Process & Engagement

How we engage. What we measure. Why the answer is defensible.

Understand how Albright Laboratories evaluates and delivers customer engagements using a structured five-stage pipeline, six published engagement models, and the same Probability Engine boardroom we score ourselves against. From first contact to audit-ready handoff, every stage has a deliverable artifact a contracting officer or procurement reviewer can verify.

The engagement models, fee schedule, and scoring methodology referenced on this page are sourced from the published Capability Statement and Business Plan §4. Both documents are updated on a versioned cadence; this page reflects the Q3 2026 rate card.

How we engage

5 stages · first contact to audit-ready handoff

Every engagement — from a $397 Diagnostic to a sovereign-region BrightFlow + blackLimes deployment — moves through the same five stages. The duration of each stage scales with the engagement model, but the artifact produced at each stage is the same, so the audit trail is consistent whether the customer is a Fortune 500 procurement team or a federal contracting officer evaluating a sole-source justification.

  1. First contact and fit screen

    1–3 business days · no charge

    A 30-minute call with the founder, or a written inbound through contact@, to confirm there is a problem we are credentialed to solve. We are deliberately narrow: AI infrastructure, sovereign / on-premise inference, federal procurement readiness, and the regulated-industry compliance posture around them. If the ask is outside that lane, we tell the prospective customer in writing and, where possible, refer them to a firm we trust.

    Customer sends
    One-paragraph problem statement; any procurement constraints (set-aside requirements, data-residency, SOC 2 / FedRAMP gating).
    We send back
    Written fit-or-no-fit determination within 3 business days. If fit, a proposed Stage 2 scope and quote.
    Who is involved
    Corey Albright (Founder & CEO). For federal-procurement inquiries, John Roland (Federal Capture Lead) joins.
    Artifact
    Fit-screen memo (1 page).

  2. Scoped diagnostic

    7–14 calendar days · $397 fixed-price AI Infrastructure Diagnostic (or fixed-fee equivalent for federal scoping engagements)

    The diagnostic is the entry point for the overwhelming majority of customers. A principal-led, patent-grade assessment of the organization's AI/ML readiness, gap analysis against the relevant compliance regime (FedRAMP, CMMC, NIST 800-171, SOC 2, EU NIS2, etc.), and a 30/60/90-day roadmap. Fixed-price by design — the customer knows the cost before the engagement starts. Convertible to retainer or Fractional CAIO if scope justifies it.

    Customer sends
    Read-only access to current architecture diagrams, security questionnaires, any existing third-party audit reports.
    We send back
    Written diagnostic report (15–25 pages); a 60-minute findings call; a roadmap with recommended next-stage scope.
    Who is involved
    Corey Albright (technical architecture, patent IP); Kevin Albright (process engineering, Lean Six Sigma DMAIC framing); Jocelyn Moore (delivery scoping).
    Artifact
    Diagnostic Report + 30/60/90 Roadmap (PDF, customer-watermarked).

  3. Engagement design

    5–10 business days · scoped against the diagnostic roadmap

    A formal statement of work — scope, milestones, acceptance criteria, named principal accountable for each deliverable, and the rate band(s) from the published §4.5 fee schedule. For federal LH / T&M work the SOW honors capped-fee ceilings without uplift. For commercial work we offer both fixed-fee and retainer structures. Every SOW carries an explicit termination-for-convenience clause so the customer is never locked in beyond a 30-day notice period.

    Customer sends
    Authorized signatory; preferred contracting vehicle (MSA, federal task order, BAA, NDA-as-needed); billing/invoicing requirements.
    We send back
    Draft SOW with milestones, acceptance criteria, named principals, hourly or fixed-fee structure, and the rate-card cross-reference. Two revision rounds included.
    Who is involved
    Jocelyn Moore (Director of Delivery, scope owner); Kevin Albright (milestone definition, FMEA on acceptance criteria); Corey Albright (signatory).
    Artifact
    Signed Statement of Work (PDF, both signatures); kickoff packet.

  4. Delivery

    Cadence varies by engagement model · weekly principal reviews, monthly executive checkpoints

    The work itself. Cadence is engagement-model-specific: retainers run on weekly delivery sprints with a named principal accountable; Fractional CAIO engagements run on a monthly executive checkpoint with weekly tactical syncs; sovereign-region and federal deliveries run against milestone-gated payment terms with formal acceptance at each milestone. Every engagement carries an open weekly principal-review call where the customer can challenge scope, re-prioritize, or pause without penalty.

    Customer sends
    Access provisioning (least-privilege, time-boxed); designated technical counterpart for weekly reviews; milestone sign-offs.
    We send back
    Weekly written status (scope/timeline/risk delta against the SOW baseline); milestone deliverables on schedule; live access to a shared engagement workspace.
    Who is involved
    Named principal per SOW deliverable; Jocelyn Moore (escalation owner); Kevin Albright (process discipline, milestone gate enforcement); subject-matter principals as scope requires.
    Artifact
    Weekly status memo; milestone deliverables (code, documentation, infrastructure, audit-evidence packages); monthly burn report against earned value.

  5. Audit-ready handoff

    10–20 business days after final milestone · included in engagement fee

    Every engagement ends with a handoff package an outside auditor, federal contracting officer, or Fortune 500 procurement reviewer can read without us in the room. The package includes: delivered artifacts under customer license, the runbook to operate them, the compliance-evidence crosswalk for the regime the engagement was scoped against (NIST 800-53, CMMC, ISO 27001, SOC 2, GDPR Article 30), and a written post-engagement scoring of what we delivered versus the original SOW acceptance criteria — including anything we shipped late or descoped, with the reason on record.

    Customer sends
    Final milestone acceptance; designated owner for the handed-off artifacts.
    We send back
    Handoff package (artifacts + runbooks + compliance crosswalk + post-engagement scoring); optional public case-study draft for customer review.
    Who is involved
    Jocelyn Moore (handoff owner); Kevin Albright (compliance-evidence package); Corey Albright (case-study sign-off if customer opts in).
    Artifact
    Audit-Ready Handoff Package (PDF + repository archive + crosswalk spreadsheet); SOW reconciliation memo.

Engagement models

6 published models · cap statement & BP §4

Six pricing structures cover the full range of federal procurement, commercial budgeting, and direct-consumer requirements. Every model is priced to be cash-flow positive from week one. We bill against earned value. We deliver against signed scope.

How we score what we ship — and what we are scored against

The Probability Engine · public on the home page

Every project Albright Laboratories takes on — including every commercial engagement and every internal product release — is scored by a three-persona boardroom against two calibrated axes. The scores for our own posture are published on the home page and re-scored on every material plan revision. The same methodology is offered as a service to ventures we engage with: we score what we ship for you, and we let you score us back against the SOW acceptance criteria from Stage 5.

Three personas, independent reads:

Sandra

Market & narrative

Reads positioning, customer-facing language, and whether the story holds up to a procurement officer or buying committee that has never met you. Catches the gap between what you mean and what an outside reader will hear.

Daxxon

Quantitative skeptic

Reads the financials, unit economics, and the math underneath every claim. Catches assumptions presented as measured data, LTV:CAC ratios that won't survive a CFO's review, and pipeline projections without an artifact behind them.

Big-AL

Deception & risk

Reads what's missing. The deception-detection persona on the BrightFlow trading engine, applied to the engagement document itself. Catches omitted edge cases, unscoped failure modes, and any silent gap between the SOW and the acceptance criteria.

Two axes, 0–100 scale, calibrated against published F500 evidence:

F500-Readiness (0–100)

How close the project resembles a present-day Fortune 500 in evidence and maturity. Calibrated against published evidence: revenue durability, governance posture, named-customer reference, audit-defensible documentation, third-party validation. A score of 100 means a Fortune 500 procurement officer could defend the choice of working with you in a board memo today, without footnotes.

Year-5 Survival Probability (0–100)

The empirical likelihood the project still exists, generating sustainable revenue, in five years. Calibrated against base-rate startup mortality data and adjusted for the structural advantages and risks specific to the project. A score of 100 means the project's continuation is structurally over-determined; a score below 50 means the boardroom marked at least one persistent failure mode that has not been retired.

Scores gate milestones. For our own posture, a downgrade in either axis between revisions triggers a written remediation plan in the next business-plan update. For customer engagements, the scoring runs against the SOW acceptance criteria from Stage 5 — and the post-engagement scoring memo is included in the audit-ready handoff package whether the score is favorable or not.

Why this process exists

Federal procurement officers and Fortune 500 procurement teams have one thing in common: they have to defend the choice of working with a vendor in writing. A contracting officer signs a sole-source justification. A Fortune 500 procurement lead writes a vendor-selection memo that survives a board audit. Neither can defend "I had a good feeling about them." Both can defend "they delivered against a signed SOW, on a published rate card, with audit-ready evidence at every milestone, and the post-engagement scoring memo is in the file."

The five-stage pipeline produces an artifact at every stage. The six engagement models are published with their pricing structure and acceptance criteria. The Probability Engine boardroom scores both us and the work we deliver, and the score is on record. Together, they are the audit trail that lets a contracting officer or procurement reviewer defend the decision to work with Albright Laboratories without taking a single claim on faith.

The process is the moat alongside the patent and the credentials. The patent (USPTO 2026) is verifiable in 30 seconds on the public record. The principals' credentials (Naval Reactors qualification, USPTO Patent Examiner, NMLS, 15+ years of named-employer past performance) are verifiable on the public record. The process documented on this page is what turns those verifiable facts into a delivery that can also be verified — by an outside auditor, by a federal cost-realism review, by a Fortune 500 procurement committee, or by the customer themselves.

Start a conversation, or read the source documents.

Every engagement begins with the Stage 1 fit screen — a 30-minute call or a written inbound. If your work falls outside the lane we're credentialed to deliver, we'll tell you in writing within three business days and, where possible, refer you to a firm we trust. If it fits, we'll send a scoped Stage 2 proposal the same way.

Start a conversation Capability Statement Business Plan