Skip to main content

PRM-05: Security, Compliance & Resilience Resource Management

PRM 8 — High Identify

Mechanisms exist to address all capital planning and investment requests, including the resources needed to implement the Security, Compliance & Resilience Program (SCRP) and document all exceptions.

Renumbered: Formerly PRM-02 in SCF 2025.4.

Code reused: In SCF 2025.4 and earlier, PRM-05 was Cybersecurity & Data Protection Requirements Definition. That control is now PRM-09.

Control Question: Does the organization address all capital planning and investment requests, including the resources needed to implement the Security, Compliance & Resilience Program (SCRP) and document all exceptions to this requirement?

General (27)
Framework Mapping Values
AICPA TSC 2017:2022 (used for SOC 2) (source) CC1.4
BSI Standard 200-1 4.1.3 5.0
COBIT 2019 EDM02.01 EDM02.02 EDM02.03 EDM02.04 EDM04.01 EDM04.02 EDM04.03
ISO 22301 2019 6.3(c) 6.3(d) 7.1 8.3.4 8.3.4(a) 8.3.4(b) 8.3.4(c) 8.3.4(d) 8.3.4(e) 8.3.4(f) 8.3.4(g) 8.3.4(h)
ISO 27001 2022 (source) 5.1(c) 7.1
ISO 27002 2022 5.4
ISO 27017 2015 5.1 7.2.1
ISO 27018 2025 5.4
ISO 27701 2025 7.1
ISO 31000 2018 5.4.4
ISO 31010 2009 6.3
ISO 42001 2023 5.1 7.1 A.6.2.2
NAIC Insurance Data Security Model Law (MDL-668) 4.D(2)(b)
NIST AI 100-1 (AI RMF) 1.0 MANAGE 2.1
NIST 800-53 R4 PM-3
NIST 800-53 R5.2 PM-03
NIST 800-53B R5 (privacy) (source) PM-03
NIST 800-82 R3 PM-03
NIST 800-82 R3 LOW OT Overlay PM-03
NIST 800-82 R3 MODERATE OT Overlay PM-03
NIST 800-82 R3 HIGH OT Overlay PM-03
NIST 800-161 R1 PM-3
NIST 800-161 R1 Level 1 PM-3
NIST 800-161 R1 Level 2 PM-3
NIST CSF 2.0 (source) GV.RR-03
NIST CSWP 39 6.1
SCF DPMP 2026 11.0
US (7)
Framework Mapping Values
USA Federal CMS MARS-E 2.0 SA-2.b PM-3 PM-3.a PM-3.b PM-3.c
USA Federal CERT RMM 1.2 ADM:GG2.GP3 AM:GG2.GP3 COMM:GG2.GP3 COMP:GG2.GP3 CTRL:GG2.GP3 EC:SG4.SP5 EC:GG2.GP3 EF:SG2 EF:GG2.GP3 EXD:GG2.GP3 FRM:GG2.GP3 HRM:GG2.GP3 ID:GG2.GP3 IMC:GG2.GP3 KIM:GG2.GP3 MA:GG2.GP3 MON:GG2.GP3 OPD:GG2.GP3 OPF:GG2.GP3 OTA:GG2.GP3 PM:GG2.GP3 RISK:GG2.GP3 RRD:GG2.GP3 RRM:GG2.GP3 RTSE:GG2.GP3 SC:GG2.GP3 TM:GG2.GP3 VAR:GG2.GP3 GG2.GP3
USA Federal IRS 1075 2021 PM-3
USA Federal NISPOM 2020 §117.18(c)(1)(ii)
USA Federal NSF RIG 2025 5.3.7.3
USA New York DFS 23 NYCRR500 2023 Amd 2 500.4(d)(4)
USA Texas DIR SCSC 2.2 2025 PM-03
EMEA (4)
Framework Mapping Values
EMEA Germany BAIT 2017 2.3
EMEA EU DORA 2023 Article 7(a) Article 7(c) Article 7(d)
EMEA EU EBA GL/2019/04 3.6.1.61 3.6.1.62 3.6.1.66
EMEA Saudi Arabia OTCC-1 2022 1-4-2
APAC (6)
Americas (1)
Framework Mapping Values
Americas Canada OSFI B-13 2022 1.2.1

Capability Maturity Model

Level 0 — Not Performed

Practices are non-existent, based on the inability to demonstrate an implemented and operational capability. A reasonable person would conclude the control is not being performed.

Level 1 — Performed Informally

Project & Resource Management (PRM) domain capabilities are ad hoc and inconsistent. Capability criteria associated with this control may include: ▪ Policies, standards & procedures associated with PRM domain capabilities provide limited coverage due to the depth and breadth of the existing documentation. ▪ Project management-related activities are decentralized (e.g., a localized/regionalized function) and uses non-standardized methods to implement secure, resilient and compliant practices. ▪ IT and/or cybersecurity personnel work with data/process owners to help ensure secure practices are implemented throughout the System Development Lifecycle (SDLC) for all high-value projects.

Level 2 — Planned & Tracked

Project & Resource Management (PRM) capabilities are requirements-driven, but are not standardized across the entity (e.g., local/regional level consistency). Capability criteria associated with this control reasonably expect the following criteria to exist: ▪ Policies and standards associated with PRM domain capabilities are formally documented and centrally-managed by the entity. ▪ Standardized Operating Procedures (SOP) associated with PRM domain capabilities are documented and maintained by process owners. ▪ IT and/or cybersecurity personnel work with business stakeholders and process owners to appropriately scope and reasonably implement cybersecurity and data protection controls associated with PRM domain capabilities to address applicable statutory, regulatory and/or contractual requirements for Technology Assets, Applications, Services and/or Data (TAASD). ▪ Project & Resource Management -related controls are primarily administrative and preventative in nature (e.g., policies, standards and procedures & guidelines). ▪ Project & Resource Management may be a defined function (e.g., team or department) or assigned as an additional duty to existing IT and/or cybersecurity personnel. ▪ The Chief Information Officer (CIO), or similar function, analyzes the organization's business strategy and prioritizes the objectives and resourcing of the security function, based on broader business requirements. ▪ A Project Management Office (PMO), or project management function, enables the implementation of cybersecurity and data protection-related resource planning controls across the System Development Lifecycle (SDLC) for all high-value projects. ▪ The PM function enables project involvement for Information Assurance Program (IAP) as part of the organization's established project management processes to ensure both cybersecurity and data protection principles are identified and implemented. ▪ Quarterly Business Review (QBR), or similar status reporting, exists to provide recurring reports on the state of the cybersecurity and data protection program.

Level 3 — Well Defined

Project & Resource Management (PRM) capabilities are standardized across the entity for applicability to People, Processes, Technologies, Data and/or Facilities (PPTDF) to ensure consistency for Technology Assets, Applications, Services and/or Data (TAASD). Capability criteria associated with this control reasonably expect the following criteria to exist: ▪ Policies and standards associated with PRM domain capabilities are formally documented and centrally-managed by the entity's Governance, Risk & Compliance (GRC) team, or similar function. ▪ Standardized Operating Procedures (SOP) associated with PRM domain capabilities are well-documented and kept current by process owners. ▪ A Project Management Office (PMO), or similar function, is appropriately staffed and supported to implement and maintain PRM domain capabilities. ▪ Technology is leveraged to enhance the efficiency and accuracy of project and resource management operations (e.g., project management solution). ▪ The entity's Governance, Risk & Compliance (GRC) team, or similar function, works with business stakeholders and process owners to appropriately scope and reasonably implement cybersecurity and data protection controls associated with PRM domain capabilities to address Minimum Compliance Requirements (MCR) (e.g., applicable statutory, regulatory and/or contractual requirements) and Discretionary Security Requirements (DSR) (e.g., entity-required controls). ▪ The Chief Information Officer (CIO), or similar function, analyzes the organization's business strategy and prioritizes the objectives and resourcing of the security function, based on broader business requirements. ▪ An implemented and operational capability exists to address all capital planning and investment requests, including the resources needed to implement the Security, Compliance & Resilience Program (SCRP) and document all exceptions to this requirement.

Level 4 — Quantitatively Controlled

Project & Resource Management (PRM) capabilities, in addition to being standardized across the entity and centrally managed to ensure consistency across Technology Assets, Applications, Services and/or Data (TAASD), efforts are metrics driven to provide sufficient insight for decision makers to predict optimal performance, ensure continued operations and/or identify areas for improvement. Capability criteria associated with this control reasonably expect the following criteria to exist: ▪ Applicable SCR-CMM Level 3 (Well Defined) capabilities are implemented and operational. ▪ Metrics reporting includes quantitative analysis of Key Performance Indicators (KPIs). ▪ Metrics reporting includes quantitative analysis of Key Risk Indicators (KRIs). ▪ Scope of metrics, KPIs and KRIs covers organization-wide cybersecurity and data protection controls, including functions performed by third-parties. ▪ Organizational leadership maintains a formal process to objectively review and respond to metrics, KPIs and KRIs (e.g., monthly or quarterly review). ▪ Based on metrics analysis, process improvement recommendations are submitted for review and are handled in accordance with change control processes. ▪ Business and technical stakeholders are involved in reviewing and approving proposed changes to evolve capabilities.

Level 5 — Continuously Improving

Utilize SCR-CMM Level 3 or Level 4 (if available) criteria definitions: ▪ There are no defined Level 5 criteria, since it is reasonable to assume a continuously-improving process is not necessary to operationalize this control. ▪ Level 5 capabilities should be considered “world-class” where the control builds on Level 4 capabilities, but are continuously improving through Artificial Intelligence (AI) and/or Machine Learning (ML) technologies. ▪ While it may be possible to develop responsive capabilities for this control through the use of AI and/or ML technologies, the criteria would be organization-specific to define.

Assessment Objectives

  1. PRM-05_A01 the resources needed to implement the cybersecurity / data privacy program are included in capital planning and investment requests and all exceptions are documented.
  2. PRM-05_A02 the documentation required for addressing the cybersecurity / data privacy program in capital planning and investment requests is prepared in accordance with applicable laws, executive orders, directives, policies, regulations, standards.
  3. PRM-05_A03 cybersecurity / data privacy resources are made available for expenditure as planned.

Evidence Requirements

E-PRM-02 Portfolio Roadmap

Documented evidence of the organization's roadmap for implementing cybersecurity-related initiatives and technologies.

Resource Management

Technology Recommendations

Micro/Small

  • Generic budget for IT products and services

Small

  • Generic budget for IT products and services

Medium

  • Dedicated cybersecurity budget
  • Dedicated data protection budget

Large

  • Dedicated cybersecurity budget
  • Dedicated data protection budget

Enterprise

  • Dedicated cybersecurity budget
  • Dedicated data protection budget

The Secure Controls Framework (SCF) is maintained by SCF Council. Use of SCF content is subject to the SCF Terms & Conditions.

Manage this control in SCF Connect

Track implementation status, collect evidence, and map controls to your compliance frameworks automatically.