MSP SERVICE DELIVERY / BUYER RESEARCH

MSP Outsourcing SLA Evidence Scorecard

An SLA scorecard should reveal missing definitions before a buyer compares response promises. This tool counts the completeness of ten written criteria for one proposed scope. It does not measure service quality, predict uptime or rank providers. A fully written clause can still be commercially unsuitable or poorly performed; evaluate those matters separately.

Evidence, not endorsement. Provider records checked 2026-09-20, 2026-10-06. Unknown does not mean unavailable. Our research method

Edited by Vasilii KaraUpdated Suggest a correction

PUT IT TO WORK

Check written SLA completeness

Choose the evidence state for ten criteria. A written clause is not proof of service performance.

Choose evidence states to build a report.

Inputs stay in this tab. Copy or print your output before leaving. No provider quality rating is calculated.

Three evidence states

Choose missing when the relevant clause has not been checked or is unavailable. Choose partial when a marketing statement or draft answers only part of the requirement. Choose written when the applicable proposed agreement defines the requirement for your actual scope. Keep the source document, version and clause reference in your own procurement record.

The report separates the states without turning partial evidence into a half-performance score. Unknowns stay visible. Do not mark a criterion written because a sales call sounds reassuring; obtain the clause or agreed scope attachment.

Ten criteria to inspect

The tool covers scope, severity, five separate clocks, pause rules, escalation and records/remedies. For each clock, require the start event, target, stop event and evidence. Record whether time is elapsed or business time and how holidays apply. Define who authorizes a pause and what happens when an approval owner cannot be reached.

Example evidence Appropriate state Why
Homepage says fast response Partial Start, target and evidence are unresolved
Scoped draft defines first action but not restore Written for action; missing or partial for restore Separate obligations must stay separate
Signed scope defines a clock and exclusions Written Completeness established, performance still untested
No data-return provision reviewed Missing Do not infer export availability

These are illustrative classifications, not results for a listed provider. A contract reviewer should assess whether the written target, exclusions and remedies are acceptable; this tool only helps organize that discussion.

Use a timeline to avoid false comparison

Imagine a signal at 22:00, acknowledgment at 22:02, useful action at 22:10, mitigation at 22:20, restoration at 22:40 and final resolution the next day. The times are invented. A two-minute acknowledgment is not a two-minute restore. The SLA evaluation guide explains the timeline and the evidence needed to audit it.

Turn the gaps into a request

Copy the report into the RFP and ask the supplier to fill the missing definitions. Retain the reply with its date and scope. If several candidates use different severity or pause rules, normalize the scenario before comparing their targets. Combine the completed definitions with a NOC pilot or desk pilot to observe a bounded sample.

Inputs stay in this browser tab and are not transmitted by the tool. Copy or print your report before closing or reloading. Do not enter secrets or confidential client evidence. Read the methodology for the distinction between provider claims, contract evidence and actual tests.