What evidence do auditors commonly ask for on PS-1 Policy and Procedures?

SSP PS-1 statement naming the personnel security policy owner and its review cadence (policy yearly for High, at least every three years for Moderate; procedures yearly for both); Personnel security policy with review signatures; Acknowledgement of access agreements signed at hire; Personnel security policy and position risk designation matrix; Background screening completion records by role tier; Termination and transfer access removal evidence within SLA.

What is the most common gap auditors find on PS-1?

Background checks not re run when employees move to higher risk roles

FedRAMP Moderate (NIST SP 800-53 Rev 5 baseline) · PS - Personnel Security

`PS-1` Policy and Procedures

Develop, document, disseminate and review the policy for personnel security, and its procedures, on the FedRAMP-defined cadence: policy at least annually under High and at least every three years under Moderate, procedures at least annually and after significant changes under both.

Source: FedRAMP Moderate (NIST SP 800-53 Rev 5 baseline), PS-1. The statement above is our statement of the clause, read from the published text and cited so you can check it against the official text, not the instrument verbatim. Open FedRAMP Moderate (NIST SP 800-53 Rev 5 baseline) in the compliance library.

A FedRAMP baseline is a subset of NIST SP 800-53 Rev 5, enhancements included.

artefacts

held by a system

at each review

hard

to go live

Policy repository / GRC workspace

where the evidence lives

teal = a system already holds it · olive = produced at each review. To go live: easy when half or more of the artefacts are already held by a system, moderate from a quarter to a half, hard below a quarter.

These are the artefacts auditors commonly ask for on this requirement, our guidance rather than text from the standard. Your assessor decides what is sufficient in your context, and asks for samples across the period when a report covers one.

system holds itEvidence a system already holds

Background screening completion records by role tier · HR system / LMS

periodic reviewEvidence produced at each review

Acknowledgement of access agreements signed at hire · HR system / LMS
Termination and transfer access removal evidence within SLA · HR system / LMS

governing documentDocuments that govern the control

SSP PS-1 statement naming the personnel security policy owner and its review cadence (policy yearly for High, at least every three years for Moderate; procedures yearly for both) · Policy repository / GRC workspace
Personnel security policy with review signatures · Policy repository / GRC workspace
Personnel security policy and position risk designation matrix · Policy repository / GRC workspace
Sanctions policy with documented application history · Policy repository / GRC workspace

First move

Mostly documents and reviews. Pull the 1 system-held artefact from your HR system / LMS on a schedule; put the documents under version control with an owner and review date, and log each review as a dated record with a named reviewer.

Common gaps auditors find

Background checks not re run when employees move to higher risk roles
Termination access removal exceeds documented SLA
Sanctions applied informally without HR documentation
Contractor screening relies on vendor attestation without sampling

Do this for your whole sheet

Paste the rows you run your controls from and get this mapping for every control at once, with the periodic-review ones flagged and a first move per row. No account for the first run.

Build my evidence sheet

PL-11 Baseline Tailoring. Tailor the selected control baseline by applying specified tailoring actions · PS-2 Position Risk Designation