Prepared by: Layer8TechGroup · Framework: 10 Technology Fixes · Documents Ingested: 14
Overall Score
5.0/10
8-domain blend
Buyer Discount Risk
Moderate
Needs Preparation
EBITDA
$1,000,000
most recent FY
Vertical
Technology / MSP
technology
Assessment Scores — 8-Domain Profile
Buyer Discount Risk
EBITDA (most recent FY): $1,000,000 (AI-extracted) · Exit Readiness: 5.0/10 — Needs Preparation
| Score | Band | Buyer Discount Risk |
|---|---|---|
| 8.0 – 10.0 | Institutional Ready | Minimal — few gaps for buyers to exploit |
| 6.5 – 7.9 | Market Ready | Low — some negotiating leverage for buyers |
| 5.0 – 6.4 | Needs Preparation | Moderate — expect re-trade attempts |
| 3.5 – 4.9 | Material Gaps | High — significant discount likely |
| Below 3.5 | Not Ready | Very High — consider delaying go-to-market |
Scores reflect readiness relative to what buyers examine in diligence — not a valuation guarantee. For a specific valuation range, share your Exit Readiness Score with your broker or M&A advisor.
↑ What strengthens your position
- High MRR percentage >70%
- Documented service contracts
- NOC/helpdesk not owner-dependent
- Stack standardization across clients
↓ What buyers will flag
- Break-fix revenue dominant
- No formal service agreements
- Owner is primary engineer
Top 3 Strengths
- FRFinancial Readiness at 6.7/10 (ADEQUATE) demonstrates adequate financial controls and record-keeping practices, which substantially reduces buyer diligence friction during the data room phase. This foundational financial hygiene preempts common re-trade triggers around accounting adjustments, working capital normalization, and ledger reconciliation—allowing the buyer to focus negotiation on substantive business fundamentals rather than financial statement quality disputes.
Top 3 Risks
- CQCustomer Quality at 4.2/10 (NEEDS WORK) represents the most material gap in Peachtree's exit readiness and will trigger a buyer discount during valuation. Buyers in the MSP vertical conduct deep diligence on customer concentration, retention rates, contract terms, and churn patterns—and a needs-work posture here signals either revenue concentration risk, sticky customer relationships, or weak contractual protections that create post-close liability. Remediation of customer diversification and contract lock-in before listing is essential to avoid significant price concessions.
- DRDiligence Risk at 4.6/10 (NEEDS WORK) creates a material liability exposure that buyers will surface as a cost or holdback during due diligence. A needs-work posture in this domain typically reflects gaps in financial documentation, operational record-keeping, data integrity, or regulatory compliance artifacts that slow buyer investigation and create uncertainty about what liabilities are buried in the business. Buyers will apply a haircut to account for remediation time and legal exposure, or require earn-out structures to mitigate unknowns.
- Operational Scalability at 4.8/10 (NEEDS WORK) and Owner Risk at 5.2/10 (NEEDS WORK) together create re-trade vulnerability during final negotiations. Buyers will flag that processes, systems, and key-person dependencies are not yet positioned for integration into a larger platform, and that founder/owner reliance remains high—both of which represent execution and retention risk post-close. Expect buyers to demand price concessions or earnout clawbacks tied to successful transition and staff retention milestones.
Recommended Priority Fixes
The five highest-priority actions for the next 90 days, ranked by deal impact. For the complete domain-by-domain remediation plan and cost estimates, see the Value Recovery Roadmap below.
Fix 1CQ
Map and diversify customer revenue concentration
Conduct a formal customer segmentation analysis identifying top 10 customers by revenue, contract renewal dates, and churn risk; then develop and execute a targeted new customer acquisition plan to reduce top-customer concentration below 15% of revenue. This directly addresses Risk 1 (Customer Quality at 4.2/10). Buyers in the MSP vertical will demand evidence that revenue is not concentrated in sticky relationships or at-risk accounts; a diversified, documented customer base eliminates a primary discount lever during valuation negotiation.
Fix 2DR
Audit and remediate financial and operational documentation gaps
Commission an independent third-party audit of accounting records, customer contracts, operational logs, and compliance artifacts to identify gaps or inconsistencies; produce a written remediation plan and execute all high-priority fixes before data room launch. This directly addresses Risk 2 (Diligence Risk at 4.6/10). Incomplete or ambiguous records signal unknown liabilities and slow buyer investigation; buyers will apply a price haircut or demand earn-out holdbacks to offset remediation cost and uncertainty. Clean, audited documentation removes this re-trade weapon.
Fix 3OR
Define key-person transition plan and document processes
Create written process documentation for all critical operational workflows and develop a 90-day post-close transition plan for founder/owner responsibilities, including named successors and knowledge-transfer milestones. This directly addresses Risk 3 (Owner Risk at 5.2/10 and Operational Scalability at 4.8/10). Buyers will flag founder reliance and undocumented processes as integration risk and retention exposure; a credible transition roadmap with staff commitment letters reduces their ability to demand price concessions or earn-out clawbacks tied to founder handoff success.
Fix 4OS
Standardize and document service delivery operations
Map all service delivery workflows, create standard operating procedures for the three highest-revenue service lines, and implement a simple project tracking system to demonstrate repeatable, scalable delivery. This addresses Operational Scalability at 4.8/10, the second-highest-priority gap. Buyers assess whether the company can be integrated into a larger platform without custom rebuild; documented, standardized processes reduce their perception of integration friction and re-trade negotiating leverage.
Fix 5TM
Commission technology infrastructure and security assessment
Engage a third-party technology consultant to perform a written gap assessment of infrastructure, data security, and system architecture against MSP industry standards; identify and prioritize the top five remediation actions with estimated remediation timelines and costs. This addresses Technology & Systems Maturity at 4.6/10. Buyers conduct CTO-led technical due diligence; undocumented or substandard infrastructure creates diligence friction and grounds for post-close liability claims. A credible third-party assessment and remediation roadmap demonstrates maturity and reduces buyer discount risk.
Domain Detail & Findings
DRDiligence Risk4.6/10 NEEDS WORK (18% blend)
Evidence coverage: scored on 7 of 7 criteria
Judged, not computed — these criteria await a document-type classifier
Deal Impact: Documentation gaps will extend diligence and require owner availability — expect timeline pressure and buyer discount attempts.
| ID | Criterion & Finding | Score | Rating | Bar |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| dr_01 | Tier A Document Set Completeness Document evidence PIS_Employee_Roster_2025.csv · PIS_GL_Export_2024Q4.csv · PIS_Demo_UI_Flow.docx · PIS_CRM_Pipeline_2025Q2.csv · PIS_CIM.docx · PIS_Customer_Contract_Atlanta_Property_Holdings.docx Peachtree Integrated Systems has filed an employee roster with hiring dates and compensation (PIS_Employee_Roster_2025.csv), general ledger exports for 2024 Q4 (PIS_GL_Export_2024Q4.csv), a Confidential Information Memorandum documenting 2024 revenue of $5.42M and EBITDA of $1.00M, and one executed customer contract with Atlanta Property Holdings showing a $15,000 monthly retainer. However, complete annual financial statements, tax returns, corporate formation records, the full customer contract set, insurance certificates, and comprehensive documentation of the company's 22-person workforce are not present in the retrieved excerpts, leaving material gaps in the standard Tier A diligence package. | 5/10 | NEEDS WORK | |
| dr_02 | Evidence Currency Document evidence PIS_Customer_Contract_Metro_Medical_Group.docx · PIS_Customer_Contract_Statewide_Clinics.docx · PIS_HC_Profile.txt · PIS_Customer_Contract_Atlanta_Property_Holdings.docx · PIS_CRM_Pipeline_2025Q2.csv Most dated artifacts are current and within expected windows. The Statewide Clinics MSA is dated May 1, 2025, the CRM pipeline shows entries from mid-2025, and the HC Profile references a December 2025 PTO liability balance, all consistent with near-current evaluation. However, the Metro Medical Group and Atlanta Property Holdings contracts lack execution dates on their signature blocks, and the HC Profile notes that the owner's post-close transition commitment exists only verbally with "no written agreement yet," creating a gap in documented formalization for a material deal term. | 7/10 | ADEQUATE | |
| dr_03 | Substantiation of Stated Figures Document evidence PIS_Customer_Onboarding_SOP.docx · PIS_Customer_Contract_Metro_Medical_Group.docx · PIS_Cybersecurity_Assessment_Report.docx · PIS_GL_Export_2024Q4.csv · PIS_Customer_Contract_Atlanta_Property_Holdings.docx · PIS_HC_Profile.txt Peachtree Integrated Systems does not substantiate headline financial or operational figures with traceable source documents. The GL export [4] shows only Q4 2024 transaction-level entries without consolidated revenue, EBITDA, or full-year totals; customer count is inferred only from two named contracts (Metro Medical Group and Atlanta Property Holdings) with no master customer list or revenue attribution; headcount appears only in narrative form in the cybersecurity assessment (22 laptops/workstations, 6 described roles) without an official headcount or organizational document; and customer retention or churn metrics do not appear in any provided document. | 3/10 | CRITICAL RISK | |
| dr_04 | Corporate Records Completeness Document evidence PIS_Customer_Contract_Atlanta_Property_Holdings.docx · PIS_Customer_Contract_Statewide_Clinics.docx · PIS_HC_Profile.txt The retrieved documents contain only customer service agreements and a human capital profile; no formation documents, operating agreement, capitalization table, or governance records are present in the provided materials. The company is identified as "Peachtree Integrated Systems, LLC" in executed customer contracts, but foundational corporate documentation required for exit readiness is not evident in these excerpts. | 2/10 | CRITICAL RISK | |
| dr_05 | Contract File Completeness Document evidence PIS_Customer_Contract_Atlanta_Property_Holdings.docx · PIS_CRM_Pipeline_2025Q2.csv · PIS_HC_Profile.txt · PIS_Customer_Contract_Statewide_Clinics.docx · PIS_Customer_Onboarding_SOP.docx Peachtree Integrated Systems has executed copies of at least two material customer managed services agreements on file—the Managed Services Agreement with Atlanta Property Holdings (dated May 1, 2025) and the Managed Services Agreement with Statewide Clinics (dated May 1, 2025)—both fully signed and containing complete service terms, SLAs, and commercial provisions. However, the CRM pipeline excerpt references several customer opportunities (WellPath Clinics, Delta Commercial Realty) and renewal engagements that appear to lack corresponding executed contract documentation in the retrieved files, and the onboarding SOP notes that "contract closed in HubSpot and supporting documents saved to client folder" without confirmation that all material agreements across the customer base are uniformly filed and indexed for retrieval. | 7/10 | ADEQUATE | |
| dr_06 | Employment File Completeness Document evidence PIS_HC_Profile.txt · PIS_CRM_Pipeline_2025Q2.csv · PIS_Employee_Roster_2025.csv · PIS_Financials_And_Operations.xlsx Peachtree Integrated Systems maintains an employee roster documenting 22 full-time and 3 part-time staff with hire dates and compensation, and a Human Capital Profile describing organizational structure, tenure, and retention metrics. However, the retrieved documents contain no evidence of individual offer letters or employment agreements for the workforce, a formal employee handbook, or eligibility records such as I-9 documentation, benefits enrollment forms, or background check files—only compensation and benefits summary information and succession notes for key personnel. | 5/10 | NEEDS WORK | |
| dr_07 | Data Room Organisation & Access No evidence submitted PIS_Customer_Contract_Atlanta_Property_Holdings.docx · PIS_Customer_Contract_Statewide_Clinics.docx · PIS_Demo_UI_Flow.docx · PIS_CRM_Pipeline_2025Q2.csv · PIS_Employee_Roster_2025.csv · PIS_Cybersecurity_Assessment_Report.docx The retrieved documents show scattered, inconsistent file naming and no evidence of a structured data room with labeling or indexing. Files are named by content type and customer (e.g., "PIS_Customer_Contract_Atlanta_Property_Holdings.docx," "PIS_CRM_Pipeline_2025Q2.csv," "PIS_Employee_Roster_2025.csv") but appear to exist as a flat collection without folder hierarchy, cross-referencing, or a master index. Document [3] describes a planned "Deal Room" feature with file explorer and evidence linking, but this is a future product specification for Peachtree Integrated Systems' software platform, not a description of the company's own data organization for exit readiness. | 3/10 | CRITICAL RISK |
OROwner Risk5.2/10 NEEDS WORK (15% blend)
Evidence coverage: scored on 4 of 4 criteria
Deal Impact: Owner dependency creates integration risk — expect R&W scrutiny and potential purchase-price adjustment.
| ID | Criterion & Finding | Score | Rating | Bar |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| owr_01 | Succession Readiness Document evidence PIS_HC_Profile.txt · PIS_CRM_Pipeline_2025Q2.csv · PIS_CIM.docx · PIS_Employee_Roster_2025.csv · PIS_Customer_Contract_Atlanta_Property_Holdings.docx Peachtree Integrated Systems has no formal succession plan documented, though the owner has verbally committed to a 12-month transition period post-close without a written agreement. A critical single point of failure exists in the Metro Medical Group relationship, which represents 16% of revenue and is held solely by the owner at the executive level, with a key employee introduced only to operational contacts. While the company demonstrated operational continuity during a 3-week owner absence in Q1 2026 with no SLA breaches, the absence of documented handoff protocols and the owner's dominance in late-stage sales and key client relationships create material succession risk. | 4/10 | NEEDS WORK | |
| owr_02 | Institutional Knowledge Capture Document evidence PIS_Customer_Onboarding_SOP.docx · PIS_Demo_UI_Flow.docx · PIS_Customer_Contract_Metro_Medical_Group.docx · PIS_Customer_Contract_Statewide_Clinics.docx · PIS_CIM.docx · PIS_HC_Profile.txt Peachtree Integrated Systems has documented its core customer onboarding process in a detailed SOP covering contract handoff, billing setup, technical discovery, and support configuration, with defined roles and target timelines. However, the CIM notes that "documentation maturity is improving but inconsistent across onboarding and engineering workflows," and the onboarding SOP itself identifies that "discovery quality varies by engineer; documentation depth is not uniform." Critical technical knowledge remains concentrated in individuals: only 2 of 3 senior engineers hold Cisco CCNA certification with no CCNP on staff, and the key Metro Medical Group client relationship (16% of 2024 revenue) is primarily held by the owner, with a key employee introduced only to operational contacts. | 5/10 | NEEDS WORK | |
| owr_03 | Management Team Depth Document evidence PIS_HC_Profile.txt · PIS_Customer_Contract_Atlanta_Property_Holdings.docx · PIS_CIM.docx Peachtree Integrated Systems has functional managers in place across operations, sales, finance, and technical delivery, with the Operations Manager, Sales Director, Controller, and NOC lead each handling their respective domains. The business demonstrated independent operation during a 3-week owner absence in Q1 2026 with no SLA breaches or client escalations, and a key employee manages field scheduling and vendor relationships without routine owner involvement. However, owner dependence persists in late-stage sales and the Metro Medical Group relationship (16% of revenue), and there is no formal succession plan despite a verbal commitment to a 12-month transition period post-close. | 7/10 | ADEQUATE | |
| owr_04 | Key Person Concentration Beyond Owner Document evidence PIS_HC_Profile.txt · PIS_Employee_Roster_2025.csv · PIS_CRM_Pipeline_2025Q2.csv Peachtree Integrated Systems has identified multiple single points of failure beyond the owner. Metro Medical Group represents 16% of revenue with the owner holding the exclusive executive relationship while a key employee has been introduced only to operational contacts; additionally, Cisco networking architecture depends on two of three senior engineers holding CCNA certification with no CCNP on staff, forcing complex network issues to vendor support. While the company demonstrated operational resilience during a 3-week owner absence in Q1 2026 with no SLA breaches, no formal succession plan exists, and the owner's verbally committed 12-month transition post-close lacks written documentation. | 5/10 | NEEDS WORK |
CQCustomer Quality4.2/10 NEEDS WORK (21% blend)
Evidence coverage: scored on 4 of 4 criteria
Deal Impact: Customer concentration or churn risk gives buyers discount leverage — expect sensitivity analysis and possible escrow.
| ID | Criterion & Finding | Score | Rating | Bar |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| cq_01 | Top Customer Concentration Document evidence PIS_CIM.docx · PIS_Customer_Contract_Atlanta_Property_Holdings.docx · PIS_Financials_And_Operations.xlsx · PIS_Customer_Contract_Metro_Medical_Group.docx · PIS_Customer_Contract_Statewide_Clinics.docx · PIS_Customer_Onboarding_SOP.docx Peachtree Integrated Systems' top three customers represented 29.7% of 2024 total revenue, with the largest customer (Metro Medical Group) accounting for 11.4% ($620K of $5.42M). The top five customers—Metro Medical Group, Atlanta Property Holdings, Statewide Clinics, Cobb Retail Centers, and Metro Office Parks—combined represent approximately 44.6% of revenue, indicating moderate concentration risk that remains visible in buyer diligence despite the company's stated diversified service mix across healthcare and commercial segments. | 5/10 | NEEDS WORK | |
| cq_02 | Revenue Predictability & Recurring Mix Document evidence PIS_Customer_Contract_Atlanta_Property_Holdings.docx · PIS_Financials_And_Operations.xlsx · PIS_Customer_Contract_Metro_Medical_Group.docx · PIS_CIM.docx · PIS_GL_Export_2024Q4.csv · PIS_Customer_Contract_Statewide_Clinics.docx Peachtree Integrated Systems generates approximately 42% recurring revenue based on 2024 monthly data averaging $190,500 in recurring revenue against $5.42M total annual revenue, with three major customers (Metro Medical Group, Statewide Clinics, SouthCare Health) on long-term contracts featuring automatic renewal provisions and 60-day non-renewal notice requirements. The company's largest customer (Metro Medical Group, $620K in 2024) operates under a 36-month initial term with automatic 12-month renewals, and two other significant recurring customers (Statewide Clinics and Atlanta Property Holdings) maintain similar multi-year or mixed recurring arrangements, though the remaining customer base includes project-based work that introduces variability in monthly revenue totals ranging from $406K to $478K. | 7/10 | ADEQUATE | |
| cq_03 | Contract Transferability Document evidence PIS_Customer_Contract_Atlanta_Property_Holdings.docx · PIS_HC_Profile.txt · PIS_Customer_Contract_Statewide_Clinics.docx · PIS_Customer_Contract_Metro_Medical_Group.docx · PIS_Customer_Onboarding_SOP.docx None of the three customer contracts reviewed (Atlanta Property Holdings, Statewide Clinics, Metro Medical Group) contain assignment or change-of-control clauses, creating material transfer risk in an M&A transaction. All three agreements specify termination rights for convenience but are silent on the ability to assign the contract to a successor provider, meaning customer consent would likely be required for each relationship to survive a change of control. Additionally, the company's largest customer relationship—Metro Medical Group, representing 16% of revenue—is personality-dependent, with the owner holding the executive relationship and a key employee introduced only to operational contacts, further limiting transferability without individual renegotiation. | 3/10 | CRITICAL RISK | |
| cq_04 | Churn Rate & Retention Metrics Document evidence PIS_Customer_Contract_Atlanta_Property_Holdings.docx · PIS_Customer_Contract_Metro_Medical_Group.docx · PIS_Customer_Contract_Statewide_Clinics.docx · PIS_HC_Profile.txt · PIS_Financials_And_Operations.xlsx Peachtree Integrated Systems does not track or report customer churn rate, net revenue retention, or any formal retention metrics. The retrieved documents contain contract terms, financial summaries, and workforce data, but no churn analysis, retention monitoring processes, root-cause analysis of customer losses, or documented retention recovery programs. The company's approach to customer retention appears reactive rather than strategic, with no evidence of systematic tracking or proactive retention initiatives. | 2/10 | CRITICAL RISK |
OSOperational Scalability4.8/10 NEEDS WORK (13% blend)
Evidence coverage: scored on 4 of 4 criteria
Deal Impact: Technology or process gaps require post-close investment — buyers will model remediation cost into their offer.
| ID | Criterion & Finding | Score | Rating | Bar |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| ops_01 | Process Documentation & Repeatability Document evidence PIS_Customer_Onboarding_SOP.docx · PIS_Cybersecurity_Assessment_Report.docx · PIS_CRM_Pipeline_2025Q2.csv · PIS_CIM.docx · PIS_GL_Export_2024Q4.csv · PIS_Demo_UI_Flow.docx Peachtree Integrated Systems has documented its customer onboarding process as a formal SOP with defined roles, workflow steps, and target timelines, enabling new staff to execute this core workflow with guidance. However, discovery quality varies by engineer with non-uniform documentation depth, and the CIM explicitly notes that "documentation maturity is improving but inconsistent across onboarding and engineering workflows," indicating that repeatability remains constrained by dependency on specific individuals and gaps in standardization across technical domains. | 6/10 | ADEQUATE | |
| ops_02 | Technology & Systems Scalability Document evidence PIS_Customer_Onboarding_SOP.docx · PIS_Financials_And_Operations.xlsx · PIS_Demo_UI_Flow.docx · PIS_Customer_Contract_Atlanta_Property_Holdings.docx · PIS_Cybersecurity_Assessment_Report.docx · PIS_CIM.docx Peachtree Integrated Systems operates a hybrid services model with manual, process-dependent workflows rather than unified, scalable platform architecture. The Cybersecurity Assessment Report identifies incomplete endpoint security deployment (Defender for Business on most endpoints, CrowdStrike only partial), inconsistent MFA enforcement across business-critical systems (Microsoft 365, HubSpot, QuickBooks Online, ConnectWise), and reliance on informal incident response practices, while the customer onboarding SOP documents variable discovery quality by engineer and non-uniform documentation depth—both indicators of systems and processes that would require meaningful modernization to support 3x revenue growth without degradation. | 5/10 | NEEDS WORK | |
| ops_03 | Vendor & Supplier Concentration Document evidence PIS_Customer_Contract_Metro_Medical_Group.docx · PIS_HC_Profile.txt · PIS_Customer_Contract_Atlanta_Property_Holdings.docx · PIS_CIM.docx · PIS_CRM_Pipeline_2025Q2.csv Peachtree Integrated Systems shows moderate vendor concentration risk, primarily through dependency on Cisco networking architecture where only 2 of 3 senior engineers hold CCNA certification and no CCNP-level expertise exists on staff, requiring escalation to vendor TAC for complex network issues. While customer contracts with Metro Medical Group and Atlanta Property Holdings include formal SLAs and termination provisions with 60–90 days' notice, the company's reliance on vendor support for critical infrastructure gaps and lack of documented alternative vendors for core networking capabilities present switching costs that could impact service continuity during transitions. | 6/10 | ADEQUATE | |
| ops_04 | Financial Controls & Reporting Cadence Document evidence PIS_Customer_Contract_Metro_Medical_Group.docx · PIS_HC_Profile.txt · PIS_Customer_Contract_Statewide_Clinics.docx · PIS_Customer_Contract_Atlanta_Property_Holdings.docx The retrieved documents contain customer contracts and compensation structure details but provide no evidence of a financial close process, reporting cadence, control documentation, or accounting oversight at Peachtree Integrated Systems. No information is present regarding monthly close timelines, budget versus actual reviews, audit trails, or the existence of a CFO or Controller, leaving the company's financial controls and reporting infrastructure entirely unassessed from the available materials. | 2/10 | CRITICAL RISK |
FRFinancial Readiness6.7/10 ADEQUATE (7% blend)
Evidence coverage: scored on 3 of 4 criteria; 1 absent
Deal Impact: Financial presentation adequate — minor cleanup required for QofE, unlikely to cause material buyer discount.
| ID | Criterion & Finding | Score | Rating | Bar |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| fr_01 | Books Quality & CPA Relationship No evidence submitted · withheld from score PIS_AR_Aging_2025Q1.csv · PIS_CIM.docx · PIS_GL_Export_2024Q4.csv · PIS_HC_Profile.txt · PIS_Customer_Contract_Atlanta_Property_Holdings.docx · PIS_Financials_And_Operations.xlsx The retrieved documents contain no evidence of a CPA relationship, audited financial statements, reviewed financial statements, or compiled financials prepared by a qualified accountant. The financial records consist only of raw transaction exports (GL entries and AR aging) with no accompanying audit, review, or compilation report, and the CIM makes no mention of external accounting support or financial statement preparation standards. Peachtree Integrated Systems' books appear to be maintained internally without formal CPA oversight, creating significant risk for buyer diligence. | — | ||
| fr_02 | Add-Back Documentation Document evidence PIS_HC_Profile.txt · PIS_Demo_UI_Flow.docx · PIS_Customer_Contract_Atlanta_Property_Holdings.docx Peachtree Integrated Systems has identified owner add-backs including a vehicle expense ($740/mo) and cell/personal expenses (~$3,800/yr), but documentation and formalization are incomplete. The year-end discretionary bonus pool ($18,000 in 2025) has consistent amounts over three years but lacks formal documentation, and owner S-corp distributions ($190,000) require restructuring through an employment agreement at close. A buyer's accountant will likely require additional support to independently verify these add-backs and normalize EBITDA from current financial statements. | 5/10 | NEEDS WORK | |
| fr_03 | Revenue Recognition & Consistency Document evidence PIS_CIM.docx · PIS_Customer_Contract_Statewide_Clinics.docx · PIS_HC_Profile.txt · PIS_Financials_And_Operations.xlsx · PIS_Customer_Contract_Metro_Medical_Group.docx Peachtree Integrated Systems segments revenue into recurring and project categories, with recurring revenue representing approximately 42% of 2024 revenue through MSP retainers, network management, and support agreements, and monthly recurring revenue tracked at ~$190K MRR. Sample customer contracts (Metro Medical Group and Statewide Clinics) reflect consistent Net 15 payment terms and standardized rate structures ($28,000/month and $21,500/month respectively, with project rates at $175–$185/hour), suggesting uniform application across major accounts. However, the CIM notes that "documentation maturity is improving but inconsistent across onboarding and engineering workflows," and no explicit statement confirms formal GAAP compliance review, audited revenue recognition policy documentation, or formalized deferred revenue tracking procedures. | 7/10 | ADEQUATE | |
| fr_04 | Three-Year Financial Trend Document evidence PIS_CIM.docx · PIS_Demo_UI_Flow.docx · PIS_HC_Profile.txt · PIS_Financials_And_Operations.xlsx Peachtree Integrated Systems demonstrates strong three-year financial performance with revenue growing from $4.1M (2022) to $5.42M (2024) and EBITDA expanding from $600K to $1.0M, while EBITDA margins improved from 14.6% to 18.4%. The company's recurring revenue base has grown to approximately 42% of total revenue with an estimated MRR of ~$190K, and gross profit margins remain healthy and expanding across all three years with no material one-time items distorting the trend. | 8/10 | STRONG |
LCLegal & Regulatory Compliance5.0/10 NEEDS WORK (6% blend)
Evidence coverage: scored on 4 of 5 criteria; 1 absent
Deal Impact: Compliance gaps will surface in diligence — expect buyer requests, timeline extension, and potential price adjustment.
| ID | Criterion & Finding | Score | Rating | Bar |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| lc_01 | Business Licenses & Permits No evidence submitted · withheld from score PIS_Customer_Onboarding_SOP.docx · PIS_Customer_Contract_Atlanta_Property_Holdings.docx · PIS_Cybersecurity_Assessment_Report.docx · PIS_CRM_Pipeline_2025Q2.csv · PIS_Customer_Contract_Statewide_Clinics.docx · PIS_CIM.docx The retrieved documents contain no evidence that Peachtree Integrated Systems maintains, documents, or has reviewed the transferability of any required business licenses or permits. The company operates as a managed IT services, structured cabling, access control, and CCTV provider across multiple states in the Southeast, yet the Confidential Information Memorandum, customer contracts, SOPs, and cybersecurity assessment are silent on licensing status, state registrations, contractor credentials, or compliance with applicable regulatory frameworks. The absence of any license documentation, compliance checklist, or transferability analysis in the data room represents a material gap for an exit transaction. | — | ||
| lc_02 | Contract Change-of-Control Provisions Document evidence PIS_Customer_Contract_Atlanta_Property_Holdings.docx · PIS_Customer_Contract_Statewide_Clinics.docx · PIS_HC_Profile.txt · PIS_Customer_Contract_Metro_Medical_Group.docx None of the three reviewed customer contracts—Atlanta Property Holdings, Statewide Clinics, and Metro Medical Group—contain assignment clauses or change-of-control provisions, creating material risk that these agreements could terminate or require renegotiation upon a sale of Peachtree Integrated Systems. Metro Medical Group represents 16% of revenue and the owner "holds executive relationship" with only operational contacts introduced to a key employee, meaning the contract's non-assignability may be compounded by personal relationship dependency. The termination-for-convenience provisions in all three agreements (ranging from 60 to 120 days' notice) allow clients to exit without consent requirements, and there is no evidence of legal review or mitigation strategy for these assignment gaps. | 3/10 | CRITICAL RISK | |
| lc_03 | Employment Law Compliance Document evidence PIS_HC_Profile.txt · PIS_GL_Export_2024Q4.csv · PIS_Customer_Contract_Atlanta_Property_Holdings.docx · PIS_CRM_Pipeline_2025Q2.csv · PIS_Employee_Roster_2025.csv Peachtree Integrated Systems lacks documented employment agreements covering non-compete and non-solicitation provisions for key technical and sales staff who manage client relationships and could take business post-departure—the documents reference "a key employee" in critical roles (NOC Operations lead, Field Dispatch, Key Account Management, Sales Pipeline) but contain no evidence of executed non-compete agreements or formal employment contracts. Compensation structures show wage data in the employee roster but no documented benchmarking methodology, and one document notes "senior engineer comp gap" with a planned adjustment for July 2026, indicating reactive rather than proactive compliance. The company also lacks I-9 documentation or classification confirmation in the retrieved excerpts, and no EEOC/DOL clearance letters or employment law audit findings are present. | 5/10 | NEEDS WORK | |
| lc_04 | Intellectual Property Ownership Document evidence PIS_Customer_Contract_Atlanta_Property_Holdings.docx · PIS_Customer_Contract_Metro_Medical_Group.docx · PIS_Customer_Contract_Statewide_Clinics.docx · PIS_HC_Profile.txt · PIS_Customer_Onboarding_SOP.docx Peachtree Integrated Systems Integrated Systems contracts are executed by "a key employee, Owner" on behalf of the entity, and customer data, billing records, and service documentation are held in entity-level systems (HubSpot, QuickBooks Online, Help Desk ticketing), establishing foundational entity ownership of operational IP. However, the documents contain no evidence of formal IP assignment agreements, trademark registration, software license transfers, or a centralized IP schedule; additionally, the owner holds primary executive relationships with key accounts (Metro Medical Group represents 16% of revenue) and retains unilateral approval authority over discounts, nonstandard terms, and remediation scopes, creating ambiguity about whether relationship-specific client arrangements are formally documented as entity property or remain dependent on owner knowledge and discretion. | 5/10 | NEEDS WORK | |
| lc_05 | Litigation & Contingent Liability Document evidence PIS_Customer_Contract_Atlanta_Property_Holdings.docx · PIS_Customer_Contract_Statewide_Clinics.docx · PIS_HC_Profile.txt · PIS_Customer_Contract_Metro_Medical_Group.docx · PIS_GL_Export_2024Q4.csv Peachtree Integrated Systems has no disclosed open litigation, undisclosed claims, or contingent liabilities evident in the retrieved documents. The company maintains workers' compensation insurance through Travelers (entity-owned and transferable per the HC Profile), and customer contracts consistently include standard limitation of liability clauses capping exposure to fees paid in the preceding six months, except for gross negligence, willful misconduct, or breach of confidentiality. The primary unresolved item is a verbal (not yet written) 12-month transition period commitment from the owner post-close, which should be formalized before closing but does not constitute active litigation or material contingent liability. | 8/10 | STRONG |
TMTechnology & Systems Maturity4.6/10 NEEDS WORK (10% blend)
Evidence coverage: scored on 5 of 5 criteria
Deal Impact: Technology gaps will require buyer attention — expect technical due diligence deep-dive and possible price adjustment.
| ID | Criterion & Finding | Score | Rating | Bar |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| tm_01 | Core Systems Documentation & Ownership Document evidence PIS_Cybersecurity_Assessment_Report.docx · PIS_Customer_Contract_Atlanta_Property_Holdings.docx · PIS_HC_Profile.txt · PIS_Customer_Onboarding_SOP.docx · PIS_CRM_Pipeline_2025Q2.csv Peachtree Integrated Systems has several core business systems in place (HubSpot, QuickBooks Online, ConnectWise, Microsoft 365) but the cybersecurity assessment identifies incomplete documentation and material personal account dependencies, including privileged accounts not fully separated from day-to-day identities and inconsistent MFA enforcement across critical systems. The customer onboarding SOP reveals discovery documentation quality varies by engineer with non-uniform depth, and vendor credential transfers frequently delay go-live when clients lack centralized records, indicating shadow IT and ownership gaps extend to customer environments the company manages. | 4/10 | NEEDS WORK | |
| tm_02 | Cybersecurity & Data Protection Posture Document evidence PIS_Cybersecurity_Assessment_Report.docx · PIS_Customer_Contract_Metro_Medical_Group.docx · PIS_Customer_Contract_Statewide_Clinics.docx · PIS_Customer_Contract_Atlanta_Property_Holdings.docx · PIS_CIM.docx Peachtree Integrated Systems has deployed mixed endpoint protection (Defender for Business on most endpoints with CrowdStrike rollout in progress for select users only) and partial MFA enforcement limited to VPN and not consistently applied across business-critical SaaS applications including HubSpot, QuickBooks Online, and ConnectWise. The company lacks a formal SIEM, has no documented incident response plan, and has not conducted tabletop exercises or preserved signoff records; the internal assessment explicitly states "No formal SIEM or fully mature cybersecurity program despite healthcare-adjacent customer base" and identifies incident response as "informal" with inconsistent tabletop participation. Cyber insurance status is not mentioned in any retrieved documents, and no formal vendor risk review cadence exists. | 5/10 | NEEDS WORK | |
| tm_03 | Data Integrity & Business Intelligence Document evidence PIS_Demo_UI_Flow.docx · PIS_Customer_Contract_Atlanta_Property_Holdings.docx · PIS_Cybersecurity_Assessment_Report.docx · PIS_Customer_Contract_Statewide_Clinics.docx · PIS_Customer_Contract_Metro_Medical_Group.docx · PIS_AR_Aging_2025Q1.csv Peachtree Integrated Systems maintains operational data across multiple systems—including AR aging reports, customer contracts, and cybersecurity assessments—but lacks integrated, reliable reporting infrastructure. The cybersecurity assessment explicitly notes "No formal SIEM; logs reviewed ad hoc" and identifies missing centralized logging and monitoring as high-priority gaps, indicating that operational visibility depends on manual processes rather than automated, accessible data systems. While financial data exists (AR aging by customer is documented), the absence of a unified business intelligence platform and the ad hoc nature of log review create significant dependency on individual knowledge and manual reconciliation rather than clean, auditable data accessible across the organization. | 5/10 | NEEDS WORK | |
| tm_04 | Technology Vendor & Subscription Management Document evidence PIS_Customer_Contract_Metro_Medical_Group.docx · PIS_Customer_Contract_Atlanta_Property_Holdings.docx · PIS_HC_Profile.txt · PIS_Customer_Onboarding_SOP.docx · PIS_Customer_Contract_Statewide_Clinics.docx · PIS_GL_Export_2024Q4.csv Peachtree Integrated Systems has documented core vendor relationships within customer contracts, which require clients to "maintain current vendor support and software licensing for covered systems," but the company's own internal technology vendor and subscription documentation is incomplete and fragmented. The GL export shows recurring software subscription expenses (HubSpot at $18,500 in November 2024, Microsoft 365 renewal in December 2024), yet no centralized vendor contract registry, renewal tracking schedule, or license ownership verification is evident in the provided materials. The customer onboarding SOP acknowledges that "vendor credential transfers can delay go-live where clients lack centralized records," and the PIS_HC_Profile indicates the owner has made only a verbal 12-month transition commitment with "no written agreement yet," creating personal dependency risk during ownership transition. | 4/10 | NEEDS WORK | |
| tm_05 | Technical Debt & Modernization Risk Document evidence PIS_Customer_Contract_Statewide_Clinics.docx · PIS_Customer_Contract_Metro_Medical_Group.docx · PIS_HC_Profile.txt · PIS_Cybersecurity_Assessment_Report.docx · PIS_Customer_Contract_Atlanta_Property_Holdings.docx Peachtree Integrated Systems operates a mixed technology environment with incomplete modernization. The Cybersecurity Assessment Report identifies material gaps including inconsistent MFA enforcement across Microsoft 365, HubSpot, QuickBooks Online, and ConnectWise; incomplete endpoint security consolidation (Defender for Business deployed to most endpoints while CrowdStrike rollout is in progress for only engineering and executive users); and limited centralized log monitoring requiring a 90-day remediation plan including MFA completion, endpoint security stack consolidation, and SIEM deployment. While the company demonstrates functional backup and restore practices with quarterly testing, the assessment rates overall cybersecurity risk as "Medium" with the caveat that "buyers will likely discount value or require a remediation plan until identity hardening, monitoring, and documentation are improved." | 5/10 | NEEDS WORK |
▲ Layer8's primary practice area. Technology & Systems Maturity is where Layer8 delivers directly — not just identifies gaps. Where this domain shows deficiencies, remediation is available immediately through Layer8 engagements.
HCHuman Capital6.4/10 ADEQUATE (10% blend)
Evidence coverage: scored on 5 of 5 criteria
| ID | Criterion & Finding | Score | Rating | Bar |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| hc_01 | Workforce Retention & Tenure Document evidence PIS_HC_Profile.txt · PIS_CRM_Pipeline_2025Q2.csv · PIS_Employee_Roster_2025.csv Peachtree Integrated Systems demonstrates stable management retention with 0% turnover across all four managers over the rolling 24 months, and technical staff average tenure of 3.2 years with 12% annual turnover among senior engineers. However, administrative roles show 30% annual turnover and overall company average tenure of 2.9 years, with a noted compensation gap for senior engineers (5% below CompTIA median) that two staff members have flagged, creating near-term retention risk in a revenue-critical role pending a planned July 2026 adjustment. | 7/10 | ADEQUATE | |
| hc_02 | Compensation Competitiveness Document evidence PIS_Customer_Contract_Atlanta_Property_Holdings.docx · PIS_HC_Profile.txt · PIS_Customer_Contract_Metro_Medical_Group.docx · PIS_Customer_Contract_Statewide_Clinics.docx Peachtree Integrated Systems benchmarks compensation against CompTIA Salary Guide (2025) and Glassdoor Atlanta data with documented annual reviews each January, and most roles (operations manager, sales director, controller, NOC engineers, field technicians, help desk) are positioned at or near market rates. However, senior engineers are compensated 5% below the CompTIA median of $112,000, with two senior engineers having expressed interest in market-rate adjustments that are planned for the July 2026 review cycle—creating a retention risk for critical technical staff post-close if the new owner does not address this documented gap promptly. The absence of formalized retention provisions or written transition agreements for key personnel, combined with the pending senior engineer compensation adjustment, introduces uncertainty about payroll inflation and staff stability under new ownership. | 6/10 | ADEQUATE | |
| hc_03 | Recruiting & Training Capability Document evidence PIS_Customer_Onboarding_SOP.docx · PIS_HC_Profile.txt · PIS_CIM.docx Peachtree Integrated Systems has a documented 90-day structured onboarding program for technical and administrative staff with defined milestones, and a key employee can execute all non-senior technical hiring and onboarding without owner involvement. The company achieved 81% new-hire 12-month retention over the trailing 2 years (13 hires, 2 departures), and demonstrated operational continuity when the owner was absent for 3 weeks in Q1 2026 with no SLA breaches or client escalations, indicating that hiring and training processes support business continuity independent of owner involvement. | 7/10 | ADEQUATE | |
| hc_04 | Bench Depth & Succession Beyond Owner Document evidence PIS_HC_Profile.txt · PIS_CIM.docx · PIS_Employee_Roster_2025.csv · PIS_Customer_Onboarding_SOP.docx Peachtree Integrated Systems has identified backups for most non-owner key roles—the NOC lead has cross-trained two others, Field Dispatch shows documented overlap, and a key employee manages billing independently after 6 months of training. However, two material single points of failure remain: Cisco networking architecture lacks CCNP-level expertise (only 2 of 3 senior engineers hold CCNA, with complex issues escalating to vendor support), and the owner holds the executive relationship with Metro Medical Group (16% of revenue) with only operational contact introduction to a key employee. No formal succession plan exists, though the owner has verbally committed to a 12-month transition post-close without written documentation, and two senior engineers' compensation gaps (5% below market) create retention risk during transition. | 6/10 | ADEQUATE | |
| hc_05 | Compensation/Benefits Structure Transferability Document evidence PIS_HC_Profile.txt · PIS_CIM.docx · PIS_Demo_UI_Flow.docx · PIS_Customer_Contract_Metro_Medical_Group.docx Peachtree Integrated Systems' compensation and benefits structure is largely portable, with group health (Cigna), dental/vision, Simple IRA (Fidelity), and workers' compensation all entity-owned and transferable at close. However, cleanup is required: the owner receives $740/month in vehicle expenses and ~$3,800/year in personal expenses that must be added back, owner S-corp distributions require formalization through an employment agreement, and the year-end discretionary bonus pool ($18,000 in 2025) lacks documentation and is currently owner-discretionary despite consistent three-year distributions to management—this bonus formula should be formalized pre-close. | 6/10 | ADEQUATE |
Value Recovery RoadmapTotal Recoverable Value: $1,550,000
Prioritized by estimated recovery impact
Complete remediation plan across all scored domains. The Priority Fixes section above highlights the five ranked starting points.
| Domain | Layer8 Service | Value at Risk | Est. Timeline | Typical Investment |
|---|---|---|---|---|
CQCustomer Quality | Contract Audit & CRM Implementation | $325,500 | ⏱ 8–10 wks | $5,000 – $9,000 |
DRDiligence Risk | Security Hardening & Data Room Preparation | $279,000 | ⏱ 4–6 wks | $2,500 – $4,500 |
OROwner Risk | Succession Planning & Knowledge Capture Sprint | $232,500 | ⏱ 6–8 wks | $3,500 – $6,000 |
OSOperational Scalability | Process Documentation & Systems Audit | $201,500 | ⏱ 8–10 wks | $4,000 – $7,000 |
TMTechnology & Systems Maturity | Technology Infrastructure Audit & Modernization Plan | $155,000 | ⏱ 6–8 wks | $3,000 – $5,500 |
HCHuman Capital | Workforce Retention & Bench Depth Sprint | $155,000 | ⏱ 6–8 wks | $2,500 – $5,000 |
FRFinancial Readiness | Books Cleanup & Add-Back Schedule | $108,500 | ⏱ 2–4 wks | $750 – $2,000 |
LCLegal & Regulatory Compliance | Legal Compliance Audit & Contract Review | $93,000 | ⏱ 6–8 wks | $3,500 – $6,500 |
| TOTAL | $1,550,000 | — | $24,750 – $45,500 | |
⚡ Selective Remediation Recommended
Several domains sit far enough below the line that a buyer will price them. The rest are close enough that attention spent there is attention not spent where it counts. Concentrate on the weakest two or three.
Focus on the two or three lowest-scoring domains first.
Typical investment ranges reflect market-rate remediation costs and are provided for prioritization purposes only. Actual engagement scope and pricing depend on business size, gap severity, and selected service provider. Layer8 Tech Group LLC provides formal engagement proposals following assessment delivery.
Ready to recover this value before you list?
Layer8 Tech Group LLC delivers these services for businesses preparing for acquisition.Schedule a Discovery Call →
Layer8 Tech Group LLC delivers these services for businesses preparing for acquisition.Schedule a Discovery Call →
Layer8 Service CatalogOne service per Roadmap row — purpose, inputs, deliverables, and success criteria
CQContract Audit & CRM Implementation
Purpose
Protect revenue base transferability by ensuring customer contracts survive a change of control and the pipeline is visible to buyers — two of the most scrutinized items in lower-middle-market diligence.
Client Inputs
All active customer agreements, CRM access or pipeline export, renewal history, list of top 10 accounts by revenue.
Engagement Approach
Contract review for assignment and change-of-control clauses, gap remediation with M&A counsel for missing language, CRM selection or cleanup, pipeline workflow configuration, and renewal tracking implementation.
Deliverables
Contract assignment analysis with remediation recommendations; updated agreements with assignment language; CRM implementation with documented pipeline stages; weighted renewal forecast report.
Success Criteria
All material contracts include assignment language acceptable to buyer counsel; CRM shows a 90-day pipeline with documented renewal rates; top-10 account relationships documented with transition plans.
DRSecurity Hardening & Data Room Preparation
Purpose
Eliminate the most common pre-close diligence findings — security gaps, disorganized documentation, and missing records — so the buyer's team moves efficiently and the seller enters negotiation with a clean record.
Client Inputs
Administrative access to email and file storage systems, current software and SaaS subscription list, contract inventory, data backup and recovery procedures.
Engagement Approach
Security posture assessment against buyer diligence checklists, MFA deployment verification, endpoint protection confirmation, data room folder structure built to standard buyer request formats, incident response procedure documented.
Deliverables
Organized data room with standard diligence folder structure; MFA confirmed across all systems; endpoint protection report; written incident response procedure; data backup and recovery procedure documented.
Success Criteria
Data room passes a sample buyer diligence checklist without gaps; security posture documented to buyer IT diligence standards; no security findings flagged during sale negotiations.
TMTechnology Infrastructure Audit & Modernization Plan
Purpose
Produce the technology documentation and remediation roadmap buyers need to underwrite the business's systems without applying a 'black box' discount — demonstrating the tech stack is an asset, not a liability.
Client Inputs
List of all software, SaaS subscriptions, and hardware; IT vendor contracts; current cybersecurity policies; network or system architecture documentation; access to primary business applications for documentation.
Engagement Approach
Systems inventory and entity-ownership documentation, cybersecurity posture assessment, data integrity review, vendor rationalization, technical debt assessment, modernization roadmap drafting aligned to buyer integration requirements.
Deliverables
Complete systems inventory with entity-owned credential confirmation; cybersecurity findings report; data integrity assessment; vendor rationalization recommendations; written 18-month technology roadmap; technical debt disclosure memo.
Success Criteria
Buyer's IT diligence team can assess all systems from documentation alone; no critical vulnerabilities undisclosed; all material systems confirmed entity-owned and transferable; technical debt quantified and roadmap accepted by buyer's IT lead.
OSProcess Documentation & Systems Audit
Purpose
Demonstrate to buyers that the business can operate and grow without the owner — the core test for platform acquisition suitability and a prerequisite for earn-out terms that don't require owner involvement.
Client Inputs
Existing process documentation (any format), list of core operational workflows, technology stack inventory, vendor contracts, org chart and current role descriptions.
Engagement Approach
Process mapping interviews with key staff, SOP drafting for undocumented workflows, technology stack documentation and gap assessment, vendor contract review, financial controls walkthrough and documentation.
Deliverables
Core SOP library covering sales, delivery, billing, and support; technology stack documentation; vendor contract summary with renewal calendar; financial controls memo; org chart with documented decision authority.
Success Criteria
A buyer's operations team can assess day-to-day execution from documentation alone; no single staff member is required to explain how the business runs; operations continue during a 30-day owner absence.
LCLegal Compliance Audit & Contract Review
Purpose
Surface and remediate the legal and compliance gaps that most commonly trigger post-LOI price reductions — license transferability, IP ownership, employment compliance, and undisclosed contingent liabilities.
Client Inputs
Business licenses and permits, material vendor and customer contracts, employment agreements and contractor arrangements, corporate formation documents, prior litigation or regulatory correspondence.
Engagement Approach
Business license review and transferability confirmation with counsel, contract assignment analysis, IP ownership confirmation, employment classification and I-9 review, litigation disclosure review and representation letter preparation.
Deliverables
Legal compliance memo covering all identified gaps and remediation actions; license transferability confirmation; contract assignment analysis; IP schedule; employment compliance findings; attorney representation letter.
Success Criteria
No open legal items triggering a material adverse change clause; licenses confirmed transferable by buyer's counsel; no IP ownership gaps; employment practices reviewed; litigation disclosure complete and documented.
ORSuccession Planning & Knowledge Capture Sprint
Purpose
Convert undocumented succession risk into a written, buyer-acceptable transition plan that reduces Day 1 integration uncertainty and unlocks negotiation leverage on earn-out and escrow terms.
Client Inputs
Owner interview (2–3 hours), key staff interviews (1 hour each), access to current SOPs and operations documentation, current organizational chart.
Engagement Approach
Structured interview series capturing operational and relationship knowledge. Knowledge capture workshops with key staff. Drafting of formal succession plan with phased transition timeline and relationship handoff schedule.
Deliverables
Written succession plan (10–15 pages); phased 90-day transition timeline; key relationship introduction schedule; operational protocol handoff checklist; retention recommendations for critical staff.
Success Criteria
Plan reviewed and accepted by buyer counsel during diligence; transition timeline supports closing without operational disruption; no retention escrow required beyond standard market terms.
HCWorkforce Retention & Bench Depth Sprint
Purpose
Demonstrate that key staff will remain post-close and that the business has the organizational depth to operate without the owner — reducing the escrow holdback and earn-out provisions buyers use to hedge staff attrition risk.
Client Inputs
Employee roster with tenure and compensation, org chart with reporting lines, existing employment or retention agreements, list of key non-owner roles, comp benchmarking data if available.
Engagement Approach
Compensation benchmarking against vertical market rates, retention risk assessment per key role, training playbook documentation, succession identification for critical non-owner positions, comp and benefits structure review for post-close transferability.
Deliverables
Compensation benchmarking report by role; retention risk matrix with recommended retention bonus structures; written succession plans for key non-owner roles; training playbook for top-3 operational roles; comp and benefits transferability memo.
Success Criteria
Buyer's HR diligence confirms comp is at or near market for all revenue-generating roles; retention agreements in place for staff with >20% of revenue exposure; succession paths documented for all roles where departure would disrupt operations within 90 days.
FRBooks Cleanup & Add-Back Schedule
Purpose
Ensure the company's financial statements survive a Quality of Earnings review without re-trading — the single most common source of post-LOI price reductions in SMB transactions.
Client Inputs
3 years of P&L statements and balance sheets, accounting system access, list of all owner add-backs with supporting documentation, CPA contact.
Engagement Approach
Bookkeeping normalization review for consistency and GAAP alignment, add-back identification and documentation with evidentiary support, CPA coordination for reviewed or audited presentation, QofE preparation briefing.
Deliverables
Normalized 3-year P&L with documented add-backs; add-back schedule with supporting documentation for each item; buyer-defensible adjusted EBITDA calculation; QofE-ready financial package.
Success Criteria
Add-backs are documented with receipts or third-party statements that a buyer's QofE accountant will accept without pushback; EBITDA figure matches seller's stated number; no surprises in financial diligence.
Ready to start a remediation sprint?
Layer8 Tech Group LLC delivers each of these services for businesses preparing for acquisition. Engagements are scoped to your timeline and deal target.Schedule a Discovery Call →
Layer8 Tech Group LLC delivers each of these services for businesses preparing for acquisition. Engagements are scoped to your timeline and deal target.Schedule a Discovery Call →
Automation Opportunity AssessmentScored separately — upside signals for post-close value creation, not deal-value drivers
▲ Automation Maturity IndexScored separately — excluded from overall score
2.5/10 (raw: 1/6)
MSP revenue infrastructure is evaluated on lead-to-contract automation, after-hours responsiveness, and client retention sequences — critical signals for buyers assessing whether ARR growth is system-driven or founder-dependent.
Automation maturity is scored separately from the overall readiness score. The gaps below represent operational efficiency opportunities and post-close value creation for a buyer — not buyer discount risk.
| # | Criterion & Finding | Score | Rating | Bar |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| R01 | AI Voice / After-Hours Call Handling Document evidence PIS_Customer_Onboarding_SOP.docx · PIS_Customer_Contract_Statewide_Clinics.docx · PIS_Customer_Contract_Metro_Medical_Group.docx · PIS_HC_Profile.txt · PIS_GL_Export_2024Q4.csv The company relies entirely on manual after-hours call handling with no AI voice agent capability; contracts explicitly reference "$175/hour for approved projects and after-hours maintenance windows" and onboarding SOPs specify "after-hours rules" configuration by Help Desk Lead, indicating calls are routed to on-call staff rather than automated or AI-driven systems. There is no evidence of 24/7 AI voice agent handling, lead qualification, or automated CRM logging for after-hours inbound calls. | 0/2 | MANUAL | |
| R02 | CRM Presence & Workflow Automation Document evidence PIS_Demo_UI_Flow.docx · PIS_HC_Profile.txt · PIS_CRM_Pipeline_2025Q2.csv · PIS_Customer_Onboarding_SOP.docx The company uses HubSpot CRM with a documented sales pipeline (14 deals tracked across defined stages with probability and close dates) and has formalized customer onboarding workflows; however, automation is limited—the pipeline is owner-dependent for approvals, discovery quality varies by individual engineer, and key operational processes like billing setup and technical discovery rely on manual handoffs rather than triggered workflows or system automation. | 1/2 | PARTIAL | |
| R03 | 24/7 Lead Capture No evidence submitted · withheld from score PIS_GL_Export_2024Q4.csv · PIS_Customer_Contract_Atlanta_Property_Holdings.docx · PIS_Customer_Onboarding_SOP.docx · PIS_Customer_Contract_Statewide_Clinics.docx · PIS_CRM_Pipeline_2025Q2.csv · PIS_AR_Aging_2025Q1.csv The retrieved documents show no evidence of automated 24/7 lead capture or chatbot systems; instead, the onboarding SOP references manual "after-hours rules" configuration by the Help Desk Lead and relies on human sales team engagement during standard business hours. The company's service agreements specify business-hours support with no indication of automated lead intake outside those windows. | — | ||
| R04 | SMS Appointment Reminders & Confirmations No evidence submitted · withheld from score PIS_AR_Aging_2025Q1.csv · PIS_HC_Profile.txt · PIS_Customer_Onboarding_SOP.docx · PIS_Customer_Contract_Atlanta_Property_Holdings.docx · PIS_GL_Export_2024Q4.csv · PIS_Cybersecurity_Assessment_Report.docx The retrieved documents contain no evidence of automated SMS appointment reminders, confirmations, or follow-up workflows; the customer onboarding SOP references email-based welcome communications and scheduled calls but does not mention SMS automation or any appointment reminder system. This capability appears to be entirely absent from the company's documented processes. | — | ||
| R05 | Automated Review Solicitation No evidence submitted · withheld from score PIS_Customer_Contract_Atlanta_Property_Holdings.docx · PIS_HC_Profile.txt · PIS_CRM_Pipeline_2025Q2.csv · PIS_Cybersecurity_Assessment_Report.docx · PIS_IT_Asset_Inventory_2025.csv · PIS_Customer_Contract_Metro_Medical_Group.docx There is no evidence of automated review solicitation in the retrieved documents; the company relies on organic reviews and manual processes without any documented trigger-based or systematic review request capability. The customer contracts and operational records show no mention of post-service review automation, SMS/email triggers, or review solicitation workflows. | — | ||
| R06 | Smart Follow-Up Sequences No evidence submitted · withheld from score PIS_Customer_Onboarding_SOP.docx · PIS_Cybersecurity_Assessment_Report.docx · PIS_Employee_Roster_2025.csv · PIS_Customer_Contract_Metro_Medical_Group.docx · PIS_Customer_Contract_Statewide_Clinics.docx · PIS_GL_Export_2024Q4.csv The retrieved documents contain no evidence of automated follow-up sequences for leads or dormant clients; the onboarding SOP describes post-close handoff procedures but does not address lead nurturing or re-engagement workflows. No marketing automation, CRM drip campaigns, or systematic follow-up mechanisms are documented or referenced across the provided materials. | — |
No automation maturity band is published for this company. 2 of 6 criteria were scored; 4 had no evidence in the material provided, and a band selected from the remainder would describe the criteria that happened to be answerable rather than the revenue infrastructure.
► Operational Automation OpportunitiesVertical-specific — excluded from overall score
2.0/10MANUAL (raw: 2/10)
Vertical-specific operational automation gaps identified in MSP & Technology Operational Automation operations. These gaps represent immediate efficiency opportunities for the current owner and post-close value creation levers for a buyer.
Operational automation gaps identified below are framed as efficiency and revenue recovery opportunities. Dollar estimates reflect operational impact, not a valuation adjustment. Layer8 delivers these implementations directly.
| Automation Opportunity | Score | Status | Bar | Layer8 Opportunity |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Ticket Triage & Auto-Assignment | 0/2 | MANUAL | Ticket automation reduces mean time to first response — the metric buyers use most heavily to benchmark MSP operational maturity and client satisfaction. | |
| Patch Management & Compliance Reporting | 1/2 | PARTIAL | Automated patch compliance reporting is a premium tier differentiator — it demonstrates systematic security management and supports cyber insurance requirements. | |
| Client Onboarding & Offboarding | 1/2 | PARTIAL | Onboarding automation is the most visible quality signal to new clients — and the fastest way to surface the gap between an MSP that runs on people and one that runs on systems. | |
| Client Health Scoring & Churn Risk Alerts | 0/2 | MANUAL | Client health automation converts churn prevention from a reactive fire drill to a proactive managed process — directly protecting the MRR base that drives MSP valuation. | |
| QBR Scheduling & Preparation | 0/2 | MANUAL | QBR automation enables consistent executive engagement across the entire client base — not just the accounts that squeaky-wheel their way to attention. |
Ready to build your automation infrastructure before you list?
Layer8 runs 90-day Automation Sprints that close AMI gaps and systematize vertical-specific workflows — on a defined scope and a fixed timeline.Schedule a Discovery Call →
Layer8 runs 90-day Automation Sprints that close AMI gaps and systematize vertical-specific workflows — on a defined scope and a fixed timeline.Schedule a Discovery Call →
Compliance Notes
PII was detected and redacted in 9 document(s) prior to ingestion:
PIS_CRM_Pipeline_2025Q2.csv: PERSON, PHONE_NUMBERPIS_Customer_Contract_Atlanta_Property_Holdings.docx: PERSONPIS_Customer_Contract_Metro_Medical_Group.docx: PERSONPIS_Customer_Contract_Statewide_Clinics.docx: PERSONPIS_Employee_Roster_2025.csv: PERSONPIS_Financials_And_Operations.xlsx: CREDIT_CARD, PERSON, PHONE_NUMBERPIS_GL_Export_2024Q4.csv: PERSON, PHONE_NUMBERPIS_HC_Profile.txt: PERSONPIS_IT_Asset_Inventory_2025.csv: PERSON