usability testing results, user feedback | |
| Role-Based Access | RBAC configuration, permission matrix, adaptive UI | |
| Multilingual Support | Supported languages, localization strategy, fallback logic | |
| Subtotal Score: | ____ / 15 | |
Scoring Weights Within User Experience Dimension:
| Criteria | Score Range | Weight (%) | Evaluator Guidance |
|---|---|---|---|
| Interface Usability | 1–5 | 50% | Assess clarity, responsiveness, and ease of navigation |
| Role-Based Personalization | 1–5 | 30% | Evaluate how well the UI adapts to different user roles and permissions |
| Language Accessibility | 1–5 | 20% | Review localization quality, language switching, and fallback behavior |
| Item | Status (✓/✗) |
|---|---|
| UI tested with at least 3 user roles | |
| Role-based dashboards implemented | |
| Multilingual UI available in ≥3 languages | |
| Localization files versioned and documented | |
| UX feedback collected from live deployments |
Purpose: Evaluate product sophistication in automation, analytics, and threat intelligence
Use Case: Vendor self-assessment, evaluator scoring, and CSI credentialing review
| Category | Description |
|---|---|
| Artificial Intelligence | Use of AI/ML for anomaly detection, behavioral analysis, and decision support |
| Threat Intelligence | Integration of OSINT/HUMINT feeds, real-time alerts, and situational awareness |
| Automation & Orchestration | Automated workflows, playbooks, and response mechanisms |
| Predictive Analytics | Forecasting threats, risk scoring, and proactive mitigation |
| Reference | Applies To | Vendor Evidence Required |
|---|---|---|
| CSI Publications on Strategic Intelligence | Threat modeling, OSINT/HUMINT integration | Intelligence feeds, alert logic, situational dashboards |
| CISA Security Convergence Best Practices | Unified threat response and automation | Playbook samples, orchestration engines, AI-driven response |
| ASIS International Convergence Report | Predictive analytics and convergence maturity | Risk forecasting models, ML training datasets |
| Innovation Attribute | Score (0–5) | Evidence / Notes |
|---|---|---|
| Artificial Intelligence | ML models, anomaly detection, behavioral analytics | |
| Threat Intelligence | OSINT/HUMINT feeds, alerting logic, source validation | |
| Automation & Orchestration | Response playbooks, workflow engines, SOAR integration | |
| Predictive Analytics | Risk scoring, forecasting dashboards, simulation tools | |
| Subtotal Score: | ____ / 20 | |
Scoring Weights Within Innovation & Intelligence Dimension:
| Criteria | Score Range | Weight (%) | Evaluator Guidance |
|---|---|---|---|
| AI/ML Integration | 1–5 | 30% | Evaluate depth of machine learning, training data, and decision support capabilities |
| Threat Intelligence Capability | 1–5 | 25% | Assess quality, timeliness, and relevance of threat feeds and situational awareness |
| Automation Maturity | 1–5 | 25% | Review orchestration logic, playbook flexibility, and response automation |
| Predictive Accuracy | 1–5 | 20% | Score effectiveness of forecasting models and proactive mitigation strategies |
| Item | Status (✓/✗) |
|---|---|
| ML models trained on ≥6 months of threat data | |
| OSINT/HUMINT feeds integrated and validated | |
| Automated playbooks deployed in live PoC | |
| Predictive dashboards used in client environments | |
| Intelligence sources documented and versioned |
Purpose: Evaluate product adaptability across legacy environments and future technology landscapes
Use Case: Vendor self-assessment, evaluator scoring, and CSI credentialing review
| Category | Description |
|---|---|
| Legacy System Integration | Ability to interface with outdated or end-of-life systems still in operation |
| Backward Compatibility | Support for older protocols, data formats, and infrastructure dependencies |
| Future Readiness | Modular architecture, cloud-native design, and support for emerging standards |
| Upgrade Path Flexibility | Ease of versioning, patching, and transitioning to next-gen platforms |
| Reference | Applies To | Vendor Evidence Required |
|---|---|---|
| 2025 Cybersecurity Agenda – Forbes | Legacy modernization and operational resilience | Legacy system support, upgrade strategy, patching roadmap |
| ISC2 Legacy System Security Considerations | Risk mitigation in legacy environments | Dependency mapping, compatibility testing, modernization plan |
| CSI Publications on Convergence Architecture | Future-proofing converged platforms | Modular design, cloud readiness, API extensibility |
| Compatibility Attribute | Score (0–5) | Evidence / Notes |
|---|---|---|
| Legacy System Integration | Supported legacy protocols, OT/IT bridging, middleware | |
| Backward Compatibility | Data format support, protocol emulation, legacy connectors | |
| Future Readiness | Cloud-native architecture, support for AI/ML, Zero Trust | |
| Upgrade Path Flexibility | Version control, patching tools, migration documentation | |
| Subtotal Score: | ____ / 20 | |
| Criteria | Score Range | Evaluator Guidance |
|---|---|---|
| Legacy Integration Capability | 1–5 | Assess ability to connect with outdated systems and maintain operational continuity |
| Backward Compatibility | 1–5 | Evaluate support for older protocols, data formats, and infrastructure dependencies |
| Future-Proof Architecture | 1–5 | Review modularity, cloud-readiness, and alignment with emerging standards |
| Upgrade Path & Lifecycle Support | 1–5 | Score ease of updates, versioning, and transition planning |
| Item | Status (✓/✗) |
|---|---|
| Product deployed in legacy environments | |
| Supports ≥2 legacy protocols or formats | |
| Modular architecture documented | |
| Cloud-native or hybrid deployment supported | |
| Upgrade roadmap available and versioned |
The framework offers a tiered pathway to accommodate vendors at different stages of maturity. This includes a Pre-Certification track for emerging solutions and a Standard Certification for market-ready products.
| Dimension | Maximum Score |
|---|---|
| Interoperability | 20 |
| Compliance Readiness | 20 |
| Deployment Maturity | 20 |
| User Experience | 20 |
| Innovation & Intelligence | 20 |
| Total Possible Score | 100 |
| Score Range | Certification Level |
|---|---|
| 90–100 | CSI Endorsed – Platinum Product |
| 80–89 | CSI Endorsed – Gold Product |
| 70–79 | CSI Endorsed – Standard Product |
| Below 70 | Not Certified – Reassessment Required |
To maximize the value of CSI certification and support ongoing vendor success, the framework provides comprehensive post-certification resources and communication support.
CSI provides certified vendors with professionally crafted communication materials to effectively articulate certification value:
Standard Certification Announcement Example:
"[Vendor Name] Achieves CSI Product Endorsement, Demonstrating Excellence in Converged Security Solutions"
MARTORELL, Spain – [Date] – [Vendor Name], a leading provider of [specific solution area], today announced it has achieved Converged Security Institute (CSI) Product-Oriented Endorsement, demonstrating validated excellence across technical interoperability, regulatory compliance, and deployment maturity.
The CSI endorsement validates [Vendor Name]'s [specific product] against 22 comprehensive capability domains and five critical evaluation dimensions, including seamless SIEM/PSIM/IAM integration, EN standards alignment, and proven field performance across multiple enterprise deployments.
"Achieving CSI endorsement represents our commitment to delivering converged security solutions that meet the highest industry standards," said [Executive Name, Title]. "This independent validation provides our customers confidence in our technical capabilities and regulatory readiness."
Key validated capabilities include:
- Advanced SIEM integration with [specific platforms]
- GDPR, NIS2, and DORA compliance readiness
- Zero Trust architecture alignment
- Multi-language support across [number] languages
- AI/ML-driven threat intelligence and automation
Pre-Certified to Standard Certification Upgrade Example:
"[Vendor Name] Advances to Full CSI Standard Certification, Expanding Validated Capability Portfolio"
Following successful completion of extended pilot deployments and comprehensive assessment across all 22 capability domains, [Vendor Name] has progressed from CSI Pre-Certification to Standard Certification status...
LinkedIn Announcement Template:
🚀 Proud to announce [Vendor Name] has achieved CSI Product-Oriented Endorsement! This independent validation demonstrates our commitment to converged security excellence across:
- ✅ Technical Interoperability - Seamless SIEM/PSIM/IAM integration
- ✅ Regulatory Compliance - EN standards & EU directive alignment
- ✅ Deployment Maturity - Proven field performance
- ✅ User Experience - Intuitive, multilingual interfaces
- ✅ Innovation & Intelligence - AI/ML-driven automation
Thank you to @ConvergedSecurityInstitute for their rigorous evaluation process. This certification enables our customers to procure with confidence and accelerate their security convergence initiatives.
#CSIEndorsement #ConvergedSecurity #SecurityCertification #ZeroTrust #CyberPhysicalSecurity
Email Signature Enhancement:
[Name, Title]
[Company] - CSI Certified Product Portfolio 🛡️
📧 [email] | 📞 [phone] | 🌐 [website]
Converged Security Institute Endorsed Solutions
Value Proposition Slide Example: "Why [Product Name] with CSI Endorsement Delivers Superior ROI"
- Reduced Procurement Risk: Independent validation eliminates vendor evaluation uncertainties
- Accelerated Implementation: Pre-certified interoperability reduces deployment time by 40-60%
- Compliance Assurance: Pre-mapped regulatory frameworks ensure audit readiness
- Future-Proof Investment: Continuous improvement framework maintains certification relevance
Competitive Differentiation Messaging: "Unlike non-certified alternatives, [Product Name] has undergone rigorous third-party validation across:"
- 22 Technical Domains: Comprehensive capability assessment
- 5 Critical Dimensions: Interoperability, compliance, maturity, UX, and innovation
- Live Deployment Testing: Proven performance in real-world environments
- Continuous Monitoring: Annual recertification ensures ongoing excellence
To strengthen the business case for CSI certification and demonstrate measurable value to senior decision-makers, the framework provides comprehensive ROI guidance and outcome measurement tools.
CSI provides certified vendors with comprehensive ROI calculation tools:
These comprehensive frameworks provide concrete, measurable justification for CSI certification investment, enabling both vendors and buyers to quantify the business value of participating in the CSI endorsement ecosystem with industry-specific precision and multi-year financial modeling.
The CSI credentialing process consists of the following stages:
| Product Tier | Evaluation Fee | Award Fee | CSI Gold Member Benefit |
|---|---|---|---|
| Platinum Product | €1,500 | €7,500 | Free evaluation and €5,000 award fee |
| Gold Product | €1,500 | €4,500 | Free evaluation and €4,500 award fee |
| Standard Product | €1,500 | €1,500 | Free evaluation and free award |
Upon successful certification, vendors receive:
The CSI framework incorporates continuous improvement mechanisms:
CSI maintains active partnerships with:
To establish a formal, transparent, and technically rigorous process for endorsing converged security solutions that meet CSI's standards for integration, compliance, and operational excellence.
This policy applies to commercial products—hardware, software, platforms, or integrated systems—that unify physical, cyber, and operational security functions. It excludes organizational maturity assessments and focuses solely on product capabilities.
Products must demonstrate:
The evaluation process consists of:
| Certification Level | Score Range | Requirements |
|---|---|---|
| Platinum Product | 90–100 points | Exceptional performance across all dimensions |
| Gold Product | 80–89 points | Strong performance with minor improvement areas |
| Standard Product | 70–79 points | Adequate performance meeting baseline requirements |
| Reassessment Required | Below 70 points | Significant improvements needed before certification |
| Service | Fee Structure |
|---|---|
| Initial Evaluation | €1,500 (all tiers) |
| Platinum Award | €7,500 |
| Gold Award | €4,500 |
| Standard Award | €1,500 |
Certified products receive:
This policy is:
For questions regarding the CSI Product Endorsement Policy:
| Field | Vendor Input |
|---|---|
| Product Name | |
| Vendor/Company Name | |
| Product Type | (e.g., platform, module, appliance) |
| Deployment Model | (e.g., cloud, hybrid, on-premise) |
| Primary Domains Covered | (Select from CSI's 22 domains) |
| Target Market | (e.g., enterprise, critical infrastructure) |
| Current Clients | (if applicable) |
Rate your product from 1 (low) to 5 (high) in each category:
| Dimension | Score (1–5) | Notes / Evidence |
|---|---|---|
| Interoperability | Supported integrations (SIEM, PSIM, IAM, etc.) | |
| Compliance Readiness | EN/ISO/EU alignment, certifications | |
| Deployment Maturity | Field-tested, scalable, modular | |
| User Experience | Interface design, accessibility, multilingual support | |
| Innovation & Intelligence | AI/ML, threat intelligence, automation | |
| Subtotal Score: | ____ / 25 | |
Rate each domain from 0 (not covered) to 5 (fully integrated):
| Domain | Score (0–5) | Notes / Features Implemented |
|---|---|---|
| Strategic Governance | ||
| Technical Architecture | ||
| Operational Capability | ||
| Credentialing & Assurance | ||
| Zero Trust Architecture | ||
| Identity & Access Management | ||
| Strategy & Risk Management | ||
| Leadership & Governance | ||
| IT Platforms & Infrastructure | ||
| Physical Security | ||
| Vendor Management | ||
| Legal & Compliance | ||
| Human Resources | ||
| Education & Training | ||
| Operations & Resilience | ||
| Audit & Assurance | ||
| Systems Integration | ||
| Cross-Functional Collaboration | ||
| Intelligence (OSINT/HUMINT) | ||
| Cybersecurity | ||
| Digital Resilience | ||
| Insider Risk | ||
| Subtotal Score: | ____ / 110 | |
| Checklist Item | Status (✓/✗) |
|---|---|
| Product profile completed | |
| Technical documentation prepared | |
| Compliance mapping attached | |
| Pilot deployment site identified | |
| Stakeholder feedback plan prepared | |
| Fee structure reviewed |
I confirm that the information provided in this worksheet is accurate and reflects the current capabilities of our product. We understand that CSI endorsement is contingent upon successful credentialing, scoring, and proof of concept deployment.
Authorized Representative Name: ___________________
Title: ___________________
Date: ___________________
Signature: ___________________