This section captures foundational vendor and product information essential for audit trail and contract correlation. Provide accurate metadata to ensure proper license reconciliation.
Software Vendor Legal Entity Name
Vendor Account Manager Name
Enterprise Contract Number
Product SKU or Part Number
Software Product Name & Version
License Model Type
Perpetual
Subscription (User-based)
Subscription (Consumption-based)
Hybrid
Enterprise Agreement
True Forward
Deployment Architecture
Cloud SaaS
Cloud PaaS
On-Premises Physical
On-Premises Virtual
Hybrid Cloud
Multi-Cloud
Deployment Environment Details
Geographic Deployment Regions (Select all applicable)
North America
South America
Europe
Asia Pacific
Middle East & Africa
Global
Current Contract Start Date
Current Contract End Date
True-Up Assessment Date
Is this software subject to regulatory compliance requirements?
Select applicable compliance frameworks
ISO 27001
SOC 2 Type II
GDPR
HIPAA
PCI DSS
FedRAMP
Other
Special License Terms or Restrictions
Conduct a thorough audit of active license consumption. This section quantifies actual usage against purchased entitlements and captures cloud-native telemetry data for consumption-based models.
Total Licenses Purchased (Baseline Entitlement)
Total Licenses Currently Allocated
Active Users (Last 30 Days)
Active Users (Last 90 Days)
User Activity Segmentation Analysis
User Segment | Total Seats | Daily Active (>4 hours) | Weekly Active (1-4 hours) | Monthly Active (<1 hour) | No Activity (0 hours) | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
A | B | C | D | E | F | ||
1 | Executive Leadership | 50 | 45 | 3 | 1 | 1 | |
2 | Engineering & DevOps | 1200 | 1100 | 75 | 20 | 5 | |
3 | Sales & Marketing | 800 | 600 | 150 | 40 | 10 | |
4 | Support & Operations | 600 | 550 | 30 | 15 | 5 | |
5 | Administrative | 300 | 200 | 60 | 30 | 10 | |
6 | |||||||
7 | |||||||
8 | |||||||
9 | |||||||
10 |
Does this product include cloud infrastructure consumption charges?
Cloud Telematics Consumption Metrics (Last Quarter)
Metric Type | Actual Consumption | Contracted Baseline | Overage (Units) | Overage Cost | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
A | B | C | D | E | ||
1 | Compute Hours (vCPU) | 45000 | 40000 | 5000 | $2,500.00 | |
2 | Storage (TB) | 120 | 100 | 20 | $1,800.00 | |
3 | API Calls (Millions) | 2.5 | 2 | 0.5 | $1,250.00 | |
4 | Data Transfer (TB) | 80 | 75 | 5 | $500.00 | |
5 | ||||||
6 | ||||||
7 | ||||||
8 | ||||||
9 | ||||||
10 |
Are there automated provisioning workflows integrated with this software?
Select integrated provisioning systems
Active Directory/Azure AD
Okta
SailPoint
ServiceNow
Custom API
SCCM/Intune
Describe any usage anomalies or irregular patterns detected during audit period
Rate the accuracy of your organization's current license allocation tracking
Very Poor
Poor
Fair
Good
Excellent
Identify and analyze license inefficiencies. This section focuses on quantifying over-allocation, categorizing unused seats, and developing reclamation strategies to optimize license utilization before true-up.
Total Unused Seats (No activity last 90 days)
Unused Seat Categorization & Reclamation Feasibility
Category | Count | Reason for Non-Use | Reclaimable? | Reclamation Action Plan | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
A | B | C | D | E | ||
1 | Terminated Employees | 120 | Offboarding process lag | Yes | Automate deprovisioning within 24 hours | |
2 | Role Changes | 85 | Transferred to non-licensed role | Yes | Reallocate to new role holders | |
3 | Seasonal Workers | 60 | Off-season inactivity | Retain for upcoming seasonal demand | ||
4 | Project-Based Contractors | 95 | Project completed | Yes | Move to pay-per-use model | |
5 | Never Activated | 90 | Provisioned but never accessed | Yes | Immediate reclamation and pool | |
6 | ||||||
7 | ||||||
8 | ||||||
9 | ||||||
10 |
Are there licenses allocated to service accounts or non-human identities?
How many service account licenses can be converted to free tiers or developer licenses?
Has your organization identified any shadow IT usage of this software?
Describe shadow IT instances and remediation plan
Assess the risk level of maintaining current over-allocated licenses
Very Low | Low | Medium | High | Critical | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Financial waste risk | |||||
Compliance audit risk | |||||
Security risk from dormant accounts | |||||
Operational inefficiency risk | |||||
Vendor relationship impact |
Projected Annual Savings from License Reclamation (USD)
Business justification for retaining any intentionally over-allocated licenses
Calculate true-up financial impact and propose budget adjustments. This section translates audit findings into concrete cost scenarios and re-allocation strategies for executive decision-making.
Current Annual Contract Value (Baseline)
Projected True-Up Cost (Without Optimization)
Projected True-Up Cost (With Reclamation)
Cost Adjustment Scenario Analysis
Scenario | Total Cost | Increase from Baseline | Budget Impact % | Assumptions | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
A | B | C | D | E | ||
1 | Status Quo (No Action) | $3,200,000.00 | $700,000.00 | 28 | All over-allocations remain, cloud overages continue | |
2 | Conservative Reclamation | $2,900,000.00 | $400,000.00 | 16 | Reclaim 60% of unused seats, partial cloud optimization | |
3 | Aggressive Optimization | $2,600,000.00 | $100,000.00 | 4 | Reclaim 90% of unused seats, full cloud rightsizing | |
4 | Vendor Negotiated Rate | $2,750,000.00 | $250,000.00 | 10 | Apply enterprise discount tier, commit to 3-year term | |
5 | ||||||
6 | ||||||
7 | ||||||
8 | ||||||
9 | ||||||
10 |
Recommended True-Up Strategy
Accept vendor true-up with minor reclamation
Negotiate based on reclamation analysis
Defer true-up to next cycle with optimization plan
Terminate unused licenses and downsize contract
Explore alternative vendor solutions
Negotiation leverage points and target discount rate
Alternative vendor evaluation summary
Budget Re-Allocation Proposal (Savings Reinvestment)
Cost Category | Original Budget | Adjusted Budget | Variance | Justification | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
A | B | C | D | E | ||
1 | Software Licenses (This Product) | $2,500,000.00 | $2,750,000.00 | $250,000.00 | True-up for actual growth | |
2 | Software Licenses (Other Tools) | $1,000,000.00 | $850,000.00 | -$150,000.00 | Reallocate savings from optimization | |
3 | Cloud Infrastructure | $500,000.00 | $450,000.00 | -$50,000.00 | Rightsizing based on audit | |
4 | Security & Compliance | $300,000.00 | $350,000.00 | $50,000.00 | Enhanced monitoring for license compliance | |
5 | Training & Enablement | $200,000.00 | $250,000.00 | $50,000.00 | Improve utilization rates | |
6 | ||||||
7 | ||||||
8 | ||||||
9 | ||||||
10 |
Does this true-up require board-level financial approval?
Board presentation summary and approval timeline
Confidence level in cost projections (1 = Low, 5 = High)
Attach supporting financial models and vendor quotes
Final review and approval by technical and procurement leadership. This section ensures both architectural compliance and commercial viability before executing true-up negotiations.
Lead IT Architect Name
Lead IT Architect Employee ID
Enterprise Procurement Director Name
Procurement Director Employee ID
IT Architect Approval: Does the current usage comply with architectural standards and security policies?
Architectural non-compliance issues and remediation plan
IT Architect Approval: Is the proposed license allocation technically justified?
Technical justification gaps and required adjustments
Procurement Director Approval: Have all commercial alternatives been evaluated?
Missing alternative evaluations and procurement risk
Procurement Director Approval: Is the budget re-allocation proposal financially viable?
Financial viability concerns and required budget modifications
Risk Assessment Scorecard (Rate 1-5 where 5 = Highest Risk)
Vendor lock-in risk | |
Compliance audit risk | |
Cost overrun risk | |
Business disruption risk | |
Data security risk |
IT Architect acknowledges that all technical data provided is accurate to the best of their knowledge
Procurement Director acknowledges that commercial terms have been reviewed and align with enterprise procurement policies
Both parties acknowledge that this audit will be used as formal evidence in vendor negotiations
Lead IT Architect Digital Signature
Enterprise Procurement Director Digital Signature
Final Approval Timestamp
Attach final audit report PDF and supporting documentation
Has this audit been reviewed by internal audit or compliance team?
Internal Audit Review Reference Number
To configure an element, select it on the form.