Multi-Jurisdiction Gap Assessment
Structured gap analysis across GDPR, LGPD, and CPRA simultaneously — identifying where your controls satisfy each regulatory requirement and where remediation is required.
Evidence-based data protection assurance across GDPR, LGPD, and CPRA — for enterprises operating across multiple regulatory jurisdictions facing escalating data protection authority scrutiny.
The challenge
Operating across borders means compliance in one jurisdiction rarely means compliance in all. Data protection authorities are issuing record fines — and internal assessments lack the independence regulators look for when things go wrong.
Data protection authorities across the EU, Brazil, and California are issuing fines that now represent material financial exposure for major institutions. The enforcement environment has shifted from guidance-focused to sanction-focused — and the quality of documentation at the time of a complaint determines the outcome.
When privacy governance is assessed by the teams responsible for implementing it, the independence that data protection authorities expect to see documented is structurally absent. The result is assurance that is difficult to defend before a regulator — not because it is wrong, but because it cannot credibly be seen as objective.
Engagement models
EONTA delivers privacy assurance through two structured engagement tracks — each calibrated to your regulatory exposure, jurisdiction profile, and DPA scrutiny timeline.
Structured evaluation of your end-to-end privacy governance — processing activities, consent architecture, data subject rights fulfilment, and technical and organisational measures across applicable jurisdictions.
Multi-jurisdiction — not single-law focus
Evidence-based — not policy review only
Independent from legal advisory conflict
Jurisdiction-by-jurisdiction gap analysis — identifying where your controls meet GDPR, LGPD, and CPRA requirements and where remediation is required before an authority raises concerns.
Three jurisdictions covered in single engagement
DPIA quality review included as standard
Documentation structured for regulatory review
Core capabilities
Each capability produces structured, evidence-based assurance — documented for data protection authority review, audit committee reporting, and legal defensibility.
Structured gap analysis across GDPR, LGPD, and CPRA simultaneously — identifying where your controls satisfy each regulatory requirement and where remediation is required.
Independent review of your Record of Processing Activities for completeness, accuracy, and alignment to actual processing operations — the document regulators examine first.
Evaluation of technical and organisational privacy controls — assessing whether measures are designed to achieve the data protection outcomes regulators and data subjects require.
Review of third-party processor and sub-processor arrangements — data processing agreements, transfer mechanisms, and adequacy assessments across your vendor landscape.
Independent assessment of Data Protection Impact Assessment quality — evaluating whether high-risk processing activities have been assessed with the rigour and documentation regulators expect.
Structured documentation of your privacy compliance posture — formatted for presentation to data protection authorities, audit committees, and legal proceedings if required.
How it works
A structured engagement that goes beyond policy review — evaluating the controls, evidence, and documentation that determine how an inquiry actually concludes.
Identify all processing activities, jurisdictions, data flows, and third-party processor relationships across your organisation.
Evaluate governance controls, processing activity accuracy, consent mechanisms, and technical measures against applicable requirements.
Review and validate existing documentation quality — ROPA, DPIAs, processor agreements — producing an evidence quality assessment.
Produce regulator-ready compliance documentation — jurisdiction-specific gap analysis, remediation roadmap, and board-level summary.
Why EONTA
Most privacy assessments are built around GDPR alone. EONTA's framework covers GDPR, LGPD, and CPRA simultaneously — identifying where your controls satisfy each regime and where jurisdiction-specific gaps exist that a single-jurisdiction review would miss entirely.
Privacy policies are not privacy compliance. EONTA evaluates the controls that implement those policies — whether they are designed correctly, whether they operate as intended, and whether the evidence of that operation is documented well enough to defend before an authority.
Law firms providing privacy advice and then assessing their own advice face an inherent conflict. EONTA operates independently from legal advisory relationships — producing assurance that carries the objectivity data protection authorities expect to see documented.
Who this is for
EONTA's privacy assurance services are designed for the governance functions and executive roles directly accountable for data protection compliance, regulatory standing, and reputational protection.
Primary stakeholders
Common engagement triggers
DPA inquiry, complaint, or audit notice received
Organisations requiring rapid, independent assessment of their privacy compliance posture following regulatory contact or a data subject complaint.
Cross-border data transfer mechanism uncertainty
Institutions operating across EU, Brazil, and California requiring independent validation of their transfer mechanism adequacy and documentation.
Annual privacy programme review or board reporting
Governance functions seeking independent assurance of their privacy programme quality for board reporting, audit committee review, or investor due diligence.
Frequently asked
Take the next step
Find out before a complaint does. A confidential scoping call takes 30 minutes and delivers a clear picture of your exposure.
All scoping conversations are confidential. EONTA does not share engagement details with third parties.