Trust record / Continuity

Founder-led key-person risk should be addressed directly, not hidden.

Ownership, documentation, exit and any support expectations are made proportionate to the engagement.

Operating detail

Continuity is recorded through concrete decisions.

The fields below describe the current method. Engagement-specific evidence and terms still have to be produced for the workflow in question.

Control / 01Continuity

Operational ownership

Client-controlled repositories, accounts and provider relationships are preferred where practical for the agreed delivery model.

Named accountable contacts
Repository and infrastructure ownership
Access transfer planned before release

Control / 02Continuity

Handover and exit

The route to operate, transfer, change or retire the capability is documented with the implementation.

Runbook and known limitations
Data export and deletion expectations
Unresolved issue register

Control / 03Continuity

Contracted support

Any post-handover support, response expectation, escrow or step-in control must be separately justified and written.

No hidden retainer
Explicit support window where agreed
Clear end state and responsibilities

Evidence request

Ask for the evidence behind the statement.

A procurement or technical question should name the control, workflow and evidence requested. The answer should state the current fact and the uncovered gap.

Continuity question recorddirect founder response

Question: The exact control, policy or evidence requested.
Applies to: The named workflow, system and engagement.
Response: Current fact, available evidence and any gap.
What this cannot conclude: That one scoped response covers another workflow, provider, environment or contract.

Send one precise trust question.

Discuss one workflow