Does compliance software include your SOC 2 audit?
Do not infer audit inclusion from a readiness dashboard or a partner logo. Ask for the audit engagement, the firm responsible for the report and the exact services included. Some offerings emphasize software, while others combine a platform with audit services; the proposal must say which work you are actually buying.
The report comes from an examination
AICPA describes SOC 2 as an examination by a licensed independent CPA. Your purchasing decision should therefore identify both the software relationship and the examination relationship, even when the sales conversation packages them together.
Thoropass presents itself around audit experts and an end-to-end evidence-to-attestation process. That makes it a candidate for a service-model discussion. Confirm the actual contracting entity, report scope and support responsibilities instead of treating the homepage as the engagement.
Source: AICPA: SOC 2 examination and proposed criteria update · Thoropass: audit platform and experts
Put three owners on the same page
Before accepting a proposal, fill in this handoff table with names and deliverables. These are suggested procurement questions, not a prescribed audit program.
On a small screen, scroll the table sideways to see every column.
| Role | Work to clarify | Question to settle |
|---|---|---|
| Your team | Operates the systems and supplies business context | Who approves policies and closes operational gaps? |
| Software or implementation provider | Delivers the contracted tooling or assistance | Who configures connections, drafts material and tracks tasks? |
| Audit firm | Performs the agreed independent examination | Who defines requests, evaluates evidence and issues the report? |
Example: the green dashboard and the open request
A fictional team has completed every visible task in its platform. The auditor then asks for a sample tied to a specific period. If the exported record does not cover that period, the dashboard status does not answer the request.
Agree how requests will be routed and how additional evidence will be supplied. Drata’s documentation, for example, describes an Audit Hub package selected by date range and notes its export limits. A handoff rehearsal can expose this kind of mismatch before it becomes urgent.
Ask for a working plan, not a promised finish date
Bring your customer’s deadline and report expectations to both the implementation contact and audit firm. Ask which milestones depend on your work, which depend on the agreed evidence period, and which depend on review. Do not treat an advertised readiness claim as a guaranteed report delivery date.
Choose the service model that fills your actual staffing gap. A team that can operate the program may value flexible tooling; a team without an implementation owner should ask for clearly scoped assistance. Neither choice removes the need to understand who does the work.
- Name the firm and legal entity responsible for the report.
- Confirm report type, system scope and relevant period in writing.
- List excluded remediation and follow-up services.
- State how audit delays affect subscription and service charges.
- Have the requesting customer confirm its report expectations.