Christopher Davis Advisory works with state and federal public-sector agencies, and with the vendors that serve them, to diagnose how decision authority actually moves through a program, then rebuild the structure so it holds under pressure, staff turnover, and technology change. Engaged directly by agencies or as a subcontract partner to prime contractors, systems integrators, and module vendors.
Certification review doesn't create governance failures. It exposes them. Whether you are the agency or a vendor supporting one, if a certification date is on the calendar, this is the fastest way in.
Three recurring failure modes across Medicaid and HHS modernization work, and where a governance-first diagnosis catches them before an audit or a delivery dispute does.
Authority is assumed rather than assigned. When a program hits a hard call, no one is certain who actually owns it until it's too late to matter.
Systems modernization quietly redistributes authority as technical decisions get made. Left undefined, agency and vendor teams each assume the other owns the call, and the program pays for it in rework and delay.
Structures built to clear a specific audit or certification rarely survive the next staff turnover or the next round of federal guidance.
Advisory work grounded in doctoral research on technology-mediated governance, and more than a decade of applied experience inside Medicaid modernization. The result is diagnosis before prescription: governance structures built to fit how a specific institution actually makes decisions, not a generic template.
The same diagnosis-first approach supports agencies directly and the vendor teams delivering alongside them.
Governance diagnosis and redesign, certification readiness, program controls, and change management for state and federal public-sector programs.
Named subject matter expertise in the same service areas, working inside a prime contractor's, systems integrator's, or module vendor's contract and delivery structure, in support of its client's goals.
Available directly to public agencies, and as a subcontract partner to the prime contractors, systems integrators, and module vendors that serve them.
States, systems integrators, and module vendors keep running into the same root cause: decision rights, evidence ownership, and oversight relationships that were never deliberately designed. This service rebuilds that governance directly, sequenced to be complete before your certification date.
For state Medicaid/HHS agencies, systems integrators, and module vendors preparing for CMS certification review.
Tell me your certification date →The review milestones are set by CMS. What they surface depends on whether ownership of the outcomes, the evidence, and the results was ever deliberately assigned.
In CMS's Streamlined Modular Certification, two reviews bracket go-live.
Tests production readiness: whether the applicable Conditions for Enhanced Funding are met, whether functionality for the required and state-specific outcomes has been developed and tested, whether the system will support metric collection and reporting, and whether privacy, security, and training are in place.
Tests whether the production system has achieved the approved outcomes, as shown by the metrics it reports back to the retroactive certification date.
Both reviews turn on evidence someone has to own and outcomes someone has to answer for. That is the governance question this service addresses. Source: CMS certification guidance
Available directly to agencies, or as a subcontract partner to the systems integrators and module vendors supporting them.
Assesses governance gaps against what outcomes-based review will test and produces a prioritized roadmap ahead of your certification date.
Decision rights, evidence ownership, and oversight rebuilt across state, systems integrator, and vendor lines, sequenced to your certification timeline.
Scoped to one module vendor's governance relationship to the state and systems integrator.
Certification lead and later project manager on one of the pilot programs that shaped today's Streamlined Modular Certification standard, with direct, inside experience of where governance breaks down under review.
Send the date, the module or program, and where you are on the pathway, and we can talk through whether a diagnostic is the right starting point.
A structured diagnosis of how decision authority, oversight, and accountability actually function inside a program, followed by the design work to close the gaps. Built for agencies navigating systems modernization, federal certification, or leadership transition, where the existing governance structure was inherited rather than designed. Delivered directly to agencies or alongside the vendor teams supporting them.
Start a conversation →A focused engagement mapping who actually holds authority across a program's key decisions (policy, operations, vendor management, and federal oversight) against who is formally accountable for them. Delivered as a working diagnosis, not a compliance checklist.
Advisory work examining integrated eligibility platforms and Medicaid enterprise systems (MES) as governance environments where policy, operations, vendor delivery, and federal oversight meet, and where authority is won or lost in the details of system design.
Coordination and governance structures for programs with multiple vendors, contractors, or subcontracted partners, supporting agencies and delivery teams alike in federal certification and compliance contexts such as CMS.
Designing the recurring structures that keep large programs visible and manageable for agency leadership and delivery teams alike: risk, issue, decision, and action logs; steering committees; and executive operating cadences.
Prosci-based change management, readiness assessments, and standard operating procedures for organizations absorbing policy, technology, or structural change.
More than a decade of public sector work across multiple states and program areas, in roles from subject matter expert to program lead. Engagement details are confidential, so this page describes the kinds of work rather than the clients.
Hands-on experience across eight modules, described by function rather than by client or vendor product. Under Streamlined Modular Certification each module is reviewed on its own, which is why module-level experience matters. See certification readiness →
Helping public organizations structure authority, ownership, and oversight when modernizing or adopting shared solutions.
Treating federal certification as a governance mechanism, and building the capacity to secure enhanced funding.
Oversight of large Medicaid and eligibility system implementations. Knowing what independent reviewers look for informs how I help teams prepare for review.
Supporting how organizations define needs, structure solicitations, and evaluate solutions when acquiring or replacing systems.
Quantitative and policy work on data stewardship, enrollment forecasting, and administrative capacity.
Whether you are an agency scoping an engagement or a vendor team looking for a subcontract partner, the conversation starts with the problem your program is facing.
Start a conversation →A reframe for how certification advisory work gets positioned: from a compliance checkpoint to an ongoing governance structure worth designing on purpose, with decision rights clarified across state, vendor, and federal roles from the outset.
Download PDF ↓Public management practitioner-scholar and doctoral researcher.
Christopher Davis brings more than 18 years of professional experience, including 12 years in public sector-related domains, to the practice of governance advisory. His work combines applied expertise in program governance, systems modernization, and administrative decision-making with graduate and doctoral training in public management theory. He works directly with public agencies and as a subcontract partner to the prime contractors, systems integrators, and module vendors that support them.
His research and teaching interests center on public management, collaborative governance, organizational theory, and the intersection of public administration and technology, with particular attention to how public organizations structure decision-making and adapt to institutional and technological change. He has presented doctoral seminar work and conference research on governance, network behavior, and collaborative decision-making in public systems.
Direct engagements with state, federal, and multilateral public-sector clients, and subcontract partnerships with the vendors that serve them.