Some client needs are best served through a defined-scope engagement. These structured offerings provide a focused starting point when a program needs clarity, direction, or technical assessment before broader work begins.
Face each Stage of Involvement knowing what the reviewers will find — because you found it first.
Every DO-178C program faces Stage of Involvement reviews, in which the certification authority or its designees examine the program's plans, data, and evidence at defined points in the lifecycle. Each SOI samples specific artifacts. Each is scheduled well in advance. Which means each one can be prepared for — deliberately, not frantically.
Budget once. Schedule when it matters.
The moment a program most needs outside review is rarely the moment procurement is easiest. An audit gets announced. An integration problem surfaces. A design decision needs experienced independent judgment before it hardens into the architecture. When that moment arrives, the last thing you want standing between the question and the answer is a new purchase order.
The Reserved Review Bundle lets you set aside review capacity while budget is available — and schedule it when your program actually needs it.
One scheduled day each quarter. A different lens each visit.
Safety-critical programs rarely fail at milestones. They drift between them. Requirements and
code separate quietly. Coverage assumptions age. Interfaces accumulate undocumented behavior.
By the time a formal review makes the drift visible, it has usually been compounding for months.
Strengthen the architecture before structural problems spread downstream.
SafeCode’s Architecture Assessment provides a focused review of software architecture and detailed design decisions with attention to structure, interfaces, initialization behavior, partitioning, verification impact, and certifiability.
Know what your evidence will look like before someone else tells you.
SafeCode’s Evidence Package Review provides a focused assessment of certification evidence for completeness, consistency, defensibility, and alignment with the applicable objectives.
Clarify what the standard requires before effort goes in the wrong direction.
SafeCode’s Standards Interpretation Brief helps organizations resolve ambiguous, disputed, or high-impact questions about standards, objectives, and compliance expectations in a specific program context.
Assess submission readiness before the real review begins.
SafeCode’s Pre-Submission Review gives teams an experienced outside check on whether a submission, audit package, or milestone review set is ready for external scrutiny.
Make traceability defensible by fixing the model behind the links.
SafeCode’s Traceability Model Assessment reviews how requirements, design, code, interfaces, and verification evidence are intended to connect, and identifies where the structure is too weak, inconsistent, or ambiguous to support assurance.
Align verification effort with the risks that actually matter.
SafeCode’s Verification Strategy Review assesses whether the planned verification approach is technically sound, proportionate to the software’s assurance needs, and likely to produce evidence that will hold up under scrutiny.
Bring experienced outside scrutiny to the moments that matter most.
SafeCode’s Independent Technical Review provides a focused, defined-scope assessment of code, design, architecture, interfaces, or review readiness at a critical milestone. It helps organizations surface material risks, challenge weak assumptions, and strengthen decision-making before formal reviews, customer exposure, or downstream rework.