A questionnaire deadline is not the same as running a compliance program.

Why answers stall

GRC platforms organize the program. They do not put fail-closed gates in your CI. Screenshots and chat-drafted policies do not survive a follow-up that asks for the control path in git.

• Platforms track questionnaires and evidence libraries — keep them.
• Yellow Theme installs PR gates, policy-as-code, and an evidence index in your stack.
• An independent CPA issues the SOC 2 report — we are not the auditor.

Yellow Theme vs GRC platforms

What gets installed

1. PR and CI gates — checks that fail closed when a control is missing.
2. Policy-as-code — rules reviewable in git, not stranded in a Word doc.
3. Evidence index — control id to artifact, reproduce steps, export shape an assessor can open.

Public samples are synthetic and labeled:

• CI security gates workflow
• Storage encryption policy
• Evidence index example

SOC 2 engineering install

Not a vibe-code fire drill

AI can draft controls. Yellow Theme installs ones you can inspect, own, and hand an assessor — under a fixed SOW with a human accountable to the artifacts. A questionnaire window is a bounded unblock, not a reason to hire DevSecOps capacity over quarters or paste Claude output into the customer portal.

Strong fit / better elsewhere

Path to unblock

Create a brief. Yellow Theme replies with a written fit note and, when it is a fit, a fixed-fee SOW — typically mid five figures for Guardrails; exact fee in the SOW. Optional call only by reply to the fit-note email. Deposit opens the engagement. Details: How we work.

Not sure where the gaps are?

Start with a free readiness check for direction — not a score. Or brief a bounded read-only teardown (control matrix, CI-versus-policy path, written findings). The fee credits toward Guardrails within 90 days when you continue. Exact teardown fee is in the SOW.