Skip to main content

TPM-14.2: Provider Contingency Plan

TPM 5 — Medium Protect

Mechanisms exist to contractually-require external service providers to have contingency plans that meet organizational contingency requirements.

Renumbered: Formerly BCD-10.3 in SCF 2025.4.

Control Question: Does the organization contractually-require external service providers to have contingency plans that meet organizational contingency requirements?

General (11)
Framework Mapping Values
CSA CCM 4.1.0 BCR-03
GovRAMP CP-08(04)
GovRAMP High CP-08(04)
NIST 800-53 R4 CP-8(4)
NIST 800-53 R5.2 CP-08(04)
NIST 800-53B R5 (high) (source) CP-08(04)
NIST 800-82 R3 CP-08(04)
NIST 800-82 R3 HIGH OT Overlay CP-08(04)
NIST 800-161 R1 CP-8(4)
NIST 800-161 R1 Level 2 CP-8(4)
NIST 800-161 R1 Level 3 CP-8(4)
US (1)
Framework Mapping Values
USA Federal FedRAMP R5 (high) CP-08(04)
EMEA (3)
Framework Mapping Values
EMEA EU EBA GL/2019/04 3.7.3.86
EMEA LUX CCSF 20/750 2020 3.7.3-86
EMEA LUX CCSF 22/806 2022 77.l
APAC (1)
Framework Mapping Values
APAC Malaysia RMiT 2025 10.48(d) A10-B5(a)(ii)

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

SCR-CMM Level 1 criteria definitions are not available for this control: ▪ A reasonable person would conclude this control requires a structured process. ▪ At this level of maturity, the "ad hoc" nature of performing a capability informally would indicate the intent of the control is not met due to a lack of consistency and formality.

Level 2 — Planned & Tracked

Business Continuity & Disaster Recovery (BCD) 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 BCD domain capabilities are formally documented and centrally-managed by the entity. ▪ Standardized Operating Procedures (SOP) associated with BCD 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 BCD domain capabilities to address applicable statutory, regulatory and/or contractual requirements for Technology Assets, Applications, Services and/or Data (TAASD). ▪ Business Continuity / Disaster Recovery (BC/DR)-related controls are primarily administrative and preventative in nature (e.g., policies, standards and procedures & guidelines). ▪ BC/DR may be a defined function (e.g., team or department) or assigned as an additional duty to existing IT and/or cybersecurity personnel.

Level 3 — Well Defined

Third-Party Management (TPM) 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 TPM 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 TPM domain capabilities are well-documented and kept current by process owners. ▪ A procurement team, or similar function, is appropriately staffed and supported to implement and maintain TPM domain capabilities. ▪ Technology is leveraged to enhance the efficiency and accuracy of third-party management operations (e.g., TPRM risk management solution and vendor 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 TPM 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). ▪ An implemented and operational capability exists to contractually-require external service providers to have contingency plans that meet organizational contingency requirements.

Level 4 — Quantitatively Controlled

Utilize SCR-CMM Level 3 criteria definitions: ▪ There are no defined Level 4 criteria, since it is reasonable to assume a quantitatively-controlled process is not necessary to operationalize this control. ▪ While it may be possible to develop “metrics-driven” capabilities for this control, the criteria would be organization-specific to define.

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. TPM-14.2_A01 the frequency at which to obtain evidence of contingency testing by providers is defined.
  2. TPM-14.2_A02 the frequency at which to obtain evidence of contingency training by providers is defined.
  3. TPM-14.2_A03 primary telecommunications service providers are required to have contingency plans.
  4. TPM-14.2_A04 alternate telecommunications service providers are required to have contingency plans.
  5. TPM-14.2_A05 provider contingency plans are reviewed to ensure that the plans meet organizational contingency requirements.
  6. TPM-14.2_A06 evidence of contingency testing by providers is obtained.
  7. TPM-14.2_A07 evidence of contingency training by providers is obtained.

Evidence Requirements

E-TPM-04 Service Level Agreements (SLAs)

Documented evidence of third-party Service Level Agreements (SLAs) to support business operations.

Third-Party Management

Technology Recommendations

Micro/Small

  • Cybersecurity Supply Chain Risk Management (C-SCRM) program

Small

  • Cybersecurity Supply Chain Risk Management (C-SCRM) program

Medium

  • Cybersecurity Supply Chain Risk Management (C-SCRM) program

Large

  • Cybersecurity Supply Chain Risk Management (C-SCRM) program

Enterprise

  • Cybersecurity Supply Chain Risk Management (C-SCRM) program

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.