CMMC Compliance for Defense Contractors in Boston, MA
If your organization handles Controlled Unclassified Information under a DoD contract, CMMC 2.0 certification is a current contracting requirement — not a future one. Stratify IT helps Massachusetts defense contractors close the gap between their current security posture and Level 2 certification.
Stratify IT works with defense contractors across Massachusetts to close that gap systematically. We assess your environment against all 110 NIST SP 800-171 practices, identify what's missing across control families like Access Control, Incident Response, and System and Communications Protection, and build a remediation path that accounts for your actual operations — not a generic template. Every engagement is scoped to your environment, and you receive a cost estimate before any work begins.
What to Expect from a CMMC Consultant Who Knows the DIB
CUI boundaries, enclave architecture decisions, and SSP documentation all have downstream consequences for your assessment outcome and your ongoing compliance posture. A gap in Audit and Accountability controls, for example, affects both your SPRS score and your ability to demonstrate practice implementation to a C3PAO assessor. Our CMMC consulting engagements are structured to address those dependencies, not treat each control in isolation.
Gap Assessment Against NIST 800-171
We evaluate your environment against all 110 NIST SP 800-171 practices and score your gaps by control family, giving you a realistic picture of remediation scope before you commit resources.
SSP and POA&M Development
We draft and refine your System Security Plan and Plan of Action and Milestones to meet the documentation standards assessors actually use during a CMMC Level 2 evaluation.
Control Implementation Support
Hands-on assistance implementing technical and administrative controls — from multi-factor authentication and audit logging to configuration baselines and access control policies.
Assessment Readiness
Pre-assessment walkthroughs, evidence package organization, and mock interviews so your team is prepared when the C3PAO assessors arrive — not scrambling.
CUI Scoping and Enclave Design
Defining your CUI boundary correctly reduces the scope of your assessment and the ongoing cost of compliance. We help you make those architectural decisions with the assessment framework in mind.
The Massachusetts Defense Contracting Environment
The greater Boston region is home to a dense concentration of defense contractors, from large primes with established compliance programs to small and mid-sized subcontractors who handle CUI but have never undergone a formal cybersecurity assessment. Massachusetts universities with defense research programs, hardware and robotics firms supplying components to the DoD supply chain, and software companies embedded in government programs all face the same CMMC 2.0 requirements — but their starting points and risk profiles vary considerably.
That variation matters in practice: a 20-person engineering firm in Cambridge using a shared cloud environment has a different remediation path than a 200-person manufacturer in the MetroWest corridor running on-premises infrastructure. We've worked across both ends of that spectrum and know how to scope compliance costs accurately for each situation, including the full consulting engagement from initial assessment through C3PAO readiness.
Defense Manufacturing
Precision manufacturers and fabricators supplying defense components face CUI requirements across engineering drawings, specifications, and supplier communications — all of which fall within CMMC scope.
Robotics and Autonomous Systems
Companies developing autonomous systems and AI-driven defense applications often carry significant IP alongside CUI, requiring security architectures that address both protection and performance.
Defense Research Organizations
Research organizations working on government-funded programs — including those with university partnerships — need to account for data flows across institutional boundaries when defining their CUI enclave.
Defense Software and IT Services
Software developers and IT service providers embedded in DoD programs frequently underestimate how much of their environment falls within CUI scope. We help define that boundary before remediation begins.
Common Implementation Challenges for Boston-Area Contractors
Cybersecurity compliance at the CMMC Level 2 standard requires meeting all 110 practices across 14 control families. The four issues below account for the majority of findings in gap assessments we conduct with contractors who have been managing their own compliance preparation.
Undefined CUI Boundaries
Many contractors have never formally defined where CUI lives in their environment. Without a defensible boundary, the scope of your assessment — and your ongoing compliance obligations — expands unnecessarily.
Incomplete or Inconsistent Documentation
SSPs and policies written to satisfy a checkbox rarely hold up in an assessment. Assessors review documentation for completeness, consistency with observed practice, and coverage of all required control statements.
Third-Party and Subcontractor Risk
If your subcontractors or managed service providers touch CUI, their security posture affects your compliance. Flow-down requirements under DFARS 252.204-7012 apply to your supply chain, not just your internal environment.
Cloud and Hybrid Environments
Using cloud services for CUI requires FedRAMP-authorized solutions that meet FIPS 140-2 encryption requirements. Many contractors are using non-compliant tools without realizing it.
How We Approach CMMC Engagements
Every engagement starts with a scoped gap assessment — we don't apply a standard project template before understanding your environment. The assessment maps your current controls against the 110 NIST 800-171 practices, identifies gaps by control family, and produces a prioritized remediation plan with effort and cost estimates. From there, the path varies based on your timeline, resources, and how close you are to needing a formal C3PAO assessment.
- Phase 1 — Scoped Gap Assessment: Document review, interviews, and technical evaluation across all 14 NIST 800-171 control families. Output is a scored gap report with remediation priorities.
- Phase 2 — Remediation Planning: A phased implementation roadmap that sequences control work to minimize operational disruption, with clear ownership assignments and timelines.
- Phase 3 — Implementation Support: Direct assistance with control implementation, SSP development, policy documentation, and evidence collection. Engagements range from full implementation ownership to targeted support for specific control families where your team has gaps.
- Phase 4 — Assessment Preparation: Pre-assessment review, evidence package organization, and readiness walkthroughs so your team and documentation are in the best possible position before the C3PAO engagement begins.
For contractors who have already achieved certification and need to maintain their compliance posture over time, our Boston managed IT services include ongoing monitoring, policy maintenance, and support for annual self-assessments and periodic reassessments.
Get a Scoped Estimate for Your CMMC Engagement
We'll assess your environment and give you a clear picture of scope, timeline, and cost before any work begins.
CMMC 2.0 Level Requirements: What Massachusetts Contractors Need to Know
CMMC 2.0 streamlined the original five-level model into three levels. Most defense subcontractors handling CUI will be required to achieve Level 2, which maps directly to the 110 practices in NIST SP 800-171.
Level 1 — Foundational
Covers 17 practices aligned with FAR 52.204-21, applicable to contractors handling Federal Contract Information (FCI) but not CUI. Annual self-assessment is permitted at this level.
Level 2 — Advanced
Requires implementation of all 110 NIST SP 800-171 practices. Most DIB contractors handling CUI fall here. A triennial assessment by a certified third-party assessment organization (C3PAO) is required for contracts involving critical national security information.
Level 3 — Expert
Builds on Level 2 with additional practices drawn from NIST SP 800-172, targeting contractors whose systems face Advanced Persistent Threat (APT) activity. Government-led assessments are required at this level.
The majority of our clients are pursuing or maintaining Level 2 certification. If you're unsure which level applies, your DFARS clauses will reference the applicable CUI category — and your contract's PWS or SOW will often specify it explicitly.
