Business continuity supplier questionnaire

A reusable template for clients onboarding Webventurer Ltd as a supplier who run a business-continuity or supplier-risk assessment. Replace the bracketed placeholders, and confirm the A–D option wording matches the client's own form before sending.

---

WEBVENTURER LTD Pepperscombe Farm, Newham Lane, Steyning, West Sussex, BN44 3LR, United Kingdom Company registration number: 06369126

[Date]

[Reviewer name and email] [Client / reviewing organisation] [Address]

For the attention of: [Reviewer name and role] Re: "Stride" engagement: Business Continuity Supplier Questionnaire

Dear [Reviewer name],

This letter accompanies our completed Business Continuity Supplier Questionnaire for the Stride engagement and is intended as supporting evidence for your supplier-risk assessment.

By way of context, Webventurer Ltd is a small UK consultancy. Stride is a fixed-price, fixed-term knowledge-transfer engagement: we teach the client's own technically-curious employees to build internal applications using AI coding tools (Anthropic's Claude Code together with Linear issue-tracking), through a kanban workflow that produces fully auditable work inside the client's own GitHub organisation.

Delivery comprises a two-day on-site setup, three weeks of weekly support, and optional ad-hoc assistance thereafter. The core deliverable is one trained internal user able to build and ship their own applications unsupervised.

We should be candid at the outset, because it bears directly on how you read the questionnaire. Stride is not an ongoing managed service.

All code, intellectual property and work history are client-owned and reside exclusively within the client's own GitHub organisation and infrastructure; Webventurer provides no hosting and operates no service on which the delivered applications depend.

The traditional supplier-continuity model assumes an ongoing service that could be interrupted. Here, the value is transferred to the client during the engagement and thereafter lives entirely within the client's own systems.

Consequently, were Webventurer Ltd to cease trading, there would be no operational continuity impact on the client's deployed applications: "If the user leaves the client, the apps survive in-place — they run on the client's GitHub org (or approved alternative) and infrastructure, and a successor can pick them up with one day of hand-over."

The responses below answer each questionnaire item honestly. Where we do not hold a formal artefact, we say so plainly and explain why the residual risk to the client is low or not applicable, rather than implying a capability we do not have.

Responses to the questionnaire

For each item we indicate the option (A–D) from the business-interruption scale that most accurately reflects Webventurer's position, followed by the supporting rationale.

1. Current business continuity policy in place?Selected response — D: "We have no plans to introduce a business continuity policy."

Webventurer does not maintain a formal, standalone documented Business Continuity Management ("BCM") policy of the kind a managed-service provider would hold, and has no current plans to introduce one — a deliberate proportionality decision rather than an oversight.

Our continuity practice is proportionate to a small consultancy. The material point for the client is that the engagement creates no Webventurer-operated service, so there is no Webventurer activity whose interruption would interrupt the client's applications.

2. Registered (certified) to, or aligned to, any recognised business continuity standards?Selected response — C: "We do not follow any recognized industry methodology for business continuity."

Webventurer is not certified to ISO 22301 or any equivalent business-continuity standard, nor aligned to a recognised industry methodology such as the BCI Good Practice Guidelines, and we do not wish to imply otherwise.

Such certification is calibrated to organisations delivering ongoing critical services. Stride leaves no ongoing service dependency on Webventurer, so the exposure the standard is designed to manage does not arise for the client's deployed applications.

3. Regular Business Impact Analysis ("BIA") of critical activities, processes and resource requirements?Selected response — D: "We have not completed a BIA to support our organization's business continuity program."

No formal, recurring BIA process is in place. A BIA exists to identify activities whose interruption would harm the client.

For Stride, the only activity with potential client impact is delivery during the engagement window itself; once capability has been transferred and the work resides in the client's GitHub org, there are no Webventurer activities on which the client depends.

4. Business Continuity ("BC") plans with recovery strategies for people, premises, technology, data and suppliers?Selected response — D: "We identify and mitigate risks to our business, but we do not have current business continuity plans in place."

We do not hold formal documented recovery plans, but we do identify and mitigate the relevant risks. Addressing each dependency honestly:

• People: Webventurer is a small team. If delivery were interrupted mid-engagement, remaining support could be rescheduled or handed over; any work completed to that point already sits in the client's GitHub org, and a successor can resume with roughly one day of hand-over.
• Premises: Delivery is on the client's site or remote and is not dependent on any Webventurer premises.
• Technology: No Webventurer-hosted technology forms part of the solution. The tools used are the client's own GitHub, Anthropic's Claude, and Linear.
• Data: All code and prompts reside in the client's systems and are contractually excluded from Claude model training under Anthropic's Commercial Terms.
• Suppliers: The critical third parties (Anthropic, GitHub and Linear) are assessed at item 6.
• Other dependencies: None beyond those above.

5. Annual testing/exercise regime validating BC plans and rehearsing incident/crisis/recovery teams?Selected response — D: "Our organization does not currently carry out planned testing of our business continuity arrangements."

Webventurer does not run an annual BC testing or exercise regime, nor maintain rehearsed incident, crisis or recovery teams.

Testing validates the recovery of an ongoing service; as there is no ongoing Webventurer-operated service underpinning the client's applications, there is nothing of that kind to rehearse on the client's behalf.

6. Assessed the BC arrangements of critical suppliers / third parties to confirm continued service in a disruption?Selected response — B: "We have assessed the business continuity arrangements of the key suppliers that support the services we provide to the client."

The genuinely critical third parties to the Stride working method are Anthropic (Claude Code / Claude), GitHub, and Linear (issue tracking). We have assessed the continuity posture each publishes — Anthropic via its Trust Center, GitHub via its public status and availability reporting, and Linear via its published service-status reporting — and all are enterprise-grade providers operating at very large scale.

Importantly, even in the event of an outage at any of them, the client's applications and code remain within the client's own GitHub organisation (or an approved alternative) and infrastructure, so no single third-party outage strands the client: the applications continue to run and can be migrated if required.

Crucially, the entire toolchain is substitutable — none of the three providers is locked in:

Tool	Role	Can be substituted with
Claude (Anthropic)	AI coding agent	A comparable agent such as OpenAI's Codex
GitHub	Code hosting	Any equivalent, e.g. Gitea or GitLab
Linear	Issue tracking	A comparable issue tracker

Because the client's applications and code live in the client's own infrastructure rather than in any of these tools, each can be swapped without impact on the deployed apps.

Code and prompts are, as noted, excluded from Claude model training under Anthropic's Commercial Terms.

Attestation

Business interruption questions completed by: Mike Mindel — Director, Webventurer Ltd, mike@webventurer.com

I confirm that the statements made in this letter and in the accompanying questionnaire are accurate and complete to the best of my knowledge and belief as at the date below.

Signed: ____________________________

Name: Mike Mindel Title: Director Company: Webventurer Ltd Date: [date]

---

Please do let me know if any item would benefit from further detail, or if a short call would be helpful; I would be glad to expand on any of the above.

Yours sincerely,

Mike Mindel Director, Webventurer Ltd mike@webventurer.com