DevOps capacity without another hiring cycle

Teams usually buy DevOps support when the delivery system starts slowing the business down: releases take too long, staging and production drift apart, enterprise customers ask how code reaches production, or engineers lose product time to runners, secrets, cloud accounts, and deployment chores.

The first goal is clarity. We identify what is blocking delivery, what needs senior DevOps ownership, and what belongs in a focused project or retained plan.

We look at the delivery system as one operating surface instead of a set of disconnected tools.

• Release path: pull request checks, build and test stages, artifacts, approvals, deployment records, release notes, rollback steps, and monitoring hooks.
• Infrastructure as Code: Terraform, Pulumi, CloudFormation, Bicep, Ansible, Helm, or the toolchain your team already uses, with attention to state, module boundaries, promotion rules, and drift.
• Enterprise evidence: access notes, deployment controls, audit trails, release checklists, runbooks, and operational documentation where they are in scope.
• Ongoing capacity: a prioritized DevOps backlog, monthly delivery review, and plan boundary that keeps retained support from becoming open-ended consulting.

The output is reviewable engineering work and operating evidence, not only advice.

• delivery-system inventory covering repositories, workflows, runners, artifacts, environments, and deployment targets
• prioritized DevOps backlog with impact, effort, risk, owner, and plan fit
• pull requests for pipeline, IaC, environment, or documentation changes
• environment inventory with ownership, purpose, access notes, and cost or lifecycle concerns where visible
• release checklist with gates, rollback steps, deployment record location, and monitoring hooks
• runbooks for common delivery failures, runner issues, environment drift, and rollback assistance
• monthly delivery review summarizing completed work, open risks, upcoming decisions, and recommended next steps

We usually improve the current CI/CD and infrastructure platform before recommending a migration. Scope is written down early so delivery work stays focused.

Typical scoped surfaces include CI/CD workflows, Infrastructure as Code, developer and production environments, cloud or Kubernetes operations, and production-support practices. That can cover build, test, scan, artifact, deploy, cache, runner, approval, rollback, provisioning, environment promotion, monitoring integration, and handoff documentation.

Cloud coverage can include AWS, Azure, GCP, Oracle Cloud, Kubernetes, bare metal, hybrid, and multi-cloud surfaces when those systems are part of the agreed operating boundary.

The sequence is deliberately simple so your team can see where work is and what decision is needed next.

1. Assess fit and scope. We confirm whether you need an audit, implementation package, retained plan, managed operation, or emergency response. Then we define repositories, environments, cloud accounts, CI/CD platforms, production surfaces, and out-of-scope systems.
2. Map the current delivery system. We review checks, stages, artifact flow, deployment paths, environments, runners, secrets, access, observability, and incident history. The result is a risk list and a backlog ordered by impact and plan fit.
3. Ship reviewable changes. Work happens inside your existing engineering workflow where possible, using pull requests, configuration changes, written acceptance criteria, handoff notes, and small process changes with clear owners.
4. Review the operating cadence. Most retained plans use weekly or biweekly delivery checks plus a monthly operating review. Release support, incident triage, escalation reviews, and quarterly plan reviews are added when agreed.

Choose the smallest shape that matches the current delivery problem. Detailed XS, S, M, and Custom pricing remains on the pricing page.

• DevOps Assessment is best when you are unsure where delivery is blocked. The usual outcome is a CI/CD map, environment map, risk list, and recommended plan.
• Pipeline Implementation is best when one delivery bottleneck needs focused work. The usual outcome is a new or rebuilt pipeline, runner setup, deployment path, and handoff notes.
• IaC Foundation is best when infrastructure needs to move into code. The usual outcome is an IaC repository structure, provisioning workflow, documentation, and review process.
• Ongoing DevOps Plan is best when the team needs continuous capacity. The usual outcome is monthly support, backlog ownership, delivery reviews, and incident help where scoped.

View the full pricing comparison →

This fits when a technical sponsor can approve access, priorities, and merge decisions; the agreed repository, CI/CD, cloud, Kubernetes, secrets, monitoring, or ticketing access can be granted; and production changes have an approval path, maintenance window, or escalation rule.

The work is delivered as reviewable engineering changes, not advice-only consulting. It does not include application feature development unrelated to delivery or platform work, broad security audits beyond delivery and infrastructure controls, formal compliance certification or legal attestation, guaranteed uptime without a written SLA, major migrations outside the retained backlog, or ownership of customer communication and business-risk acceptance unless those items are explicitly scoped.

The service should leave your operating system easier to inspect and maintain: a pipeline map, IaC repository and review rules, environment inventory, runbooks, and a monthly delivery review. Measured outcomes can include shorter build and test feedback loops, fewer manual release steps, clearer environment ownership, more repeatable provisioning, documented rollback paths, and reviewed cloud or runner costs.

For retained plans, escalation paths are agreed during onboarding: communication channel, severity definitions, authorized approvers, production-change rules, and when Assistance may act directly versus advise. After each meaningful change, we leave a handoff note that explains what changed, how to validate it, how to roll it back, and what remains risky.

If an issue moves outside the DevOps plan boundary, we route it to the right service path: Emergency Response for active production impact, SRE as a Service for reliability operations, Security Audit for broad security review, or a scoped implementation project for larger platform changes.

Related service paths: CI/CD Audit, Managed Self-Hosted Runners, Cloud Account Management, Cloud Infrastructure, GitOps, DevSecOps as a Service, Managed Kubernetes, and Engagement Models.

Start with a DevOps assessment. We will review your delivery path, identify the highest-impact fixes, and recommend an audit, implementation package, or flat-rate plan.

Request DevOps assessment →

Can you work with our existing CI/CD platform? Yes. We usually improve the current platform before recommending a migration.

Do you replace our engineers? No. We supply DevOps capacity and operating structure so your engineers can keep shipping product.

How quickly can work start? A focused assessment can start after access and stakeholder availability are confirmed. Implementation timing depends on repository count, environment complexity, and change-control requirements.

Do flat-rate plans include unlimited work? Plans include ongoing support within the agreed scope. Large migrations, new compliance programs, or major re-architecture are scoped separately when needed.

Can this include emergency production help? Yes, when incident response coverage is included in the selected plan or scoped as a separate emergency engagement.