Honest sizing
If the smaller option is sufficient, the document says the smaller option is sufficient. We size against your actual workload and the growth you can evidence. If the proposal already on your desk is sound, we say so and go home.
Get it right the first time.
Grant-scoped requirements and design, honest sizing, and documents you can attach to a funding application or a board proposal. We design it, then hand it back to your team.
Where we fit
There is rarely a line item for a second attempt.
A grant-funded project is not a budget that can be topped up. The amount is fixed, the reporting date is fixed, and both were agreed before anybody specified a single piece of equipment.
That makes getting the design right the first time worth more here than almost anywhere else. A redesign has nowhere to come from.
It also changes what useful advice looks like. Before anything gets bought, somebody has to work out whether the smaller option is genuinely sufficient. That is the work we do, and the reasoning goes in the document.
Money not spent on unnecessary capacity stays with the mission. That is arithmetic, not sentiment.
The engagement
What the work actually looks like.
Requirements written to the envelope
Requirements and a target-state design that fit inside the funding and the reporting deadline you already have. The scope you submit is the scope you can deliver. That might be a virtualisation refresh, a second program site, or scoped remote access for staff and volunteers. Either way it gets designed once, and documented for whoever administers it next.
Something a funder or board can read
A named, independent design carries weight in a grant application or a board packet that a vendor quote does not: one is a price, the other is the case for the price. Ours is written to be attached, and to be read by people who are not engineers.
Cost modelled over time, not at purchase
On cloud and infrastructure decisions, what a design costs to run matters as much as what it costs to buy. The running cost usually outlives the grant that paid for the hardware. Both go in the model, so the number you take to a funder is the whole number.
Why independent matters
Named engagements. Signed deliverables.
Vendor-neutral by design. We are not tied to one vendor’s stack, so the design starts from what the site actually needs. If the design in front of you is already sound, we’ll say so and go home.
Work is attributable to IZT TECH and never white-labelled. That matters here. The deliverable usually gets read by somebody else: a client, a board, an auditor. An anonymous document carries no more weight than the opinion of whoever is holding it.
Where we hand off
When the work belongs to a sister division.
If the real problem is a donor CRM, an integration, or software that has to be written rather than designed, that belongs to IZT APPS. If it is phone systems or voice, that is IZT CLOUD. IZT TECH advises and the sister divisions provide: separate divisions, separate contracts, named as a finding rather than folded into our own scope. Drawing that line is part of how we scope every engagement. If you run clinical programs, our healthcare page covers the segmentation and evidence an assessor asks for.
IZT APPS open_in_newIZT CLOUD open_in_newHow we work arrow_forwardHealthcare consulting arrow_forward
Need help with something?
Tell us the decision you’re trying to make. We’ll tell you whether it’s an engagement, a referral to one of our sister divisions, or something you don’t need us for.
We’re here for you, so you can focus on what matters.
- mail [email protected]
- call (833) 498-2444