Align
Framework · 30 minutesConfirm your framework, your current state, and the outcome this engagement has to produce.
- HIPAA, SOC 2, FedRAMP, or NIST
- Current control posture
- Audit, sale, or build trigger
You get: a scoped control target
Compliance engineering
Compliance is not a checklist. It is an engineering discipline.
Maxiom designs and builds compliant software for healthcare IT, federal contracting, and regulated SaaS. Engineers who have worked under BAAs, implemented production FHIR APIs, and shipped code inside federal security frameworks.
Compliance engineering for healthcare IT, federal, and regulated SaaS teams
Regulatory compliance is an engineering discipline, not a documentation exercise. Maxiom engineers have operated under BAAs, implemented production FHIR R4 and SMART on FHIR APIs, and built systems aligned with FedRAMP, NIST 800-53, SOC 2 Type II, and HITRUST CSF requirements. We design encryption and key management, audit logging, access controls, and data retention into system architecture from the start — so your next audit, customer security review, or authorization assessment has code-level evidence behind it. Healthcare teams can map a feature against logs, prompts, analytics, and vendors with the HIPAA minimum-necessary mapper before those copies exist.
- 2002
- Founded
- $100M+
- Delivered
- 98%
- Satisfaction
The problem
Compliance gets bolted on, not built in
Most teams treat compliance as a documentation task. The actual risk lives in how data is structured, accessed, logged, and retained: decisions made at the keyboard.
AI tools cannot reason about regulatory context
An AI tool that has never operated under a BAA cannot interpret the nuance of what minimum necessary means for a specific data access pattern.
The cost of getting it wrong is asymmetric
A compliance failure in healthcare or federal contracting is not just a bug. It is a breach notification, a fine, a lost contract, or a failed audit.
Is this right for you?
Healthcare SaaS building FHIR APIs
You need a FHIR-capable engineering partner who has implemented production FHIR APIs, not an engineer learning the spec on your timeline.
Company approaching SOC 2 Type II
Your auditors are asking for code-level evidence of controls. A compliance questionnaire is not enough.
Federal contractor under NIST 800-53
You need system boundary definition, control implementation, and continuous monitoring architecture that a FedRAMP assessor can validate.
How our compliance engineering engagement works
Kickoff
- 01
- 02
Review
Code or architectureExisting code review or greenfield architecture assessment — whichever matches the engagement.
- Code-level evidence where it exists
- Architecture gaps where it does not
- NDA and least-privilege access
You get: facts mapped to your controls
- 03
Findings
Gap analysisFindings mapped to your specific controls with severity rankings and remediation guidance.
- Severity-ranked gaps
- Control-by-control mapping
- Remediation guidance, not a checklist dump
You get: a packet an auditor can read
- 04
Close
Remediate or buildFix gaps in existing systems or build compliant systems from the ground up — depending on stage.
- Critical gaps closed first
- Written scope for remaining work
- Named engineer accountability
You get: controls that exist in the product, not the slide deck
Compliance-first engineering
Maxiom engineers design and build compliant systems from the ground up. FHIR API development, HIPAA-aligned data architecture, encryption and key management strategy, audit logging design, BAA-compatible service integration.
Compliance code review
A compliance-focused review against your specific regulatory framework. Findings mapped to relevant controls, severity-ranked, with remediation guidance. For companies approaching certification or a major customer security review.
Ongoing compliance engineering
A Maxiom compliance engineer embedded in your development workflow. Architecture decision review, third-party integration evaluation, monthly risk summary.
HIPAA / HITECHHL7 FHIR (R4, SMART on FHIR, CMS interoperability)FedRAMP / NIST 800-53SOC 2 Type IIHITRUST CSF
- NDA signed before access
- Read-only repository only
- Senior engineers every time
- Report in 10 business days
Frequently asked questions
What is compliance engineering?
Compliance engineering is the practice of designing and building software so regulatory controls — HIPAA minimum necessary access, FHIR interoperability, FedRAMP security controls, SOC 2 trust criteria — are implemented in code, data models, and infrastructure rather than documented after the fact.
Which compliance frameworks does Maxiom support?
HIPAA and HITECH, HL7 FHIR (R4, SMART on FHIR, CMS interoperability), FedRAMP and NIST 800-53, SOC 2 Type II, and HITRUST CSF. Engagements are scoped to your specific framework and current certification stage.
Do you build new compliant systems or review existing code?
Both. We offer compliance-first greenfield engineering, compliance-focused code review for teams approaching certification, and ongoing embedded compliance engineering for organizations that need continuous control validation as they ship.
Can Maxiom help with FHIR API development?
Yes. Senior engineers implement production FHIR R4 and SMART on FHIR APIs, including resource modeling, scopes, bulk export considerations, and CMS interoperability requirements.
Does Maxiom operate under a BAA for healthcare work?
Yes. Maxiom is a BAA-capable engineering partner. Engagements that involve PHI are structured with the contractual and technical controls healthcare delivery requires.
How does compliance engineering differ from a paperwork audit?
Audits and questionnaires document intent. Compliance engineering implements encryption, access control, audit logging, retention, and monitoring in architecture and code so assessors and customers can verify controls in the system itself.
Can you support FedRAMP and NIST 800-53 control implementation?
Yes. We engineer system boundary definition, control implementation, continuous monitoring architecture, and implementation evidence that assessors can validate — not documentation alone.
When should we engage a compliance engineer?
Before greenfield builds in regulated markets, before SOC 2 or FedRAMP assessments, before major customer security reviews, and whenever AI-assisted development may have introduced control gaps in PHI, payment, or government data paths.
What industries use Maxiom compliance engineering?
Healthcare IT, federal and government contracting, regulated SaaS, and fintech teams that need senior engineers to treat compliance as a delivery constraint rather than a late-stage checklist.